Peter Rathlev wrote: > > [...] I need some sort of point-to-point L2 link fault management > > between the switches. > > > > Is UDLD suitable for this purpose? I have experimented a bit with > > "udld port aggressive" and have found out the following strange > > thing. > > > > When the physical link goes down, UDLD detects this condition and > > shuts the switch interface down. However, after several minutes, the > > interface goes up again with "%PM-4-ERR_RECOVER: Attempting to recover > > from udld err-disable state on Gi0/17". The interface is up even > > though "Current bidirectional state: Unknown", and seems to be in the > > STP forwarding state. > > This is because UDLD errdisable recovery has been enabled. You can > disable it with: > > no errdisable recovery cause udld > > Problem is that you have to intervene manually to enable the interface > after service has been restored.
I may be already unable to reach the switch remotely to intervene manually, after the interface has been errdisabled for good. > But at least you will not have loops. > > I'm not aware of a more elegant solution to your problem, but I'm > interested in hearing about one. What if I try the non-aggressive UDLD, would it make any difference? -- Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN sip:[email protected] _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
