[c-nsp] nexus 5xx vpc peer keepalives

[Tony Varriale]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "scott owens" <scottowens12 at gmail.com>
To: <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 5:35 PM
Subject: [c-nsp] nexus 5xx vpc peer keepalives


> Tony,
>
> Read this as well ( it talks about NOT using the mgmt0 for peer keep 
> alives
> ) - we are trying this too
>
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/datacenter/nexus5000/sw/layer2/Cisco_Nexus_5000_Series_NX-OS__chapter8.html
>
> After figure 6, step 3 there is this text ;
> Note
> VLAN 900 must not be trunked across the vPC peer-link because it carries 
> the vPC
> peer-keepalive messages. There must be an alternative path between
> switches NX-5000-1 and
> NX-5000-2 for the vPC peer-keepalive messages.
>
> The problem we are encountering is that if we drop the peer vlan from
> the 5k to 5k link then we get weird errors as well.
>
>
>
> I will STRONGLY suggest that you test any possible failure scenario that 
> you
> can think of.
> Are you using the 5Ks/ FEXs in dual homed fashion ?
>
> I have an open case with Cisco on the use of

I didn't respond to all of your questions comments.

We never put the keepalive vlan across the peer link.  It's always in its 
own VRF in whatever fashion/implementation on the 5k and 7k.

If you have an OOB network that requires the 5k mgmt0 ports to be used 
there, burn one of 1-8 on a 5010 or one of 1-16 on a 5020 as a gig port and 
do another VRF specially for the peer link.  Done.

Yes, most of our customers are dual connected.

We've done a lot of testing.  But, we have not done what you have.  It's not 
the recommended practice, it's not the correct design and no one around 
Cisco supports it.  So, we don't implement that way.

I know the docs (all 10000 of them) may seem confusing and contradictory. 
But, if you follow above you shouldn't have any issues.

tv