[c-nsp] 15.0(SE) 3560 was ME3600X Netflow and WCCP?

[Reuben Farrelly]

I've had some quite odd problems with IPv6 with 12.2(58)SE1.  Upon 
loading the image, all IPv4 worked OK, but my IPv6 addresses on 
loopbacks were there, but non functional.  Routes for them were 
propagated throughout OSPFv3 but I wasn't able to ping them from 
anything other than the local router itself where the loopback was 
configured.  But yet I was able to successfully ping and trace to other 
IPv6 addresses on VLAN interfaces on the switch itself.  There was also 
some route looping going on which was evident in traceroutes to the 
loopbacks on those devices which were exhibiting the problem, although 
the (show ip) route tables looked fine.

I wondered if this was some sort of mis-programming or bug within the 
forwarding tables or something.......

What's really odd is that I upgraded four units, and two exhibited this 
problem whereas two others didn't.  So it wasn't just a one off, and 
didn't come good by reloading a second time.  The configs were all 
similar, ones that worked were a 3750E, 3560G and one that failed was a 
3560-V2 (the other one that failed I can't recall right now).

After spending an hour trying to work out what was going on and if I 
could work around it, I rolled those two offenders back to 12.2(55)SE3 
and it all came good again.

Given the heap of new features in 12.2(58)SE (some very welcome, 
especially the WCCP ACL deny ability fixed finally) I wasn't overly 
surprised to be finding a few glitches though...

Reuben


On 28/07/2011 4:23 PM, Peter Rathlev wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-07-28 at 13:56 +1000, Reuben Farrelly wrote:
>> Doesn't seem like much difference between 12.2(58)SE and 15.0(1)SE in
>> terms of either features or bug fixes, so if you've taken the (brave)
>> plunge and are already running 12.2(58)SE it looks like a fairly minor
>> upgrade.
>
> Is something special implied in the "(brave)" part? Is there some known
> problem with 12.2(58) by any chance? We've started upgrading here and
> there and have yet to see any problems.
>
> Or is it just because it's so very new? :-)
>