Cisco Routing / Question on LACP

Hello Experts,

Can someone please take a look at my the configuration on my DLSW's 4 & 5 and let me know why DLSW-5 can't ping 172.16.1.1 or DLSW-4, can't ping 172.16.1.2

The interfaces are up and channeling is working fine, see below:

dlsw-4#show ip int brie
Interface              IP-Address      OK? Method Status                Protocol
Ethernet0/0            unassigned      YES manual up                    up      
Ethernet0/1            unassigned      YES manual up                    up      
Ethernet0/2            unassigned      YES unset  up                    up      
Ethernet0/3            unassigned      YES unset  administratively down down    
Ethernet1/0            unassigned      YES unset  administratively down down    
Ethernet1/1            unassigned      YES unset  administratively down down    
Ethernet1/2            unassigned      YES unset  administratively down down    
Ethernet1/3            unassigned      YES unset  administratively down down    
Port-channel1          172.16.1.1      YES manual up                    up      
Vlan1                  unassigned      YES unset  administratively down down    
Vlan100                100.1.1.1       YES manual up                    up      

dlsw-5#show ip int brie
Interface              IP-Address      OK? Method Status                Protocol
Ethernet0/0            unassigned      YES manual up                    up      
Ethernet0/1            unassigned      YES manual up                    up      
Ethernet0/2            unassigned      YES unset  up                    up      
Ethernet0/3            unassigned      YES unset  administratively down down    
Ethernet1/0            unassigned      YES unset  administratively down down    
Ethernet1/1            unassigned      YES unset  administratively down down    
Ethernet1/2            unassigned      YES unset  administratively down down    
Ethernet1/3            unassigned      YES unset  administratively down down    
Port-channel1          172.16.1.2      YES manual up                    up      
Vlan1                  unassigned      YES unset  administratively down down    
Vlan200                200.1.1.1       YES manual up                    up      


Group  Port-channel  Protocol    Ports
------+-------------+-----------+-----------------------------------------------
1      Po1(RU)         LACP      Et0/0(P)    Et0/1(P)    


The configurations are attached.

Regards
14-38-05--DLSW-4-64.187.124.3-.txt
14-38-13--DLSW-5-64.187.124.3-.txt
LVL 1
Member_2_7966113Asked:
Who is Participating?

Improve company productivity with a Business Account.Sign Up

x
Advertise Here
 
Craig BeckConnect With a Mentor Commented:
Try with IOU version i86bi-linux-l2-adventerprisek9-15.2d

Also, try with a static Etherchannel to rule out a LACP bug.
0
 
Predrag JovicNetwork EngineerCommented:
Most likely source interface for ping is VLAN 100, try extended ping

ping       and then press enter

then select source interface po1 for ping

if you turn on routing on both devices you don't need source interface since interface closest to destination will be used for pings
0
 
Member_2_7966113Author Commented:
LVL,

Thanks for responding,

I have configured the following on both routers

ip routing
ip cef
router eigrp 1
network 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255
no auto-summary

Now I'm getting the following errors:

*Aug 24 08:59:21.657: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: EIGRP-IPv4 1: Neighbor 172.16.1.2 (Port-channel1) is down: retry limit exceeded
dlsw-4#ping
*Aug 24 08:59:25.119: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: EIGRP-IPv4 1: Neighbor 172.16.1.2 (Port-channel1) is up: new adjacency
dlsw-4#ping
*Aug 24 09:00:44.711: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: EIGRP-IPv4 1: Neighbor 172.16.1.2 (Port-channel1) is down: Interface PEER-TERMINATION received
dlsw-4#ping
*Aug 24 09:00:48.170: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: EIGRP-IPv4 1: Neighbor 172.16.1.2 (Port-channel1) is up: new adjacency
dlsw-4#ping
*Aug 24 09:02:07.743: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: EIGRP-IPv4 1: Neighbor 172.16.1.2 (Port-channel1) is down: Interface PEER-TERMINATION received
*Aug 24 09:02:08.045: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: EIGRP-IPv4 1: Neighbor 172.16.1.2 (Port-channel1) is up: new adjacency
dlsw-4#ping
*Aug 24 09:03:27.624: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: EIGRP-IPv4 1: Neighbor 172.16.1.2 (Port-channel1) is down: retry limit exceeded
0
NEW Internet Security Report Now Available!

WatchGuard’s Threat Lab is a group of dedicated threat researchers committed to helping you stay ahead of the bad guys by providing in-depth analysis of the top security threats to your network.  Check out this quarters report on the threats that shook the industry in Q4 2017.

Download the Report
 
Predrag JovicNetwork EngineerCommented:
There is no need to configure dynamic routing for ping.
# ip routing
is enough.
Since neighbor is flapping in EIGRP looks like your etherchannel is not stable.
Is that GNS3, packet tracer, or real switches? In the case of GNS3 it could be some bug, for packet tracer - occasionally it deletes configuration from the interface that is assigned to etherchannel :) .
0
 
Member_2_7966113Author Commented:
OK,

Let me remove EIGRP

Regards
0
 
Member_2_7966113Author Commented:
Its GNS3
0
 
Predrag JovicNetwork EngineerCommented:
Gns3 is bugy. Delete all and try again. 😊
0
 
Member_2_7966113Author Commented:
Will it work on Cisco IOU?
0
 
Predrag JovicNetwork EngineerCommented:
Not sure.
0
 
Predrag JovicNetwork EngineerCommented:
The thing is, if you configured properly etherchannel - through Po1 interface everything should work, and most likely it is working (since router was occasionally able to establish neighbor relationship between EIGRP neighbors through etherchannel - that mean two way communication). Looks like traffic between devices is burst by nature for some reason, packets are coming  and then stop, and then all over again. Not sure what can be done about it, but if both router "see" that LACP is properly working - communication between routers work properly (EIGRP establishes neighbor relations), but it is unstable for some reason.
0
 
Michael OrtegaConnect With a Mentor Sales & Systems EngineerCommented:
I guess it's possible, but why would you assign your port-channel an IP?

Also, what traffic are you trying to allow over this port-channel? Default VLAN1?

The only other VLAN I see configured is VLAN200 on DLSW-5 and VLAN100 on DLSW-4.

What exactly are you trying to allow through this port-channel?

The typical configuration I would see on a port-channel is something like this (assuming the VLAN you wanted to traverse the port-channel was VLAN10):

DLSW-5
interface Port-channel1
 switchport trunk allowed vlan 10
 switchport mode trunk
!
interface Ethernet0/0
 switchport trunk allowed vlan 10
 switchport mode trunk
 channel-group 1 mode active
!
interface Ethernet0/1
 switchport trunk allowed vlan 10
 switchport mode trunk
 channel-group 1 mode active

DLSW-4
interface Port-channel1
 switchport trunk allowed vlan 10
 switchport mode trunk
!
interface Ethernet0/0
 switchport trunk allowed vlan 10
 switchport mode trunk
 channel-group 1 mode active
!
interface Ethernet0/1
 switchport trunk allowed vlan 10
 switchport mode trunk
 channel-group 1 mode active

MO
1
 
Craig BeckCommented:
@Michael - L3 Port-channel is common.  It is used where you want to allow multiple links to be aggregated but don't want to use a VLAN and SVI.  Your config above doesn't include any L3 configuration.
0
 
Member_2_7966113Author Commented:
Craig, this was the correct solution. Michael, the reason for this type of setup was because I was following a lab
0
 
Michael OrtegaSales & Systems EngineerCommented:
@Craig Beck

Sorry, I didn't mean to indicate that it was uncommon, period. I meant that it wasn't common to see it in a layer 2 application and I simply assumed that's all we were talking about since there weren't any other details in the attached configs to suggest otherwise. That's precisely why I was asking about "what" traffic needed to traverse the etherchannel/port-channel.

I saw the comment about EIGRP being added to the mix, but I wasn't sure how that fit into the whole picture, which it didn't appear that it did.

MO
0
Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.