Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

NewValidation: Check if we have multiple spines in the lldp neighborship for the leaf #125

Open
almo-ina opened this issue May 16, 2024 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #161
Open

NewValidation: Check if we have multiple spines in the lldp neighborship for the leaf #125

almo-ina opened this issue May 16, 2024 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #161
Assignees

Comments

@almo-ina
Copy link

Validation Type

[ ] - Fault

[ ] - Config

[ ] - Bug

[ ] - Other : connection issue

by mistake, the customer may have a leaf that is single connected to a spine [one or more links to the same spine instead of multiple spines].

What needs to be validated

Check if the leaf has multiple spines showing in the lldp neighbor output.

Why it needs to be validated

should the leaf be single connected to one spine, during the upgrade of that spine, an outage is expected on that leaf.

Additional context

Exmaple:

correct behavior on leaf 236 [notice we have two different spines Spine1 and Spine2 :
APIC1# fabric 236 show lldp neighbors

Node 236 (Leaf236)

Capability codes:
(R) Router, (B) Bridge, (T) Telephone, (C) DOCSIS Cable Device
(W) WLAN Access Point, (P) Repeater, (S) Station, (O) Other
Device ID Local Intf Hold-time Capability Port ID

Spine1 Eth1/49 120 BR Eth2/9
Spine2 Eth1/50 120 BR Eth2/6

Wrong connection as in leaf 235 [notice we have the same spine twice]:

Leaf235# show lldp neighbors
Capability codes:
(R) Router, (B) Bridge, (T) Telephone, (C) DOCSIS Cable Device
(W) WLAN Access Point, (P) Repeater, (S) Station, (O) Other
Device ID Local Intf Hold-time Capability Port ID

Spine2 Eth1/49 120 BR Eth2/8
Spine2 Eth1/50 120 BR Eth2/9

@jeestr4d jeestr4d self-assigned this May 22, 2024
@jeestr4d jeestr4d linked a pull request Sep 11, 2024 that will close this issue
@monrog2 monrog2 linked a pull request Sep 11, 2024 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants