<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: vifmgr.lifs.noredundancy on IFGRP in ONTAP Discussions</title>
    <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/vifmgr-lifs-noredundancy-on-IFGRP/m-p/146843#M32667</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi there!&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;You've got the cause essentially right - IFGRPs are seen as a single port just like a physical port (or a vlan definition), even when multiple ports exist as members, and there is a failover policy set on the LIF, but no other ports it can live on.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;You can modify the LIF to not have a failover policy - for a replication one there is essentially no risk to doing so. You would do it by:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;PRE&gt;network interface modify -vserver &amp;lt;vserver&amp;gt; -lif &amp;lt;lif_name&amp;gt; -failover-policy disabled&lt;/PRE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Hope this helps!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2019 04:56:42 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>AlexDawson</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-02-28T04:56:42Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>vifmgr.lifs.noredundancy on IFGRP</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/vifmgr-lifs-noredundancy-on-IFGRP/m-p/146825#M32663</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Running Multiple FAS 8200s&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;All running On-Tap 9.3 p10&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Hi All&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Im seing the below on my filers (in the Event Logs)&amp;nbsp;which im 95% certain is a red herring.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Would like a little clarity or options before i dump it to support so any help greatly appreaciated....&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;My network is air gapped so logs etc may me difficult.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The "Intercluster Replication" IFGRP comprises of 2 uplinks per filer, carrying the replication vLAN&amp;nbsp;which i have confirmed from the command line.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The replication IFGRP is assigned to the Broadcast Domain "Replication" when&amp;nbsp;checked the correct IFGROUP is shown inside the bradcast domain. So all looks good to me..&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;However (and im gussing here) that On-Tap cannot determine that IFGRP&amp;nbsp;shown in the Broadcast Domain&amp;nbsp;"Replication" acually consists of multiple physical ports and is therefore beleives that there is actually no redundancey here, hece the error log...?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;(Bearing in mind there is some very very heavy design for&amp;nbsp;my estates,&amp;nbsp;and even assiging just an extra physical port will take months of change controll as the designs are updated the documentation valadidated the work instructions ammended&amp;nbsp;then followed with annother round of testing etc etc etc etc...&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Is there a quicker way of surpressing just&amp;nbsp;these SPECIFIC&amp;nbsp;events for the&amp;nbsp;Replication Broadcast Domain,&amp;nbsp;or otherwise stopping them without too much modification..?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;[Log Snippet below.]&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT size="3"&gt;Severity:- Alert&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT size="3"&gt;Source:- vifmgr&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT size="3"&gt;Event:- vifmgr.lifs.noredundancy: No redundancy in the failover configuration for 1 lif assigned to node "MY-FILER". LIFs "INTERFACE NAME" (Intercluster replication)&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT size="3"&gt;Description: This message occurs when one or more logical interfaces (LIFs) are configured&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;FONT size="3"&gt;to use a failover policy that implies failover to one or more ports but have no failover&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;FONT size="3"&gt;targets beyond their home ports. If any affected home port or home node is offline or&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;FONT size="3"&gt;unavailable, the corresponding LIFs will be operationally down and unable to serve data.&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Cheers all&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Any help much appreaciated.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2025 12:47:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/vifmgr-lifs-noredundancy-on-IFGRP/m-p/146825#M32663</guid>
      <dc:creator>Burnt</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-06-04T12:47:52Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: vifmgr.lifs.noredundancy on IFGRP</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/vifmgr-lifs-noredundancy-on-IFGRP/m-p/146843#M32667</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi there!&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;You've got the cause essentially right - IFGRPs are seen as a single port just like a physical port (or a vlan definition), even when multiple ports exist as members, and there is a failover policy set on the LIF, but no other ports it can live on.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;You can modify the LIF to not have a failover policy - for a replication one there is essentially no risk to doing so. You would do it by:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;PRE&gt;network interface modify -vserver &amp;lt;vserver&amp;gt; -lif &amp;lt;lif_name&amp;gt; -failover-policy disabled&lt;/PRE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Hope this helps!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2019 04:56:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/vifmgr-lifs-noredundancy-on-IFGRP/m-p/146843#M32667</guid>
      <dc:creator>AlexDawson</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-02-28T04:56:42Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

