Multiple VLANs on a VIF

[radek_kubka]

Hi everybody,

I am trying to configure multiple VLAN interfaces on top of a multimode VIF. In theory all seems to be fine:

fas02> ifconfig -a

[snip]

vif_fas02: flags=0xa2d08863<BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST,TCPCKSUM,VLAN> mtu 1500

        partner vif_fas01 (not in use)

        ether 02:a0:98:23:3a:d8 (Enabled virtual interface)

vif_fas02-2: flags=0x2948863<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST,TCPCKSUM> mtu 1500

        inet 192.168.2.20 netmask-or-prefix 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.2.255

        partner vif_fas01-2 (not in use)

        ether 02:a0:98:23:3a:d8 (Enabled virtual interface)

vif_fas02-70: flags=0x2948863<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST,TCPCKSUM> mtu 1500

        inet 192.168.70.222 netmask-or-prefix 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.70.255

        partner vif_fas01-70 (not in use)

        ether 02:a0:98:23:3a:d8 (Enabled virtual interface)

vif_fas02-87: flags=0x2948863<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST,TCPCKSUM> mtu 1500

        inet 192.168.87.221 netmask-or-prefix 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.87.255

        ether 02:a0:98:23:3a:d8 (Enabled virtual interface)

And on the Cisco 3750 switch side:

interfacePort-channel10

switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport trunk allowed vlan 2,70,87
switchport mode trunk
end

VLAN 2 interface does work without any problems, yet I cannot ping VLAN 70 and 87 addresses.

As far as I can tell, the only difference is that VLAN 2 has been created first using vlan create command, whilst two others were added later using vlan add command.

Any ideas what the problem could be?

Thanks & regards,
Radek

[shaunjurr]

Hi,

What is the output of 'vif status vif_fas02'?  What is the output on the cisco switch of 'sh interface status po10'  (iirc)?  3750's have often need to have etherchannel mode forced to "on" instead of desirable.

My memory fails me, but setting vlans on Po interfaces might need to be done on the physical interfaces...  You might try to do 'sh trunk' and see which vlans are active and forwarding as well.

All that I can think of at the moment...haven't been a net admin for a few years now. Hope it helps.

[radek_kubka]

Hi,

Thanks for the response!

There is definitely something dodgy going on with the vif at the moment:

fas02> vif status vif_fas02

default: transmit 'IP Load balancing', VIF Type 'multi_mode', fail 'log'

vif_fas02: 1 link, transmit 'IP Load balancing', VIF Type 'multi_mode' fail 'default'

     VIF Status    Up     Addr_set

    up:

        e0b: state up, since 21Jun2011 16:36:01 (1+18:20:51)

                mediatype: auto-1000t-fd-up

                flags: enabled

                input packets 207275, input bytes 19332659

                output packets 24861, output bytes 4813144

                up indications 3, broken indications 1

                drops (if) 0, drops (link) 0

                indication: up at 21Jun2011 16:36:01

                        consecutive 1920, transitions 8

    pending:

        e0a: state pending, since 21Jun2011 16:50:16 (1+18:06:36)

                mediatype: auto-1000t-fd-up

                flags: enabling

                input packets 0, input bytes 0

                output packets 0, output bytes 0

                up indications 0, broken indications 0

                drops (if) 0, drops (link) 0

                indication: down at 21Jun2011 16:50:16

                        consecutive 0, transitions 0

As these are the two only ports on the controller, I need to connect via a console cable to reset the ports & the vif.

I am actually going to re-creeate a vif with a vif create command, including all VLANs in question in one go & see what happens.

Regards,

Radek

[radek_kubka]

OK, all solved after:

1) deleting vlans

2) destroying vif

2) creating vif again

3) creating all vlans in one go:

     vlan create vif_fas02 2 70 87

I am not 100% sure what helped - the fact that now e0b is no longer in a pending state, or not using vlan add command.

Regards,
Radek

[radek_kubka · Accepted solution]

OK, here is the latest:

When we created vif initially, it was on a single physical port only (e0b) & we chose IP-based load balancing. Actually, all addresses on all three VLANs were accessible at that point.Then we added the second physical NIC (e0a) to the vif. All looked fine in the GUI, yet vif status showed that e0a was in a pending state.

So my thinking is: IP-based load balancing means VLAN 2 was pushed via e0b, whilst any additional VLAN was supposed to go via e0a - but the interface wasn't properly up, hence it didn't work.

I just tested it again by vlan delete & vlan add and all works 100% fine.