01-16-2017 05:46 AM - edited 01-16-2017 06:03 AM
Looking to upgrade my ISL links between core switches (two out of three 6510s in each fabric), I've realised that instead of ISL's being trunked between two of them, they are just standalone ISLs.
What I'm seeing on one of the two switches in my first fabric (mirrored in the other one) is as follows:
:FID128:admin> trunkshow 1: 32-> 12 10:00:x 19 deskew 15 MASTER 2: 33-> 20 10:00:x 19 deskew 15 MASTER 3: 46-> 27 10:00:x 31 deskew 15 MASTER 47-> 31 10:00:x 31 deskew 16
Trunk 1 and Trunk 2 contain ports patched into the other core switch (DID 19), which normally I would epxpect to be part of the same trunk.
Trunk 3 confirms that a proper trunk formed to the third core switch (mesh), which only confirms that trunking licence is in place (in fact, this would only confirm licencing to be in place on switch with local domain and switch DID 31 but I did confirm that switch within DID 19 also has got it).
My two questions:
Checking portchannelshow from first switch to DID19, it is clear that both ports are used for routing to that switch so will using portdecom on one of the remote ports (ex. on port 20 @ DID 19, while moving it to port 13 @ DID19 ) cause any detrimental effect (I think there is plenty of bandwidth to let one ISL link handle the traffic while the other being switched over to corrrect port)?
8 domain(s) in the fabric; Local Domain ID: 1
Domain: 19 Name: SWx WWN: 10:00:00x Port Channel: Ports: 32, 33
I would rather avoid part of infrastructure complaining about missing connctivity and dropped frames.
Have I missed on anything?
Solved! Go to Solution.
01-16-2017 06:05 AM - edited 01-16-2017 06:10 AM
Yes port that need to participate to a same Trunk need to be in a same port group.
The best is to make sure that switches are using DLS with LOSSLESS enable (can be check with dlsshow command).
If not to enable it dlsset --enable -lossless on both switches.
Issue portdecom command
Move desired ISL to the same port group.
Then portcfgpersistentenable the concerned ISL port.
01-17-2017 02:01 AM
01-17-2017 03:34 AM
I think I can partially answer my own question:
DLS is enabled by default with EBR (exchange-based routing) but not with its lossless feature so DLS is not switched off by default as such.
DLS is set with Lossless disabled
Am still not 100% sure if act of turining it on actually causes any IO blip (I would assume it would not ...).
01-17-2017 04:23 AM
The activation of LOSSLESS is not disruptive.