DenJS
Contributor
Contributor

LACP between 2xCisco Nexus & 2xNIC on ESXi host

Hi there,

I have two Cisco Nexus9k switches connected together with a VPC peer, and I have ESXi server with two NICs each has 2xPorts

I'm trying to set up a proper LAG/LACP between all four but it seems that it's not going to work. Here is how everything is connected:

[switch1] --- VPC Peer --- [switch2]

      |                                         |

[server nic1, port1]          [server nic2, port2]

 

on my switch1 I have:

po101, vpc101, int eth1/46 (channel-group 101 mode active)

on my switch2 I have:

po101, vpc101m int eth1/45 (channel0group 101 mode active)

I then get this on both:

Flags: D - Down P - Up in port-channel (members)
I - Individual H - Hot-standby (LACP only)
s - Suspended r - Module-removed
b - BFD Session Wait
S - Switched R - Routed
U - Up (port-channel)
p - Up in delay-lacp mode (member)
M - Not in use. Min-links not met
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group Port- Type Protocol Member Ports
Channel
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
101 Po101(SD) Eth LACP Eth1/45(s)

on my ESXi host I Have vDS, with LAG configured using server nic1, port 1 and server nic2, port2 connected to switch1 eth1/46 and switch2 eth1/46 respectively.

Nothing works as you may imagine 😉 I don't even see any attempts on nexuses from the ESXi to initiate LACP or accept it (I tried Active-Passive and in reverse but no difference)

Po101 goes into down mode, and Eth1/45(46) go to suspended mode. They only go UP if I change PO mode to ON which I guess makes no sense.

Also my VM attached to a port group with LAG enabled - has no connectivity regardless of PO modes.

I have a suspicion that this is not gonna work across two separate NICs on the server but... well, means I'm quite limited in having redundancy then? As my other ports are used for iscsi and have only 2 NICs (4 ports in total).

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

0 Kudos
0 Replies