![]() ) to one of the two physical interfaces, which should allow the ping to start working. You can work around this by statically assigning a non-BIA MAC address (e.g. To simplify a lot of complex technical details, the ASIC "doesn't like" receiving packets where the source and destination addresses are both BIA and tends to drop those packets. On modern Nexus 9000 series switches, this is needed so that the switch does not send a packet with the same source and destination MAC address, both of which are assigned to the switch as BIA (Burned-In Addresses). If the above accurately describes the "loopback testing" you are performing, then on modern Nexus 9000 series switches, you will most likely need to configure a unique, non-default static MAC address on at least one of the two physical interfaces. ping 192.0.2.2 vrf Blue and/or ping 192.0.2.1 vrf Red) to validate that the ports operate as expected. You are then pinging between the two interfaces (e.g. You are then assigning a unique VRF to each physical interface, then placing both physical interfaces in the same broadcast domain/subnet (for example, Ethernet1/1 in VRF Blue is assigned 192.0.2.1/24 and Ethernet1/2 in VRF Red is assigned 192.0.2.2/24). Based upon your configuration, when you say "loopback testing", I'm assuming you mean a scenario where you are looping back cables between two different physical interfaces of the same switch (for example, Ethernet1/1 connects to Ethernet1/2). There are a few different ways to perform loopback testing, depending on what you're trying to do. Switch# ping 10.10.10.2 source-interface loopback 0 Warning: Deleted all 元 config on interface Ethernet1/15 Warning: Deleted all 元 config on interface Ethernet1/13 Warning: Deleted all 元 config on interface loopback1 Warning: Deleted all 元 config on interface loopback0 Can anyone see where I may have left something out that would allow these two interfaces to successfully communicate? ![]() Previously I was getting the message "Destination Host Unreachable" so I've made progress, but it's still not quite right. I've been trying to establish a configuration for performing loopback testing and this is the closest I have gotten. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |