Wired Intelligent Edge

Hi All,

 

Is there anyone with any experience of configuring LACP between Aruba and Avaya switches. In our environment we have got old avaya switches which I'm trying to upgrade to Aruba 2930f switches.

At the moment, set up is like below;

 

Aruba 3810 Core switch configured port 1/3, 2/3 as Trk1 type lacp with Avaya switches type LA on port 1/50, 2/50. 

 

I want to replace those switches with Aruba 2930F. 

 

While on existing Avaya switch both trunk port are allowing all vlans except vlan 1, while on core Aruba switch both trunk are in vlan 1 untagged. 

 

Now, I'm confused whether I should put both trunk port on new 2930f switch in all vlans or only in default vlan 1 and should I configure it as static lacp trunk. 

 

Please let me know if you need further information. Thanks a lot. 

 

 

Who is driving your choices? the Aruba 3810M Stack (is it a stack? I think it is since you wrote you aggregated ports 1/3 and 2/3 - so ports 3 on both stack members - on logical interface trk1 by using LACP as control protocol).

 

Given that you should configure the aggregated interface on the Aruba 2930F (it is a single switch or a VSF stack, doesn't really matter) to match exactly what you have done already on your core side.

 

So do a show vlan port trk1 detail on your Aruba 3810M and configure the trk port on the Aruba 2930F exactly cope with that (control protocol included: if LACP is used on one side the very same should be used on the other side).

Once done check by verifying that outputs match (show vlan port trk<n> detail on Aruba 3810M and show vlan port trk<m> detail on Aruba 2930F).

 

Once the aggregated interfaces are configured, don't forget that you should then work against them (identified by trk<x> with <x> as the aggregated interface Id) without touching the aggregated physical member ports.

Hi Davide,

 

Thanks, well the situation is a bit different the person before me who configured the core switch didnt really configured it properly. 

 

On my core side 2 switches stacked together while on access switch(2930f) stacked together. I have configured the same lacp type

but there is one thing I'm little lost is

 

1) Does both side ports in lacp need to have same operation key which in this instance core switch has Opr key : 963 while on access switch Opr key is 533

 

2)show lacp peer, on core gives me this LACP MODE=Active, while same command on 2930f switch gives me LACP MODE=Passive. Is that issue, please note I haven't connected the new switch with core yet but just wanted to know if this is the default state on lacp

 

syd-3810# show lacp peer

LACP Peer Information.

Local Local Port Oper LACP Tx
Port Trunk System ID Port Priority Key Mode Timer
------ ------ ----------------- ----- --------- ------- -------- -----
1/3 Trk2 703018-854901 50 32768 16394 Active Fast
2/3 Trk2 703018-854901 114 32768 16394 Active Fast

Not connected yet

SYD-SWL8-STACK# show lacp peer

LACP Peer Information.

 

Local Local Port Oper LACP Tx
Port Trunk System ID Port Priority Key Mode Timer
------ ------ ----------------- ----- --------- ------- -------- -----
1/50 Trk2 000000-000000 50 0 0 Passive Fast
2/50 Trk2 000000-000000 103 0 0 Passive Fast

 

And also I have been trying to find document on configuring dhcp-snooping but no luck while I can find for dhcpv6 snooping.

 

Do you got some sort of info or commands or document I can refer to config dhcp-snooping. 

 

Thanks for your help.

 

Rish

---

@rishabhm wrote: but there is one thing I'm little lost is

 

1) Does both side ports in lacp need to have same operation key which in this instance core switch has Opr key : 963 while on access switch Opr key is 533

It's OK. Operation Key value is local to the switch entity where the port aggregation is configured...so no issue at all if on the Aruba 3810M side your trk2 adopted 963 and on the Aruba 2930F side your trk2 adopted 533.

 

---

@rishabhm wrote: 2)show lacp peer, on core gives me this LACP MODE=Active, while same command on 2930f switch gives me LACP MODE=Passive. Is that issue, please note I haven't connected the new switch with core yet but just wanted to know if this is the default state on lacp

That's good. Proceed, as example, by connecting port 1/3 to 1/50 first and then connecting port 2/3 to 2/50 as last step (or vice versa, or do it  crossed...as you prefer...but KIS and documented so you will know who goes where).

 

Repeat show trunks, show lacp and show vlan port trk2 details on both ends once all involved physical links related to aggregated logical interfaces (the two trk2 you defined) are connected and interfaces are thus up (Passive versus Active is just a way of deciding which end will start off the control protocol negotiations:  normally one end is set to Active and the other end is set to Passive but also both ends set as Active are good).

 

For DHCP Snooping let me check if there is a good specific guide or if you can rely simply on ArubaOS-Switch management and configuration guide(s) for 3810M and 2930F.

Hi Rish,

---

@rishabhm wrote: On my core side 2 switches stacked together while on access switch(2930f) stacked together.

forgot to say that since you're dealing with a pair of stacks (2xAruba 3810M backplane stacked in Hardware and 2xAruba 2930F frontplane stacked with VSF) the best thing you can do is to mesh the links between them: so both your two trk2 port aggregations should be made of four links (not simply by two)...that way the interconnection between both stacks will be more resilient against any stacks' node failure and any stacks' interlink failure (no matter the stack you're considering will suffer an issue).

 

Say:

 

1/x <--> 1/n
1/y <--> 2/m
2/x <--> 2/n
2/y <--> 1/m

 

instead of simply being:

 

1/x <--> 1/n
2/x <--> 2/n

 

 

Thanks Mate for all your help and valuable insight,

 

I'm little confuse here, the way it has been set up is 2 core(3810) on level 9 stacked together connected to access sw on level 9 (6 From avaya atm) as well as level 8 (2 from Aruba, stacked together). To connect the trunk I'm using uplink ports on aruba 2930f. 

 

Are you suggesting to use 1G port also for trunking?

 

Thanks,

Rish

---

@rishabhm wrote:Thanks Mate for all your help and valuable insight

It was my pleasure!

---

@rishabhm wrote: I'm little confuse here, the way it has been set up is 2 core(3810) on level 9 stacked together connected to access sw on level 9 (6 From avaya atm) as well as level 8 (2 from Aruba, stacked together). To connect the trunk I'm using uplink ports on aruba 2930f. 

Understood, that's your topology so it's OK.

---

@rishabhm wrote:Are you suggesting to use 1G port also for trunking?

---

Not necessarily. If your aggregate interface has 10Gbps physical member ports (so trk<x> is made of two or more 10Gbps physical ports) it means that - correctly - the throughput of the trunk is 2x10Gbps...probably because who configured it decided that 2x10Gbps (or 4x10Gbps) are better than 2x1Gbps (or 4x1Gbps) on that uplink...there are various reasons and constrains behind such decision but, generally, if you can aggregated fast ports (e.g. 10Gbps)...do it, it's better than aggregating slow ports (e.g. 1Gbps)...you need to understand that each uplink/downlink between a Core and its various Access switches should be sized to support/sustain the assumed throughput for that uplink.

 

I was only considering that having an uplink between two stacks (2x3810M and 2x2930F) the most reliable form of port aggregation between both stacks is the one that meshes the links as suggested above (case with four links).

Thanks Davide,

 

I really appreciate your help. Also today I noticed on our Aruba core switch and avaya access switch between trunk there is no vlan 1 allowed on avaya while vlan 1 is in trunk on aruba core 3810 side. Is that an issue? as I will deploying those switches on Saturday just wanted to check if I need to keep same vlan consistency although I have allowed all vlans on new aruba switches(2930f) except vlan 1. I'm not sure why the network engineer before me have allowed vlan 1 on aruba core side but not on avaya side. Any idea?

---

@rishabhm wrote: Also today I noticed on our Aruba core switch and avaya access switch between trunk there is no vlan 1 allowed on avaya while vlan 1 is in trunk on aruba core 3810 side. Is that an issue?

Hi! generally it's a good practice to have a matching VLAN tagging (tag/untag) configuration on both ends...if it's not the case it means that excluded VLAN Ids preclude particular tagged traffic (or, eventually, also preclude untagged traffic) to flow on the link set between peers.

---

@rishabhm wrote: as I will deploying those switches on Saturday just wanted to check if I need to keep same vlan consistency although I have allowed all vlans on new aruba switches(2930f) except vlan 1. I'm not sure why the network engineer before me have allowed vlan 1 on aruba core side but not on avaya side. Any idea?

---

Well...given that it's difficult to discover why he/she did things that way without knowing the history behind the network (and how it grew/was modified with time)...a simple explanation could be that he/she simply forgot to remove untagged membership of VLAN id 1 on downlinks after setting tagging membership on those downlinks (I say that because I presume Avaya access switches were deployed well before the Aruba 3810M stack so we can accept that those switches would drive your configuration settings, at least initially)...but this could be a reasonable approach only if we also accept that the absence of VLAN Id 1 as untagged on uplink ports of Avaya switches is something desired (or required) and it doesn't affect the intended operations.

 

The ultimate question is: is VLAN id 1 (Default) necessary into your actual network? is there any host in that VLAN id (check access ports for that)? it both answers are two sound no you can start to think removing it on uplink/downlink ports (provided that, as written, those ports are already tagged at least on another VLAN id (as it is).

 

If no host is on VLAN 1 (globally speaking and especially on your access layer) then you could easily remove it from Aruba 3810;'s downlink ports to Avaya access switches (since Avaya haven't it). That's to have the matching.

 

Another question is: are you 100% sure Avaya switches haven't uplink ports with VLAN 1 untagged membership (maybe it's something implicit - as it is on Aruba - and not explicitly exposed on the running configuration <- I'm just speculating).

Hi ,

Thanks I’m sure nothing is assigned to vlan 1 neither on core aruba switch or avaya switch but as I will be replacing avaya with Aruba 2930f i want to make sure to follow best practices . Also to note, Aruba 3810 has management vlan 100 while on 2930f as well have configured 100 as mgmt port.

Just to know: I have configured dhcp snooping on all vlans and added trusted port, though I have disabled option 82 on snooping is that a best practices to do so? Do you have any suggestion on that?

Thanks,
Rish

Sent from my iPhone

---

@rishabhm wrote: Also to note, Aruba 3810 has management vlan 100 while on 2930f as well have configured 100 as mgmt port.

---

OK, so VLAN 100 will need to be admitted on the uplinks too (thus uplink ports will be configured to be tagged members of that VLAN too)...clearly if your desire is to have it distributed on every switch (I think you will).

 

---

@rishabhm wrote: Just to know: I have configured dhcp snooping on all vlans and added trusted port, though I have disabled option 82 on snooping is that a best practices to do so? Do you have any suggestion on that

---

To avoid adding an off-topic discussion on this specific thread I suggest you to open a new DHCP Snooping dedicated thread (in the meantime, have you already tried to look for other DHCP Snooping threads on the Community? What's about documentation?).