Forum Discussion
soymanue
Nimbostratus
NimbostratusConfigSync issue with LTM 11.2 HF1
Hello
I have upgraded two BIG-IP 3600 from version 11.1 to 11.2 HF1.
High Availability seems to be working, but ConfigSync fails.
Both devices show "Disconnected" state.
If you go to Device Management > Devices the other peer appears with its older information.
I've tried to force ConfigSync from console:
tmsh run cm config-sync to-group /Common/device-group-failover-67cbdf7d77ca
tmsh run cm config-sync to-group device-group-failover-67cbdf7d77ca
But nothing happens.
In /var/log/ltm file there are several messages like this:
Can't connect to CMI peer 192.168.96.251, port:6699, Transport endpoint is not connected
Telent to the other peer's 6699 port doesn't work:
telnet 192.168.96.251 6699
Trying 192.168.96.251...
telnet: connect to address 192.168.96.251: Connection refused
telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: Connection refused
Any idea?
Anthonyjoy of joys!! I've just changes the untagged interfaces in the vLAN and its fixed it. I'd be interested to understand why Device1 had 1.1/1.2 UP and Device2 only had 1.2 UP.
Thank you so much for your help so far with this!
Anthony- What_Lies_Bene1
Cirrostratus
Glad it's working Anthony. Out of interest what exactly did you change, it's not clear? - AnthonyMight help if I explain!
In Network > Interfaces, Device1 had 1.1 and 1.2 UP, Device2 had 1.2.
vLAN configuration only had 1.1 untagged. I set this to also include 1.2 and the magic happened.
I've been speaking with a colleague, trying to get our heads around it with very limited knowledge, and we assume that this is a hardware configuration, as there appears to be no way to affect the UP/DOWN status apart from disabiling it - I'd like to understand this a bit better incase it is something that needs to be fed back to the person who built it.
Thanks
Ant - What_Lies_Bene1So you added the same VLAN (untagged) that was assigned to 1.1 (which was down) to 1.2 (untagged) yes?
You are correct regarding the UP/DOWN status. Of course, as you've found, UP doesn't mean things are working past layer 2, as with any other device. Is the VLAN in question assigned to both 1.1 and 1.2 on device1? If so why? As a failover? Any idea why 1.1 is down on device2? - AnthonyYes I untagged/assigned 1.1 & 1.2 in the VLAN. There is a future plan to have both interfaces in use, effectively doubling the bandwidth. It just looks like they have been plugged in differently in the datacentres so a ticket will be raised to sort that out.
- What_Lies_Bene1OK. Well, you might want to look into trunking and LACP to avoid running STP.
- AnthonyThanks Steve, I will have a look into those. Not sure what they are right now, but sure it will all become clear when I start delving deeper.
Thanks
Ant - What_Lies_Bene1
Anthony. Are you not a network engineer? If these devices are for production traffic I'd suggest you need some assistance to prevent issues in the future caused by a poor design or implementation now. No offence intended but BIG-IPs are far from plug and play.
- AnthonyI'm far from a network engineer. My team and I just look after them once they are plugged in and configured initially. The serious network configuration will be done by our network engineer.
- What_Lies_Bene1Glad to hear it. Cheers