Both LACP interface ethernet1/2 moved out of AE-group

cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Announcements
Please sign in to see details of an important advisory in our Customer Advisories area.

Both LACP interface ethernet1/2 moved out of AE-group

L2 Linker

We've a PA-3050 up and running for over a year now. It is configured with an agregated interface with LACP enabled (mode active, transmission rate Fast). These interfaces are attacheced to a procurve 5406 where the interfaces on the procurve are configured as a trunk of the type lacp.

 

This was running fine till now. Last 3 days the connection on the aggregated interface was gone for about 10 minutes. During this period the system log is filled with these kind of messages:

 

lacp-up,ethernet1/1,0,0,general,critical,LACP interface ethernet1/1 moved into AE-group ae1
lacp-up,ethernet1/2,0,0,general,critical,LACP interface ethernet1/2 moved into AE-group ae1
nego-fail,ethernet1/2,0,0,general,critical,LACP interface ethernet1/2 moved out of AE-group ae1
nego-fail,ethernet1/1,0,0,general,critical,LACP interface ethernet1/1 moved out of AE-group ae1

 

I found this article, and this seems to be the case. (the l2ctrld.log is filled up with these messages). However: I have no idear how to fix this.

 

Procurve:

show lacp local

LACP Local Information.


System ID: 001ffe-854700


LACP Tx Rx Timer
Port Trunk Mode Aggregated Timer Expired
---- ------ -------- ----------- ------ --------
A3 Trk2 Active Yes Fast No
A4 Trk2 Active Yes Fast No

 

show lacp peer

LACP Peer Information.


System ID: 001ffe-854700


Local Local Port Oper LACP Tx
Port Trunk System ID Port Priority Key Mode Timer
------ ------ -------------- ----- --------- ------- -------- -----
A3 Trk2 d4f4be-407901 16 32768 48 Active Fast
A4 Trk2 d4f4be-407901 17 32768 48 Active Fast

 

Palo Alto: 

show lacp aggregate-ethernet ae1

LACP:

**********************************************************************************
AE group: ae1
Members: Bndl Rx state Mux state Sel state
ethernet1/1 yes Current Tx_Rx Selected
ethernet1/2 yes Current Tx_Rx Selected
Status: Enabled
Mode: Active
Rate: Fast
Max-port: 8
Fast-failover: Disabled
Pre-negotiation: Disabled
Local: System Priority: 32768
System MAC: d4:f4:be:40:79:01
Key: 48
Partner: System Priority: 18176
System MAC: 00:1f:fe:85:47:00
Key: 291
Port State
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interface Port
Number Priority Mode Rate Key State
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ethernet1/1 16 32768 Active Fast 48 0x3F
Partner 3 0 Active Slow 291 0x3D

ethernet1/2 17 32768 Active Fast 48 0x3F
Partner 4 0 Active Slow 291 0x3D

Port Counters
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interface LACPDUs Marker Marker Response Error
Sent Recv Sent Recv Sent Recv Unknown Illegal
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ethernet1/1 390044 11674573 0 0 0 0 0 0
ethernet1/2 390048 11674600 0 0 0 0 0 0

19 REPLIES 19

First, I would migrate off of Junos version 14.x for anything unless it is JTAC recommended.  There are only a couple pieces of hardware that still use this as recommended.  All of my hardware is v15.x minimum with most v17.x or higher.  PAN 7.1.x is going EOL next year.  I would move to 8.1.x ASAP.  It appears you are running code versions that are becoming fairly dated.  I would not worry about "increased traffic" of LACP active.  You aren't running 10/100mbit links.  Even then, it probably wouldn't be an issue.

Yeah, I agree with that, let me do it active/active & will update you, it might be a possibility with version 14.1x53 I'm running on the switch.

 

Thanks for all your help & thoughts.

 

Regards,

Ganesh

I also noticed the same problem between Pan 5250  running 8.1.13 and Juniper QFX10002  running JunOS 18.4R2.7

 

Both Active,  Fast.  but 1 interface is keep going out of AE group almost 2 to 5 times an hour.

 

 

 

If it's the same interface, I'd start looking at Layer 1.  Bad cable?

I have PA 5050 setup as  Fast and Nokia device as slow.

This setup works fine since last 4 years.

 

MP

Help the community: Like helpful comments and mark solutions.
  • 20519 Views
  • 19 replies
  • 1 Likes
Like what you see?

Show your appreciation!

Click Like if a post is helpful to you or if you just want to show your support.

Click Accept as Solution to acknowledge that the answer to your question has been provided.

The button appears next to the replies on topics you’ve started. The member who gave the solution and all future visitors to this topic will appreciate it!

These simple actions take just seconds of your time, but go a long way in showing appreciation for community members and the LIVEcommunity as a whole!

The LIVEcommunity thanks you for your participation!