<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Cisco ASR OTV fallback route/MAC flapping in Application Networking</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/application-networking/cisco-asr-otv-fallback-route-mac-flapping/m-p/2898977#M44016</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 12pt;"&gt;Appreciate any advice if you have experience similar issue before.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 12pt;"&gt;Running OTV between two sites using a pair of ASRs at each site in unicast mode. Two VLAN stretched between the two sites.&amp;nbsp; The typical behavior for MAC learn via ISIS should be admin distance of 50 with the local host MAC being 40.&amp;nbsp; When I look into it more deeply on the MAC address flapping for a handful of the hosts in one of the VLAN after a fallback test. &amp;nbsp;I see the local route towards the switch with an &lt;STRONG&gt;admin distance of 40 installed as a backup route, &lt;/STRONG&gt;and a &lt;STRONG&gt;preferred alternative received from the Overlay with an admin distance of 30&lt;/STRONG&gt;. &amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 12pt;"&gt;Does this mean there might be some looping occurring.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 12pt;"&gt;Any idea what does the AD 30 mean, I can’t seem to find the definition anywhere on the web?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 12pt;"&gt;Is there any way to ensure the locally-learned route is always preferred anyway&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 12pt;"&gt;(i&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;.&lt;/SPAN&gt;e&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;.&lt;/SPAN&gt; can I configure it to have a lower admin distance than anything the Overlay generates?)&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 12pt; color: #1f497d;"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 12pt;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;Another strange observation&amp;nbsp;is that similar&amp;nbsp;routes is found in the&amp;nbsp;otv arp-nd-cache for both site.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt;"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Apr 2016 02:43:42 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>light101sg</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-04-25T02:43:42Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Cisco ASR OTV fallback route/MAC flapping</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/application-networking/cisco-asr-otv-fallback-route-mac-flapping/m-p/2898977#M44016</link>
      <description>Reach ability issue after OTV fallback with route/MAC flapping observed.</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Apr 2016 02:43:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/application-networking/cisco-asr-otv-fallback-route-mac-flapping/m-p/2898977#M44016</guid>
      <dc:creator>light101sg</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-04-25T02:43:42Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

