<?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 Re: Layer 2 Migration Challenge in Software-Defined Access (SD-Access)</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/software-defined-access-sd-access/layer-2-migration-challenge/m-p/4172361#M916</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I thought I would give an update if anyone finds this in future. It does seem to be a bug,&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://bst.cloudapps.cisco.com/bugsearch/bug/CSCvv03589" target="_blank"&gt;https://bst.cloudapps.cisco.com/bugsearch/bug/CSCvv03589&lt;/A&gt;. (I don't think it is publicly disclosed yet)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;From TAC engineer, it seems to be cosmetic at this stage.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE&gt;The root cause of this traceback because there is an all zero source mac passed in and trying to create mac entry in SISF.
This traceback won’t cause any crash.&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2020 07:21:54 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>scvvuuren</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2020-10-23T07:21:54Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Layer 2 Migration Challenge</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/software-defined-access-sd-access/layer-2-migration-challenge/m-p/4161446#M881</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Good Day&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I was busy with a change for a customer over the weekend but decided to roll back due to the following error messages received on the L2 border.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE&gt;Oct  3 2020 14:47:07.674 UTC: %LISP-4-MAP_SERVER_CONVERGING: IID 8217 Map-server is converging, unable to send negative map-reply.
Oct  3 2020 14:47:51.811 UTC: %SISF-3-INTERNAL: Internal error, Invalid creation arguments 3 20 50 -Process= "SISF Main Thread", ipl= 0, pid= 371 -Traceback= 1#b32070248316f3a388a1fd2209b0de6c  :55C5259A6000+696A206 :55C5259A6000+68E6123 :55C5259A6000+68E860B :55C5259A6000+688A47C :55C5259A6000+68B0AC9 :55C5259A6000+686E11A :55C5259A6000+69255F1 :55C5259A6000+696E708 :55C5259A6000+AAB5673 :55C5259A6000+696D42B :55C5259A6000+AA8907E&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;We have about 5 or even more subnets as layer 2 borders currently with no issues so far.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;It is only observed when migrating a specific subnet, even after deleting it completely from fabric and re-creating it the same condition applies.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I then did the same process with another subnet, no issues.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The only thing I can think of thus far, if perhaps one of the existing subnets as layer 2 border might be bridged to this subnet in the legacy lan perhaps.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Any ideas, advise?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2020 09:16:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/software-defined-access-sd-access/layer-2-migration-challenge/m-p/4161446#M881</guid>
      <dc:creator>scvvuuren</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-10-05T09:16:08Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Layer 2 Migration Challenge</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/software-defined-access-sd-access/layer-2-migration-challenge/m-p/4161691#M882</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;What version of Cisco DNA Center and IOS XE are you on?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Are you experiencing any forwarding or other issues or just receiving a Traceback?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2020 17:36:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/software-defined-access-sd-access/layer-2-migration-challenge/m-p/4161691#M882</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jonathan Cuthbert</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-10-05T17:36:12Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Layer 2 Migration Challenge</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/software-defined-access-sd-access/layer-2-migration-challenge/m-p/4161863#M886</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;DNAC 1.3.3.7 with IOS-XE 17.3.1.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I could not observe actual forwarding issues, but did not want to migrate subnet into the fabric until I fully understand the issue and the repercussions of it.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So yesterday I thought about having a look at the MAC entries in the device-tracking database and found 1 particular MAC address 9 times. In different VRF's, but there are no entries in the CAM or ARP tables of this MAC address.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE&gt;show device-tracking database | i 0000.0000.00fd&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;Closest thing I could find thus far is this bug:&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://bst.cloudapps.cisco.com/bugsearch/bug/CSCvm86310/?rfs=iqvred" target="_blank"&gt;https://bst.cloudapps.cisco.com/bugsearch/bug/CSCvm86310/?rfs=iqvred&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;What I did find interesting though is in a TrustSec Configuration Guide when they show an example of show device-tracking database the same MAC appears in the document so it does not seem to be something specifically on the customers network.&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/sec_usr_cts/configuration/15-sy/sec-cts-15-sy-book/cts_ipv6_sgt_sgacl.html" target="_blank"&gt;https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/sec_usr_cts/configuration/15-sy/sec-cts-15-sy-book/cts_ipv6_sgt_sgacl.html&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2020 06:34:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/software-defined-access-sd-access/layer-2-migration-challenge/m-p/4161863#M886</guid>
      <dc:creator>scvvuuren</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-10-06T06:34:33Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Layer 2 Migration Challenge</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/software-defined-access-sd-access/layer-2-migration-challenge/m-p/4172361#M916</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I thought I would give an update if anyone finds this in future. It does seem to be a bug,&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://bst.cloudapps.cisco.com/bugsearch/bug/CSCvv03589" target="_blank"&gt;https://bst.cloudapps.cisco.com/bugsearch/bug/CSCvv03589&lt;/A&gt;. (I don't think it is publicly disclosed yet)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;From TAC engineer, it seems to be cosmetic at this stage.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE&gt;The root cause of this traceback because there is an all zero source mac passed in and trying to create mac entry in SISF.
This traceback won’t cause any crash.&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2020 07:21:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/software-defined-access-sd-access/layer-2-migration-challenge/m-p/4172361#M916</guid>
      <dc:creator>scvvuuren</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-10-23T07:21:54Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

