<?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: APIC-EM C220M4 LACP Query in Controllers</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/controllers/apic-em-c220m4-lacp-query/m-p/3561582#M993</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I think your question is about why multiple interfaces, if only one has a default route?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Let me give you my deployment (albeit with two physical interfaces, but same concept applies).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have an "external" management network that connects to external services like HTTP/CCO etc.&amp;nbsp; This is also the interface that the HTTP user comes in on.&amp;nbsp; You can think of this as the "northbound".&amp;nbsp; This interface needs a default route as it is going to CCO for applications like Active advisor/maps etc.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;All of the devices in my lab are accessible via a "private" southbound interface.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; These IP addresses are well known, so I have a static route to get to these well-defined management IP addresses for my network devices.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This is a common approach where people will generally not allow general access to the management network for their devices.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Adam&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Sun, 03 Dec 2017 03:24:03 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>aradford</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2017-12-03T03:24:03Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>APIC-EM C220M4 LACP Query</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/controllers/apic-em-c220m4-lacp-query/m-p/3561580#M991</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hello Fellow Networkers,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We are rebuilding a three appliance cluster operating APIC-EM Version 1.6.0.30151 and need clarification on the wisdom of my actions.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;During the GUI install I did not assign an VLAN ID to bond0 VNIC 1 (management interface) of a LACP bonded pair of Gigabit ports, but did assign IP addressing.&amp;nbsp; We assigned VLAN 888 to a bond0: Virtual NIC2 and populated with an accessible range of addresses.&amp;nbsp; Following completion we can fully manage the appliance via bond:0 VNIC 2, but have no access to bond0: VNIC 1 IP range.&amp;nbsp; I have tried setting the native VLAN on the neighbouring switch trunk port but I’m not seeing any MACs other than that associated with bond0: VNIC2 (VLAN 888).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;What’s the recommended corrective action other than a “config_wizard”?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Pearls of wisdom would be much appreciated.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks in anticpation.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2019 12:42:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/controllers/apic-em-c220m4-lacp-query/m-p/3561580#M991</guid>
      <dc:creator>michael.taylor</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-01T12:42:03Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: APIC-EM C220M4 LACP Query</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/controllers/apic-em-c220m4-lacp-query/m-p/3561581#M992</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;OK school boy error fixed by adding the native vlan to the trunk allowed VLANs; however, a question remains.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Addition of adding multiple virtual interfaces to the LAG is optional; indeed, only one IP interface can host a Default Gateway.&amp;nbsp; So assuming that the southbound interface has to be routable what is the point of adding a non-routable management interface akin to a Wireless LAN Controller Service Port?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Dec 2017 12:14:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/controllers/apic-em-c220m4-lacp-query/m-p/3561581#M992</guid>
      <dc:creator>michael.taylor</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-12-01T12:14:52Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: APIC-EM C220M4 LACP Query</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/controllers/apic-em-c220m4-lacp-query/m-p/3561582#M993</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I think your question is about why multiple interfaces, if only one has a default route?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Let me give you my deployment (albeit with two physical interfaces, but same concept applies).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have an "external" management network that connects to external services like HTTP/CCO etc.&amp;nbsp; This is also the interface that the HTTP user comes in on.&amp;nbsp; You can think of this as the "northbound".&amp;nbsp; This interface needs a default route as it is going to CCO for applications like Active advisor/maps etc.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;All of the devices in my lab are accessible via a "private" southbound interface.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; These IP addresses are well known, so I have a static route to get to these well-defined management IP addresses for my network devices.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This is a common approach where people will generally not allow general access to the management network for their devices.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Adam&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 03 Dec 2017 03:24:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/controllers/apic-em-c220m4-lacp-query/m-p/3561582#M993</guid>
      <dc:creator>aradford</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-12-03T03:24:03Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

