ACI UI PortBlk Object Naming

[nplusplus]

Good Morning (US EDT), All,

It seems that between 4.2 and 5.2, ACI started generating a hash to use as the name for portblk objects when creating them through the UI.  Portblk objects used to be named "block<#>" where # seemed to be sequential.  Does anyone know what algorithm is now being used to generate the name for such objects?  I would like to maintain parity with the UI/internal API behavior when implementing code for creating such objects.  I have not yet found a reference to the change in behavior in the release notes, nor can I find a reference to the behavior in the API inspector or object browser.

Thank you,

Nathan

[RedNectar · Accepted solution]

Hi @nplusplus ,

Once you get to ACI v5.2(7f) you are going to find it hard to use any Leaf Profiles or Interface Profiles of your own creation anyway - I suggest you just "go with the flow" and allow ACI to create the names of the Leaf and Interface profiles anyway - and once you have submitted to Cisco's control of that, all interface selectors will also be automatically names, and every infraPortBlk  object will be given the name portblock1 

Here are the new naming systems

1. Leaf Switch Profiles

apic1# moquery -c infraNodeP | egrep "^name\ |^dn"
name : system-node-profile-1201
dn : uni/infra/nprof-system-node-profile-1201
name : system-node-profile-1202
dn : uni/infra/nprof-system-node-profile-1202

2. Interface Profiles

apic1# moquery -c infraAccPortP | egrep "^name\ |^dn"
name : system-port-profile-node-1201
dn : uni/infra/accportprof-system-port-profile-node-1201
name : system-port-profile-node-1202
dn : uni/infra/accportprof-system-port-profile-node-1202

3. Interface Selectors - note that an interface selector won't be created unless there is an Interface Policy Group to attach it to - and it then VERY ANNOYINGLY appends the name of the Interface Policy Group to the selector name

apic1# moquery -c infraHPortS | egrep "^name\|^dn" 
name : system-port-selector-accportgrp-T18:SA.Host_APPG
dn : uni/infra/accportprof-system-port-profile-node-1201/hports-system-port-selector-accportgrp-T18:SA.Host_APPG-typ-range
name : system-port-selector-accportgrp-T18:SA.Host_APPG
dn : uni/infra/fexprof-system-fex-192-profile-node-1202/hports-system-port-selector-accportgrp-T18:SA.Host_APPG-typ-range
name : system-port-selector-accbundle-T18:L1201..1202:1:48_VPCIPG
dn : uni/infra/accportprof-system-port-profile-node-1202/hports-system-port-selector-accbundle-T18:L1201..1202:1:48_VPCIPG-typ-range
name : system-port-selector-accbundle-T18:L1201..1202:1:48_VPCIPG
dn : uni/infra/accportprof-system-port-profile-node-1201/hports-system-port-selector-accbundle-T18:L1201..1202:1:48_VPCIPG-typ-range

I'm annoyed with this naming because

1. I reserve the suffix _APPG for Access Port Policy Groups, and now the system has ruined my naming convention, and
2. the resulting names are ridiculously long

[nplusplus]

Not sure if I should be excited or worried given that I currently have to upgrade to 5.2.7 soon.

Thank you,

Nathan