cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
10525
Views
10
Helpful
10
Replies

ACI - Atomic Counters - F1549 - Packets Dropped

ju.mahieu
Level 1
Level 1

Hi,

The error F1549 is currently occurring on our ACI platform. The file attached summarizes all the information I have collected.

But unfortunately, I can't find the cause of this issue

How to deal with this kind of error ? Any ideas to find out the root cause ?

APIC running version : 2.1(1h).

Thank you.

Ju

1 Accepted Solution

Accepted Solutions

Any atomic counter stats are going to be unreliable for EX based switches. We have multiple bugs opened to track this (CSCvb89753 is a customer visible one). 2.1(1h) fixed some (not all) of these faults (or at least suppressed them). We verify that this isn’t causing problems in a couple of different ways:

    -Verify that no drops are being seen on spine uplink ports
    -Capture traffic on both source and dest of a flow and verify that everything is being received (provided there are performance complaints)

Until we get a complete fix for atomic counter reporting the only thing that we can suggest at this point is to squelch these faults. You won’t lose any functionality in doing this because atomic counters can’t be trusted as a reliable source of information at this point with EX switches.

View solution in original post

10 Replies 10

Marcel Zehnder
Spotlight
Spotlight

Hi Ju

Is this a stretched fabric? If yes, these faults are kind of normal behavior:

http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/switches/datacenter/aci/apic/sw/kb/b_kb-aci-stretched-fabric.html#concept_524263C54D8749F2AD248FAEBA7DAD78

Regards

Marcel

Hi Marcel,

This is not a stretched Fabric.You'll find attached the design.

Our "legacy" network is currently operating on two Catalyst 6500.

Regards,

Joseph Young
Cisco Employee
Cisco Employee

Are these EX series switches?

Yes Joseph. We have the following devices

LEAF101 - N9K-C93180YC-EX

LEAF102 - N9K-C93180YC-EX

SPINE201 - N9K-C9336PQ

SPINE202 - N9K-C9336PQ

Ju

Any atomic counter stats are going to be unreliable for EX based switches. We have multiple bugs opened to track this (CSCvb89753 is a customer visible one). 2.1(1h) fixed some (not all) of these faults (or at least suppressed them). We verify that this isn’t causing problems in a couple of different ways:

    -Verify that no drops are being seen on spine uplink ports
    -Capture traffic on both source and dest of a flow and verify that everything is being received (provided there are performance complaints)

Until we get a complete fix for atomic counter reporting the only thing that we can suggest at this point is to squelch these faults. You won’t lose any functionality in doing this because atomic counters can’t be trusted as a reliable source of information at this point with EX switches.

Hi Joseph,

I don't have any drops on spine uplink ports, hence I can wait the bug has been fixed.

Thank you for your explanation.

Regards,

Ju

I hate to dredge up an old thread, but is the atomic counters still an issue under the 3.1 and 3.2 trains? Thanks!

 

I would like to know this aswell. We are running 3.2 and I have fault 1549 for a couple of EX switches. Thanks.

This is not clear to me, however I have seen these at least on 3.1.1x

 

Would be great to have an official statement here from Cisco.

 

 

We are experiencing this same fault and we have FX switches. We already squelched the faults but it still keeps on reoccurring. Are atomic counters unreliable for FX switches as well ? 

Could you share the link for the documentation on this? 

We are running ACI 5.1(2e).

Getting Started

Find answers to your questions by entering keywords or phrases in the Search bar above. New here? Use these resources to familiarize yourself with the community:

Save 25% on Day-2 Operations Add-On License