cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
2105
Views
5
Helpful
13
Replies
Highlighted
Beginner

ACI - Interface configuration deleted but faults still displayed

Hi ,

For testing purposes, a leaf interface has been configured (1/38). Finally, the configuration wasn't necessary and has been deleted.

Unfortunately, a fault regarding the interface stay displayed.

How can I remove it ?

You will find attached screenshot and detailed description about this issue.

Thank you

Ju

13 REPLIES 13
Highlighted
Participant

Hi Ju

Looks like there is a static binding configured on this interface. Delete the binding and the fault should disappear.

HTH

Marcel

Highlighted
Cisco Employee

Marcel is correct. That EPG still has a static path to that port. 

Highlighted

Thank You Marcel and Dpita for your answers.

You will find attached an extract from visore about all my static paths.

As you can see, I don't have any binding to the port 1/38 on leaf 103. Only on leaf 101 and 102 for l3-out. Curious thing, on the leaf 101 and 102, it's on the same port id (1/38).

Additionally, in my configuration:

- For the moment I never use 'static binding'.

- Most of the times I'm using 'Physical domain association' to bind an epg to a physical Domain -> Aaep -> Interface Policy Group -> and finally a port block through an Interface Profile. In my current config, the block 1/38 associated to the interface profile/switch profile 103 has been deleted. So I don't know how a binding could persist ?

Any ideas ?

Regards,

Ju

Highlighted

Thanks for the extra info. 

I dont suppose you have an AAEP with a EPG deployed from it? the object would be

infraRsFuncToEpg

its a newer feature where you can deploy an static path or EPG/VLAN from the AAEP level. Based on your fault that might be the case

"node-103/attEntitypathatt-[aep-name-aep]rsstPathAtt"

Highlighted

Yes.

I'm using this new feature to bind the EPG with a vlan encapsulation.

But I don't use it to make static binding to specific physical interface...

Ju

Highlighted

Ill try to recreate the issue. 

In the mean time, please provide the output of the object i mentioned in my last reply

infraRsFuncToEpg

Thanks!

Highlighted

Thank you for your help Dpita.

You will find attached the files.

Ju

Highlighted

Hello

could you please open a case to handle this? i am on shift for the next 30 minutes and would love to see this live in a webex. 

thanks!

Highlighted

I'm currently out of office for a day. Ill open a case friday. Maybe you will be in charge ;-)

Ju

Highlighted

Hi Daniel,

The case is created :

681772081

Ju

Highlighted

Thanks for the update. i have read through the case notes. You are in good hands. 

Have a nice day. 

Please make sure to close the loop with this SupportForum thread when the case is resolved!

Highlighted

Hi Daniel,

FYI, finally a bug has been opened by Denis (Tac)

CSCvd38936

Symptom:
F0467 is displayed for interface wich is not configured as part of EPG

Conditions:
Interface was previously associated with EPG via configuration on AEP level

Workaround:
na for the moment

Ju

Highlighted

Below the workaround proposed by the TAC team (Denis Boichenko):

===========================================

"Based on this information, I was able to reproduce the problem in my lab:

  1. Step1: We don’t have any access port selector created on interface profile XXX
  2. Step2: Create two access port selectors under interface profile XXX:
  3. access port selector 1-33
  4. Interface: eth 1/33
  5. PolicyGroup: Regularport
  6. access port selector 1-34
  7. Interface: eth 1/34
  8. PolicyGroup: Regularport
  9. Step3: Remove policy group under access port selector “1-34”, so we don’t have any policy group configured at all for this access port selector

 After this, the fault occurs on Tenant XXXX, EPG-XX. After we remove access port selector “1-34”,the fault remains present forever

 In order to get rid of fault, we need to create the same access port selector “1-34” and assign it to the same policy group. If we need to remove access port selector “1-34”, we need to remove it completely without firstly removing association with policy group"

===========================================

Ju