cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
455
Views
1
Helpful
15
Replies

Problem between Routers ASR 920 with Rapid PVST and switch with RSTP

AmilcarDD
Level 1
Level 1

Dear Sirs,

We have encountered an issue whan connecting a switch with RSTP redundancy to a redundant Cisco ASR 920 arrangement.

Each router is connected to the adjacent router, by a *tp cable in each site and by fiber optic to other sites.

The routers are configured for Rapid PVST.

Based on the behaviour, it seems the Cisco Routers are unaware of the second ring that exists locally through the switch, and are constantly shuting down the ports, probably due to storm detection or the likes.

Can you advise on how we should change the configuration of the router ports that are connected to the switch, in order to obtain stable operation ?


Both routers have the identical configurations:

(...)
spanning-tree mode rapid-pvst
spanning-tree extend system-id
no spanning-tree vlan 90-95,410-415
spanning-tree vlan 190-195 priority 4096
sdm prefer default
diagnostic bootup level minimal
(...)
interface GigabitEthernet0/0/5
description [GSEXT] SCADA LAN
no ip address
no ip proxy-arp
load-interval 30
shutdown
media-type auto-select
negotiation auto
storm-control broadcast level 10.00
storm-control action shutdown
service-policy input PM_IN
service instance 194 ethernet
description LAN SCADA
encapsulation untagged , dot1q 194
l2protocol peer stp
bridge-domain 194
!
!
(...)
interface GigabitEthernet0/0/10
description == Link Router 1 to Router 2 Gi0/0/10 ==
no ip address
no ip redirects
no ip unreachables
no ip proxy-arp
load-interval 30
media-type auto-select
negotiation auto
cdp enable
service-policy output PM_OUT
service instance 90 ethernet
description P2P 1
encapsulation dot1q 90
rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetric
bridge-domain 90
!
service instance 92 ethernet
description P2P 2
encapsulation dot1q 92
rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetric
bridge-domain 92
!
service instance 93 ethernet
description P2P 3
encapsulation dot1q 93
rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetric
bridge-domain 93
!
service instance 94 ethernet
description P2P 4
encapsulation dot1q 94
rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetric
bridge-domain 94
!
service instance 95 ethernet
description P2P 5
encapsulation dot1q 95
rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetric
bridge-domain 95
!
service instance 190 ethernet
description LAN 6
encapsulation dot1q 190
rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetric
l2protocol peer stp
bridge-domain 190
!
service instance 192 ethernet
description LAN 7
encapsulation dot1q 192
rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetric
l2protocol peer stp
bridge-domain 192
!
service instance 193 ethernet
description LAN 8
encapsulation dot1q 193
rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetric
l2protocol peer stp
bridge-domain 193
!
service instance 194 ethernet
description LAN 9
encapsulation dot1q 194
rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetric
l2protocol peer stp
bridge-domain 194
!
service instance 195 ethernet
description LAN 10
encapsulation dot1q 195
rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetric
l2protocol peer cdp stp
bridge-domain 195
!
service instance 1024 ethernet
encapsulation untagged
l2protocol peer cdp stp
bridge-domain 1024
!
!WAN_LAN_Topology.jpg

15 Replies 15

Hello
I would try and use the same if applicable- in either case i would suggest you need to make sure its enabled for ALL vlans on all switching hardware that is running  L2 and tagging including those rts if they are doing L2 also
However care must be taken -I do not understand your topology fully to say go ahead and do such changes - you need to be mindful of any changes you make especially if it effects hardware you do not administer
 


Please rate and mark as an accepted solution if you have found any of the information provided useful.
This then could assist others on these forums to find a valuable answer and broadens the community’s global network.

Kind Regards
Paul
Review Cisco Networking for a $25 gift card