SD Access Border types and L2VN conversion

[KevinR99]

Hi

When I define a Border type in SDA by selecting or deselecting the Default to all Virtual Networks and Do not import external routes I can no longer change those selections.  So if I have initially selected an Anywhere Border because that was appropriate at the time but things change and I now prefer to change my Border type why can I no longer change this without decomissioning my Border and re-adding it again.  What are the technical challenges that mean I cannot make this change in service?

Also, if I initially routed a vlan outside my fabric by means of a L2VN and L2 handoff but now want to route it inside the fabric by an Anycast gateway I cannot convert the L2VN to an Anycast gateway.  So I need to clear all my port assignments in the L2VN on every edge, delete the L2VN, create the Anycast gateway then re-assign the original ports to the gateway address pool.  What are the technical challenges around just converting the L2VN to an Anycast gateway.  In a non-SDA network it's as simple as creating an SVI and routing it.  No need to change the vlan id or even clear the ports.

Hopefully these features will be available in the near future.

Thanks, Kev.

[Torbjørn]

I agree with you @KevinR99, especially on the second one. It has cost me a few hours at this point... 

I would suggest submitting these with "Make a wish" on your Catalyst Center. You can find this by clicking the question mark in the top right of the UI and selecting "Make a wish".

[Andrii Oliinyk]

Guys, let me to complement u. CatC lacks of:
1) automate L3-handoff in single VLAN
2) support VLAN-translation on L2-handoff
3) stp bpdu-guard support on trunks to servers
etc etc etc...
it's just a 0.1% of my experience on "cannots" in CatC. & yeah, i dont believe in "make a whish" unless somebody will bring reliable positive statistics on its usability.

[Torbjørn]

They do actually respond to suggestions there sometimes, but I have yet to see any of my suggested improvements outside of simple bugfixes actually be implemented. I don't think there is a better way to propose these changes unfortunately

[jedolphi]

i dont believe in "make a whish"

We do review and prioritise the MAWs, and the more MAWs there are for a use case the more likely it will be priortised.

What are the technical challenges that mean I cannot make this change in service?

The automation needs to be written and tested, including accounting for what can happen to overlay/production traffic if this change is made while packets are flowing.

cannot convert the L2VN to an Anycast gateway

Please do raise an MAW if you have not already. And may I suggest you also raise it to your Cisco sales team.

[KevinR99]

I have made a wish on the L2VN to Anycast gateway issue and received feedback that the feature is roadmapped.  Still to find that destination on the roadmap as of 2.3.7.7

Regarding the Border change.  I'd be surprised if there have not already been many MAWs on that feature.  After all, we do like to make changes to our networks after we install them.  In a traditional network world this would be as simple as redistributing routes which can be done easily, quickly and without impact.  It seems SDA has over complicated this.  I have the "intent" to do this but SDA doesn't have the ability to convert my "business intent" into reality.  So for now I need to remove a Border/CP from my fabric then re-add it with different boxes ticked whilst "accounting for what can happen to overlay/production traffic if this change is made while packets are flowing"