MDS9513 Add ISL to Port Channel problem.

abcwellingtonabc · ‎09-27-2011

Hi Experts,

I have a problem when add a new ISL to an existing Port Channel config.

The ISL port is up state and correctly configured like another ports in port channel.

Looks bellow the error:

MDS1300M6A# show port-channel summary

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Interface Total Ports Oper Ports First Oper Port

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

port-channel 1 4 4 fc12/48

port-channel 2 2 2 fc6/47

MDS1300M6A# show port-channel database

port-channel 1

Administrative channel mode is active

Operational channel mode is active

Last membership update failed: port not compatible [Resources Unavailable]

First operational port is fc12/48

4 ports in total, 4 ports up

Ports: fc12/48 [up] *

fc10/48 [up]

fc11/48 [up]

fc9/48 [up]

Anyone seen this?

Tks

Wellington

Mohammed Hamzeh · ‎09-28-2011

hi Wellington

what version are you running ?

can you send me the port configuration and the port-channel configuration ?

from both sides of the port-channel

thanks

Moh

rammuthaiya · ‎10-08-2011

Hi Wellington,

It seems that the members of the port-channel havung an issue. In fact I have come across same issue.

I did "shut" and "no shut" of each and every member and it came good.

Regards,

Ramkumar

rammuthaiya · ‎10-08-2011

Also confirm the the Port channel is shared mode.

Vu Phan · ‎10-11-2011

Hello Wellington,

make sure the new ISL has the same port speed as the existing members

Thanks

santkumd528 · ‎10-23-2011

Did u make any progress here? Cisco port countd start from 0(like 0-47 on a 48 port scenario). So shouldn't it be fc12/47 instead of fc12/48 in the report?

Michael Concannon · ‎02-07-2012

Also interested in whether there was a resolution to this. I'm currently experiencing the same issue trying to get port channels going between a pair of 6120XP FI's and 9509 MDS switches. Some ports will come up in the channel on the MDS side, others will return the "port not compatible [Resources Unavailable]"

Jeremy Waldrop · ‎02-07-2012

By default interfaces that are put into a SAN port channel must have rate-mode dedicated set. I personally think this is over kill and wastes resources.

The work around that I have used many times is to use a shared mode port-channel. To do this you must first create the port-channel, set the switchport mode to F, channel mode active and set the rate-mode to shared and then add the interfaces to it using the force keyword. Here is an example config

feature npiv

feature fport-channel-trunk

interface port-channel 11

channel mode active

switchport mode F

switchport description SAN Port Channel to UCS 6140-A fc2/1-6,fc3/1-6

switchport rate-mode shared

interface fc1/1

switchport description UCS 6140-A fc2/1

channel-group 11 force

no shutdown

interface fc1/2

switchport description UCS 6140-A fc3/1

channel-group 11 force

interface fc1/7

switchport description UCS 6140-A fc2/2

channel-group 11 force

no shutdown

interface fc1/8

switchport description UCS 6140-A fc3/3

channel-group 11 force

no shutdown

interface fc1/13

switchport description UCS 6140-A fc2/3

channel-group 11 force

no shutdown

interface fc1/14

switchport description UCS 6140-A fc3/4

channel-group 11 force

no shutdown

Michael Concannon · ‎02-08-2012

That did the trick - specifically setting the port channel to rate-mode shared. Certainly solved the problem as far as getting all the deisred ports up in the channel, but where I still have a knowledge gap is the operational difference between dedicated and shared. Are there any Cisco docs (beyond the command reference guide to toggle the feature) that explains why you'd choose one versus the other, and what it means from a design perspective?

On a different note, while I'm no expert, here's some background to consider for others who may encounter the same issue (whether on UCS or a Nexus 5K). I (and our network team) come from an IOS background, so while the IOS "parts" of NX-OS are pretty familiar, the SAN "parts" of NX-OS are a little new. We're also more CLI oriented, and while not impossible to configure via CLI, in our environment, the GUI for UCS seems to be more popular across the board - and we're still learning that piece as well.

Our storage team is very familiar with SAN-OS, so they're very comfortable with the SAN "parts" of NX-OS. But, they're very used to configuring the MDS switches via the GUI, which is what got us off track a bit. In our scenario, creating a SAN port channel on the MDS via the GUI didn't give us the option for setting "switchport rate-mode shared" Not saying it's not there in the GUI, but we certainly couldn't find it.

Long story short, if the configuration of the SAN port channel on the MDS is in question, check it via the CLI and make any necessary changes there as a quick workaroud.

Jeremy Waldrop · ‎02-09-2012

When a port is in rate-mode shared there are no guarantees on how much of the port group bandwidth the port will actually have access to. Depending on the line card there are port groups made of up 6 ports, all 6 ports share 12-13GB of bandwidth. When a port in a port-group is placed in dedicated mode it is gauranteed 4/8G depending on the line card and SFP.

Take a look at this config guide - http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/datacenter/mds9000/sw/5_2/configuration/guides/int/nx-os/gen2.html#wp1073333

zawoo · ‎02-16-2012

You would always use dedicated mode for bringing up ISL. You may also use dedicated mode for high-end storage so that you will have dedicated bandwidth for storage access instead of sharing the bandwidth with others in the same port group. You would use shared mode mostly for hosts and medium to low end storage since you may not need a dedicated bandwidth. It all depends on how you would design your SAN environment.

Sent from Cisco Technical Support iPhone App

Fernand DOUBI · ‎03-14-2015

Hello All !!

I experienced this issue "port not compatible resources unavailable".

I got an explanation to that by checking the throughput of the module in the slot.

You have to check it by the command: show port-resources module <Number of Slot>

So you can see the max bandwith usable by portgroup (For me, 4 ports have 12.8 Gbps).

You cannot have two ports in the same portgroup with 8 Gbps dedicated with this configuration.

I chose one port from different portgroup (Portgroup 1 and 2) for being in dedicated mode in the portchannel.

Finally, make sure to have the same parameters for the members of the portchannel.

Thanks,