06-20-2011 11:06 PM - edited 03-07-2019 12:54 AM
HI everyone
I have two 3750Xs for stack, and i want connect a 2960 switch on this stack with port-channel.
I connect 2960 G0/1 to 3750X G1/0/24, and 2960 G0/2 to 3750X G2/0/24.
the config is that:
3750X:
interface Port-channel1
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport mode trunk
interface GigabitEthernet1/0/24
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport mode trunk
channel-group 1 mode on
interface GigabitEthernet2/0/24
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport mode trunk
channel-group 1 mode on
2960:
interface Port-channel1
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport mode trunk
interface GigabitEthernet0/1
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport mode trunk
channel-group 1 mode on
interface GigabitEthernet0/2
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport mode trunk
channel-group 1 mode on
after that, 3750X stack show me a error-disable message:
*Mar 1 00:04:00.266: %PM-4-ERR_DISABLE: channel-misconfig (STP) error detected on Gi1/0/24, putting Gi1/0/24 in err-disable state
*Mar 1 00:04:00.333: %PM-4-ERR_DISABLE: channel-misconfig (STP) error detected on Po1, putting Gi1/0/24 in err-disable state
*Mar 1 00:04:00.333: %PM-4-ERR_DISABLE: channel-misconfig (STP) error detected on Po1, putting Po1 in err-disable state
*Mar 1 00:04:01.281: %LINEPROTO-5-UPDOWN: Line protocol on Interface GigabitEthernet1/0/24, changed state to down
*Mar 1 00:04:00.300: %PM-4-ERR_DISABLE: channel-misconfig (STP) error detected on Gi2/0/24, putting Gi2/0/24 in err-disable state (Switch-2)
*Mar 1 00:04:01.315: %LINEPROTO-5-UPDOWN: Line protocol on Interface GigabitEthernet2/0/24, changed state to down
*Mar 1 00:04:01.315: %LINEPROTO-5-UPDOWN: Line protocol on Interface Port-channel1, changed state to down
i try to config spanning-tree etherchannel guard misconfig, but no use
finally, i have to use "no errdisable detect cause all"
i check the cisco.com, and find a information: for this case, channel-group can use mode desirble.
but when i try to change the channel-group in 3750X stack, it shows me that: "with pagp enable, desirble mode must config in the same switch"
i try to use mode desirble mode in G1/0/23 and G1/0/24 in 3750X stack, it still can not work.
i want to know how to solve this problem? not only do "no errdisable detect cause all".
Thanks a lot
Solved! Go to Solution.
06-21-2011 02:46 AM
Hello,
You are using your EtherChannel without a negotiation protocol. As a result, if the opposite switch is not also configured for EtherChannel operation on the respective ports, there is a danger of a switching loop. The EtherChannel Misconfiguration Guard tries to prevent that loop from occuring by disabling all the ports bundled in the EtherChannel.
I cannot stress this enough: never, never, NEVER use the "on" mode for EtherChannels until absolutely certain you understand all the implications. The EtherChannel negotiation protocols PAgP and LACP are designed precisely to detect whether the opposite switch is configured for EtherChannel and bundle the ports only if the opposite switch has agreed to do the same.
My advice:
This way, you will configure both your switches to negotiate the creation of the EtherChannel, and prevent the misconfig guard from tripping.
Oh, by the way, did I say that using the "on" mode is a bad idea?
Best regards,
Peter
06-21-2011 12:38 AM
Hi
Can you please provide the STP configuration...
aslo output of
sh span root
How many vlans have you configured?
Thanks
Vignesh
06-21-2011 02:23 AM
the STP :
spanning-tree mode pvst
spanning-tree extend system-id
vlan 150-151
show spanning tree:
Switch#sh spanning-tree
VLAN0001
Spanning tree enabled protocol ieee
Root ID Priority 32769
Address 40f4.ec9d.2a00
Cost 3
Port 488 (Port-channel1)
Hello Time 2 sec Max Age 20 sec Forward Delay 15 sec
Bridge ID Priority 32769 (priority 32768 sys-id-ext 1)
Address 6400.f100.1e80
Hello Time 2 sec Max Age 20 sec Forward Delay 15 sec
Aging Time 15 sec
Interface Role Sts Cost Prio.Nbr Type
------------------- ---- --- --------- -------- --------------------------------
Po1 Root FWD 3 128.488 P2p
VLAN0150
Spanning tree enabled protocol ieee
Root ID Priority 32918
Address 40f4.ec9d.2a00
Cost 3
Port 488 (Port-channel1)
Hello Time 2 sec Max Age 20 sec Forward Delay 15 sec
Bridge ID Priority 32918 (priority 32768 sys-id-ext 150)
Address 6400.f100.1e80
Hello Time 2 sec Max Age 20 sec Forward Delay 15 sec
Aging Time 15 sec
Interface Role Sts Cost Prio.Nbr Type
------------------- ---- --- --------- -------- --------------------------------
Po1 Root FWD 3 128.488 P2p
VLAN0151
Spanning tree enabled protocol ieee
Root ID Priority 32919
Address 40f4.ec9d.2a00
Cost 3
Port 488 (Port-channel1)
Hello Time 2 sec Max Age 20 sec Forward Delay 15 sec
Bridge ID Priority 32919 (priority 32768 sys-id-ext 151)
Address 6400.f100.1e80
Hello Time 2 sec Max Age 20 sec Forward Delay 15 sec
Aging Time 15 sec
Interface Role Sts Cost Prio.Nbr Type
------------------- ---- --- --------- -------- --------------------------------
Po1 Root FWD 3 128.488 P2p
06-21-2011 02:46 AM
Hello,
You are using your EtherChannel without a negotiation protocol. As a result, if the opposite switch is not also configured for EtherChannel operation on the respective ports, there is a danger of a switching loop. The EtherChannel Misconfiguration Guard tries to prevent that loop from occuring by disabling all the ports bundled in the EtherChannel.
I cannot stress this enough: never, never, NEVER use the "on" mode for EtherChannels until absolutely certain you understand all the implications. The EtherChannel negotiation protocols PAgP and LACP are designed precisely to detect whether the opposite switch is configured for EtherChannel and bundle the ports only if the opposite switch has agreed to do the same.
My advice:
This way, you will configure both your switches to negotiate the creation of the EtherChannel, and prevent the misconfig guard from tripping.
Oh, by the way, did I say that using the "on" mode is a bad idea?
Best regards,
Peter
06-21-2011 11:47 PM
HI peter
thanks for your advice.
I know etherChannel negotiation protocols are designed precisely, so when i found the problem, i try to use "active" mode or "desirable" mode for the etherchannel. but in 3750X stack, i can not config other etherchannel mode except "on"
the 3750X stack show this infomation:
%With PAgP enabled, all ports in the Channel should belong to the same switch
Command rejected (Port-channel1, Gi1/0/24): Invalid etherchnl mode
so i change the EC port with G1/0/23 and G1/0/24 instead of G1/0/24 and G2/0/24, the EC can use "desirable" mode and other.
but for physics line redundancy, i can't connect the line to one 3750X switch with G1/0/23 and G1/0/24, so what other method i can try?
Best regards
06-22-2011 12:14 AM
I find a document in cisco.com about this sense:
this document shows that in 3750 stack sense, EC only can use "ON" or "LACP" model. the pagp is not support cross-stack EC.
but why i config EC with "on" model, the device made the port "errdisable" ?
06-22-2011 06:40 AM
Hello,
In general, when EtherChannel-enabled ports are put into the errdisabled state by the EC Misconfig Guard, it is because all these ports were receiving STP BPDUs sent by the other switch. In a correctly configured EtherChannel, this is not possible because an EtherChannel is considered a single port by STP, and thus only one BPDU over the EtherChannel is sent, regardless of the number of bundled links. Receiving multiple BPDUs on ports bundled in an EtherChannel indicates that the other switch is not yet correctly configured for EtherChannel. The EC Misconfig Guard detects this and disables the links in order to prevent switching loops which could otherwise ensue.
The question is why does your EC Misconfig Guard keep tripping. The configuration seems to be okay. There is a command to disable the EC Misconfig Guard but I do not want to use it just yet.
If your switch does not support LACP (perhaps your IOS needs an upgrade or an additional license?), let's try to do it as follows:
The primary goal behind this procedure is to keep the ports physically shutdown until absolutely all EC configuration is performed on both switches, and only then start activating them.
If the EC Misconfig Guard blocks your ports again, I would be interested in seeing the output of your show cdp neighbor output on both switches. Perhaps the wiring is not correct, and we are configuring inappropriate ports.
Best regards,
Peter
06-22-2011 07:23 PM
Hello peter
thanks for your advice.
i will try reconfig Port-channel 1 when the physical ports shutdown. and see what happens.
thanks again.
12-10-2011 08:59 AM
Not sure if you got your answer but I ran into the same problem. ECs were configured correctly on both sides but getting the misconfig error. Try disabling all physical ports and port-channels on both sides. Then only enable the port-channel which should automatically enable the physical ports that are members of the channel group as well.
11-29-2012 11:52 AM
Thanks Daniel!
I had the same problem with EC's configured the same on both sides. Disabling the Port-Channel's on both sides and then enabling them brought everything up as expected. Must somehow re-sync the Port-Channel Interface to the physical interfaces.
04-22-2013 03:18 PM
I find for myself that if i create the the portchannel and then i add the interfaces i run into the same problem.
How i got around this problem was, adding the command: channel-group 1 mode on (on the physical interfaces)and letting the switch created the po on its own.
hope it helps someone
06-06-2013 03:01 AM
Hi Rene! You are spot on. I hit the issue of channel-miscong error. What i have reliaze is, is i become obssessed with deleting port-channel on interface level. For intstance
C2960G(config)#int range g0/49 - 50
C2960g(config-if)#no channel-group 1
and this never worked.
so i deleted the entire port-channel 1 in global config
e.g:
C2960G(config)# no port-channel 1
and there for did this:
C2960G(config)#int range g0/49 - 50
C2960g(config-if)#channel-group 1 mode on
this created a port-channel and it worked straight away.
Jun 6 09:45:29.705: %LINK-3-UPDOWN: Interface GigabitEthernet0/49, changed state to up
Jun 6 09:45:29.721: %LINK-3-UPDOWN: Interface GigabitEthernet0/50, changed state to up
Jun 6 09:45:31.456: %LINEPROTO-5-UPDOWN: Line protocol on Interface Vlan1, changed state to up
Jun 6 09:45:32.458: %LINEPROTO-5-UPDOWN: Line protocol on Interface Vlan5, changed state to up
Jun 6 09:45:32.458: %LINEPROTO-5-UPDOWN: Line protocol on Interface GigabitEthernet0/49, changed state to up
Jun 6 09:45:32.458: %LINEPROTO-5-UPDOWN: Line protocol on Interface GigabitEthernet0/50, changed state to up
Jun 6 09:45:32.793: %LINK-3-UPDOWN: Interface Port-channel1, changed state to up
Jun 6 09:45:29.705: %LINK-3-UPDOWN: Interface GigabitEthernet0/49, changed state to up
Jun 6 09:45:29.721: %LINK-3-UPDOWN: Interface GigabitEthernet0/50, changed state to up
All thanks to You Rene and hope this will help others too!
08-29-2016 06:49 AM
Aug 29 10:47:30.190: %EC-5-UNBUNDLE: Interface Te1/50 left the port-channel Po36
Aug 29 10:47:30.194: %PM-4-ERR_DISABLE: channel-misconfig (STP) error detected on Po36, putting Po36 in err-disable state
Aug 29 10:47:30.306: %PM-4-ERR_DISABLE: channel-misconfig (STP) error detected on Po35, putting Te1/49 in err-disable state
Reset interface / port-channel. reconfigured PO again..but no luck for above errors.
issue resolved post configuring below command ..
errdisable recovery cause channel-misconfig
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide