cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
Announcements
Join Customer Connection to register!
461
Views
5
Helpful
9
Replies
Beaurr
Beginner

replace a switch in a stack

Hello,

what is the method, step by step,  to replace a switch in a stack ?

I already had to change the master of a stack once and it was problematic

I had lost the port configuration of the switch master.

So in prevention, I would like to have the exact procedure

 

 

first, if it is the stack master that must be replaced

#sh swi

*1       Master 00b6.xxxx.xxxx    13     4       Ready

 2       Member 7018.xxxx.xxxx    11     4       Ready

3       Member 2c73.xxxx.xxxx    9      4       Ready

4       Member 2c73.xxxx.xxxx    7      4       Ready

5       Member 2c73.xxxx.xxxx    1      4       Ready

 

#sh running-config

.....

switch 1 provision ws-c2960x-48lpd-l

switch 2 provision ws-c2960x-48fpd-l

switch 3 provision ws-c2960x-48fpd-l

switch 4 provision ws-c2960x-48fpd-l

switch 5 provision ws-c2960x-48fpd-l

 

all switches have the same  IOS version but my spare switch in case of problem is a c2960x-48fpd-l ( currently the switch master in production is a c2960x-48lpd-l model).

 

 in second, Is the procedure the same if the switch to be replaced is not the master but a member?

 

and finally, in a 3850 switch stack, is it the same procedure?

 

thank you

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions

Hello Beaurr
FYI - Just to be clear -  If the a switch fails (master or otherwise) the replacement method is just the same- you DONT need  to reload the whole stack for a master failed switch to be replaced, it just won’t come back as the master Also you would not need to reload the whole stack just for the failed master to become the master again, unless you rest the master to be exactly the same prior to the master failure.

 


@Beaurr wrote:

yes, for readability reasons, we want the master to always be the first switch at the top of the stack.




Also it is recommended to designate the master/standby switches to be those that don’t have any uplink interconnects obviously this would be when you have more two switches in a stack, The theory being any failure to a uplink switch(s) wont incur master switch functionality failover at the same time, or if you have a failure of a master you don’t lose uplink connectivity or incur link convergence.




kind regards
Paul

Please rate and mark posts accordingly if you have found any of the information provided useful.
It will hopefully assist others with similar issues in the future

View solution in original post

9 REPLIES 9
balaji.bandi
VIP Master

Most of the switch proceedure is the same - when you replacing the part of the stack member or master switch.

 

Power down old switch and remove from stack

Offline prepare the switch :
- New switch load same IOS and feature set as exiting stack members
- New switch change switch member number and priority to the old switch member number and priority
- save the config and power down new switch

bringing to Live
- connect the cable new switch to Live stack via stack wise cabling and power new switch up

 

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/switches/lan/catalyst2960x/software/15-0_2_EX/stack_manager/configuration_guide/b_stck_152ex_2960-x_cg/b_stck_152ex_2960-x_cg_chapter_010.html#concept_6E38EA556E8A4A198FD7BBDC159F4B07

 

When master switch fails, other slave switch become master, when the master switch replaced, it will not become master, the slave (be as master) - until whole stack rebooted.

BB

***** Rate All Helpful Responses *****

How to Ask The Community for Help

Beaurr
Beginner

Thank you!

So  I need to connect to the new switch ( before stacking this switch)is it given the highest priority?

Like this :

#switch 1 priority 15

( if I want to replace the master)?

Reza Sharifi
Hall of Fame Expert

If you are replacing a switch master, you want to connect to the new switch and provision it with the same switch number and priority as the old master but as BB also said, the priority will not change until the stack is rebooted. 

HTH

sure the number should be highest if that should be master ( but required whole stack required to reboot) to become new one to be master.

 

BB

***** Rate All Helpful Responses *****

How to Ask The Community for Help

switch 1 provision ws-c2960x-48lpd-l

switch 2 provision ws-c2960x-48fpd-l

switch 3 provision ws-c2960x-48fpd-l

switch 4 provision ws-c2960x-48fpd-l

switch 5 provision ws-c2960x-48fpd-l

 

 

 

In my network, the switches are numbered from top to bottom. The 1st switch is the master.its priority is 15. Switch 2 has the priority of 11, so switch 2 becomes master The model of my master switch is not quite the same,c2960x-48lpd-l for the master; c2960x-48fpd-l for others. Of course IOS is the same. My spare switches are 2960x-48fpd-l.So I imagine that if I have to change the master I must also connect to the stack before #conf t

#no switch 1 provision ws-c2960x-48lpd-l

# switch 1 provision ws-c2960x-48fpd-l

#wr

 

on the new switch (before joining it to the stack)

 

#conf t

#switch 1 priority 15

#wr

Connect the new switch to the stack with stack cable.

Power on the new switch

Reload the entire stack ( ?)

 

# verify  with #sh swi

 

wire the switch ports

is that correct?

 

thanks

yes - if you are replacing the Master switch ( if that was failed or due to maintenance reason) - the procedure is correct.

 

for adding a new switch you do not need to reboot the stack until your intention put back switch1 as the master switch.

 

make sure you have enough downtime for the stack to reboot.

 

 

BB

***** Rate All Helpful Responses *****

How to Ask The Community for Help

ok thanks.

 

yes, for readability reasons, we want the master to always be the first switch at the top of the stack.

Hello Beaurr
FYI - Just to be clear -  If the a switch fails (master or otherwise) the replacement method is just the same- you DONT need  to reload the whole stack for a master failed switch to be replaced, it just won’t come back as the master Also you would not need to reload the whole stack just for the failed master to become the master again, unless you rest the master to be exactly the same prior to the master failure.

 


@Beaurr wrote:

yes, for readability reasons, we want the master to always be the first switch at the top of the stack.




Also it is recommended to designate the master/standby switches to be those that don’t have any uplink interconnects obviously this would be when you have more two switches in a stack, The theory being any failure to a uplink switch(s) wont incur master switch functionality failover at the same time, or if you have a failure of a master you don’t lose uplink connectivity or incur link convergence.




kind regards
Paul

Please rate and mark posts accordingly if you have found any of the information provided useful.
It will hopefully assist others with similar issues in the future

View solution in original post

Thanks for your help