01-02-2019 11:18 AM
I have a customer UCS Environment (multiple fully populated B200 M4 chassis) with 3.2(3*) code. I was looking at the management IP pool on UCSM and I am a little bit confused why there is no IP assigned to blade CIMC, like screenshot...
The KVM access to the blade is done through the IP assigned to the service profile...
Please advise!
01-02-2019 11:28 AM
If you have assigned the IP via service profile, the assigned IP should show up on the server profile, general tab, expand the 'Management IP Address' box in the right pane.
Kirk...
01-02-2019 11:31 AM
Thats correct but thats not really what I am asking...
I would expect two OOB addresses assigned: one to the blade CIMC; (OPTIONAL) one to the service profile associated to the blade. But now I only see one OOB address via service profile.
01-04-2019 07:27 AM
So you have a block of IP addresss defined in the pools/root/ip pools/IP Pool ext-mgmt location, as well as the management pool your service profile is referencing? The IP Pool ext-mgmt blocks are where the CIMC itself will try to pull IPs from, if defined.
I am curious as to what the use case you have for that is, as most customers want to avoid the double-dipping of IPs for a blade/service profile.
Thanks,
Kirk...
01-04-2019 08:42 AM
The UCS domain was setup before I was on project for this customer...so not sure the use case.
Yes, there is pool defined for ext-mgmt. But I want to know why the blade CIMC did not get an IP as shown in screenshot. It seems like only the service profile gets IP from the pool...
01-04-2019 10:12 AM
I haven't found a change documented in release notes, but one of a couple of things is probably happening:
Thanks,
Kirk...
01-04-2019 10:23 AM - edited 01-04-2019 10:25 AM
Service profiles already consumed the available IPs. CIMC can't pull IP due to none free in block. Do you have free IPs currently available in the ext-mgmt ip block?
I would say this likely the case here...Thanks!
Also would Cisco recommends to assign IP to CIMC vs assign IP to Service profile for the blade?
01-04-2019 12:37 PM
Decomissioning blades for hardware maintenance, or other troubleshooting releases a cimc based IP back into the pool, which can end up being reassigned. Depending on monitoring configuration and other connectivity options for IPMI, it is probably beneficial to apply them at the service profile, as the association between service profile and IP will generally not be removed unless manual, purposeful changes are made to reset.
Thanks,
Kirk...
01-04-2019 01:34 PM
That makes sense.
If I configured pool IP for the management under service template and then generate service profile from the template to associate with a blade, the blade would get two OOB IP addresses (one for CIMC and one under the Service Profile) assuming there are enough IP addresses in the ext-mgmt OOB pool, right? Then this would be against the rule to not double-dipping IP for a single blade from the OOB pool...
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