Hi @RedNectar and @Remi Astruc Thanks for both of your responses earlier. I have double checked with the system team (which manage the IBM ToR) and apparently they're using PVRST to prevent L2 loop on their side. ACI would just forward the BPDUs without participating in STP. So one of the uplink is Alternate port and being actively blocked (logically, per VLAN). I think this is also why MCP has yet kicked in (it has no reason to - STP has already done the job). Guess I'm just gonna plan for a quick migration towards the right case. Also, is it necessary to configure the uplink MC-LAG (on the PureApp ToR) with link-type shared on the right case, as per best practice? Sincerely thank you both.
... View more
Hi all, We recently migrate our core network from plain old Catalyst and Nexus switches to ACI, and stumbled upon one case. An IBM integrated system (PureApp) was connected to the network via 2 port-channel (non-vPC) stemming from its ToR switches. As we migrated, unbeknownst to us there's also a feature which is somewhat identical to vPC on the IBM ToR switches (called vLAG), hence we configured the ACI downlink towards the PureApp system as two separate vPCs (left of the diagram). Apparently, on the IBM's side, they suggest moving towards the recommended dual-sided MCLAG design (on the right). However, having looked up on the Internet, we haven't found out the real benefits of such design over the existing, separate vPCs. Can someone point out to me on whichever benefits should I consider for the dual-sided MCLAG design?
... View more