Box to Box quasi redundancy

Hi folks,
I tried to run box-to-box redundacy between two different models of CSS.
Box1 is a CSS 11501 software 7.20 build 104 and box2 is a CSS 11050 sofware 5.00 build 63.
Playing the script ends up with:
File copy Config Sync Failed. Commit unsuccessful!
localconfig: 2545 bytes
remoteconfig : 2479 bytes
WARNING: The local version of code differs from the remote version of code.
Check for configured new commands on this switch.
... but i can't see any "new command".
I synchronized the two configuration manually and redundancy seems to work properly.
Any chance to have the script working properly with a software upgrade of the 11050 to the latest (and last) version 6.10?
Thanks in advance.
Fausto

Fausto,
With 2 different hardware models of the CSS (especially with one 2nd gen and one 1st gen) the configs will not be the exact. They will have different settings for number of interfaces as well as possibly different interface names.
The script will always copy to the backup, and will always fail the byte check, if you use different hardware versions.
either way, the redundancy should work fine. It is typically recommended that both CSSs run the same version of code, but that is impossible with the 2 hardware models you have. If there was a problem with the redundancy, this configuration would be very diffucult to support.
so, to answer your question, the upgrade to 6.10 will not eliminate the error. The only way to eliminate the error is to eliminate the check for filesize at the end of the script, and there is not an option to do that.
You are welcome to modify the script, but again, that is not supported by TAC. Many still do modify scripts on the CSS though with success.
-Steve

Similar Messages

Failover not working correctly on "redundancy-phy" (box to box style)

Hi,
I've got 2 CSS 11506 boxes configured using box to box failover. Failing the master CSS box itself (powering down) causes the backup CSS to become master and all is well.
However when the switch, which the CSS is connected to, fails the CSS didn't fail over so I added the redundancy-phy to both the interfaces connected to the switch and failed the switch again. At this point a "show redundancy" shows the master becoming backup but between 3 and 5 seconds later it re-assumes master status and keeps flipping every 60 - 90 seconds
I also tried a service with a type of redundancy-up and again the same symptoms - fails over but assumes master again within 3--5 seconds.
Any help gratefully received!
Cheers

box-to-box is the least interesting redundancy mechanism.
I definitely prefer vip/interface redundancy.
More complex to configure but better control.
Regarding your problem, is the switch connected to both CSS ? Do you have a direct link between the CSS for the redundancy protocol ? What version do you run ?
Gilles

Box-to-Box redundancy question ?

guys,
i have two CSS 11506 configured as Box-to-Box Master/Backup mode.
im trying to apply the commit_redundancy "argument" command from the Master CSS
the configuration has been sent to the Backuo EXCEPT the commands related to ssl certiface that the process fail:
associate rsakey
associate cer
thats because i have generate the cer and rsakey on each CSS with different names.
is there anything that can help me? or i have to re-generate the cer and rsakey again with the same name ??
please check the attached file that will clarify my point !!
please advice,
Thanks in advance

Dear Jose,
i have exported the files from CSS1 and importes them to CSS2,
but im trying now to apply commit_redundany command and still showing me failed to synch
here you have the output that i got:
CSS1# commit_redundConfig "10.0.207.18 -d -s"
Checking the disk space locally before continuing with the script.
COMMIT_REDUNDANCY Version: 4.6
Verifying that ip redundancy is activated on Master switch.
Verifying that app session is up with backup switch.
Making sure app session is up.
Seconds to wait before calling it quits: 120
Checking the disk space remotely before continuing with the script.
Config Sync Failed.
CSS1# commit_redundConfig "10.0.207.18"
Checking available disk space on systems ...
Verifying app and redundancy configs ... /|-\-
Previous synchronization still occurring on remote switch.
i tired to dissconnet and restart CSS2 (Backup) but still im getting that message "Previous synchronization still occurring on remote switch."
please advice,
Thanks,
hasan odeh

Box-to-box redundancy over DWDM

Is possible to use box-to-box redundancy, when the connectivity between CSSs (for APP) is provided by using DWDM technology??
CSS - ONS - ONS - CSS.
Thank you.

officially not supported but it works most of the time.
Gilles.

CSS Box to Box - Redundancy

We have two CSS running in box to box redundancy in two-arm (router mode) on code 8.10.40. Master is running with ip redundancy master (causing it to always be master if it is up and running).
We had a need to reload a previous configuration. To do this I copied the configuration to startup-config under running boot-file. I then ran command copy start run (on the master). After doing so, we lost all VIPs, although servers on second arm of CSS were accesible as well as the interface on the same network as the VIPs.
There is a 6509 switch between our CSS and the Firewall (firewall's are running in same mode - box to box). Firewall team saw traffic destined for the VIPs leave their interface, but we never saw it hit the CSS. I think that we had an ARP issue, but nobody can attest to this 100%. We had to reboot both CSS's to get VIPs to respond properly.
What would be the normal expectations in this scenario?
What is best practice to reload a configuration?

the copy start run does not erase the running config. So, it tries to add whatever config you had in startup on top of the running config.
Personally I would have simply done a reload once the config was in startup.
Gilles.

Software upgrade on box-to-box redundant CSS's

I am planning a software upgrade from version 5.00 Build 63 to version 6.1 on a pair of CSS 11150 devices running box-to-box redundancy.
Should both devices be upgraded at the same time, or can I split them and upgrade on consecutive weekends ?

if it was 2 different 5.0 release, I would say ok.
But a 5.0 and a 6.1 release, it could be ok but that's not 100% sure.
Sorry, that's all I can say.
Maybe you could put both images on the CSS, boot the CSS out of 6.1 and configure them to reboot with 5.0 in case something wrong happens.
Gilles.

CSS box to box redundancy redundant link

Hello,
Does CSS 15001 with firmware version sg0820001 (08.20.0.01) require gigabit link for box to box redundancy's redundant link?
Thank's
Raymond.

The crossover cable used for the redundant link can be connected to two Gigabit Ethernet or two Fast Ethernet ports.
See:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/app_ntwk_services/data_center_app_services/css11500series/v8.20_v8.10/configuration/redundancy/guide/Redndncy.html#wp1060803

GE redundancy through fibre for box-to-box redundancy

According to Cisco documentation, you need to use crossover cable to connect master and redundant CSS for box-to-box redundancy. May I know whether the fibre can be used instead of crossover cable? And how about the ISC link for ASR? Can I use fibre also?

Gilles,
CSS Redundancy Configuration Guide (Software Version 7.30) said that:
Use the redundancy-l4-stateless command in content or group configuration mode to enable stateless redundancy failover in a box-to-box redundancy or a VIP and virtual interface redundancy configuration. Stateless redundancy failover allows critical TCP/IP traffic to continue in case of a failure at the load-balancing CSS by allowing the backup CSS to set up a mid-stream TCP flow. This feature is disabled by default.
The default behavior of a CSS is to set up load-balanced TCP flows only when it receives a TCP frame that begins with SYN. When stateless redundancy failover is enabled and a failover occurs, the backup CSS establishes a mid-stream flow for any existing TCP sessions. The CSS still exhibits the default behavior for all new flows. To restore the default behavior of the CSS for all flows after issuing the redundancy-l4-stateless command, use the no redundancy-l4-stateless command.
Does this mean that client does not need to reestablish connection to server after failover?
Thanks
Deng Qi

Quirkiness with box to box redundancy.

I have several sets of CSS's running in box to box redundancy running version 5.03 Build 15.
My question is what causes one CSS to out of the blue go backup and the other become master? I've had this happen on just about all the ones I have configured for box to box. This one pair has been running for a little over a year without a problem and today failed over to the other CSS twice. Nothing shows up in the logs except the "transition to redundancy backup / master." Another pair did this several times about a year ago, after having ran for quite some time. I rebooted both units and they were fine for a period of about 6 months. I find this very strange and am curious if anyone else has had these same problems. I have updated the code on one set, the problem reappered about 7 months later.
I'm now deploying all new CSS installs using interface/vip redundancy.
Thanks!

the version you are using is a potential explanation.
I would really not recommend it.
You should either go to 5.0 or 6.10
Regarding the problem you got, it could also be related to how you connected the CSS together.
Do you have a straight connection between the 2 ? or do you use a switch ?
If a switch, something could have happened there.
Gilles.

Box-to-box redundancy

I´m a little bit confused about the config guide ragarding box-to-box redundancy.
customer will use 2 Css 11503 and wants to configure box-to-box redundancy.
There is one advice that it is essary to link the two switches via a FE-Port. but i also fond an advice that a GE-Port can be used.
What is right? It´s depending on sw-version ?
Thank you for your help
regards
Dietrich Schleyer

Dietrich,
initially it was necessary for this link to be FE.
With the most recent versions this link can also be a GE link.
Since this link is only being used for some kind of keepalive between the 2 CSS, I don't see the need to use GigE.
Also, unless your customer is doing firewall loadbalancing, you should really convince him to use vip/interface redundancy and not box-to-box redundancy.
You get faster failover time with vip/interface red., you can turn on statefull failover [not possible with box-to-box] and it is easier to troubleshoot.
Regards,
Gilles.
Thanks for rating this answer.

Box-to-box redundancy and ARP question

In a box-to-box failover scenario are the MAC addresses of both active and standby CSS11503s supposed to match up? The reason I ask relates to an issue where without clearing the ARP cache on the Default GW (a PIX with a default ARP timeout of 240 minutes) all services were unreachable via the VIPs.

the addresses are not the same but the CSS sends a gratuitous arp upon failover to advertise the new mac-address.
Gilles.

BOX To BOX Redundacny

Hi Just a quick question on Box to box redundancy. Up to now we have only configured the one armed toplogy within our infrastucture. We now have a need to allow the CSS to work "In Line" so I am looking at the box to box topology.
My questions are as follow;
1) Am I right in thinking that the box to box topology does support statefull failover?
2) If I don't add the group command to the configuration, the source addresses will not be NAT'D to the VIP address? Would this affect failover or any other function? The main reason being that our web team would like to collect client statS.
2) Am I right in thinking that its not possible to create different vlans in the one armed topology?

statefull failover is only possible if you configure ASR.
This function exists only the CSS11500 and requires vip/interface redundancy. It is not supported with box-to-box redundancy.
If you remove/suspend the group, the CSS will stop nating the client ip address.
one armed 1 physical interface with 1 vlan.
This is just a "name" to qualify a particular design. The CSS does not know about one armed or inline.
So, if you have a single physicall interface betwen your CSS and a switch, it is possible to make this link a trunk and have multiple vlans. You would then be outside the one-armed mode.
Gilles.
Gilles.

CSS Box-to-Box software upgrade

I'm getting ready to upgrade two CSS's in box-to-box redundancy mode.
The upgrade is simple enough, but what are the best practices for two boxes in box-to-box?
I suppose I can copy the software up to the master box. Then force the standby box to be master and copy up the software to the standby.
Perform the upgrade/reboot on the standby. Then once the standby is again operational, do the master.
Seems cumbersome. Any suggestions?

I would suggest upgrading and rebooting the secondary CSS, then do the primary. Â However, I would suggest you verify the APP session status between the 2 CSS's BEFORE upgrading and rebooting the primary. Â If you can ensure APP session communication between the load balancers you should be okay to perform the upgrade on the primary device. Â In my opinion this is the better if the two options you have outlined.
- JasonÂ

When I right click on a link to open in new tab and move my cursor into the dialog box the box dissapears this is new in the last 24 hours.

I'm using Firefox 8.0 on Suse 11.4 today is 11/28/11 the past 24 hours I've been experiencing this: I always try to right click on links and open in new tab, lately when I do so and move the cursor into the dialog box the box disappears. Also if I online shop say for clothing, if I want to change size's when I click the button to do so nothing happens when I want to scroll down and pick a different size, (I can hi-light the size and click on it then when the window scrolls back up the default size is still there. This isn't consistent with all web sites.

You can middle-click a link to open the link in a new tab.
Start Firefox in <u>[[Safe Mode]]</u> to check if one of the extensions or if hardware acceleration is causing the problem (switch to the DEFAULT theme: Firefox (Tools) > Add-ons > Appearance/Themes).
*Don't make any changes on the Safe mode start window.
*https://support.mozilla.com/kb/Safe+Mode

Moving in form from box to box

I created a form and when I was done in testing, when I go to my first box, then tab to the next box each time I go to the next box, it randomly goes all over the place. Is there a way I can change the way it tabs from box to box??

Hi,
You can set the Tab Order in the "Tab Order" tab ;-) If you don't see it, you can access it from the Window menu.
The implementation of tab order varies in different versions of LC designer, so you should check the help file and serch the forums for "tab order".
Once you set the tab order, the form should work as expected. If you add new objects, you will probably have to redo the tabbing order.
Hope that helps,
N.

Box to Box quasi redundancy

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for