5

So, I had a well-working switch-profile configuration that was synchronized between my core01 and core02 switches. Until profile-revision 66, that is.

I was trying to renumber a FEX (which wasn't in use yet) and things got very discombobulated, where core01 was on revision 69 and core02 was on revision 67.

After some valiant fighting (which involved desyncing them, importing the interface, then resyncing), I now have switches that are in sync again. The only issue is that the revision numbers are different:

 core01# sh switch-profile status

 switch-profile  : core-shared
 ----------------------------------------------------------

 Start-time: 875074 usecs after Tue Dec 24 18:47:14 2013
 End-time: 171940 usecs after Tue Dec 24 18:47:17 2013

 Profile-Revision: 72     
 Session-type: Commit
 Session-subtype: -
 Peer-triggered: Yes
 Profile-status: Sync Success

 Local information:
 ----------------
 Status: Commit Success
 Error(s): 

 Peer information:
 ----------------
 IP-address: 129.10.X.Y
 Sync-status: In sync
 Status: Commit Success
 Error(s): 

and

core02(config-sync)# sh switch-profile status

 switch-profile  : core-shared
 ----------------------------------------------------------

 Start-time: 658119 usecs after Tue Dec 24 18:47:14 2013
 End-time:  43352 usecs after Tue Dec 24 18:47:17 2013

 Profile-Revision: 69
 Session-type: Commit
 Session-subtype: -
 Peer-triggered: No
 Profile-status: Sync Success

 Local information:
 ----------------
 Status: Commit Success
 Error(s): 

 Peer information:
 ----------------
 IP-address: 129.10.X.X
 Sync-status: In sync
 Status: Commit Success
 Error(s): 

My question is, how bad is this?

I've tested, and I can make changes and commit them and they are each capable of having changes made in 'config sync' which are replicated to the partner. It's just....it makes me feel icky.

Is this necessarily a bad thing? Should I do something to bring the numbers into sync?

1

1 Answer 1

6

I spoke with Cisco's TAC about this, and the answer that I got from them, after they inspected the 'show switch-profile status' on each of the switches, is that things are working exactly right.

The individual Profile-Revision numbers are local to the switches, and not a result of a shared version number, like many clustered products.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.