2

I received a new Stackwise cable to make my switch stack of 5 Cisco 3750x's now fully redundant.

Upon connecting the new Stackwise cable, I found that the switch did not recognize the new cable. I later found that it is recommended to reload the switch that I just connected to so that the cable would be recognized.

Switch 4 is my master switch, so would reloading slot 5 (switch 5) be sufficient or does the whole stack need to be reloaded? If reloading the slot is sufficient, is there any way that I can schedule a reload in the middle of the night for just that one particular slot?

Here is the current output (MAC addresses omitted for security):

3750X_STACK#show switch detail
Switch/Stack Mac Address : xxxx.xxxx.xxxx
                                           H/W   Current
Switch#  Role   Mac Address     Priority Version  State
----------------------------------------------------------
 1       Member xxxx.xxxx.xxxx     1      3       Ready
 2       Member xxxx.xxxx.xxxx     1      3       Ready
 3       Member xxxx.xxxx.xxxx     1      3       Ready
*4       Master xxxx.xxxx.xxxx     1      3       Ready
 5       Member xxxx.xxxx.xxxx     1      3       Ready



         Stack Port Status             Neighbors
Switch#  Port 1     Port 2           Port 1   Port 2
--------------------------------------------------------
  1        Ok         Ok                5        2
  2        Ok         Ok                1        3
  3        Ok         Ok                2        4
  4        Ok        Down               3      None
  5       Down        Ok              None       1
Improve this question

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
4

You can use the reload at <time> command to schedule a reboot of the whole stack but there is no way that I'm aware of to reload an individual stack member at a specific time, without resorting to third-party tools to issue the reload slot <number> command at a specific time.

Edit 1: To set your stack member priorities, you can use the command switch <stack member number> priority <new priority value> on each of your existing members. Higher values equals higher priority, equalling preferred master member. For example a value of 15 means it will be the preferred master over other members with a value of 1. You want your values to be different for each member, such as 15 for member 1, 14 for member 2, etc. The fact that your currently elected master is member 4 (as shown by the * symbol next to it and the word "Master" in the Role column), proves that your election process is selecting a switch other than your first member (which is usually what most people want as the master).

Improve this answer
6
  • 1
    Is it recommended to reload the whole stack and just forgo reloading a single slot?
    – Craken
    Sep 11, 2019 at 16:08
  • 1
    @Craken I usually try to avoid it just for not wanting to take down parts of the network that don't need to be taken down, but there are things you should consider before doing anything. You don't have stack member priorities defined statically (yours are still the default of 1) which means your stack master election process relies on other means to select its master, which could result in issues if you restart the whole stack. I'd suggest you statically set your priorities first, then schedule your reload. See my edit above for instructions.
    – Jesse P.
    Sep 11, 2019 at 16:13
  • 1
    If I set my master to a high priority, does setting the rest of the switches with a priority really matter? Im assuming since my master is on 4 that configuration is sitting on 4?
    – Craken
    Sep 11, 2019 at 16:26
  • 1
    @Craken Yes, it matters. If you only set it on one switch, the rest will still have a priority of 1, which means the next logical member (i.e. member 2) won't necessarily become the master, like you may want it to be. Also, I think you may be confused about where the configuration is stored. In a stack, the configuration is replicated/cloned on ALL stack members, so that any of them can become the stack master if/when needed. That being the case, I personally would make member 1 the stack master, member 2 secondary master, member 3 tertiary master, etc.
    – Jesse P.
    Sep 11, 2019 at 17:24
  • 1
    Is there any benefit to having the master as the first switch or is it just for organizing purposes?
    – Craken
    Sep 11, 2019 at 21:10

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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