Community discussions

MikroTik App
 
dhiaahmed
newbie
Topic Author
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 1:05 pm

LACP problem with bridge interface

Thu Nov 10, 2022 9:46 pm

Hello everyone, I'm trying to make a bond interfaces between 3 cisco managed switchs and Mirotik CCR 2004 router my problem is that as soon as I add the bonded interfaces to the bridge I lost conictivity in my network unless I remove the bounded interfaces from the bridge.
Anyone has solution to this issue ?
 
sindy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 10205
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 9:19 pm

Re: LACP problem with bridge interface

Sat Nov 12, 2022 5:31 pm

Show us the configuration that does not work from both the Cisco switch and the 2004.

Disconnect the patchcords between the Cisco and the 2004, configure the bonding at both devices - do you lose connectivity at that moment?
If not, connect them using one of the patchcords - do you lose connectivity?
If not, can you see, at both devices, some MAC addresses to be reachable via that bond/port channel (show mac address-table interface PoX, /interface bridge host print where interface=bondX)?
If it works with a single patchcord, connect the other one - do you lose connectivity at that moment?
 
dhiaahmed
newbie
Topic Author
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 1:05 pm

Re: LACP problem with bridge interface

Sat Nov 12, 2022 11:07 pm

Thank you for your reply, my problem is that as soon as I add more than one bond interface to the bridge. I mean when I have only one bond interface inside the bridge every thing is OK however when I add another bond interface to the bridge I lost conictivity .
 
sindy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 10205
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 9:19 pm

Re: LACP problem with bridge interface

Sun Nov 13, 2022 11:04 am

Same question - do you lose connectivity as soon as you add the bond to the bridge even if no cables are connected to the ports in that bond? It could be that by mistake, you are adding the bonds configured as edge ports so STP doesn't break an L2 loop. What RouterOS version are you running on the 2004?
 
dhiaahmed
newbie
Topic Author
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 1:05 pm

Re: LACP problem with bridge interface

Sun Nov 13, 2022 8:59 pm

Same question - do you lose connectivity as soon as you add the bond to the bridge even if no cables are connected to the ports in that bond? It could be that by mistake, you are adding the bonds configured as edge ports so STP doesn't break an L2 loop. What RouterOS version are you running on the 2004?
- I lose connectivity as soon as I add the bond to the bridge while all the cables are connected between the cisco and the 2004.
- Would you please tell me how to configure the bond as edge port.
- The RouterOS is 7.6.
 
sindy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 10205
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 9:19 pm

Re: LACP problem with bridge interface

Sun Nov 13, 2022 9:49 pm

- I lose connectivity as soon as I add the bond to the bridge while all the cables are connected between the cisco and the 2004.
So the next step to try is to disable the interfaces before making them member ports of the second bond (if physically disconnecting the cables is complicated) and see what happens.

- Would you please tell me how to configure the bond as edge port.
When adding an /interface bridge port row, you specify an edge value, which may be one of auto no no-discover yes yes-discover. The default is auto; the thing is that you do not want the bond to be an edge port, because in edge mode, the bridge doesn't expect another bridge to be connected through that port, so the port doesn't wait for STP BPDUs before starting to forward traffic. auto should be safe in terms that it waits for BPDUs after the link goes up.

- The RouterOS is 7.6.
I've done a test in the meantime - I've set up two pairs of EoIP tunnels between two CHRs running 7.6 in my portable lab; on each CHR, I've made each pair of EoIPs the member links of a bond in LACP mode, and made both bonds member ports of a bridge. It works as expected - in the STP topology, one of the bridges became a root one with two designated ports, and the other one a non-root one with one root port and one alternate port. No loss of connectivity. So unless that's a bug spedific for the arm64 architecture, something must be wrong in your configuration.


Until now I was assuming it worked for you with a single link between the 2004 and each Cisco switch, but maybe the assumption was wrong and you started from port channels/bonds at once? The thing is that Mikrotik uses RSTP by default, whereas Cisco switches use PVST+ by default. These two flavors of STP are mutually incomprehensible, so the Cisco switches may isolate the 2004 as from the point of view of PVST+, the 2004 looks like a cable connecting the Cisco switches together, so the Ciscos may choose not to use that link.

If you don't need separate spanning trees for different groups of VLANs, you can keep using RSTP on Mikrotik and only switch the Cisco switches from PVST+ to MSTP, because MSTP is backwards compatible with RSTP. If you need multiple spanning trees, the 2004 must use MSTP as well.
 
dhiaahmed
newbie
Topic Author
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 1:05 pm

Re: LACP problem with bridge interface

Mon Nov 14, 2022 5:42 pm

I'm really grateful that you are making things easier for me.
Until now I was assuming it worked for you with a single link between the 2004 and each Cisco switch
yes, it's working fine with a single link.

If you don't need separate spanning trees for different groups of VLANs, you can keep using RSTP on Mikrotik and only switch the Cisco switches from PVST+ to MSTP, because MSTP is backwards compatible with RSTP. If you need multiple spanning trees, the 2004 must use MSTP as well.
I'll reconfigure the 2004 and see if it would work.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ccrsxx and 66 guests