Virtual Blade - PARTIALLY CONFIGURED

Unanswered Question
Sep 2nd, 2010

I've followed the directions on setting up a VB for Windows 2008 Core, and it has always worked in 4.1.5a. We're now running 4.2.1. Am I missing something? We keep getting this error:  PARTIALLY CONFIGURED, and yet it doesn't tell you what else you need to do. This is something that's very basic on setting up so I don't see what else It needs to be configured.

virtual-blade enable

virtual-blade 2
description Windows 2008 Core
device cpu qemu64
device nic e1000
device disk IDE
device keyboard en-us
memory 1024
disk 100
cpu-list 1 2
boot cd-image disk /local1/vbs/WoW_1.0.1.iso
boot from cd-rom
autostart
exit

.

License Name   Status      Activation Date Activated By 
-------------- ----------- --------------- --------------
Enterprise     active      05/10/2010      admin        
Video          active      05/10/2010      admin        
Virtual-Blade  active      05/10/2010      admin    

I have this problem too.
0 votes
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
Loading.
johng231 Thu, 09/02/2010 - 07:49

Ahhh ! I'm missing one of the physical interface, it wasn't assigned to the VB.

Since I'm using standby for both physical interfaces, it doesn't let me apply it to the VB !!!!!!! Does VB support the standby interface if configured on the WAE?

labwaasrem1(config-vb)#interface 2 bridge gigabitEthernet 1/0
GigabitEthernet 1/0 is part of an Standby group.
To use this interface in a virtual blade, it must be removed from
the Standby group.

labwaasrem1(config-vb)#interface 2 bridge gigabitEthernet 2/0
GigabitEthernet 2/0 is part of an Standby group.
To use this interface in a virtual blade, it must be removed from
the Standby group.

labwaasrem1(config-vb)#

This can't be good since we designed our entire WAAS branch deployment to be used with standby!

Bhavin Yadav Thu, 09/02/2010 - 11:22

Hi John,

As per the WAAS 4.2.1 config guide, you have to use physical interface to map the virtual blade.

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/app_ntwk_services/waas/waas/v421/configuration/guide/virtual.html#wp1051532

Step 6 Configure  the interface bridge you want to use between the virtual blade and the  physical interfaces on your WAE.

c. In the Bridge Interface list, choose the physical WAE interface that the virtual blade interface is bridged to. Choose either GigabitEthernet or PortChannel.

Hope this helps.

Regards.

johng231 Thu, 09/02/2010 - 13:06

I've tried using the physical interfaces but it won't let me because they're setup in standby at the WAE level. Do I need to break standby for this to work? Does VB not support standby?

Bhavin Yadav Thu, 09/02/2010 - 13:59

Hi John,

When you configure the interface under standby group, it does not act as physical interface from that point onwards. Hence, if the physical interface is in standby group, it can not be used with VB. VB, at present supports physical interface and port channels.

You will have to use individual physical interface.

Hope this answers your question.

Regards.

johng231 Fri, 09/03/2010 - 08:38

Is it possible to add additional interfaces to the WAE/WAVE device and assigned it to the VB? I've already deployed the interfaces being setup as standby to all of our remote branches. Now you're telling me standby is not supported at all. This will be a big redesign on my part as I can't do port-channel to a 4ESW module on a router. It should state in the documentation standby is not supported.

Bhavin Yadav Fri, 09/03/2010 - 10:09

Hi John,

This is documented in the configuration step as I mentioned previously.

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/app_ntwk_services/waas/waas/v421/configuration/guide/virtual.html#wp1051532

Step 6 Configure  the interface bridge you want to use between the virtual blade and the  physical interfaces on your WAE.

I am sorry if it was not specifically mentioned in the release notes or anywhere else.

With this said, the feature that you are requesting might be on its way for future. WAAS Product Management team is always looking at these kind of features as per demand and request. I will also request you to talk to your Cisco Sales Account team about this feature so that it can be pushed out to PM team.

Hope this helps,

Regards.

johng231 Fri, 09/03/2010 - 10:21

I understand it states to use the physical interface or port-channel. The problem is you can't have your physical interface be part of a standby group and be part of a VB.  It should explain to you that if you have a standby configured it will not work. That's where the confusion is because I was selecting the physical interface, however the GUI doesn't give you an error message like the CLI telling you that you have to break the physical interface from the standby group.

Thanks for your responses. I'll follow up next with my SE.

johng231 Tue, 09/07/2010 - 13:38

Is it possible to add another physical interface (inline card) to a WAVE-574 or WAE-674 appliance and apply it to a VB ?

Bhavin Yadav Tue, 09/07/2010 - 14:29

Nope. you have to use gig interface and map it virtual interface. it wil lcreate a cirtual interface for VB which will not be visible to you under

config / sh interface.

Regards.

johng231 Wed, 09/08/2010 - 11:06

Can I allocate GIG1/0 for WAAS optimization primary interface and GIG 2/0 with another IP address but in different subnet and assign it to the VB ?

Thanks for your help! I appreciate it so much!

John

Bhavin Yadav Wed, 09/08/2010 - 18:03

Hi John,

That's a good question but I have to verify in the lab as I am not sure.

I will update you once I finish my lab work.

Thanks.

johng231 Thu, 09/09/2010 - 08:37

I got it working in my LAB. The one benefit is you can optimize the VB traffic now, since I have GIG 2/0 plugged into the Core switch and GIG 1/0 is plugged directly into the WAN router for optimization.The big downside here is I would loose the redundancy on the interfaces. :-(

Bhavin Yadav Thu, 09/09/2010 - 12:01

Hi John,

Thanks for the update.

Hope this answers our question now.

Regards.

tasoskypraios Sun, 07/31/2011 - 12:47

Hello,

I am experiencing the same problem. I can't use the standby interface in 4.2.3b version. Does anyone know if this has changed in later releases? If not, i have to use Gigabit ethernet or portchannel but this means that i will loose redudancy as i have each Gigabi tethernet interface to different Catalyst 6513 switch. I have to use only one interface of these or both with portchannel but in the same switch. Am i correct?

Thank you

johng231 Mon, 08/01/2011 - 07:48

Check out version 4.4.1. You can only assign a BVI interface to a virtual blade. Which then you can assign your standby group to the BVI interface. The BVI becomes your primary interface, not the standby.This will allow you to keep your redundancy on separate physical switches.  

tasoskypraios Tue, 08/02/2011 - 03:47

Thank you very much for your prompt answer. Have you made this configuration? If yes is it possible to give it to us in order to help us?

johng231 Tue, 08/02/2011 - 11:24

I had it configured once in the lab before, when testing it out on 4.4.1. I don't have the original configs for it.

Here are some steps that should help you get started.

bridge 1 protocol ieee

interface BVI 1

ip address x.x.x.x x.x.x.x

exit

interface Standby 1

bridge-group 1

exit

interface GigabitEthernet 1/0

standby 1 primary

exit

interface GigabitEthernet 2/0

standby 1

exit

primary-interface BVI 1

virtual-blade 1

  interface 1 bridge-group 1 mac-address xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx

Actions

This Discussion