This may explains the myth of unicast flooding we had in our network. According to documentation this behavior should only occur If we are having asymmetric routing or HSRP with load-balancing. In our case we had HSRP routers where all active groups were in one router so theoretically we should not have unicast flooding especially that we are having one DFC ES+ card and no ports connected to RSP ports.
But now my guess (thanks to your replies) this happened cause SVI interfaces are part of PFC so flooding will occur between DFC & L3 SVIs @ PFC. So in our case either "mac-address-table synchronize" or adjusting CAM to be equal that of ARP would have solved the issue. I have applied the 2nd one cause was still studying the effect of "mac-address-table synchronize"
We are pleased to announce availability of Beta software for 16.6.3.
16.6.3 will be the second rebuild on the 16.6 release train targeted
towards Catalyst 9500/9400/9300/3850/3650 switching platforms. We are
looking for early feedback from customers befor...
Introduction Featured Speakers Luis Espejel is the Telecommunications
Manager of IENova, an Oil & Gas company. Currently he works with Cisco
IOS® and Cisco IOS XE platforms, and NX to some extent. He has also
worked as a Senior Engineer with the Routing P...
In this session you can learn more about Layer 3 multicast and the best
practices to identify possible threats and take security measures. It
provides an overview of basic multicast, the best security practices for
use of this technology, and recommendati...