Major Version Mismatch on identical switches

[Bas van Delft]

Hi,

We have bought four identical 3750X switches with identical SW-images: 12.2(55)SE3          C3750E-UNIVERSALK9-M

We initially connected two switches, this resulted in forming a stack.

With the other two switches we wanted to do the same thing. However, we received the following message:

%STACKMGR-5-MAJOR_VERSION_MISMATCH: Major Version Mismatch (Local 1 - Received 6) with neighbor-1

Both switches will not see each other and the output of show switch stack-ports shows only one switch and both stack ports as being Down.

I did some digging using the show platform stack-manager all command to find out that three of the 3750X's have the stack version number 1.45 and one has 6.45. This would obviously indicate the reason behind the mismatch, but the SW-versions on all new switches are identical!

Checking the CISCO site explains that mismatching of Major version is critical:

Major Version Number Incompatibility Among Switches

Switches with different major Cisco IOS software versions usually have different stack protocol versions. Switches with different major version numbers are incompatible and cannot exist in the same switch stack.

That's all I could find. Nothing about changing the major version number, so all I can suspect is that IOS version needs to be the same...which in my case is...

Does anybody have a clue to remedy this behaviour?

Kind regards,

Bas van Delft

[Leo Laohoo]

All stack members should be running the same IOS and the same Feature set.

The only way to remedy is to pull the other switch offline and upgrade/downgrade the IOS as necessary.

[Bas van Delft]

But the switches all have the identical IOS and were bought brand new, delivered just yesterday. So no change in IOS has been made and all IOS-versions are identical, as ordered. How come there is a Major Version difference? What does the Major Version number stand for anyway; 1 opposed to 6...

KR,

Bas

[Leo Laohoo · Accepted solution]

Can you please post the "sh version" of the current stack and the new stack?

[Joseph W. Doherty · Accepted solution]

Disclaimer

The     Author of this posting offers the information contained within this     posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding  that    there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any   purpose.   Information provided is for informational purposes only and   should not   be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind.   Usage of  this  posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.

Liability Disclaimer

In     no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever   (including,   without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or   profit) arising  out  of the use or inability to use the posting's   information even if  Author  has been advised of the possibility of  such  damage.

Posting

Do all have same feature license?

[Bas van Delft]

Got it!

While ordered all IP Base feature license, one has been shipped with Lan Base.

Within show version it says it all (overlooked at the first time)

License Level: lanbase

License Type: Default. No valid license found.

Next reload license Level: lanbase

Against the others:

License Level: ipbase

License Type: Permanent

Next reload license Level: ipbase

While this explains the Major Version difference, to me the error message could be made much easier: License version mismatch would suffice and be much more spot on.

Thanks for triggering the feature license issue!