07-08-2016 09:56 AM - edited 03-08-2019 06:33 AM
Hello Guys;
I have a vpc domain configured on two Nexus 6000 with error VTP type-2 configuration incompatible due to vtp being on different versions.
Does changing from vtp version 3 to vtp version 1 will require a switch reload or will the vtp mode changed?
Both switches are in Transparent Mode.
Thanks in advanced!
Regards,
07-08-2016 10:26 AM
Hi,
No, it does not require a reboot. Since both switches are in transparent mode changing it should not effect the production, but it maybe a good idea to make the change after hours in case there is a blip.
HTH
07-08-2016 10:27 AM
Excellent.
Thanks for your reply.
Regards,
07-09-2016 03:40 AM
Hello
reverting vtp3 back lower version:
Vtp 1 and 2 are not compatiable so if you are going to change the vtp version make sure you don't end adding an incorrect version as the cravat is if it is reverted back to a incorrect number it could initcate a version renumbering throughout the domain.
Also if the switch your reverting is a vtp 3 server (not primary) and if it has an higher revision number then of an exiting vtp 1/2 server - client it could override the existing vtp D/B.
Gladly your saving grace with your scenario is you state they are running in transparent mode so you should be okay.
res
paul
07-19-2016 11:14 AM
Hello;
I was able to revert to version 1 with no reload necessary as explained.
But we had the following situation:
Our Distribution switch (Catalyst 6500) was in default vtp mode, i.e., no vtp domain name, Server mode and vtp version 1. We changed the vtp mode to transparent first, then configured the domain name to the one existing in all of our other switches.
After that, a couple of Access switches connected to that Distribution switch got disconnected with the following message:
%DTP-SW1_SP-5-DOMAINMISMATCH: Unable to perform trunk negotiation on port Gi1/1/13 because of VTP domain mismatch.
The Port-channels from those switches got disconnected form the Dist. Switch afterwards.
The switches that got disconnected had a different vtp domain name and were in transparent mode.
The solution was to change the vtp domain name on the access switches to the same vtp domain in the Dist. Switch. Then the switches were able to connect again via the trink ports.
Question: If the access switches were in Transparent Mode, why changing the domain name on the Dist. Switch disconnected the access switches?
Thanks for your support.
Regards,
07-19-2016 11:42 AM
Hi,
I think even in transparent mode you still need to have the same domain name.
Transparent—VTP transparent switches do not participate in VTP. A VTP transparent switch does not advertise its VLAN configuration and does not synchronize its VLAN configuration based on received advertisements, but transparent switches do forward VTP advertisements that they receive out their trunk ports in VTP Version 2.
Dynamic Trunking Protocol (DTP) sends the VTP domain name in a DTP packet. Therefore, if you have two ends of a link that belong to different VTP domains, the trunk does not come up if you use DTP. In this special case, you must configure the trunk mode as on or nonegotiate, on both sides, in order to allow the trunk to come up without DTP negotiation agreement.
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/lan-switching/vtp/10558-21.html
HTH
07-19-2016 12:21 PM
Understand. My trunks are in desirable non-silent mode.
One question, why the access switches were able to trunk to the Dist. Switch when the Dist. Switch was in default VTP mode?
Thanks again for your support.
Regards,
Find answers to your questions by entering keywords or phrases in the Search bar above. New here? Use these resources to familiarize yourself with the community: