The plan is migrate the uplinks from a fews 6500 to a couple Nexus 7000 using pingroups with no trafic disruption. So i have made a desing but i not sure if this is the best way to accomplish the objective without problems.
This is the desing:
There will be two (new) PINGROUPS (All the server use two VNICs) that will be facing to the nexus using the PO 108 and PO 109, is this a good configuration? the nexus are using VPC towards the fabric; the fabric are in EHM.
We made a couple of test moving the vnic into the pingroup and it work fine, but i want to know is this configuration is good.
This works ok; however, best practise in UCS design is using dynamic pinning, and not static pinning (what you are doing). In your case, dynamic or static pinning will have the same result; however, the managment overhead for static pinning is bigger; for every interface, you have to add the pingroup, and if you forget, it will fall back to dynamic pinning.
This document will provide screenshots to outline the steps to setup
TACACS+ configuration to ACI and also the configuration required on
Cisco ACS server. Please find the official Cisco guide for configuring
TACACS+ Authentication to ACI:
Is it supported or NOT supported? It's a frequently asked question.
Before APIC, release 2.3(1f), transit routing was not supported within a
single L3Out profile. In APIC, release 2.3(1f) and later, you can
configure transit routing with a single L3Out pr...
Cisco Documents are usually accurate, but when it came to the document
on Cisco APIC Signature-Based Transactions it was slightly off the mark.
This document is for those novices to API like me who cant seem to
figure out how to go about performing signat...