Open joelebla opened 1 month ago
A new scenario was recently discovered where a customer configured etherbnet interfaces starting from 0.
dn : uni/infra/hpaths-1_eth1_0/rsHPathAtt-[topology/pod-1/paths-1/pathep-[eth1/0]]
dn : uni/infra/hpaths-2_eth1_0/rsHPathAtt-[topology/pod-2/paths-2/pathep-[eth1/0]]
dn : uni/infra/hpaths-3_eth1_0/rsHPathAtt-[topology/pod-2/paths-3/pathep-[eth1/0]]
dn : uni/infra/hpaths-4_eth1_0/rsHPathAtt-[topology/pod-1/paths-4/pathep-[eth1/0]]
dn : uni/infra/hpaths-5_eth1_0/rsHPathAtt-[topology/pod-1/paths-5/pathep-[eth1/0]]
After the upgrade to 5.3(2c), it triggered the following error: "Error: 400 - Failed to decode IfIndex, id: 0x1ffff000, error: 1".
(use upvote :thumbsup: for attentions)
Validation Type
[ ] - Fault
[X] - Config
[ ] - Bug
[ ] - Other
What needs to be validated
There are multiple scenarios described in the defect that can lead to failure of config deployment on upgrade to version with fix for CSCwh68103.
Why it needs to be validated
Such misconfiguration on the source version will result in policy deployment failure on the destination. This includes VPC configuration failure and outage.
Additional context
The validation should detect any of the 5 scenarios, identify the problematic configuration for the user, and recommend the method of resolution depending on impacting scenario.