M-LAG configuration consistency check classifies device configurations into key configurations (Type 1) and common configurations...

To identify the false statement, we evaluate each option based on standard M-LAG documentation, such as Huawei’s and Arista’s guidelines, which are commonly referenced in HCIP-Data Center Network training.

Option A: In loose mode, if Type 1 configurations of the two M-LAG member devices are inconsistent, the member interface on the M-LAG backup device is in Error-Down state and an alarm is generated, indicating that Type 1 configurations on the two devices are inconsistent.

Evaluation: This statement is true. In loose mode, inconsistencies in Type 1 (key) configurations are still critical, as they can affect M-LAG operation. According toHuawei M-LAG Configuration Guide, when Type 1 configurations are inconsistent in loose mode, the system may place the member interface on the backup device into an Error-Down state and generate an alarm to alert administrators. This ensures that critical issues are flagged, even in loose mode, to prevent loops or packet loss.

Conclusion: True.

Option B: If Type 1 configurations of the two M-LAG member devices are inconsistent, certain problems may occur, such as loops and long-period packet loss when the status is normal.

Evaluation: This statement is true. Type 1 configurations are essential for M-LAG operation, and inconsistencies can lead to severe network issues. For example, mismatched LACP settings or VLAN mappings can create loops or cause packet loss, as noted inArista M-LAG Documentation. These problems can persist even when the system appears normal, making consistency checks critical for troubleshooting and O&M.

Conclusion: True.

Option C: If Type 2 configurations of the two M-LAG member devices are inconsistent, the M-LAG running status may be abnormal. Compared with Type 1 configuration problems, Type 2 configuration problems are more likely to be detected and have less impact on the network.

Evaluation: This statement is true. Type 2 (common) configurations, such as QoS or STP settings, are less critical but can still affect network performance. According toHuawei M-LAG Best Practices, Type 2 inconsistencies are often detected during consistency checks but have a lower impact on M-LAG operation compared to Type 1 issues. They are also more likely to be flagged during monitoring, as they are less severe and easier to resolve.

Conclusion: True.

Option D: If Type 2 configurations of the two M-LAG member devices are inconsistent, an alarm that indicates key and common configuration inconsistencies is generated.

Evaluation: This statement is false. While Type 2 (common) configuration inconsistencies are detected during consistency checks, they do not typically triggeralarms, especially alarms that specifically indicate both key and common configuration inconsistencies. According toHuawei M-LAG Configuration GuideandArista M-LAG Documentation, Type 2 inconsistencies may be logged or reported in system logs but are not severe enough to generate critical alarms unless they significantly impact network operation. Alarms are more commonly associated with Type 1 (key) configuration inconsistencies, as they pose a higher risk to M-LAG functionality.

Conclusion: False.