A water-utility Spectrum-X leaf fails new EVPN routes after growth. What should cl-resource-query help show?

When a water-utility Spectrum-X leaf fails new EVPN routes after growth, cl-resource-query should help show whether Spectrum-X resource or profile limits explain the failed EVPN routes. Growth often pushes route, tunnel, or related ASIC allocations into a profile ceiling; the query relates forwarding failures to those limits. Water-utility operators can then fix capacity or profiles instead of chasing unrelated control-plane myths.

Claiming Spectrum-X interface error counters explain the failed EVPN route installs fails conceptually: interface errors diagnose physical or link-layer health, not the route or ASIC allocation ceilings that cl-resource-query checks. Asserting that Spectrum-X CPU utilization trends explain the failed EVPN routes fails because CPU load does not reveal resource or profile allocation limits; cl-resource-query is the tool for correlating forwarding failures with those ceilings. Asserting that Spectrum-X BGP neighbor uptime explains the failed EVPN route capacity fails because neighbor uptime only confirms session state, not whether resource or profile limits are blocking new route installations.

Exam caveat: Resource/profile limits are one common explanation for post-growth EVPN failures, not the only one. If cl-resource-query shows ample headroom, continue with BGP/EVPN configuration and underlay diagnostics.

Operational check: On the failing water-utility leaf, run cl-resource-query after EVPN growth, identify near-limit resource classes tied to routing/EVPN scale, compare against the switch profile, and remediate by reducing scale, changing profile, or expanding capacity—only disable BGP if evidence points to a BGP fault, not as a first reflex.