Jeff, port Gi3/4 in WS-C4506 wasn't errdisabled. Port status was "notconnect". Once I did "shutdown" and "no shutdown" to port Gi3/4 in WS-C4506 port status changed to "connected".
FF, if TAC replaces such GBIC's for free, Cisco has probably documented and acknowledged this problem- is there an official TAC document for this? Quinn, Thank you for this! Description of bug "CSCti80308" is "On reloading Catalyst 4500 series switch, Catalyst 3xxx switches connected to WS-X4448-GB-SFP may get err-disabled", but the WS-C4506 didn't reload and WS-C4506 port facing the WS-C2960G-24TC-L flapped only two times. I mean there were no errdisabled port on neither side. regards, martin 2011/10/4 quinn snyder <[email protected]>: > check into the following bug > bug id: CSCti80308 > i have hit this in other c4k chassis with different cards, but the result is > the same. > regards, > q. > -= sent via ipad. please excuse brevity, spelling, and grammar =- > On Oct 3, 2011, at 17:55, Martin T <[email protected]> wrote: > > I have a following setup: > > WS-C2960G-24TC-L[Gi0/22] <-> [Gi3/4]WS-C4506 > > SFP in WS-C2960G-24TC-L is a noname 1000BASE-LX10 transceiver working > thanks to "service unsupported-transceiver". GBIC in WS-C4506 is an > Avago AFCT-5611Z 1000BASE-LX10. Linecard model in WS-C4506 is > WS-X4306-GB. > > I had a situation where WS-C2960G-24TC-L reloaded, but link between > WS-C2960G-24TC-L and WS-C4506 did not came up until I did "shutdown" > and "no shutdown" to port Gi3/4 in WS-C4506. I have seen similar > behaviour with GBIC transceivers on WS-X4306 linecard as well(in > another WS-C4506) and for example in case there is a fibre cut between > the switches, once the cable is repaired, sometimes one needs to make > "shutdown" and "no shutdow" to GBIC port in order for line protocol to > come up. > > As I understand, in case there is no Rx signal to the GBIC, the Tx is > still operational(tested this with light meter and in case of > 1000BASE-SX one is even able to see the red light constantly on) and > both ends should see each other. > > > Anybody else seen something like this? What might be the reason behind > this behaviour? How common is this with SFP's? Are there GBIC's with > chip set design preventing such problems? > > > regards, > martin > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
