On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 12:28 AM, Phil Mayers <[email protected]> wrote: > Your direct test I would expect to fail; pulling the TX fibre will cause the > far end to signal fault and bring the entire link down.
Yes, the far end. But I meant I connected both TX and RX between two ports. That made them both come up (of course). But when I pulled just one TX they both went down. > Are you sure the taps are working i.e. providing a valid light-level and so > forth? What's the media & distances/powers? It's LX and a less than 100 meters. Sure, it's split, but still. We haven't measured it, but since the unsplit port-to-port test doesn't work either then it's not that. > What kind of tap is it? Passive fibre, OEO? Passive. > What does "show int ... extensive" show, with the tap inserted into RX? It's not connected at the moment, but no change from when the incoming light is off. Just down and sad. We've since tried connecting two ports with just one fiber strand, and with Cisco and Huawei it just works, once duplex is set to full (or just not auto). The problem with that is that Cisco doesn't (to my knowledge) have any cheap 24 port SFP switch, and Huawei is Huawei. We even checked the Huawei connected to the same tap, and it had no problem there either. > Are any odd protocols running at the *far* end? Can you turn them off? Can't experiment with the live traffic. :-) But yes, there is at least STP there. But again this would not affect the two-ports-on-the-same-switch scenario. It's not that it's up and blocked, it's down with all the lights off. _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
