Well, I have been trying to get a backup file out of this so I can send it to you, but so far when I try to do http/https backup it fails the only thing is I get a network error, and if I look in the switch logs, it says it cannot find the file.
I have a SG300-28 at home, it was never this cantankerous, I can do file backups and uploads to it with no issues whatsoever. They must have cut some major corners somewhere with these switches. On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 11:30 AM Chuck Hast <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, I went to pull the backed up config files out of both switches > and got a "network failure." I setup a tftp server on my > laptop and tried to go that way and got a "file not found" error. > > Appears that I have to upgrade to a later rev of the firmware/boot > file. Both switches are presently at Rev 1.2.9.44, which has no > ssh, and appears that it "likes" some old version of i.e. So perhaps > doing that upgrade will take care of these issues. Who knows. > Once I do the upgrades I will let you know what happens, if it still > does not want to pass the vlan 20 to switch 02 I will pull the > config file and send it. This rev level has NO CLI whatsoever, > but it is installed in one of the later revs, got to get to that. > > > On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 11:38 PM Chuck Hast <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Let me get you the config files, let us not break our heads on it >> until you can look at them. I know on the web screens I set up >> port 50 to have vlan 20 tagged on both ends. In my megre work >> in this area, it seems that I always did the same thing, the link >> carrying the camera VLAN went on a separate path to keep >> possible latence down due to competition for the link path. >> >> This is the same case the cameras are on VLAN 20, it is a >> total network island because the stinking cameras call home, >> and the best way to avoid it is just to put them on and island >> network. This is the first time I can recall having this issue. in >> the past I just tagged the two ends of the link and my video >> data went that direction. All the rest went with VLAN 1 on >> the other link. >> >> On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 4:15 AM Mike C. <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> > >>> > That is what I was thinking based on the other Cisco doc I read all I >>> need >>> > to do is set both of the two fibre links up as trunks and it should >>> work, >>> > but there is another one that also said the part about tagging. I have >>> VLAN >>> > 20 (the VLANS are 1, 10 and 20) on port 50 on both ends, I have also >>> removed >>> > it but still no joy.\ >>> >>> >>> Just to be clear, with port based vlans, which is what you have, a port >>> can >>> only belong to 1 untagged vlan. So when you have a port set to untagged >>> w. >>> the pvid set, then that port will only be in the default / native vlan, >>> which is VLAN 1 on most network equipment vendors. This is often used as >>> the management vlan. >>> >>> However, you can only have 1 untagged vlan per port. Any other vlans you >>> want that port to handle must be tagged. Otherwise, all those packets >>> will >>> be treated as they're part of the default / native vlan. >>> >>> Which seems to be what you have configured. VLAN 1 untagged pvid on P49 >>> and >>> VLAN 20 untagged pvid on P50 on both switches. >>> >>> And that makes me reconsider my earlier statement: >>> >>> Switch B >>> > >>> > 49 GE49 Enabled Disabled STP Root 20000 128 Forwarding >>> > 32768-f0:29:29:f5:43:bd 128-97 0 1 >>> > 50 GE50 Enabled Disabled STP Alternate 20000 128 Discarding >>> > 32768-f0:29:29:f5:43:bd 128-98 0 0 >>> > This one says discarding for port 50, so suspect that is the issue. >>> > >>> >>> Normally, the way this is designed and configured when there's multiple >>> uplinks is to create a LAG or MLT, a trunk group that carries all VLANs. >>> This provides more bandwidth and failover redundancy. >>> >>> But you haven't said anything about a LAG configuration and if you don't >>> have any traffic traversing P50, if memory serves until you take the >>> fibre >>> link down on P49. Is that correct? >>> >>> Therefore, if you want this to work you will have to tag vlan 10, 20 on >>> port 49 and port 50 and you will have only 1 active uplink over which all >>> VLANs traverse. >>> >>> Then in the event of a failure of the active uplink, Spanning Tree will >>> reconfigure and use P50. >>> >>> Does that make sense at all? This is difficult to troubleshoot and >>> explain >>> over email without the configs. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PLUG: https://pdxlinux.org >>> PLUG mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug >>> >> >> >> -- >> >> Chuck Hast -- KP4DJT -- >> I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me. >> Ph 4:13 KJV >> Todo lo puedo en Cristo que me fortalece. >> Fil 4:13 RVR1960 >> >> > > -- > > Chuck Hast -- KP4DJT -- > I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me. > Ph 4:13 KJV > Todo lo puedo en Cristo que me fortalece. > Fil 4:13 RVR1960 > > -- Chuck Hast -- KP4DJT -- I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me. Ph 4:13 KJV Todo lo puedo en Cristo que me fortalece. Fil 4:13 RVR1960 _______________________________________________ PLUG: https://pdxlinux.org PLUG mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
