Hello. The feeling we have had is that mostly it's the tri-rate copper SFPs that is causing the frustration. Same with ASR1001. Never had an issue with optical fixed rate modules though.
Bästa hälsningar / Best regards, Gustav Uhlander Senior Communication & Infrastructure Engineer Steria AB Kungsbron 13 Box 169 SE-101 23 Stockholm Sweden Tel: +46 8 622 42 15 Fax: +46 8 622 42 23 Mobile: +46 70 962 71 03 gustav.ulan...@steria.se www.steria.se -----Original Message----- From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Aaron Sent: den 4 september 2014 20:41 To: 'Lobo'; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] SFP's (Third party) for ME3600 Have you tried the hidden global command... "service unsupported-transceiver" This worked for me when I couldn't get sfp's to work. My notes below... after typing that global command, just shut/no shut the port and it should immediately start working. you won't need to reboot me3600 nor will you need to reinsert the sfp. it will work. insert sfp... "show log" will show bad crc error and port in err-disabled mode. sh int status err sh int g0/23 ...will show port in err-disabled sh inventory ...will not be listed at first. ...will be down down on "sh ip int br" conf t int g0/23 shut no shut sh inventory ...will now show like this... NAME: "GigabitEthernet0/23", DESCR: "Not Present" PID: , VID: , SN: 0000000008332636 Apr 18 07:59:26: %GBIC_SECURITY_CRYPT-4-VN_DATA_CRC_ERROR: GBIC in port 23 has bad crc Apr 18 07:59:26: %PM-4-ERR_DISABLE: gbic-invalid error detected on Gi0/23, putting Gi0/23 in err-disable state eng-lab-3600-2#sh int status err Port Name Status Reason Gi0/23 lab2 pc err-disabled gbic-invalid conf t service unsupported-transceiver eng-lab-3600-2#conf t Enter configuration commands, one per line. End with CNTL/Z. eng-lab-3600-2(config)#service unsupported-transceiver Warning: When Cisco determines that a fault or defect can be traced to the use of third-party transceivers installed by a customer or reseller, then, at Cisco's discretion, Cisco may withhold support under warranty or a Cisco support program. In the course of providing support for a Cisco networking product Cisco may require that the end user install Cisco transceivers if Cisco determines that removing third-party parts will assist Cisco in diagnosing the cause of a support issue. eng-lab-3600-2(config)#int g0/23 eng-lab-3600-2(config-if)#shut eng-lab-3600-2(config-if)#no shut eng-lab-3600-2(config-if)#^Z eng-lab-3600-2#ib g0/23 Interface IP-Address OK? Method Status Protocol GigabitEthernet0/23 unassigned YES unset down down eng-lab-3600-2#ib g0/23 Interface IP-Address OK? Method Status Protocol GigabitEthernet0/23 unassigned YES unset down down eng-lab-3600-2#ib g0/23 Interface IP-Address OK? Method Status Protocol GigabitEthernet0/23 unassigned YES unset up up eng-lab-3600-2# ...show invent... NAME: "GigabitEthernet0/23", DESCR: "Not Present" PID: , VID: , SN: 0000000008332636 ...sho log... Apr 18 08:08:24: %LINK-3-UPDOWN: Interface GigabitEthernet0/23, changed state to up Apr 18 08:08:25: %LINEPROTO-5-UPDOWN: Line protocol on Interface GigabitEthernet0/23, changed state to up eng-lab-3600-2#sh int status err eng-lab-3600-2# Aaron -----Original Message----- From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lobo Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2014 10:48 AM To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] SFP's (Third party) for ME3600 Similar issues here. The only 1000BaseT SFPs that we've gotten to work are the Cisco branded ones. Some of the other brands/manufacturers we've used have given mixed results. In one instance we had plugged in a 10/100/1000 SFP and tried connecting it to a Cisco 3750 FE port. The FE port on the 3750 would come up but it would not come up on the 3600X side. Swapping the SFP with a Cisco branded one would resolve the issue most of the time. The 3600X has proven to be one of the more finicky switches in terms of accepting non Cisco branded SFPs. Jose On 9/4/2014 6:53 AM, Phil Mayers wrote: > On 03/09/2014 22:03, David Farrell wrote: >> On 02/09/2014 20:10, James Bensley wrote: >>> I've used hundreads with no issues at all (with both >>> insertion/removal and actual operation). > >> I've had a few 1000BaseT SFPs, both Cisco-branded and otherwise, >> where the wee tab mechanism has broken and the 'release' isn't pushed >> in to allow the SFP to slide out. I ended up having to push the 'release' >> mechanism in with a screwdriver to pop the SFP out. Had to file those >> SFPs in the bin. > > Likewise. The copper SFPs seem to be a bit hit and miss TBH, in terms > of physical build quality and actual work-ing-ness, particular the > tri-rate / autoneg style issues. > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
