OT (sort of) TAC Horror Stories
Just curious about other peoples experiences with TAC on products "gone bad"... 1) Get call while almost in bed at 9:30 PM 2) 3548XL GigE interface goes down... 3) Restart and power cycle switch to no avail.. 4) Swap out GBIC and fiber patch with no more luck... 5) Call TAC, luckily equipment is on 7x24x4 SmartNet.. 6) Actually get new switch in 3.5 hours delivered to site.. 7) While configuring notice fan does not work... 8) Install anyways and call TAC again (luckly unit was near HVAC vent)... 9) TAC agrees to send another unit but have to wait till next afternoon.. 10) Replacement arrives but half it's ports don't enable after boot (the LEDs stay sort of yellow) 11) TAC agrees to send another but it will take (this was on a Friday) till Monday... 12) Get replacement.. 13) Pull out of box and hear a serious rattle (must be atleast two parts loose in chassis) 14) TAC agrees to send another unit but need 3 days to find one... 15) Unit finally shows up and actually works (and didn't rattle) I was lucky as the first unit worked (though it's fan did not) and did not over heat (mainly due to it's location)... Had there been cooling problems I would have yanked a fan off one of the other units (though as the part was not a "service item" TAC did not support such creativeness).. Just curious as to what anyone elses TAC horror stories have been like? _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OT (sort of) TAC Horror Stories
Bob, I never worked for Cisco TAC, but I was a TAC employee for two other networking companies over a 4 year period of time. Over the past two years, most network equipment manufacturers have had substantial backlogs of new orders that need to be filled as soon as possible. The QA groups are under a significant amount of pressure to get the products out the door as soon as possible, to fullfill those backorders. The manufacturers are under a lot of pressure to get the products assembled and shipped very quickly. The companies that manufacturer the components that go into the completed product are also under the gun to get the parts shipped out very quickly. Unfortunately, in order to get the speed, you have to take steps away from the QA process... The other strange phenomenon that I've seen happen before is that, since the sales force seems to have more clout than the logistics group that supplies the depots with spare parts, and sometimes the depots tend to get more refurbished products than new products. Sometimes, repair technicians do not find the problems that caused the refurbished product to be initially sent back to the company, because they to are under pressure to turn the product around, and ship it back out into the field, because of the backlog with manufacturing new products. Unfortunately, the only people in this entire cycle of chaos and bad quality who actually have to answer directly to the customers are the poor TAC Engineers, who have absolutely nothing to do with the entire process. The only thing that they have the power to do is authorize the shipment of replacement equipment to you. If that equipment is bad, TAC will have to deal with the next irrate phone call from the next dissatisfied customer. On a side note... After doing technical support for networking manufacturers over a 4 year period of time, maybe 1 out of 10 customers sent a thank you note showing appreciation for us helping them out after the problem was resolved. Maybe 1 out of 500 asked for your manager's email address to send a note letting them know what kind of job you did. Cisco sends out a survey to all TAC customers, but how many people respond? After my first consulting project was completed, the client treated us to Filet Mignon at Ruth's Chris Steakhouse. They even bought a take-home meal for my wife! So show your friendly TAC engineers some appreciation. If they help solve a problem that saves your company thousands or millions of dollars, send them a company shirt, hat, or a gift certificate to their favorite restaurant, or just fill out the survey praising their work. Because once they solve your problem, they are rewarded kindly by having to take the next major disaster out of the endless case queue! At 05:44 PM 1/23/01 -0800, Bob Johnson wrote: >Just curious about other peoples experiences with TAC on products "gone >bad"... > >1) Get call while almost in bed at 9:30 PM >2) 3548XL GigE interface goes down... >3) Restart and power cycle switch to no avail.. >4) Swap out GBIC and fiber patch with no more luck... >5) Call TAC, luckily equipment is on 7x24x4 SmartNet.. >6) Actually get new switch in 3.5 hours delivered to site.. >7) While configuring notice fan does not work... >8) Install anyways and call TAC again (luckly unit was near HVAC vent)... >9) TAC agrees to send another unit but have to wait till next afternoon.. >10) Replacement arrives but half it's ports don't enable after boot (the >LEDs stay sort of yellow) >11) TAC agrees to send another but it will take (this was on a Friday) till >Monday... >12) Get replacement.. >13) Pull out of box and hear a serious rattle (must be atleast two parts >loose in chassis) >14) TAC agrees to send another unit but need 3 days to find one... >15) Unit finally shows up and actually works (and didn't rattle) > >I was lucky as the first unit worked (though it's fan did not) and did not >over heat (mainly due to it's location)... Had there been cooling problems I >would have yanked a fan off one of the other units (though as the part was >not a "service item" TAC did not support such creativeness).. >Just curious as to what anyone elses TAC horror stories have been like? > >_ >FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html >Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OT (sort of) TAC Horror Stories
Yeah, I've had experience with their Cache Engine team and found it lacking as well. Turns out an online banking customer using the box couldn't even use it as the CE500 won't work with https/SSL certificates (I believe that was the issue, might be a little off on my terminology). Too bad TAC didn't know that. The worst thing is that Cisco is the one who recommended the product without researching what it could do and that it wouldn't support the traffic they needed to pass (if nothing else, it slowed it down). -- Jason Roysdon, CCNP+Security/CCDP, MCSE, CNA, Network+, A+ List email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://jason.artoo.net/ Cisco resources: http://r2cisco.artoo.net/ "Rick Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I have never had a problem with TAC that i can think > of. Their cache engine support team is not that well > experienced but they get the job done, just takes a > little longer then with the R&S groups. I have had a > lot of failures with the 3548XL switches though. Bad > GBIC and loose screws during shipment, sounds like we > are seeing the same issues. The GBIC failures are > usually the slot going bad not the module itself, they > come in waves, 2-3 at a time every few months. > > But when it comes down to TAC, i can't complain. Now > the QA people that see the products out the door, > Cisco needs to do something there, new and rma. > > Rick Thompson > --- "Erick B." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > First of all, this isn't a problem with cisco TAC. > > They assisted you and dispatched hardware in a > > timely > > manner. This is a problem with damage during > > shipping > > or possibly defective units from the warehouse or > > supplier used. I don't work for them but do know > > sometimes that companies use other suppliers for RMA > > dispatches. Since you got 2 slightly-defective units > > in a row I would let TAC know about it nicely and > > ask > > them to pass it on to their RMA/logistics group so > > they can look into it. Give them the RMA #, case #, > > etc. > > > > --- Bob Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Just curious about other peoples experiences with > > > TAC on products "gone > > > bad"... > > > > > > 1) Get call while almost in bed at 9:30 PM > > > 2) 3548XL GigE interface goes down... > > > 3) Restart and power cycle switch to no avail.. > > > 4) Swap out GBIC and fiber patch with no more > > > luck... > > > 5) Call TAC, luckily equipment is on 7x24x4 > > > SmartNet.. > > > 6) Actually get new switch in 3.5 hours delivered > > to > > > site.. > > > 7) While configuring notice fan does not work... > > > 8) Install anyways and call TAC again (luckly unit > > > was near HVAC vent)... > > > 9) TAC agrees to send another unit but have to > > wait > > > till next afternoon.. > > > 10) Replacement arrives but half it's ports don't > > > enable after boot (the > > > LEDs stay sort of yellow) > > > 11) TAC agrees to send another but it will take > > > (this was on a Friday) till > > > Monday... > > > 12) Get replacement.. > > > 13) Pull out of box and hear a serious rattle > > (must > > > be atleast two parts > > > loose in chassis) > > > 14) TAC agrees to send another unit but need 3 > > days > > > to find one... > > > 15) Unit finally shows up and actually works (and > > > didn't rattle) > > > > > > I was lucky as the first unit worked (though it's > > > fan did not) and did not > > > over heat (mainly due to it's location)... Had > > there > > > been cooling problems I > > > would have yanked a fan off one of the other units > > > (though as the part was > > > not a "service item" TAC did not support such > > > creativeness).. > > > Just curious as to what anyone elses TAC horror > > > stories have been like? > > > > > > __ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great > > prices. > > http://auctions.yahoo.com/ > > > > _ > > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices. > http://auctions.yahoo.com/ > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: OT (sort of) TAC Horror Stories
Try this one: Get call on Sunday morning, 8am -- woken up after going to sleep at 5:45am. Drive 50km to site, to find a port on a 2924XL is not forwarding traffic. Try another port, works okay. Phew. Try notebook on "faulty" port, won't forward traffic. Reboot switch. Won't forward traffic. Swap with onsite spare switch. Works. Remove switch to talk to TAC and get RMA replacement. 2 weeks of telephone tag, and "recreate the problem, in a way that we can troubleshoot this". Problem can not be recreated over 2 weeks.. all 24 ports tested a total of 12 times each. RMA REFUSED. Told to give the switch back to the customer, and reinstall it into a production network. The equipment plugged into that switch port? A PLC that controls an electronic industrial press, which if it doesn't recieve calls does not work; possible consequence: well, if someone gets an arm stuck in a moving part, lost limbs or even human death. The unit in question was even more reluctant to be serviced, because it replaced a 2924XL 6 weeks prior, that simply had 8 dead LEDs. A cosmetic problem, but was replaced nonetheless (along with 3 others at the same time from the same site). -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of J Roysdon Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 10:09 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT (sort of) TAC Horror Stories Yeah, I've had experience with their Cache Engine team and found it lacking as well. Turns out an online banking customer using the box couldn't even use it as the CE500 won't work with https/SSL certificates (I believe that was the issue, might be a little off on my terminology). Too bad TAC didn't know that. The worst thing is that Cisco is the one who recommended the product without researching what it could do and that it wouldn't support the traffic they needed to pass (if nothing else, it slowed it down). -- Jason Roysdon, CCNP+Security/CCDP, MCSE, CNA, Network+, A+ List email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://jason.artoo.net/ Cisco resources: http://r2cisco.artoo.net/ "Rick Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I have never had a problem with TAC that i can think > of. Their cache engine support team is not that well > experienced but they get the job done, just takes a > little longer then with the R&S groups. I have had a > lot of failures with the 3548XL switches though. Bad > GBIC and loose screws during shipment, sounds like we > are seeing the same issues. The GBIC failures are > usually the slot going bad not the module itself, they > come in waves, 2-3 at a time every few months. > > But when it comes down to TAC, i can't complain. Now > the QA people that see the products out the door, > Cisco needs to do something there, new and rma. > > Rick Thompson > --- "Erick B." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > First of all, this isn't a problem with cisco TAC. > > They assisted you and dispatched hardware in a > > timely > > manner. This is a problem with damage during > > shipping > > or possibly defective units from the warehouse or > > supplier used. I don't work for them but do know > > sometimes that companies use other suppliers for RMA > > dispatches. Since you got 2 slightly-defective units > > in a row I would let TAC know about it nicely and > > ask > > them to pass it on to their RMA/logistics group so > > they can look into it. Give them the RMA #, case #, > > etc. > > > > --- Bob Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Just curious about other peoples experiences with > > > TAC on products "gone > > > bad"... > > > > > > 1) Get call while almost in bed at 9:30 PM > > > 2) 3548XL GigE interface goes down... > > > 3) Restart and power cycle switch to no avail.. > > > 4) Swap out GBIC and fiber patch with no more > > > luck... > > > 5) Call TAC, luckily equipment is on 7x24x4 > > > SmartNet.. > > > 6) Actually get new switch in 3.5 hours delivered > > to > > > site.. > > > 7) While configuring notice fan does not work... > > > 8) Install anyways and call TAC again (luckly unit > > > was near HVAC vent)... > > > 9) TAC agrees to send another unit but have to > > wait > > > till next afternoon.. > > > 10) Replacement arrives but half it's ports don't > > > enable after boot (the > > > LEDs stay sort of yellow) > > > 11) TAC agrees to send another but it will take > > > (this was on a Friday) till > > > Monday... > >
Re: OT (sort of) TAC Horror Stories
Only part failure I've ever had was out of the box with a 2900 with two slots. One slot had a FDDI module, and the other a FE module. It was acting as an expensive transceiver. TAC stayed on the phone while we troubleshooted the hardware and ended up getting 3 support personnel involved as it was thought to be a spanning tree issue with the FDDI. Basically, what I'm saying is that instead of just saying, "Yeah, bad part, send it in," they troubleshooted the mess out of the thing as it was a mission critical link to a bunch of legacy equipment (3 hours or so). In the meantime, we left a huge Bay box in place with the FDDI ring connected to it and a 10mbit hub port connected to the other Cisco gear. Even though we had a DOA part, the customer was very happy to see their support contract paying off already, and the part was there the next day and worked with no problems. -- Jason Roysdon, CCNP+Security/CCDP, MCSE, CNA, Network+, A+ List email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://jason.artoo.net/ Cisco resources: http://r2cisco.artoo.net/ "dre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message 94lis6$icg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:94lis6$icg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Bob Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Just curious about other peoples experiences with TAC on products "gone > > bad"... > > > 1) Get call while almost in bed at 9:30 PM > > 2) 3548XL GigE interface goes down... > > The problem here was that you are using 3548XL switches... > if you were using a modular chassis with redundant > everything (i.e. 6500 w/ dual PSs, SUPs, et al), you > probably wouldn't be worried about your 3548XL. Not > to mention that the MTBF numbers on the XL series > suck in comparison to the 6000/6500. > > > I was lucky as the first unit worked (though it's fan did not) and did not > > over heat (mainly due to it's location)... Had there been cooling problems I > > would have yanked a fan off one of the other units (though as the part was > > not a "service item" TAC did not support such creativeness).. > > Just curious as to what anyone elses TAC horror stories have been like? > > I've personally never experienced any problems with the TAC. > It is often that I get a front line person that has no idea > what I'm talking about, and sometimes they try to help anyways, > but after I explain to them that I would like it escalated, > they do it. Good team of people, IMHO. Best tech-support ever. > > It sounds like your problems were not even TAC related, more > like shipping and receiving problems (UPS, anyone?). So be > more careful when trying to pin the blame on a tech-support > department, especially the Cisco Technical Assistence Center. > They were doing their jobs just fine. > > -dre > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OT (sort of) TAC Horror Stories
Bob Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just curious about other peoples experiences with TAC on products "gone > bad"... > 1) Get call while almost in bed at 9:30 PM > 2) 3548XL GigE interface goes down... The problem here was that you are using 3548XL switches... if you were using a modular chassis with redundant everything (i.e. 6500 w/ dual PSs, SUPs, et al), you probably wouldn't be worried about your 3548XL. Not to mention that the MTBF numbers on the XL series suck in comparison to the 6000/6500. > I was lucky as the first unit worked (though it's fan did not) and did not > over heat (mainly due to it's location)... Had there been cooling problems I > would have yanked a fan off one of the other units (though as the part was > not a "service item" TAC did not support such creativeness).. > Just curious as to what anyone elses TAC horror stories have been like? I've personally never experienced any problems with the TAC. It is often that I get a front line person that has no idea what I'm talking about, and sometimes they try to help anyways, but after I explain to them that I would like it escalated, they do it. Good team of people, IMHO. Best tech-support ever. It sounds like your problems were not even TAC related, more like shipping and receiving problems (UPS, anyone?). So be more careful when trying to pin the blame on a tech-support department, especially the Cisco Technical Assistence Center. They were doing their jobs just fine. -dre _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OT (sort of) TAC Horror Stories
Actually ... --- Bob Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just curious about other peoples experiences with > TAC on products "gone > bad"... > > 1) Get call while almost in bed at 9:30 PM > 2) 3548XL GigE interface goes down... > 3) Restart and power cycle switch to no avail.. > 4) Swap out GBIC and fiber patch with no more > luck... > 5) Call TAC, luckily equipment is on 7x24x4 > SmartNet.. > 6) Actually get new switch in 3.5 hours delivered to > site.. 3.5 hours is pretty good . However it has not necessarely to do with the TAC . The right tools and good logistics . > 7) While configuring notice fan does not work... This is bad . But , you can not blame TAC . > 8) Install anyways and call TAC again (luckly unit > was near HVAC vent)... > 9) TAC agrees to send another unit but have to wait > till next afternoon.. TAC is very understandable . > 10) Replacement arrives but half it's ports don't > enable after boot (the > LEDs stay sort of yellow) Bad again . But nothing to do with the TAC . > 11) TAC agrees to send another but it will take > (this was on a Friday) till > Monday... TAC is again very helpfull . > 12) Get replacement.. > 13) Pull out of box and hear a serious rattle (must > be atleast two parts > loose in chassis) Bad luck again but nothing to do with the TAC . > 14) TAC agrees to send another unit but need 3 days > to find one... Those guys are terrific . > 15) Unit finally shows up and actually works (and > didn't rattle) > > I was lucky as the first unit worked (though it's > fan did not) and did not > over heat (mainly due to it's location)... This is true . Everything in place to escalate ... >Had there > been cooling problems I > would have yanked a fan off one of the other units > (though as the part was > not a "service item" TAC did not support such > creativeness).. This has to do with logistics . After an RMA you supposted to send back the bad equipment in one piece . There are ( not all ) very creative people in TAC . I would not underestimate this . > Just curious as to what anyone elses TAC horror > stories have been like? Probably everyone has a messed up case with TAC . May I ask you a question ; Howmany GOOD cases have you expierenced with TAC ;-) ? > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices. http://auctions.yahoo.com/ _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: OT (sort of) TAC Horror Stories
Dre, The comments you make about this person's network are not fair in regards to why they are using 3548's. For all you know, it maybe just a small workgroup segment of 30 users that does not warrent the expense of a bare bones 600x/650x or a 4000 chassis. It might be taking a sledge hammer to swat a nat. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of dre Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 10:41 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT (sort of) TAC Horror Stories Bob Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just curious about other peoples experiences with TAC on products "gone > bad"... > 1) Get call while almost in bed at 9:30 PM > 2) 3548XL GigE interface goes down... The problem here was that you are using 3548XL switches... if you were using a modular chassis with redundant everything (i.e. 6500 w/ dual PSs, SUPs, et al), you probably wouldn't be worried about your 3548XL. Not to mention that the MTBF numbers on the XL series suck in comparison to the 6000/6500. > I was lucky as the first unit worked (though it's fan did not) and did not > over heat (mainly due to it's location)... Had there been cooling problems I > would have yanked a fan off one of the other units (though as the part was > not a "service item" TAC did not support such creativeness).. > Just curious as to what anyone elses TAC horror stories have been like? I've personally never experienced any problems with the TAC. It is often that I get a front line person that has no idea what I'm talking about, and sometimes they try to help anyways, but after I explain to them that I would like it escalated, they do it. Good team of people, IMHO. Best tech-support ever. It sounds like your problems were not even TAC related, more like shipping and receiving problems (UPS, anyone?). So be more careful when trying to pin the blame on a tech-support department, especially the Cisco Technical Assistence Center. They were doing their jobs just fine. -dre _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OT (sort of) TAC Horror Stories
Hi, First of all, this isn't a problem with cisco TAC. They assisted you and dispatched hardware in a timely manner. This is a problem with damage during shipping or possibly defective units from the warehouse or supplier used. I don't work for them but do know sometimes that companies use other suppliers for RMA dispatches. Since you got 2 slightly-defective units in a row I would let TAC know about it nicely and ask them to pass it on to their RMA/logistics group so they can look into it. Give them the RMA #, case #, etc. --- Bob Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just curious about other peoples experiences with > TAC on products "gone > bad"... > > 1) Get call while almost in bed at 9:30 PM > 2) 3548XL GigE interface goes down... > 3) Restart and power cycle switch to no avail.. > 4) Swap out GBIC and fiber patch with no more > luck... > 5) Call TAC, luckily equipment is on 7x24x4 > SmartNet.. > 6) Actually get new switch in 3.5 hours delivered to > site.. > 7) While configuring notice fan does not work... > 8) Install anyways and call TAC again (luckly unit > was near HVAC vent)... > 9) TAC agrees to send another unit but have to wait > till next afternoon.. > 10) Replacement arrives but half it's ports don't > enable after boot (the > LEDs stay sort of yellow) > 11) TAC agrees to send another but it will take > (this was on a Friday) till > Monday... > 12) Get replacement.. > 13) Pull out of box and hear a serious rattle (must > be atleast two parts > loose in chassis) > 14) TAC agrees to send another unit but need 3 days > to find one... > 15) Unit finally shows up and actually works (and > didn't rattle) > > I was lucky as the first unit worked (though it's > fan did not) and did not > over heat (mainly due to it's location)... Had there > been cooling problems I > would have yanked a fan off one of the other units > (though as the part was > not a "service item" TAC did not support such > creativeness).. > Just curious as to what anyone elses TAC horror > stories have been like? __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices. http://auctions.yahoo.com/ _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OT (sort of) TAC Horror Stories
I have never had a problem with TAC that i can think of. Their cache engine support team is not that well experienced but they get the job done, just takes a little longer then with the R&S groups. I have had a lot of failures with the 3548XL switches though. Bad GBIC and loose screws during shipment, sounds like we are seeing the same issues. The GBIC failures are usually the slot going bad not the module itself, they come in waves, 2-3 at a time every few months. But when it comes down to TAC, i can't complain. Now the QA people that see the products out the door, Cisco needs to do something there, new and rma. Rick Thompson --- "Erick B." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > First of all, this isn't a problem with cisco TAC. > They assisted you and dispatched hardware in a > timely > manner. This is a problem with damage during > shipping > or possibly defective units from the warehouse or > supplier used. I don't work for them but do know > sometimes that companies use other suppliers for RMA > dispatches. Since you got 2 slightly-defective units > in a row I would let TAC know about it nicely and > ask > them to pass it on to their RMA/logistics group so > they can look into it. Give them the RMA #, case #, > etc. > > --- Bob Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Just curious about other peoples experiences with > > TAC on products "gone > > bad"... > > > > 1) Get call while almost in bed at 9:30 PM > > 2) 3548XL GigE interface goes down... > > 3) Restart and power cycle switch to no avail.. > > 4) Swap out GBIC and fiber patch with no more > > luck... > > 5) Call TAC, luckily equipment is on 7x24x4 > > SmartNet.. > > 6) Actually get new switch in 3.5 hours delivered > to > > site.. > > 7) While configuring notice fan does not work... > > 8) Install anyways and call TAC again (luckly unit > > was near HVAC vent)... > > 9) TAC agrees to send another unit but have to > wait > > till next afternoon.. > > 10) Replacement arrives but half it's ports don't > > enable after boot (the > > LEDs stay sort of yellow) > > 11) TAC agrees to send another but it will take > > (this was on a Friday) till > > Monday... > > 12) Get replacement.. > > 13) Pull out of box and hear a serious rattle > (must > > be atleast two parts > > loose in chassis) > > 14) TAC agrees to send another unit but need 3 > days > > to find one... > > 15) Unit finally shows up and actually works (and > > didn't rattle) > > > > I was lucky as the first unit worked (though it's > > fan did not) and did not > > over heat (mainly due to it's location)... Had > there > > been cooling problems I > > would have yanked a fan off one of the other units > > (though as the part was > > not a "service item" TAC did not support such > > creativeness).. > > Just curious as to what anyone elses TAC horror > > stories have been like? > > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great > prices. > http://auctions.yahoo.com/ > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices. http://auctions.yahoo.com/ _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OT (sort of) TAC Horror Stories
"dre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message 94lis6$icg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:94lis6$icg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I've personally never experienced any problems with the TAC. > It is often that I get a front line person that has no idea > what I'm talking about, and sometimes they try to help anyways, Andre.. The 'front line' person you get is the CRC agent (Customer Response Center). They are not engineers/technicians. However, they are encouraged, and trained, to field as much of the problem as is possible for them. Their efforts off-load a great deal of the calls that otherwise would be going to the TAC engineers. Leaving TAC free (or reasonably so) to put more effort into handling their already heavy technical related call volume. Another benefit, is that it gives the CRC agent, some experience into the technical side of the Cisco world, and some of them progress to move to TAC.. and begin their own learning & certification track. It's a win for TAC in their assists, a win for the CRC in their growth, and since Cisco support is considered hands-down the best.. it's a win for Cisco as a whole. > Bob Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Just curious about other peoples experiences with TAC on products "gone bad"... Bob.. I can definitely relate to the story.. but do keep in mind, that TAC was 100% on the ball in taking care of the problem. Unfortunately, this sounds like a shipping related problem. I'd also suspect some mishandling at the fulfilment docks. I can further tell you, that issues like that are followed up on internally. The worst case I dealt with.. was a call I fielded to a customer who said his product (don't recall what it was) looked like it had been beaten up & thrown around. Of course, I felt he was exaggerating, and figured the unit was a refurbed product with some cosmetic damage. Well.. he was quite descriptive of the damage.. which totally shocked me to think a Cisco product arived in the condition he stated. I asked him to send me a picture of the box & the shipping it came in. I have no idea who was smoking what that day in shipping, but the product was in a shoddy cardboard carton, and the casing truly was crushed in on one side and gouged severly on 2 others. Needless to say, it was an overside wrecked paperweight. He was of course sent a new replacement immediately. Unfortunately, I never did find out what happened to create this problem in the 1st place. And I definitely tried ;-) -- -- | __O_/ | |___, _ |CCIE | \ _ |CCNP Never stop climbing! --> | ./ |CCNA - Stephen E. Hildenbrand -- "dre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message 94lis6$icg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:94lis6$icg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Bob Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Just curious about other peoples experiences with TAC on products "gone > > bad"... > > > 1) Get call while almost in bed at 9:30 PM > > 2) 3548XL GigE interface goes down... > > The problem here was that you are using 3548XL switches... > if you were using a modular chassis with redundant > everything (i.e. 6500 w/ dual PSs, SUPs, et al), you > probably wouldn't be worried about your 3548XL. Not > to mention that the MTBF numbers on the XL series > suck in comparison to the 6000/6500. > > > I was lucky as the first unit worked (though it's fan did not) and did not > > over heat (mainly due to it's location)... Had there been cooling problems I > > would have yanked a fan off one of the other units (though as the part was > > not a "service item" TAC did not support such creativeness).. > > Just curious as to what anyone elses TAC horror stories have been like? > > I've personally never experienced any problems with the TAC. > It is often that I get a front line person that has no idea > what I'm talking about, and sometimes they try to help anyways, > but after I explain to them that I would like it escalated, > they do it. Good team of people, IMHO. Best tech-support ever. > > It sounds like your problems were not even TAC related, more > like shipping and receiving problems (UPS, anyone?). So be > more careful when trying to pin the blame on a tech-support > department, especially the Cisco Technical Assistence Center. > They were doing their jobs just fine. > > -dre > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: OT (sort of) TAC Horror Stories (Best to change the title to SmartNet QA horror stories))
As pointed out by many, the problem was not so much with TAC than with the SmartNet spares system. I consider the whole program under the umbrella of TAC (considering the amount we pay for SmartNet) hoever the TAC staff themselves have always been extremely respnosive and dependable In this case is was bad QA by Smartnet. I consider receiving 3 defective replacement units (covered under a 7x24x4 Onsite Smartnet contract) over a 1 week period a "horror story" but I perhaps should not be blaming TAC... Bob _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
