On 4 May 2016 at 14:36, Simon Lockhart wrote:
> On Wed May 04, 2016 at 02:27:13PM +0100, Phil Mayers wrote:
>> Right up until you RMA it and the *next* TAC engineer says it's a fake and
>> you can't have a replacement, and the previous engineer is nowhere to be
>> found.
>>
>> I would get written
On Wed May 04, 2016 at 02:27:13PM +0100, Phil Mayers wrote:
> Right up until you RMA it and the *next* TAC engineer says it's a fake and
> you can't have a replacement, and the previous engineer is nowhere to be
> found.
My thoughts exactly.
Just to confuse matters a bit, we don't buy these cards
On 04/05/16 14:20, James Bensley wrote:
What do TAC say?
If they say the card will function as normal and it doesn't void your
support then I'd be inclined to keep the card.
Right up until you RMA it and the *next* TAC engineer says it's a fake
and you can't have a replacement, and the previo
What do TAC say?
If they say the card will function as normal and it doesn't void your
support then I'd be inclined to keep the card.
Although a having a "warning" isn't great as that means false
positives on the NMS.
Cheers,
James.
___
cisco-nsp maili
All,
We've recently received a WS-X6908-10G-2T which has been 'upgraded' to a -2TXL
by replacing the DFC-4 with a DFC4-EXL.
When we install the card in our 6500, we get the following warning:
May 3 05:49:10.566 UTC: %SMC-DFC4-2-BAD_ID_HW: Failed Identification Test in
4/0/1 [5/0]
The m
