3524 XL - fiber module not working

Recently bought a fiber module (transceiver) for our 3524 XL series switch. When I pushed it in to the receptacle on the switch, I get nothing. Nothing on either port.

However, when I push it into another 3524 XL switch that we have the Module springs to life and works fine.

My boss says it's probably "shut down" and I need to "no shut" the port.

Can anyone advise me on this - is there some facet to this that I should be aware of?

Reply to
joddpur
Loading thread data ...

snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com crashed Echelon writing news: snipped-for-privacy@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com:

Usually it takes some fiber cable and an active unit in the other end before link will occure.

Does the switch identify the module in sh int status or a sh inv command.

If the port is administrativly shut down as your boss says log into switch and do:

conf t int gi0/1 (or gi0/2 depending on which port you plugged transceiver into) no shut

Reply to
Bjarke Andersen

You might want to consider briefly contracting a network engineer with certifications for a service call. Have them configure the network switch with the same settings that your other working network switch uses (central logging server, login authentication server, DNS settings, etc...) if no one else there is available to configure this seemingly new ethernet switch for initial use. If you go with this suggestion, there is no reason why not to ask for a demonstration of this being performed.

The answer to just this one question is below, but I am judging your skill as such that you might get stuck again on something else. There are other factors here which we are not even getting into which could crop up and be a problem. For now, here is your process to enable that port:

Connect a computer serial port (DB-9) to the console port on the switch (RJ-45) with the supplied Cisco light blue console cable. Run Hyperterminal in Windows or a similar terminal emulation program which can communicate over the serial port (might be COM1). Connect with settings of 9600 baud, 8 data bits, 1 stop bit, and no parity. The login for the console port of the router should appear on the screen. If there is a password prompt or a login banner, go ahead and get through that. The prompt on the screen should be a > symbol. Enter the command "enable" and you will probably be prompted with another password. This new prompt has a # symbol. Enter the command "show ip interface brief" to list the names of all of the interfaces. The interface you are looking into will be listed here. As an example for this, consider that the interface is GigabitEthernet0/1. Enter the command "configure terminal" and the prompt will now show (config) in the prompt. From this prompt, enter the command "interface GigabitEthernet0/1". The prompt should now change to show (config-if) in the prompt. Enter the command "no shutdown". Repeat for the other interface if desired. Use the command "exit" until you are disconnected from the device.

Reply to
Scott Perry

Thanks Bjarke and Scott both for your time and energy in helping.

I have logged in to Ciso devices and am familiar with the Cisco commands and such.

I have "no shut" the port when my boss suggested this, but to no avail.

The first time I pushed the module into this 3500 was with a fiber transceiver on the other end (forget the brand). I have since connected an hp Procurve switch that is sort of the hp version of cisco's 3500. It has the transceiver module in place and working.

Prior to my attempts to make this 3500 fiber module work, I have had 2 generic transceivers on both sides of a 100 meter fiber run. It has worked for years and in fact is working right now. My goal is to remove these 2 generic fiber transceivers so that my fiber transmissions are not bottlenecked with a single ethernet to the switch. By placing two switches/with fiber modules built in, I'm gaining a lot of bandwidth (hope that makes sense -as I'm not sure I explained it well).

The hp procurve worked right away, as did a 3500 I have at another location. Just this one 3500 is being difficult. The interface is showing down / down. I'm going to test again tonight when everyone goes home, but I posted here because I'm familiar with routers and some PIX not the switch. I thought maybe there is some facet to the

3500 that I am not aware of. I doubt very much that both gigabit ports are bad and since the module works in another identical switch than it must be a setting in the IOS?? Correct?

Thanks again

Reply to
joddpur

snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com writes: ...

Probably not a setting in IOS no.

My first thought would be that something is wonky with the GBIC. Maybe its EEPROM is blown or something. I've had some that went bad like that in the 3524XL days..

One version of IOS in one switch of yours must not care. The other version of IOS in your problem switch probably does care if the contents are invalid.

Does anything show up in the logs about invalid GBIC EEPROM? Make sure logging is turned on, and look at the logs to see if it detected a wonky GBIC.

Reply to
Doug McIntyre

snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote in news:1186593548.116521.7520 @l70g2000hse.googlegroups.com:

If you do a "sho int status", does the gbic show up correctly?

chris

Reply to
Chris Marva

You might be running into a "security" issue in that the Catalyst IOS is considering the GBIC counterfeit. If you bought bargain basement GBICs, they're often black-market fakes from China. You can sometimes tell because the Cisco sticker has been razor-bladed off in spots. I believe there is an EEPROM hash/serial number check done by the IOS and if it doesn't like what it sees, the GBIC won't come up. I've run into situations where an older IOS version accepted the GBIC, but after an IOS upgrade things quit working.

My guess is that if you're using generic GBICs, the EEPROM check is causing your grief. I could be totally wrong, but if everything else seems to be OK after a check of the port and controller stats, and, other GBICs do work, then perhaps this is your issue.

Just one more way for Cisco to charge you $400 for a $4 part...

Chris Marva wrote:

Reply to
fugettaboutit

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.