cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
3019
Views
11
Helpful
7
Replies

CSCvq89463 - 8845/8865 freezing randomly

tgarst
Level 1
Level 1

Hello Cisco forum -

 

Just so you are aware of this 8845/8865 freeze issue.  I know these BUGs are sometimes hard to search/find so I thought a community post on this might help.  This is a very intermittent issue and Cisco is working on new firmware to resolve.

ES (Engineering Special SIP 12.5(1)ES11) it seems that in fact there is no fix for the defect yet as of 8-19-2019.

We had this impact upper level employees, so this is high visibility for us.

7 Replies 7

Leo Laohoo
Hall of Fame
Hall of Fame

@tgarst wrote:

We had this impact upper level employees, so this is high visibility for us.


Escalate the issue with your Cisco AM/SE.  

Thanks for your post Leo.  I think this is possibly a hardware revision versus firmware issue as we did replace our C-level employee phone with new.  I noticed his old 8845 phone was V03 and his new is v08.  I have seen hardware revision vs. firmware issues with Avaya and Nortel phones too, so this issue is not just limited to Cisco (lol).

I did send the info to our Cisco SE just so he is aware of what current 88xx issues we are having.  I feel like the 88xx models are not nearly as reliable as 79xx (even with the infamous 79xx hookswitch issue).  We are finally replacing 79xx that have been in service for 15+ years and our 88xx are dropping like flies (in two-three years) .... not good for Cisco in my opinion.  Too many BUG issues to list:  Traffic light/light saber (session button flash issue), cat5e versus cat6 issue, freezing issue, connecting issue, must I name more??  

Can someone at Cisco finally admit they are having some massive 88xx issues?

I am getting pretty frustrated (if you can't tell) with not getting any traction on all these 88xx issues.

aalejo
Level 5
Level 5

More than 1 year later and this issue still no resolved

 

statik1983
Level 1
Level 1

Was this issue ever resolved?! I am having the same issue with multiple 8845s.  Cisco what is resolution?  There should be a firmware update to resolve this.  I am seeing most of our phones are v2 or v3.  I have our 8845's with firmware sip8845_65.11-7-1-17

 

 

Rail2244
Level 1
Level 1

Hello.

We observed same issue with one of 8865.

It rebooted during video call.

Firmware: sip8845_65.14-0-1-0001-135

 

[19:29:22 20/12/21] LastTimeLocalResetPhoneToldToDestroy

 

************************************************************
* Dumping Backtrace of crashing thread *
************************************************************
/lib/libc.so.6(gsignal+0x40) [0x40f46f38]
#0 clone at /lib/libc.so.6:0x40ff49b0 (pc=0x40ff4a38 base=0x40f18000, offset=0x000dca38)
#1 unable to access pc address at 0x00000078

Cisco still lacking a resolution even a period of two and a half years. 

It's been occurring for a while, and Cisco only discovered this bug (ID: CSCvq89463) after raising couple of cases opened in 3 months

[11:59:28 01/03/23] LastTimeLocalResetPhoneToldToDestroy

************************************************************
* Dumping Backtrace of crashing thread *
************************************************************
/lib/libc.so.6(gsignal+0x40) [0x40f58f38]
#0 clone at /lib/libc.so.6:0x410069b0 (pc=0x41006a38 base=0x40f2a000, offset=0x000dca38)
#1 unable to access pc address at 0x00000078

************************************************************
* Crash Information *
************************************************************
Thread Name (comm): ms_libmsTimer
Task ID: 28181
Task CmdLine: /usr/sbin/ms
Signal: 6
si_signo: 6
si_errno: 0
si_code: -6
si_addr: 0x69b3

************************************************************

tgarst
Level 1
Level 1

Yes, that is the BUG case I opened .... and yes .... seems like no fix available (and impacting v14 CUCM per case notes I have seen).  Disappointing for Cisco.  I still think it has something to do with specific phone hardware revisions.

What hardware (v X) are you experiencing the issue on??  To me, seems like lower revisions might have it happen more often.  But, I have not seen the issue in a long time as it seems we got some newer revisions on shipments.