PI 3.1.3 why unsupported cisco device?

[Kevin Homistek]

Hello, I have several Catalyst 6824 devices, that show up in Inventory as managed, but device type is "Unsupported Cisco Device" - TAC case has been open since 9/2/16 on this issue - also just loaded DP4 this morning but didn't help. Anyone out there managing these switches using PI 3.x?

Below is a partial sh ver from one of the systems - they're all the same:

System image file is "bootdisk:/c6848x-adventerprisek9-mz.SPA.152-2.SY1.bin"

Cisco C6824-X-LE-40G ( Intel(R) Pentium(R) CPU @ 2.00GHz ) processor (revision ) with 2994175K/409600K bytes of memory.
Processor board ID FDO1932L02A
Processor signature 0xA9060300
Last reset from power-on
1 Virtual Ethernet interface
1 Gigabit Ethernet interface
24 Ten Gigabit Ethernet interfaces
2 Forty Gigabit Ethernet interfaces
1955824K bytes of USB Flash bootdisk (Read/Write)

Thanks,

Kevin

[Marvin Rhoads · Accepted solution]

They show up as unsupported because Cisco has not built a device pack that adds support for them.

Each new device type (as defined by SNMP OID) needs specific support built in so that Prime Infrastructure can correctly ascertain its capabilities and applicable features.

As of right now (PI 3.1.3 with DP 4), The 6800 series switches that are supported are 6887, 6880, 6800 LE, 6800ia, 6840 and any VSS variants of those.

Reference: http://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/td/docs/net_mgmt/prime/infrastructure/3-1/supported/devices/PI31-Supported-Device-List.xlsx

[Kevin Homistek]

Marvin, thank you for clear and speedy reply! Is there anyway to request device support from development? I'm hoping the 6824s are in the roadmap.

[Marvin Rhoads]

You're welcome. Thanks for the rating

You can request your TAC engineer to file an enhancement request. If you have a Cisco account manager you can also ask that they do the same.

Customer input is one of the leading avenues for ranking development priorities. A single customer's request generally doesn't make it happen but add several together and it definitely pushes things up in the queue.

[winston.barrett1]

Currently have a TAC Case open, will request enchancement case open and also will engage our SE.

[winston.barrett1]

I request my TAC engineer to file an enhancement request, and his response was, there was one opened since sept of last year.

How does Cisco weight what hardware gets development for PI support?

[Marvin Rhoads]

Tell the TAC engineer to add your case to the enhancement request.

Nobody outside the business unit that develops Prime Infrastructure can tell you the details of why a given product doesn't have support yet. All they tell us is that it's a combination of customer requests and revenue opportunity. For better or worse, PI is one tiny crumb in one small piece of the pie that is Cisco's products. (Just my observation as someone who's been using Cisco's management products for over 20 years starting with CiscoWorks for Solaris is the mid 90s.)

I guess that tells us not a lot of Catalyst 6824s have been sold and those who are buying them aren't for the most part depending on PI to manage them.

[winston.barrett1]

I would agree. It  pains me  to report tothat LMS is currently providing  some feature sets of management when PI which I may add Cisco is pushing as a replacement to LMS it is actually pulling configuration..

Reason not to throw out the old broom..

[Marvin Rhoads]

I agree completely.

I have spoken directly to many Cisco engineers and marketing folks at the Cisco Live "solutions" booth featuring PI and stressed this point every year for the last 3-4 years. I've done it during the weekly demo series for PI. I've sent them emails.

Net result = the current situation. Thus I advise customers to consider SolarWinds NPM and NCM (or PRTG for the really small shops) as an option.

[winston.barrett1]

One of our groups was using Solarwinds, but we just moved them over to PI, good thing all thier devices are supported

We have a the biggest appliance that Cisco sells for PI,  been running PI since 1.2 days, and I watch it mature over the years, we had LMS for Wired and PI for Wireless.

We just merged our wired into the same appliance as the wireless and seem to be having performance issues,  tac had to clean up numbers hang jobs.

I am looking at 8k AP, 300 WLC, and 5K wired switches, not counting DC stuff. According to Cisco doc the applicance should fine and this is just one BU. We are thinking of getting another appliance and splitting wired off.

Personally I love PI, my peers have pitch forks ready to burn the house down.. Too many issues since we merge our wired.

[Kevin Homistek]

It's frustrating because we have 20 of these that run our MPLS backbone - when the equipment was ordered, we moved to PI 3.x (and away from LMS) to manage them. It didn't occur to me to verify device support with Cisco and our SE didn't mention that these devices were not supported; I believe there are assumptions that buying Cisco products = seamless integration with PI - this obviously isn't the case.

I personally am liking PI, but at the moment, it's disconcerting to know that my 6824s are not being managed. I appreciate any others who have these devices, to open a TAC case and ask to be added to the enhancement request that Marvin mentions above.

Thanks,
Kevin

[winston.barrett1]

almost a year later and still no support for this device.

[Marvin Rhoads]

Have you opened a TAC case to request the enhancement?

The more people who do that, the higher the priority of the device being added.

[Kevin Homistek]

I've run this up the chain as far as I could -- radio silence. No word on when or if this device will be supported.

[oysteins]

Hi

Did you get an swer from cisco? The 6824 is not supported in Prime 3.4 either.