cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
4013
Views
10
Helpful
2
Replies

3rd party SFP+ on Nexus 7010

arne.schwabe
Level 1
Level 1

After upgrading to 5.1.1 our Nexus 7010 does not like the 3rd party HP SFP+ Copper cables anymore:

gebData-2# sh int ethernet 1/18 transceiver 
Ethernet1/18
    transceiver is present
    type is 10Gbase-(unknown)
    name is WL GORE         
    part number is 487660-001      
    revision is C   
    serial number is 011910-144      
    nominal bitrate is 10300 MBit/sec
    Link length supported for copper is 7 m
    cisco id is --
    cisco extended id number is 4

gebData-2# sh int statu | i 1/18
Eth1/18       --                 sfpInvali routed    full    auto    10Gbase-(un

Is there a new "transceiver unsupported" comand or are 3rd party SFP disallowed now.

2 Replies 2

Lucien Avramov
Level 10
Level 10

Here is the compatibility matrix:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/interfaces_modules/transceiver_modules/compatibility/matrix/OL_6974.html

And when you look at the parts:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/modules/ps5455/data_sheet_c78-455693.html

You see that it's Cisco branded SFP. So you need a Cisco branded SFP on Nexus

I believe the 3rd party unsupported SFP are re-inforced in later NX-OS code.

Okay, so if you're a customer with a large data center using third-party server infrastructure at the edge (such as HP BladeSystems) and you have a large investment in HP SFP+ DACs that have been working fine with your Cisco Nexus infrastructure, you are royally hosed.

This is totally unacceptable.

HP are equally as guilty, as they apparently also do not allow third-party DACs to connect to their Virtual Connect modules.

A correctly rated SFP+ module is a correctly rated SFP+ module, whether or not it is sold by this manufacturer, or that manufacturer.

Yet customers stand by and accept this anti-competitive behavior from their hardware vendors, hurting only themselves. We will be hammering our Cisco and HP reps about this fiasco.