Re: 9300 Switch with POE Negotiation Issues

zloggins · ‎02-21-2023

After some more troubleshooting, it seems this ended up being an error with the end devices and not sending proper Power Negotiation, when we moved a port that was reporting getting 30 watts to one that reported 15.4 watts, that port then changed to 30 watts and showed the Power Negotiation status.

_________________________________________________________________________________________

We have a 9300 switch that suddenly seems to have an issue with sending out the correct POE allotment.
Version 16.12.4
C9300-48U

Below compares ports 9 (not online) and port 8 (working/online) for examples.

The "down" ports seems to got get a power request from down the line which doesn’t make since because testing with separate POE injectors and test monitors work and we can see the cameras.

Switch Port / POE RJ45 Patch Cable -----> POE Coax Adaptor -----> POE over Existing Coax -----> Junction box for Coax -----> POE Coax Adaptor -----> RJ45 Patch Cable -----> Camera

These ports are all setup the same way, we have 14 of 18 that only show 15 watts, 4 show 30 watts and work. Previously they all showed 30.

Is there anyway to force 30 watts instead of just allocated needing 30 watts?

Do you see any suggestions that we could do?

It looks like it boils down to the ports, like port 9 below, see it as a Class 4 but only allocate or send 15 instead of 30 watts.

If I set the port as a priority / max allotment of 30000, 40000 or 60000.... it continues to only show 15 and settles at the 1.4 watts.

We already tried:
power inline port priority high
power inline static max
power inline static max 30000
power inline static max 40000
power inline static max 60000

Power Negotiation Used: None

vs

Power Negotiation Used: IEEE 802.3at LLDP

They are several port with the issue that port 9 in this example are suddenly having. They were working fine.

We have no issues with pulling too much power from what I can tell.

There is probably a protocol in the switch for safety that the POE injector and monitors ignore?

It sees that both as Class 4 devices (meaning it should be supporting 30 watts)

It allocates 60 (max allowed per port)

You can see the highlighted differences below, actual port settings match. So that should be doing the same thing.

Port 9 starts with 15.4 watts and settles at 1.7 watts. Power negotiation is listed as none.

Port 9 starts with 30 watts and settles at 9 watts. Power negotiation is listed as IEEE 802.3at LLDP (this is what should show on the other ports).

NOT WORKING PORT / Camera not visible

WFB-HB-M-N-9300-A(config)#do sh power inline g1/0/9 d

Interface: Gi1/0/9

Inline Power Mode: auto

Operational status: on

Device Detected: yes

Device Type: Ieee PD

IEEE Class: 4

Discovery mechanism used/configured: Ieee and Cisco

Police: off

Power Allocated

Admin Value: 60.0

Power drawn from the source: 15.4

Power available to the device: 15.4

Actual consumption

Measured at the port: 1.7

Maximum Power drawn by the device since powered on: 1.7

Absent Counter: 0

Over Current Counter: 0

Short Current Counter: 0

Invalid Signature Counter: 0

Power Denied Counter: 0

Power Negotiation Used: None

LLDP Power Negotiation --Sent to PD-- --Rcvd from PD--

Power Type: - -

Power Source: - -

Power Priority: - -

Requested Power(W): - -

Allocated Power(W): - -

Four-Pair PoE Supported: Yes

Spare Pair Power Enabled: No

Four-Pair PD Architecture: N/A

WORKING PORT, camera visible:

WFB-HB-M-N-9300-A(config)#do sh power inline g1/0/8 d

Interface: Gi1/0/8

Inline Power Mode: auto

Operational status: on

Device Detected: yes

Device Type: Ieee PD

IEEE Class: 4

Discovery mechanism used/configured: Ieee and Cisco

Police: off

Power Allocated

Admin Value: 60.0

Power drawn from the source: 30.0

Power available to the device: 30.0

Actual consumption

Measured at the port: 9.4

Maximum Power drawn by the device since powered on: 9.9

Absent Counter: 0

Over Current Counter: 0

Short Current Counter: 0

Invalid Signature Counter: 0

Power Denied Counter: 0

Power Negotiation Used: IEEE 802.3at LLDP

LLDP Power Negotiation --Sent to PD-- --Rcvd from PD--

Power Type: Type 2 PSE Type 2 PD

Power Source: Primary unknown

Power Priority: low high

Requested Power(W): 25.5 25.5

Allocated Power(W): 25.5 25.5

Four-Pair PoE Supported: Yes

Spare Pair Power Enabled: No

Four-Pair PD Architecture: Shared

Leo Laohoo · ‎02-21-2023

No one should be using 16.12.4. It is a dumpster fire on board a train wreck.

Ufuk57 · ‎11-03-2023

Hello everyone, I also have a similar case, I hope I'm in the right place.

We have IP-TV boxes in use, these require no more than 15.4 watts. At idle they are somewhere around 5.2 watts - class 4.

these boxes have worked wonderfully on a WS-C2960X-24PS-L or C9200L-48PXG-4X.
We have now switched to the C9300LM-48UX-4Y (version 17.09.04a) switches and have noticed that some boxes no longer start at all - no poe.
I have tried all possible commands (power inline..) on the port and no success.

Funnily enough, I used an extra-long cable over 30 meters, with which the box at least showed the first signs of life.

debug mode was also active, strangely enough nothing was displayed on the gig ports, the 9300 still has tengiga ports and maybe something came up there in debug... the only time I saw a Tstart issue and couldn't reproduce it
I have oriented myself according to this guide: https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/switches/catalyst-9200-series-switches/215636-troubleshooting-power-over-ethernet-poe.html

yes, this TS guide is for the 9200 series, but I couldn't find anything for the 9300.

it seems to be somehow related to the UPoE, does anyone have an idea what else I could do? it would be cool if i could disable 802.3bt so that only 802.3af/at is running or somehow get phantom power.

as I said, I have tried everything...
- speed set to 100
- power policy set to static, also worked with max values here, tried every variant
- tried the commands: 1-event , 2-event, 2x-mode
- shut down switch cold and waited and switched on again
- the switch is in the stack, so other ports have also been tried. but other switches without a stack from the same family have also been tried, without success.

here is an excerpt from a working box that works on the 9300 (yes I know, actually we should say just replace the IP box, but it works on a 2960x and 9200 without UPoE):

#sh power inline gi 1/0/3 detail

Interface: Gi1/0/3
Inline Power Mode: auto
Operational status (Alt-A,B): on,off
Device Detected: yes
Device Type: Ieee PD
Connection Check: SS
IEEE Class (Alt-A,B): 0
Physical Assigned Class (Alt-A,B): 3
Discovery mechanism used/configured: Ieee and Cisco
Police: off

Power Allocated
Admin Value: 60.0
Power drawn from the source: 15.4
Power available to the device: 15.4
Allocated Power (Alt-A,B): 15.4

Actual consumption
Measured at the port(watts) (Alt-A,B): 5.3
Maximum Power drawn by the device since powered on: 5.5

Absent Counter: 0
Over Current Counter: 0
Short Current Counter: 0
Invalid Signature Counter: 0
Power Denied Counter: 0

Power Negotiation Used: None
LLDP Power Negotiation --Sent to PD-- --Rcvd from PD--
Power Type: - -
Power Source: - -
Power Priority: - -
Requested Power(W): - -
Allocated Power(W): - -

Four-Pair PoE Supported: Yes
Spare Pair Power Enabled: No
Four-Pair PD Architecture: Shared
Perpetual POE Enabled: FALSE
Fast POE Enabled: FALSE

many thanks in advance

Georg Pauwen · ‎11-03-2023

Hello,

there is a bug (pasted below) that should be fixed in your release, but you might try the workaround anyway:

Symptom: If PoE switch in BT mode and connecting IEEE compliant PD with 2-pair cable (Signal pair), PD will not get detected and powered up Conditions: PoE switch in BT mode and connecting IEEE-compliant PD with 2-pair cable (Signal pair), PD will not get detected and powered up Workaround: + Connect with 4-pair cable (Signal pair & Spare pair) for BT mode + Configure the switch to work in AT mode: switch# configure terminal switch(confgi)#no hw-module switch <switch_number> upoe-plus !!!WARNING!!!This Configuration will powercycle the switch to make it effective.Would you like to continue y/n?[confirm]

Ufuk57 · ‎11-03-2023

Thank you very much for the quick response, it doesn't seem to be completely fixed after all... by the way, are such errors present in the higher versions 17.1x.x? otherwise I would still try this, although I'm not a FAN of it because it's always the ED versions

unfortunately this command does not work for me:
#no hw-module switch 1 upoe-plus
This Config is not supported for this switch

I get a, is not supported.

Leo Laohoo · ‎11-03-2023

@Ufuk57 wrote:

#no hw-module switch 1 upoe-plus

Not all models support that commands. And if they do, the command is enabled by default.

@Ufuk57 wrote:

Power drawn from the source: 15.4
Power available to the device: 15.4

Something is drawing 15.4wac (default) on that port.

Is LLDP enabled?

Ufuk57 · ‎11-05-2023

yes, LLDP is enabled.. also I've tried with disabled. But no luck.

any ideas ?