C3850-NM-4-10G went to err-disable when using 1GE SFP's
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
11-14-2013 12:57 AM - edited 03-10-2019 12:24 PM
Hi together,
I have a problem with C3850-NM-4-10G module on Catalyst 3850 with 48 Ports. At the moment the switch is
running with IOS version 3.2.3.
I know that this module can pick up 1GE and 10GE SFP(+) optics in several combinations.
So that's not the problem.
If I insert any 1GE SFP to the physical ports I receive the following err-disable message:
*Nov 13 09:50:42.539: %PLATFORM_PM-6-MODULE_ERRDISABLE: The inserted SFP module with interface name Te1/1/1 is not supported
*Nov 13 09:50:42.539: %PM-4-ERR_DISABLE: gbic-invalid error detected on Te1/1/1, putting Te1/1/1 in err-disable state
A "shut" and "no shut" helps to get the interfaces UP/UP. After the interfaces are in state UP/UP,
I see the correct SFP-type in the output of "show interface status".
IMHO it is not correct that the Ports went into err-disable state at the first time.
Right now, I am not sure, what will happen after a reboot.
Does anybody has an idea how to solve it?
regards
./chris
- Labels:
-
Catalyst 3000
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
11-14-2013 01:22 AM
Here some additional informations and outputs from the switch:
# No 1GE SFP insert:
Switch#show int status | inc Te1
Te1/1/1 notconnect 1 auto auto unknown
Te1/1/2 notconnect 1 auto auto unknown
Te1/1/3 notconnect 1 auto auto unknown
Te1/1/4 notconnect 1 auto auto
10:02
Switch#
# Put SFP into the slots
*Nov 14 01:58:22.118: %PLATFORM_PM-6-MODULE_ERRDISABLE: The inserted SFP module with interface name Te1d
*Nov 14 01:58:22.118: %PM-4-ERR_DISABLE: gbic-invalid error detected on Te1/1/1, putting Te1/1/1 in erre
Switch#
*Nov 14 01:58:41.935: %PLATFORM_PM-6-MODULE_ERRDISABLE: The inserted SFP module with interface name Te1d
*Nov 14 01:58:41.935: %PM-4-ERR_DISABLE: gbic-invalid error detected on Te1/1/2, putting Te1/1/2 in erre
Switch#
10:02
# Check the interfaces status
Switch#show int status | inc Te1
Te1/1/1 err-disabled 1 auto auto unknown
Te1/1/2 err-disabled 1 auto auto unknown
Te1/1/3 notconnect 1 auto auto unknown
Te1/1/4 notconnect 1 auto auto
10:02
# Perform a "shut" and "no shut"
Switch(config)#int ten1/1/1
Switch(config-if)#no shut
Switch(config-if)#int ten1/1/2
Switch(config-if)#
# Interfaces change do "normal status" UP but notconnected
*Nov 14 01:59:33.126: %PLATFORM_PM-6-MODULE_INSERTED: SFP module inserted with interface name Te1/1/1sht
*Nov 14 01:59:33.976: %LINK-3-UPDOWN: Interface TenGigabitEthernet1/1/1, changed state to do
10:03
# Check interface status again.... hmm working as aspected
Switch#show int status
*Nov 14 01:59:54.975: %SYS-5-CONFIG_I: Configured from console by console| inc Te1
Switch#show int status | inc Te1
Te1/1/1 notconnect 1 full 1000 1000BaseSX SFP
Te1/1/2 notconnect 1 full 1000 1000BaseSX SFP
Te1/1/3 notconnect 1 auto auto unknown
Te1/1/4 notconnect 1 auto auto
Doing a "write memory" followed by reload
# After the reload and connectting a fibercable to see if the interfaces are forwared traffic and STP
is blocking as aspected.
Switch#show int status | inc Te1
Te1/1/1 connected 1 full 1000 1000BaseSX SFP
Te1/1/2 connected 1 full 1000 1000BaseSX SFP
Te1/1/3 notconnect 1 auto auto unknown
Te1/1/4 notconnect 1 auto auto unknown 10:10
VLAN0001
Spanning tree enabled protocol ieee
Root ID Priority 32769
Address c025.5c84.cf80
This bridge is the root
Hello Time 2 sec Max Age 20 sec Forward Delay 15 sec
Bridge ID Priority 32769 (priority 32768 sys-id-ext 1)
Address c025.5c84.cf80
Hello Time 2 sec Max Age 20 sec Forward Delay 15 sec
Aging Time 300 sec
Interface Role Sts Cost Prio.Nbr Type
------------------- ---- --- --------- -------- --------------------------------
Te1/1/1 Desg FWD 4 128.53 P2p
Te1/1/2 Back BLK 4 128.54 P2p
Looks quite good after re reload, but the err-disable messages at the beginning still stay spooky to me... or?
regards
./chris
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
11-14-2013 03:00 AM
What is the exact model of the SFP?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
11-14-2013 03:15 AM
GLC-SX-MMD
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
11-14-2013 06:21 AM
HI!
I am Just doing something similar and have exactly the same issue.
No matter wich port and combination I use, all GLC-SX-MMD= go into err-disable after insertion on any port (using the NM-2-10G).
A reboot seems to work without problems, all Modules inserted before the reboot come up successfull.
I use IOSX version 3.3.0
My secound deployment of 3850 and again bugs bugs bugs
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
11-14-2013 01:27 PM
Create a TAC Case.
This could be an IOS bug.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
11-14-2013 06:36 PM
GLC-SX-MMD
Hmmmmm ... Stupid question: Have you tried GLC-SX-MM (non-DOM)?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
11-15-2013 12:22 AM
It's not a stupid question :-)
But yes I did. I have tested with GLC-SX-MM and GLC-T.... always the same issue :-(
In the meantime I really think it is a bug. I also did some research in bug search database but did not find any hint.
So I think I will open a TAC case for it.
regards
./chris
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
11-15-2013 12:28 AM
Thanks, Chris.
Do let us know if and when you get the Bug ID.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
11-15-2013 01:22 AM
Hi!
As I have a similar issue at the same time I tested with a pretty old GLC-SX-MM= and it worked for me. but thats not an option as I prepare customer equipment....
As a Quick fix i enabled autorecovery:
errdisable recovery cause gbic-invalid
errdisable recovery interval 30
This way my GLC-SX-MMD= starts working properly with a delay of 30 seconds.
I also did several reboots without autorecovery and everytime all SFPs came up successfull.
So maybe this helps to get your devices runing too.
Christian
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
11-15-2013 03:09 AM
Sure I know this commands, but IMO it is only a workaround to get the SFPs working during implementation at customer site. This is not the answer why 1GE SFPs went to err-disable.
But it is interessting that a very old GLC-SX-MM w/o DOM is working, because I also tested with the old SFPs. Result: still err-disable.
Actually we are discussing if we open a TAC case. If we will do so, I will post the result here
regards
./chris
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
11-15-2013 03:24 AM
No, it can't be a soultion, it's nothing more than a hotfix.
I didn't want to blame you with the commands but wanted to document a way to fix for other guys finding this thread
I am in the same situation as you are and actually prepare customer equipment.
While browsing the releasenotes to verify my 3850-NM-2-10G config with with 2x GLC + 2x SFP+, I just found a bug that could match to our issue:
Removing and reinserting SFP modules causes the port to go into an error-disabled state.
The workaround is to use the shutdown/no shutdown commands on the port.
My TAC case is already opened...
Christian
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
11-15-2013 04:11 AM
np :-)
The bug ID is quite interessting, I was only searching for Catalyst 3850, NIM, err-disable etc. but did not find that bug.
Hmm... if you have already opened a TAC case, I do not need to open once more for the same issue. Perhaps you can post the findings of the TAC here in die CSC thread.
thx
./chris
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
11-15-2013 03:34 PM
Hmm... if you have already opened a TAC case, I do not need to open once more for the same issue.
I don't have a 3650/3850 but I would like to offer my opinion. I disagree with you. Even though Christian has created a TAC Case, I would also recommend you create one as well. I believe people inside TAC will be able to determine how serious this bug is if more and more people create TAC Cases for similar cases. Call it "measuring metrics".
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
11-15-2013 03:50 PM
Hi Guys,
I'm more than happy to help you with this and get a bug filed if need be. I'm not aware of this particular issue, but I have all of the above components and can cycle through them in my lab early next week (out of the office for the weekend). Once you get a tac case open, post or send me the SR number and I will work on it for you.
thanks
-Luke
