Copying from tftp to flash

[onyema101]

Hi am having trouble copying file c3560-ipservicesk9-mz.150-1.SE from tftp server

to a new cisco catalyst c3560g switch, I installed the certificationkits tftp server on my local desktop and i  can ping the tftp server from the switch and vice versa, each time I run command on switch copy tftp flash  i keep getting no such file and i am sure i have copied the file to the default folder of the tftp server. I need some one to help me out and tell what am doing wrong.

[onyema101]

Switch Ports Model              SW Version            SW Image

------ ----- -----              ----------            ----------

*    1 28    WS-C3560G-24TS     12.2(50)SE5           C3560-IPBASE-M

[Leo Laohoo]

3560G-24TS can support 15.0.

[SOcchiogrosso]

I'd recommend you download tftpd32 or 64 and work from there.

You mentioned certification kits so I assume this is a lab environment?


Sent from Cisco Technical Support Android App

[geraldceasar]

can you specify the file extension of the IOS is it a .tar or .bin

if .tar

archive download-sw /overwrite tftp://192.x.x.x /c3560-ipservicesk9-tar.150-2.SE4.tar

if .bin

Switch#

Switch#

Switch#copy tftp flash:

Address or name of remote host []? 192.x.x.x

Source filename []? c3560-ipservicesk9-tar.150-2.SE4.bin

Destination filename [c3560-ipservicesk9-tar.150-2.SE4.bin]?

[Network713]

Used my desktop Win10, tftp64. I deleted the current IOS on 3560, then did a tftp and got !OO!OO!OO!OO!OO!OO!OOO!OO!... [timed out]. The solution for me was to use another tftp server and program, I used my Solarwinds server with Solarwinds tftp and it was all good (but it took a long time). I know it is best to do it on a local pc, but I don't have that option.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WS-C3560V2-48PS#delete /recursive /force flash:c3560-ipbasek9-mz.122-55.SE12.bin

WS-C3560V2-48PS#dir
Directory of flash:/

2 -rwx 796 Aug 30 2017 15:17:17 -05:00 vlan.dat
3 -rwx 5511 Sep 21 2020 17:32:19 -05:00 private-config.text
5 -rwx 4120 Sep 21 2020 17:32:19 -05:00 multiple-fs
6 drwx 512 May 1 1993 13:39:31 -05:00 crashinfo_ext
8 -rwx 64627 Sep 21 2020 17:32:18 -05:00 config.text

WS-C3560V2-48PS#copy tftp://10.10.10.247/c3560-ipbasek9-mz.150-2.SE11.bin flash:c3560-ipbasek9-mz.150-2.SE11.bin
Destination filename [c3560-ipbasek9-mz.150-2.SE11.bin]?
Accessing tftp://10.10.15.247/c3560-ipbasek9-mz.150-2.SE11.bin...
Loading c3560-ipbasek9-mz.150-2.SE11.bin from 10.10.15.247 (via Vlan10): !OO!OO!OO!OO!OO!OO!OOO!OO!... [timed out]

WS-C3560V2-48PS#copy tftp://10.10.10.100/c3560-ipbasek9-mz.150-2.SE11.bin flash:c3560-ipbasek9-mz.150-2.SE11.bin
Destination filename [c3560-ipbasek9-mz.150-2.SE11.bin]?
Accessing tftp://10.10.18.100/c3560-ipbasek9-mz.150-2.SE11.bin...
Loading c3560-ipbasek9-mz.150-2.SE11.bin from 10.10.18.100 (via Vlan10): !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!O!!!!!!!!!!
[OK - 16664448 bytes]
16664448 bytes copied in 1200.217 secs (13885 bytes/sec)

WS-C3560V2-48PS#verify /md5 flash:c3560-ipbasek9-mz.150-2.SE11.bin
.........................................................................................................................................................................Done!
verify /md5 (flash:c3560-ipbasek9-mz.150-2.SE11.bin) = b81d9bfd47be75d966d122af60003fef

[Richard Burts]

Thanks for sharing your experience with the community. It is interesting that attempts to tftp from one server had problems and from a different server (using a different software) it was successful. I am interested in your statement that "I know it is best to do it on a local pc, but I don't have that option." Can you give us some information about the path from the switch being updated to the server(s)? I wonder if there might be something along that path that was impacting the tftp transfer? I also wonder if there might be something about the connection for .247 that might have impacted the transfer (perhaps something like a duplex mismatch)?

I had a similar experience working with a customer and trying to do code upgrades where the device that supplied the new code (the tftp server) was in one site and the devices being upgraded were in remote sites. The path between devices was over a WAN and I discovered that if I did the transfer in off peak hours it was likely to be successful but if I attempted the transfer during peak hours that the transfer was likely to fail. I then discovered that if instead of tftp (UDP based) I used a transfer that was TCP based the transfer was much more likely to be successful - and that peak/off peak made much less difference. So my suggestion to anyone who is having difficulty with code upgrades (and especially anyone who is transferring large image files) is to use a TCP based protocol rather than UDP based tftp.

[Joseph W. Doherty]

Just to add to Rick's suggestion to use a TCP based protocol (e.g. FTP) over a UDP based protocol (e.g. tftp), TCP based protocol often are significantly fasted over WANs.  This because they "window" transmissions, when often UDP protocols do not.  They might also use MTU when sometimes UDP does not.

Also BTW, in the past I've found some implementations of FTP work better than others.

[Raulpompa]

Try:

copy ftp://cisco:cisco@10.0.26.38:22/isr4200_file_name.bin flash:

user: cisco

pwd. cisco