Not able to ping devices on 9200 switch or ports 1-47.

[Steve S123]

I very new to configuring Cisco switches.  So I pretty sure that I have just missed something very simple and the fix will be very quick.

The background this switch is being configured for use with the Livewire Audio Over IP protocol AOIP for short.  There are devices called nodes that encode and decode audio so it can be transported around the network. The plan was to setup ports 1-47 for this task and leave the other ports not configured for now. 

The designer of this protocol Telos AXIA puts together basic configuration sheets for network switches they will support this protocol. Link below

https://support.telosalliance.com/article/x0cv44uxl5-configuring-cisco-9000-series-for-use-with-livewire

I have configured the switch according the guide.  

The nodes attached to ports  3, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, and 48.  There is a laptop plugged into port 1. 

The Vlan1 is set to IP 192.168.167.1 subnet 255.255.255.0

The nodes and laptop have static IP addresses from 192.168.167.130 and up. 

The issue.  The nodes (which have a webui) that are plugged into ports 3 - 15 will not reply to pings sent from the Cisco command console or from the Windows laptop command prompt plugged into port 1. Also the webui of the nodes are not accessible from the laptop plugged into port 1.  

The node plugged into port 48 responds to pings and the webui is accessible.

Below is the output the commands "show mac address-table" and "show arp".  Also attached is the show run on the switch. 

Thanks

Shortened output of show mac address-table
1 5850.ab80.f1da DYNAMIC Gi1/0/7
1 5850.ab80.f1e0 DYNAMIC Gi1/0/9
1 5850.ab80.f21a DYNAMIC Gi1/0/3
1 5850.ab80.f7f6 DYNAMIC Gi1/0/15
1 5850.ab80.f924 DYNAMIC Gi1/0/11
1 5850.ab80.fa90 DYNAMIC Gi1/0/48
1 5850.ab80.fbc2 DYNAMIC Gi1/0/13
1 6887.c65c.98c7 STATIC Vl1
1 f8e4.3b9e.1cc1 DYNAMIC Gi1/0/1
Total Mac Addresses for this criterion: 30

Command output of show arp

AXIA#show arp
Protocol Address Age (min) Hardware Addr Type Interface
Internet 192.168.167.129 - 6887.c65c.98c7 ARPA Vlan1
Internet 192.168.167.163 193 5850.ab80.fa90 ARPA Vlan1
Internet 192.168.167.201 28 f8e4.3b9e.1cc1 ARPA Vlan1
AXIA#

[Richard Burts]

I do not have experience with the technology you are using, so my insight is limited. If someone in the community does have experience and can jump in that would be good.

Here is what I observe:

- the mac address table shows that multiple nodes are connected, and the device on port 1.

- The arp table shows that only 3 devices have responded to arp (the SVI for vlan 1, the device on port 1, and the node on port 48.

- the configuration of port 48 is very minimal, while the configuration of other nodes is more complex. 

Is the node on port 48 the same as the nodes on other ports? If the nodes are the same then it suggests that something in the configuration of other ports is interfering with arp. And if arp is not working that would explain why the other nodes are not working.

[Steve S123]

Richard

Thank you for the reply. 

The device on port 48 is the same as the devices on ports  3, 7, 9, 11, 13, and 15.

Could a group policy cause the reason for the devices on ports 3, 7, 9, 11, 13, and 15 to not respond to arp requests?

Or is there a possible issue of using Vlan1 for this group of devices.  Since Vlan1 is the default Vlan and I thought I read somewhere that there are some restrictions with how Vlan1 can be used since it is the default Vlan.  Been doing some reading trying to figure out what the issue is and came across something about Vlan1 being different than if I created a Vlan10 for these devices to be part of.   

Thanks again

Steve

[Richard Burts]

Steve

It is good to know that the device on port 48 is the same as the devices on ports 3, 7, 9, 11, 13, and 15. It sure seems to suggest that there is something in the config that is causing the problem.

I very much doubt that the issue has anything to do with using vlan 1. There are articles that suggest that you should not use vlan 1 for user traffic. This mostly reflects a security concern. Their suggestion is to put ports that have user devices into a different vlan, leaving vlan 1 for administrative protocols like CDP and for unused ports. If you do this and someone manages to connect a device into a switch port they would not have any visibility into your user traffic. But using vlan 1 for user traffic does not create any operational problems like the one you are having.

I looked briefly at the article in the link you provided and see that they state that they normally do use vlan 1 for their devices. So that is another reason to believe that using vlan 1 is not an issue.

If the issue is not related to using vlan 1 then it is reasonable to assume that the issue might have something to do with the policy applied to the ports. As a test I suggest that you use port 3 where the first node is connected. In the config remove "service-policy output TELOS" from that interface. Save the config change. Then test and see if the node connected to port 3 works?

Having suggested that change I note that port 1 where the laptop is connected also has that policy applied and it does not impact the laptop. I am guessing that there is something about the nodes that is significantly different from the laptop.