Hello,  The fact that it is OM4 fiber should have nothing to do with it. In the simplest terms, OM4 is the same as OM3 with the real difference being it's a higher grade with less impurities. That's why it can support runs of a greater distance. So that's not the issue. It looks like you have replaced everything except the SFPs themselves and one of them may be bad.  Hope this helps     ... View more

Hello,  Take a closer look at your HUB. You created " policy-map QoS_300M" but have "policy-map QoS_600M" configured on the WAN interface. Regards ... View more

Hello,  Just my opinion, but not a fan of PON. Had the same situation a couple of years ago with PON being touted as the greatest thing since sliced bread. My understanding is that it may be effective for provider services like Verizon FiOS, but not so much for LAN environments.   1- The PON splitters effectively mean that up to 32 (possibly more) users (ONTs) are aggregated together. It may have increased since, but the aggregate to the users is 2.4 gig and from the users is 1.2 gig. Meaning 32 users total combined bandwidth is just that. Now if you use ONTs with multiple ports the shared 2.4G/1.2G gets more dense. They'll tell you the algorithms used make it work but in a classic switched environment with CAT6A and each user having a dedicated gig connection, you can see the obvious advantage over PON.   2- There may be a smaller footprint in the IT closet, but the devil is in the details. The ONTs can provide POE, but now wherever you have an ONT you'll need a power receptacle. Also if you have WAPs, wall phones, etc., things can get a little difficult.   3-You can provide power from the TR, but that is also a mess. This requires running the fiber with copper cabling to power the ONT. This means you'll need a power rack in the TR which may require a transformer and probably a UPS. There are also possible distance limitations with running power with the fiber. Plus the engineers that install and maintain the system will be working with these power wires and connections. The potential for touching hot wires is there.   4- The PON system itself needs to be administered and managed. This will require a central management system with GUI interface as well as maintenance contract. Something else to keep in mind price wise.    5- It can be more difficult to analyze or diagnose network issues just by the nature of PON. If you want to sniff traffic or connect a device you'll need to do so at a central location and not closer to the issue as PON limits that.   Again my opinion, and I'm sure there are PON advocates out there. But if you are in a "data intensive" environment I would not recommend PON.    Regards     ... View more

Sorry, but need clarification. Is the debug and output of the local router provided where the sources are and not on the receiver end? If that is the case, the similar information from the receiver side would be helpful.   ... View more

You are making sense and some good troubleshooting on your part. Suggest re-ordering your access list so that the 239.255.255.255 is not denied by the first instance: ! Access-list 10 Permit 239.255.255.255 Permit 239.192.0.0 0.1.255.255 !   ... View more

"spanning-tree bpdufilter enable" disables spanning tree bpdus on an interface. Essentially disabling STP. Which could be an issue if connected to other switches. "spanning-tree portfast edge" allows for the immediate forwarding of packets until STP can run, mainly for purposes of DHCP and access ports. I don't understand your response though. However, if you have portfast on an interface and are concerned about possible BPDUs, then you enable BPDU guard either globally or on an interface basis. ... View more

Hello, Not sure the reasoning behind the way you have things configured, but you have spanning tree turned off on all the interfaces with the "spanning-tree bpdufilter enable" command and from what I can tell the "no ip igmp snooping tcn flood" allows flooding of all multicast packets anytime there's a topology change (for example a port going up and down). So every time you reboot a server or add a new connection, causing a port to go up or down, you're flooding all the ports with multicast traffic and basically creating a broadcast storm. Not to mention any broadcasts that probably compound the issue.   Unless there is a compelling reason, suggest removing the "no ip igmp snooping tcn flood" to see if that improves things, and then the "spanning-tree bpdufilter enable" if possible. Also, if this switch is connected to other network switches, removal of the bpdufilter may require a closer look.   Hope this helps. Hope this helps. ... View more

This sounds more like a STP issue more than anything else. Could you post the switch config and perhaps "sh spanning-tree root"? ... View more

Just out of curiosity, is there a TTL setting associated with the 239.255.255.255 group? If so, and it is set to 0 or 1 then that may be your problem. Set it to something equivalent to the maximum number of hops in your network  and add a couple more just for kicks. Hope this helps. ... View more

I agree with OMZ in that I don't think the IGMP configuration is needed  on the routed interfaces on both the router and switch.  ... View more

Hello,  I did a test and think the password "default" has a space at the end which may be considered a character. So try typing the password followed by a space "default " then hit enter.   Hope this helps ... View more