I’m glad it worked out for you. I guess it depends on how many you have though. The VG202s are nice and we use the VG224 where we have high-density needs. The cost on those VG202s is about 2.5x higher for the actual device and 4x higher for SmartNet versus the ATAs. I think Cisco needs to fix or create a low-cost ATA and preferably put the Ethernet pass-thru back in it like the old ATA 188s and nearly every model of phone has. I don’t need two analog ports. I need 1 analog port and an Ethernet pass-thru for the multifunction printer. As much as we would all like fax machines to go away, they are not leaving any time soon as evident in every multi-function printer sold today… ... View more

We are having this same issue after upgrading from 5.1 to 5.2 and I have not been able to get it resolved.  We are using the 1121 physical server appliance so no way to go back.  I just cannot figure out why that 'view log-processor' will not go to Monitored. Without it, we appear to have no visibility to the reports.  We are seeing the following in the contents of the associated log file if anyone can make sense of it. Oct 18 2011 16:42:36 com.cisco.nm.acs.view.collector.Main.main(Main.java:117) INFO main Acs.MGMT.ACSVIEW Log processor initializing... Oct 18 2011 16:42:36 com.cisco.nm.acs.view.collector.Main$ShutdownListener.run(Main.java:160) DEBUG ShutdownListener Acs.MGMT.ACSVIEW Listening for shutdown ... View more

Negative. We essentially came to terms with the fact that the adapter is recognized in 7.3.4 but doesn't have enough functionality to use it. We will be upgrading the system soon and running a recent version of ONTAP 8 which has full support for the adapter and we hope to get it going then for iSCSI and FCoE. ... View more

I will see what I can find. It did seem odd at first because we only had problems with the ATAs at the sites. Everything else was fine. After looking at it though, the ATA 187s are SIP and all of the phones are SCCP which may bring about problems like this which we are not used to dealing with.  Also, to clarlify on what we saw in CUCM, the device status was 'Rejected'. These are at remote locations registering back to HQ so it could have been a keepalive issue late at night with some telco maintenance occurring or something. I would have to look at that further. So far, we've only seen it on a handful of the devices and only once at each location.  Hopefully it does not become a recurring issue. ... View more

We have seen this type of behavior as well. Not deregistered but banned or something along those lines. Same resolution though...power cycle the ata to get it registered and working again. I'll see if I still have the screenshots. No firewalls between the ucm server and ata device. They are separated by an mpls wan. Sent from Cisco Technical Support iPhone App ... View more

I appreciate you putting this out here. I do have one question from the configs post above. In the Nexus 5k, you appear to use VLAN 1010 as your FCoE VLAN which is then mapped to VSAN 1000.  I see where you have all of the configuration for VSAN 1000 done, but in the NetApp, you do not appear to have VLAN 1010 configured, only 11 and 26.  If this is due to cleansing your configs before posting, I understand, but if not, please explain where that VLAN definition is on the NetApp side as I think that is what I'm missing. I'm probably going to go back to NOW support and try again later this week. In ONTAP 8.0.1rc, the adapters support all functionality like a true CNA. You can even run iSCSI and CIFS/NFS traffic across them as they show up as actual Ethernet interfaces with the ifconfig options available.  Unfortunately, in ONTAP 7.3.4 they are seen by the system but only for FCoE access which is fine except that the ability to configure the Ethernet side seems to be absent. If I come up with a solution for mine, aside from another ONTAP upgrade, I will be sure to post it here... ... View more

ONTAP 7.3.4 How did you configure it to work? ... View more

No. I have not gotten anywhere yet. I can see the Ethernet side as up in the NetApp but the FC interface is still down in the NetApp and the vFC interface is down in the Nexus.  I got absolutely no where with the NetApp case I opened and gave up. I will probably start looking at it again next week. Let me know if you figure it out between now and then. I think there has to be a privileged command in the NetApp side to configure the FCoE VLAN or something. You can see the CNA properties under privileged options in the NetApp which shows the Ethernet Link status as up. netapp-3140-01*> cna show Slot:             3 Description:      Dual-channel, QLogic CNA 8112(8152) rev. 2 FC Adapter Name:  3a MPI Firmware Rev: 1.38.0 PHY Firmware Rev: 1.6.0 FC Firmware Rev:  5.2.0 FC Port ID:       0x000000 FC Nodename:      50:0a:09:80:89:ca:c7:41 (500a098089cac741) FC Portname:      50:0a:09:81:99:ca:c7:41 (500a098199cac741) FC Status:        LINK NOT CONNECTED Link Speed:       10 GBit Link Status:      LINK UP Slot:             3 Description:      Dual-channel, QLogic CNA 8112(8152) rev. 2 FC Adapter Name:  3b MPI Firmware Rev: 1.38.0 PHY Firmware Rev: 1.6.0 FC Firmware Rev:  5.2.0 FC Port ID:       0x000000 FC Nodename:      50:0a:09:80:89:ca:c7:41 (500a098089cac741) FC Portname:      50:0a:09:82:99:ca:c7:41 (500a098299cac741) FC Status:        LINK NOT CONNECTED Link Speed:       10 GBit Link Status:      LINK UP ... View more

Thanks for the reply. I did end up figuring this out. It was a VLAN turnking issues on the core layer above the 5K and not a Nexus 2K limitation. So far the Nexus 2K switches are working out fine although I think I may be done 2960S switch stacks with the 10GB uplinks from my distribution layer if I had to do it all over again for just 10/100/1000 ports. Obviously the new 2232 models with oversubscribed 10GB ports are unique to this line of devices. ... View more