Between 2 WS-12-250-AC firmware 1.2.2, I connected those via port 14 SFP, both in trunk mode all tagged.
I can ping both switch but the one I'm not connected via copper, I'm having problem to manage it via both https or ssh. If I use copper ports, it work just fine.
I tryed 2 modèles of SFP to LC adapter (ROBOfiber SFP-7000-85 and Addon J4858C-AO) with 2 different LC patch cables.
Sometime, I have access to the WebUI but can't save change (infinite applying and a reload will lead me to loggin again), sometime don't even have access to WebUI. SSH never work.
It's work one time to change and apply config by connecting first via copper, connect fiber, disconnect copper. I was still able to save change, those change validated via serial. Once I try the other model of SFP, didn't work anymore. Tryed the other pair that worked, still doesn't work.
I will continue with some other tests.
Management problem via SFP ports
-
sirhc - Employee
- Posts: 7415
- Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 3:48 pm
- Location: Lancaster, PA
- Has thanked: 1608 times
- Been thanked: 1325 times
Re: Management problem via SFP ports
I will Skype Eric a link to this thread.
Please post up a LAB to recreate what your doing (be detailed in how you have it setup, the more details of the exact LAB the better he can recreate it)
If people provide a specific LAB (detailed out) Eric will LAB it at his location and see.
A lot of people will come on and be very vague with their setup which leaves room for interpretation so Eric will not LAB it and attempt to fix it.
He is a great guy but a very typical programmer where he wants a very specific step by step and this happens.
If people provide a "detailed" LAB he will LAB it but when it is Vague he may not or if he does he does it a different way it may yields different results and he moves on as we have him doing a LOT of stuff.
A simple diagram also sometimes makes it easier for someone else to visualize what your trying to convey.
Please post up a LAB to recreate what your doing (be detailed in how you have it setup, the more details of the exact LAB the better he can recreate it)
If people provide a specific LAB (detailed out) Eric will LAB it at his location and see.
A lot of people will come on and be very vague with their setup which leaves room for interpretation so Eric will not LAB it and attempt to fix it.
He is a great guy but a very typical programmer where he wants a very specific step by step and this happens.
If people provide a "detailed" LAB he will LAB it but when it is Vague he may not or if he does he does it a different way it may yields different results and he moves on as we have him doing a LOT of stuff.
A simple diagram also sometimes makes it easier for someone else to visualize what your trying to convey.
Support is handled on the Forums not in Emails and PMs.
Before you ask a question use the Search function to see it has been answered before.
To do an Advanced Search click the magnifying glass in the Search Box.
To upload pictures click the Upload attachment link below the BLUE SUBMIT BUTTON.
Before you ask a question use the Search function to see it has been answered before.
To do an Advanced Search click the magnifying glass in the Search Box.
To upload pictures click the Upload attachment link below the BLUE SUBMIT BUTTON.
-
mike99 - Associate
- Posts: 837
- Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 10:53 am
- Location: Quebec, Canada
- Has thanked: 95 times
- Been thanked: 245 times
Re: Management problem via SFP ports
VLAN config Netonix 1 (my PC is connected to port 1 and trunk between switch (trunk mode all tagged) when using copper is port 12 and when using fiber is port 14).
VLAN config on Netonix 2 (Trunk (trunk mode all tagged) between switch when using copper is port 12 and when using fiber is port 14).
It's also affect acces to Ubnt device WebUI and SSH. I plugged a rocket M5 into Netonix 2 port 10, I can ping the device but if I try to access it, I get the certificate warning but after that, it time out. SSH just time out. If I unplug port 14 fiber and connect a RJ45 patch câble between port 12 on both switch, I can access netonix 2 management and ubnt rocket via WebUI (SSL) or SSH.
- Code: Select all
# show vlans
ID Enable Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
---- ------ ----------- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
3317 true Management U T T T T T T T T T T T T T
4000 true Clients E E U U E E E E E E T T E T
2317 true BH_Distribution E E E E U U U U U U T T E T
1317 true BH_Amener E U E E E E E E E E T T U T
VLAN 3317 IPv4 Address: 172.21.67.4/255.255.255.0
VLAN config on Netonix 2 (Trunk (trunk mode all tagged) between switch when using copper is port 12 and when using fiber is port 14).
- Code: Select all
# show vlans
ID Enable Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
---- ------ ----------- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
3317 true Management T T T T T T T T T T U T T T
4000 true Clients E E E E E E E E E E E T E T
2317 true BH_Distribution E U U U U U U E E E E T E T
1317 true BH_Amener U E E E E E E E E E E T E T
VLAN 3317 IPv4 Address: 172.21.67.5/255.255.255.0
It's also affect acces to Ubnt device WebUI and SSH. I plugged a rocket M5 into Netonix 2 port 10, I can ping the device but if I try to access it, I get the certificate warning but after that, it time out. SSH just time out. If I unplug port 14 fiber and connect a RJ45 patch câble between port 12 on both switch, I can access netonix 2 management and ubnt rocket via WebUI (SSL) or SSH.
-
mike99 - Associate
- Posts: 837
- Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 10:53 am
- Location: Quebec, Canada
- Has thanked: 95 times
- Been thanked: 245 times
Re: Management problem via SFP ports
If I use nmap, both netonix 2 and rocket show me that port 443 and 22 is open.
-
mike99 - Associate
- Posts: 837
- Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 10:53 am
- Location: Quebec, Canada
- Has thanked: 95 times
- Been thanked: 245 times
Re: Management problem via SFP ports
TCPdump from my PC trying to access the rocket on netonix 2 port 10. It didn't time out but try infinitly like this until I close tab. Tryed both chrome and firefox.
- Code: Select all
11:25:21.716950 IP 192.168.1.19.40239 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [S], seq 2574230263, win 29200, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 518856767 ecr 0,nop,wscale 7], length 0
11:25:21.717213 IP 192.168.1.20.http > 192.168.1.19.40239: Flags [S.], seq 2116761784, ack 2574230264, win 5792, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 617501 ecr 518856767,nop,wscale 1], length 0
11:25:21.717237 IP 192.168.1.19.40239 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [.], ack 1, win 229, options [nop,nop,TS val 518856767 ecr 617501], length 0
11:25:21.794086 IP 192.168.1.19.40239 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [P.], seq 1:767, ack 1, win 229, options [nop,nop,TS val 518856786 ecr 617501], length 766
11:25:21.794389 IP 192.168.1.20.http > 192.168.1.19.40239: Flags [.], ack 767, win 3662, options [nop,nop,TS val 617579 ecr 518856786], length 0
11:25:21.795734 IP 192.168.1.20.http > 192.168.1.19.40239: Flags [P.], seq 1:278, ack 767, win 3662, options [nop,nop,TS val 617580 ecr 518856786], length 277
11:25:21.795744 IP 192.168.1.19.40239 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [.], ack 278, win 237, options [nop,nop,TS val 518856787 ecr 617580], length 0
11:25:21.802300 IP 192.168.1.19.40241 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [S], seq 2419230938, win 29200, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 518856788 ecr 0,nop,wscale 7], length 0
11:25:21.802376 IP 192.168.1.19.40239 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [P.], seq 767:1424, ack 278, win 237, options [nop,nop,TS val 518856788 ecr 617580], length 657
11:25:21.802477 IP 192.168.1.20.http > 192.168.1.19.40241: Flags [S.], seq 2721842653, ack 2419230939, win 5792, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 617587 ecr 518856788,nop,wscale 1], length 0
11:25:21.802500 IP 192.168.1.19.40241 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [.], ack 1, win 229, options [nop,nop,TS val 518856788 ecr 617587], length 0
11:25:21.802598 IP 192.168.1.19.40241 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [P.], seq 1:727, ack 1, win 229, options [nop,nop,TS val 518856788 ecr 617587], length 726
11:25:21.802823 IP 192.168.1.20.http > 192.168.1.19.40241: Flags [.], ack 727, win 3622, options [nop,nop,TS val 617587 ecr 518856788], length 0
11:25:22.003545 IP 192.168.1.19.40239 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [P.], seq 767:1424, ack 278, win 237, options [nop,nop,TS val 518856839 ecr 617580], length 657
11:25:22.008984 IP 192.168.1.20.http > 192.168.1.19.40239: Flags [.], ack 1424, win 4428, options [nop,nop,TS val 617788 ecr 518856839,nop,nop,sack 1 {767:1424}], length 0
11:25:22.100508 IP 192.168.1.20.http > 192.168.1.19.40239: Flags [P.], seq 1726:1988, ack 1424, win 4428, options [nop,nop,TS val 617885 ecr 518856839], length 262
11:25:22.100536 IP 192.168.1.19.40239 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [.], ack 278, win 245, options [nop,nop,TS val 518856863 ecr 617580,nop,nop,sack 1 {1726:1988}], length 0
11:25:22.101298 IP 192.168.1.20.http > 192.168.1.19.40241: Flags [P.], seq 1449:1657, ack 727, win 3622, options [nop,nop,TS val 617885 ecr 518856788], length 208
11:25:22.101306 IP 192.168.1.19.40241 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [.], ack 1, win 237, options [nop,nop,TS val 518856863 ecr 617587,nop,nop,sack 1 {1449:1657}], length 0
11:25:28.188549 IP 192.168.1.20.http > 192.168.1.19.40239: Flags [F.], seq 1988, ack 1424, win 4428, options [nop,nop,TS val 623973 ecr 518856863], length 0
11:25:28.188577 IP 192.168.1.19.40239 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [.], ack 278, win 245, options [nop,nop,TS val 518858385 ecr 617580,nop,nop,sack 1 {1726:1989}], length 0
11:26:07.099543 IP 192.168.1.19.40241 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [.], ack 1, win 237, options [nop,nop,TS val 518868113 ecr 617587,nop,nop,sack 1 {1449:1657}], length 0
11:26:07.099758 IP 192.168.1.20.http > 192.168.1.19.40241: Flags [.], ack 727, win 3622, options [nop,nop,TS val 662883 ecr 518856863], length 0
11:26:12.099079 ARP, Request who-has 192.168.1.19 tell 192.168.1.20, length 46
11:26:12.099110 ARP, Reply 192.168.1.19 is-at 00:1b:21:34:66:b2 (oui DCBX), length 28
11:26:13.207541 IP 192.168.1.19.40239 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [.], ack 278, win 245, options [nop,nop,TS val 518869640 ecr 617580,nop,nop,sack 1 {1726:1989}], length 0
11:26:13.207766 IP 192.168.1.20.http > 192.168.1.19.40239: Flags [.], ack 1424, win 4428, options [nop,nop,TS val 668991 ecr 518858385], length 0
11:26:18.215531 ARP, Request who-has 192.168.1.20 tell 192.168.1.19, length 28
11:26:18.215717 ARP, Reply 192.168.1.20 is-at 00:27:22:16:e8:8d (oui Unknown), length 46
11:26:52.215541 IP 192.168.1.19.40241 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [.], ack 1, win 237, options [nop,nop,TS val 518879392 ecr 617587,nop,nop,sack 1 {1449:1657}], length 0
11:26:52.215775 IP 192.168.1.20.http > 192.168.1.19.40241: Flags [.], ack 727, win 3622, options [nop,nop,TS val 707999 ecr 518856863], length 0
11:26:57.215795 ARP, Request who-has 192.168.1.19 tell 192.168.1.20, length 46
11:26:57.215817 ARP, Reply 192.168.1.19 is-at 00:1b:21:34:66:b2 (oui DCBX), length 28
11:26:58.231542 IP 192.168.1.19.40239 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [.], ack 278, win 245, options [nop,nop,TS val 518880896 ecr 617580,nop,nop,sack 1 {1726:1989}], length 0
11:26:58.231782 IP 192.168.1.20.http > 192.168.1.19.40239: Flags [.], ack 1424, win 4428, options [nop,nop,TS val 714014 ecr 518858385], length 0
11:27:03.239537 ARP, Request who-has 192.168.1.20 tell 192.168.1.19, length 28
11:27:03.239684 ARP, Reply 192.168.1.20 is-at 00:27:22:16:e8:8d (oui Unknown), length 46
11:27:37.271541 IP 192.168.1.19.40241 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [.], ack 1, win 237, options [nop,nop,TS val 518890656 ecr 617587,nop,nop,sack 1 {1449:1657}], length 0
11:27:37.271790 IP 192.168.1.20.http > 192.168.1.19.40241: Flags [R], seq 2721842654, win 0, length 0
11:27:37.286712 IP 192.168.1.19.40239 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [F.], seq 1424, ack 278, win 245, options [nop,nop,TS val 518890659 ecr 617580,nop,nop,sack 1 {1726:1989}], length 0
11:27:37.286919 IP 192.168.1.20.http > 192.168.1.19.40239: Flags [.], ack 1425, win 4428, options [nop,nop,TS val 753069 ecr 518890659], length 0
11:27:37.378572 IP 192.168.1.19.40535 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [S], seq 3473761243, win 29200, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 518890682 ecr 0,nop,wscale 7], length 0
11:27:37.378823 IP 192.168.1.20.http > 192.168.1.19.40535: Flags [S.], seq 3504589946, ack 3473761244, win 5792, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 753161 ecr 518890682,nop,wscale 1], length 0
11:27:37.378866 IP 192.168.1.19.40535 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [.], ack 1, win 229, options [nop,nop,TS val 518890682 ecr 753161], length 0
11:27:37.379053 IP 192.168.1.19.40535 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [P.], seq 1:722, ack 1, win 229, options [nop,nop,TS val 518890682 ecr 753161], length 721
11:27:37.379317 IP 192.168.1.20.http > 192.168.1.19.40535: Flags [.], ack 722, win 3617, options [nop,nop,TS val 753161 ecr 518890682], length 0
11:27:37.508417 IP 192.168.1.20.http > 192.168.1.19.40535: Flags [P.], seq 1449:1657, ack 722, win 3617, options [nop,nop,TS val 753290 ecr 518890682], length 208
11:27:37.508446 IP 192.168.1.19.40535 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [.], ack 1, win 237, options [nop,nop,TS val 518890715 ecr 753161,nop,nop,sack 1 {1449:1657}], length 0
11:28:22.507548 IP 192.168.1.19.40535 > 192.168.1.20.http: Flags [.], ack 1, win 237, options [nop,nop,TS val 518901965 ecr 753161,nop,nop,sack 1 {1449:1657}], length 0
11:28:22.507765 IP 192.168.1.20.http > 192.168.1.19.40535: Flags [.], ack 722, win 3617, options [nop,nop,TS val 798289 ecr 518890715], length 0
11:28:27.507248 ARP, Request who-has 192.168.1.19 tell 192.168.1.20, length 46
11:28:27.507290 ARP, Reply 192.168.1.19 is-at 00:1b:21:34:66:b2 (oui DCBX), length 28
-
Eric Stern - Employee
- Posts: 532
- Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2014 9:41 pm
- Location: Toronto, Ontario
- Has thanked: 0 time
- Been thanked: 130 times
Re: Management problem via SFP ports
On the Status tab click the little gear on the far right of Port 14 and select "Port Detail". Does it show any errors?
-
mike99 - Associate
- Posts: 837
- Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 10:53 am
- Location: Quebec, Canada
- Has thanked: 95 times
- Been thanked: 245 times
Re: Management problem via SFP ports
RX Drops incressing and RX oversize
- Code: Select all
Port
14
-
data vers switch #2
Receive Total
Rx Packets
146
Rx Octets
36918
Rx Unicast
114
Rx Multicast
20
Rx Broadcast
1
Rx Pause
0
Transmit Total
Tx Packets
221
Tx Octets
27667
Tx Unicast
118
Tx Multicast
56
Tx Broadcast
47
Tx Pause
0
Receive Size Counters
Rx 64 Bytes
19
Rx 65-127 Bytes
96
Rx 128-255 Bytes
5
Rx 255-511 Bytes
2
Rx 512-1023 Bytes
12
Rx 1024-1526 Bytes
1
Rx 1527- Bytes
0
Transmit Size Counters
Tx 64 Bytes
25
Tx 65-127 Bytes
154
Tx 128-255 Bytes
22
Tx 255-511 Bytes
13
Tx 512-1023 Bytes
7
Tx 1024-1526 Bytes
0
Tx 1527- Bytes
0
Receive Queue Counters
Rx Q0
116
Rx Q1
0
Rx Q2
0
Rx Q3
0
Rx Q4
0
Rx Q5
0
Rx Q6
0
Rx Q7
0
Transmit Queue Counters
Tx Q0
202
Tx Q1
19
Tx Q2
0
Tx Q3
0
Tx Q4
0
Tx Q5
0
Tx Q6
0
Tx Q7
0
Receive Error Counters
Rx Drops
19
Rx CRC
0
Rx Undersize
0
Rx Oversize
11
Rx Fragments
0
Rx Jabber
0
Rx Filtered
0
-
mike99 - Associate
- Posts: 837
- Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 10:53 am
- Location: Quebec, Canada
- Has thanked: 95 times
- Been thanked: 245 times
Re: Management problem via SFP ports
Upgraded MTU from 1518 to 1718, seem to fix the problem.
-
sirhc - Employee
- Posts: 7415
- Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 3:48 pm
- Location: Lancaster, PA
- Has thanked: 1608 times
- Been thanked: 1325 times
Re: Management problem via SFP ports
mike99 wrote:Upgraded MTU from 1518 to 1718, seem to fix the problem.
Thanks for closing the ticket, many people do not post back when they figure it out.
Support is handled on the Forums not in Emails and PMs.
Before you ask a question use the Search function to see it has been answered before.
To do an Advanced Search click the magnifying glass in the Search Box.
To upload pictures click the Upload attachment link below the BLUE SUBMIT BUTTON.
Before you ask a question use the Search function to see it has been answered before.
To do an Advanced Search click the magnifying glass in the Search Box.
To upload pictures click the Upload attachment link below the BLUE SUBMIT BUTTON.
-
mike99 - Associate
- Posts: 837
- Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 10:53 am
- Location: Quebec, Canada
- Has thanked: 95 times
- Been thanked: 245 times
Re: Management problem via SFP ports
Still strange that those paquets are considered oversize on SFP with the same MTU than on copper. I check if it was normal that SFP need higher MTU but didn't found anything about something like this with google.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 48 guests