Extreme Networks BD 6808 errors -- help to interpret.
I've recently stumbled over an error in the logs of one of my Black Diamond 6808's. Due to redundant MSMs this hasn't had any practical effect yet, but I have just initiated a ticket on the matter. Parallell to that I thought I'd take the oportunity to ask if anyone here has any more insight on what this means, what is happening and possibly what could cause it. Is it simply a matter of a broken MSM, or what could trigger something like this? Replies onlist or offlist appreciated, whatever you prefer. Thank you in advance, SYST: The signature of NMC0 is disappered. Reset the NMC10 SYST: Removed MSM-B base module SYST: slave MSM communications pipe is closed SYST: MSM-B is inserted. SYST: Start initializing MSM-B base module SYST: MSM-B SN = 701021-17 0235F-70778 SYST: slave MSM communications pipe is open SYST: Done initializing MSM-B base module SYST: MSM-B HW_AN=0 SW_AN=0 DECODE=0 INTSTAT=0 ANRCVCFG=0 CTRL=10000000 SYST: slot 3 HW_AN=a1 SW_AN=13 DECODE=1b INTSTAT=bf8 ANRCVCFG=41a0 CTRL=ff3ffc00 SYST: MSM-B=[701021-17 0235F-70778 ] SYST: slot 3=[701026-15 0315F-80358 ] SYST: backplane=[701000-08 0230h00123 ] SYST: [2] Connection between MSM-B mother board port 2 and I/O module 3 port 1 broke, fix immediately SYST: MSM-B HW_AN=0 SW_AN=0 DECODE=0 INTSTAT=0 ANRCVCFG=0 CTRL=10000000 SYST: slot 4 HW_AN=a1 SW_AN=13 DECODE=84 INTSTAT=bf8 ANRCVCFG=41a0 CTRL=ff3ffc00 SYST: MSM-B=[701021-17 0235F-70778 ] SYST: slot 4=[701024-21 0238F-70372 ] SYST: backplane=[701000-08 0230h00123 ] SYST: [2] Connection between MSM-B mother board port 3 and I/O module 4 port 1 broke, fix immediately SYST: MSM-B HW_AN=0 SW_AN=0 DECODE=0 INTSTAT=0 ANRCVCFG=0 CTRL=10000000 SYST: slot 6 HW_AN=a1 SW_AN=13 DECODE=1b INTSTAT=bf8 ANRCVCFG=41a0 CTRL=ff3ffc00 SYST: MSM-B=[701021-17 0235F-70778 ] SYST: slot 6=[701026-15 0315F-80383 ] SYST: backplane=[701000-08 0230h00123 ] SYST: [2] Connection between MSM-B mother board port 5 and I/O module 6 port 1 broke, fix immediately KERN: Secondary Mgmt port initialized KERN: Secondary Mgmt port enabled SYST: The signature of NMC0 is disappered. Reset the NMC10 SYST: Removed MSM-B base module SYST: slave MSM communications pipe is closed SYST: MSM-B is inserted. SYST: Start initializing MSM-B base module SYST: MSM-B SN = 701021-17 0235F-70778 SYST: slave MSM communications pipe is open SYST: Done initializing MSM-B base module KERN: Secondary Mgmt port initialized KERN: Secondary Mgmt port enabled SYST: The signature of NMC0 is disappered. Reset the NMC10 SYST: Removed MSM-B base module SYST: slave MSM communications pipe is closed SYST: MSM-B is inserted. SYST: Start initializing MSM-B base module SYST: MSM-B SN = 701021-17 0235F-70778 SYST: slave MSM communications pipe is open SYST: Done initializing MSM-B base module KERN: Secondary Mgmt port initialized KERN: Secondary Mgmt port enabled -- /mattias ahnberg (AS20514).
Mattias Ahnberg wrote:
I've recently stumbled over an error in the logs of one of my Black Diamond 6808's. Due to redundant MSMs this hasn't had any practical effect yet, but I have just initiated a ticket on the matter.
I just got word from a few members that my post was seriously off topic. I did try to study the information at http://www.nanog.org/listfaq.html before I posted just to be certain, and my view is that I couldn't find anything that outruled a posting like my own. I have probably missed something, perhaps unwritten policy, and for that I am sorry. I will not repeat my mistake. -- /mattias ahnberg (AS20514).
(followups set) On 10-Jun-2006, at 06:09, Mattias Ahnberg wrote:
Mattias Ahnberg wrote:
I've recently stumbled over an error in the logs of one of my Black Diamond 6808's. Due to redundant MSMs this hasn't had any practical effect yet, but I have just initiated a ticket on the matter.
I just got word from a few members that my post was seriously off topic. I did try to study the information at http://www.nanog.org/ listfaq.html before I posted just to be certain, and my view is that I couldn't find anything that outruled a posting like my own.
It's the AUP that determines what's on-topic for the list, not the FAQ. Your message was perfectly fine for the NANOG list according to the AUP. However, in the interests of getting you a good answer to your question, you might find the following list more useful than this one: https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/extreme-nsp This advice is also in the FAQ you quoted (well, kind of: see <http:// www.nanog.org/listfaq.html#routerconfig>).
I have probably missed something, perhaps unwritten policy, and for that I am sorry. I will not repeat my mistake.
Getting flamed by other subscribers is all part of life in the big city :-) Joe
I have probably missed something, perhaps unwritten policy, and for that I am sorry. I will not repeat my mistake.
Please DO CONTINUE to discuss this on the list. Ignore all those messages of complaint. The only complaints that matter are those of the Mailing List Administrators whose names are listed here: http://www.nanog.org/listadmins.html The people who were complaining to you are not serious about network operations. They just want to keep it as a private club where only people who know the secret handshake can apply. However, in the 21st century, stable and reliable network operations are vital to the global economy. This means that we MUST openly discuss issues that arise in order to jointly solve the problems and to educate all parties involved, vendors, researchers and operators. It's OK to step on some toes and offend a few people. This is a rough and tumble business where you need to have a thick skin to survive. Perhaps the problem is that the COMPLAINANTS do not have a thick enough skin. --Michael Dillon
participants (3)
-
Joe Abley -
Mattias Ahnberg -
Michael.Dillonļ¼ btradianz.com