T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
2926.1 | | SLINK::HOOD | My God, what have I done to my spleen? | Mon Oct 30 1995 11:06 | 3 |
| What is the configuration?
Does HUBwatch continue to perform normally?
|
2926.2 | echo the same problems as .0 | MARVEL::PATELA | Anup Patel - Lan Technologies, CSC U.K. | Fri Nov 03 1995 05:54 | 57 |
| hi,
re .0
I have a customer also reporting the same messages when invoking
hubwatch. Hubwatch continues and is successfull in retrieving port
stats, however unsuccessfull in invoking the general management window
for a DECbridge 900mx, (DECswitch 900EF). The customer has no problems
managing a concentrator 900.
My customer has an old versions of both the bridge and hub, v1.2.1 and
v2.2.1 respectively.
The erro log on bridge shows 4 entries, three of these seem to the
same.
The entries are as follows (I will include one entry and supply the
differences from this initial for the other).
Entry # = 0
Entry status = 0 [0=valid, 1=write_error, 2=invalid,
3=empty, 4=crc_error]
Entry id = 11
Firmware rev = 1.2
Reset Count = 5
Timestamp = 0 CC E497
Write Count = 31
FRU Mask = 0
FRU Mask = 1FC
Error data = SR=000A PC=00000000 Error Code=00000000
0:0000000A 1:00000000 2:00000000 3:00000005
4:00000049 5:00000000 6:0000001B 7:00000000
Entry # = 1
Timestamp = 0 CC E39D
Write Count = 30
Error data = 4:00000064 6:0000001A
Entry # = 2
Timestamp = 0 CC E3EA
Write Count = 30
Error data = 4:00000064 6:0000001A
Entry # = 3
Timestamp = 0 CC E448
Write Count = 30
Error data = 4:00000064 6:0000001A
thanks in advance,
Anup Patel
|
2926.3 | dechub museum exhibit! | NETCAD::MILLBRANDT | answer mam | Fri Nov 03 1995 10:02 | 9 |
| .2, I'm surprised that configuration works at all!
The hub and bridge versions are too old for that version -
you'd need DEChub V3.1 at least. But don't bother with
that, because they are both severely out of date.
Please please have your customer upgrade. DEChub V4.1,
DECswitch900EF V1.5.2, etc - see Note 2.
- Dotsie
|
2926.4 | HUBwatch for VMS 4.1.1 ??????? | NPSS::WADE | Network Systems Support | Fri Nov 03 1995 10:12 | 11 |
| re .3
You missed the part about HUBwatch for VMS in .0. There isn't any
HUBwatch for VMS V4.1.1 to support the new firmware.
By the way, does anyone out there really need a new release of HUBwatch
for VMS for their customers? Just checking....
Bill Wade
Network Product Support
|
2926.5 | at least upgrade to V3.1 | NETCAD::MILLBRANDT | answer mam | Fri Nov 03 1995 16:02 | 5 |
| Even to work with Hubwatch V3.1.x, .2 is out of rev.
Hubwatch V3.1.x needs DEChub V3.1 and whatever DECbridge
version went with it, just like I said.
Dotsie
|
2926.6 | | NPSS::WADE | Network Systems Support | Fri Nov 03 1995 16:46 | 15 |
| re .5
And all I'm saying is don't go to MAM 4.1 and DEFBA 1.5.2 and expect
to manage it with HUBwatch for VMS 3.1.1.
The previous rev of the firmware that works with HUBwatch for VMS 3.1.1
is located at anonymous ftp site ftp.digital.com in directory
/pub/DEC/hub900/prev_fw/hw3_1_fw/firmware.
Bill
|
2926.7 | action already initiated..... | MARVEL::PATELA | Anup Patel - Lan Technologies, CSC U.K. | Mon Nov 06 1995 05:32 | 13 |
|
re .3/.5 & .4/.6,
Thanks. I was aware that the customer is on old versions and already
had action to upgrade to mam v3.1.0 and corresponding modules. Cannot
take customer to v4.1 at the moment.
I wanted to know if anyone can add value to errors with hubwatch and
the error log dump information.
Anup Patel.
|
2926.8 | "Test ID = 1FC is result of bugs in FW=1.2.1... upgrade it | NETCAD::BATTERSBY | | Mon Nov 06 1995 09:27 | 11 |
| RE: .2 That error log data for the DECswitch looks funny.
Perhaps it's typed incorrectly. I've stared at many error logs
in our lab here in LKG and the one entered here doesn't look quite
like the ones I've seen. There appears to be two lines labeled with
"FRU Mask". The second line with this label should have been labeled
"Test ID" as the = 1FC is a firmware test code type seen on older rev
DECbridges with firmware rev 1.2.1. This rev firmware had some bugs
related to FDDI which generated the Test code 1FC and should be
upgraded to avoid this problem.
Bob
|
2926.9 | I need OpenVMS with everything else. | PTOJJD::DANZAK | Pittsburgher � | Mon Nov 06 1995 09:43 | 28 |
| I have a customer that is an all-VMS shop, using HUBwatch on both the
PC and OpenVMS etc. They've been mucking with managing the hub with
both (which is at the latest firmware) and ran into a DECswitch 900EF
problem in which they could NOT flip a bridge port from the backplane
to the front. Nor could they delete a FLEXlan that they created.
We did a reset of the MAM (which ended up crashing their FDDI cluster!)
and after that were able to flip the port but NOT delete the LAN.
I suggested some scheduled downtime (this IS a production 24 x 7) with
a few VERY NARROW windows scheduled for maintenance - and reseting
EVERYTHING to factory defaults.
If we are NOT going to release timely, coordinated versions and put
production customers into jeopardy, perhaps we could code things to
explicitely NOT WORK so customers we don't provide software that breaks
their production environments!
p.s. my demo room config has a VAXstation managing V4(mumble firmware)
with the ONLY FRIGGEN OpenVMS version available. I can't order new
demo gear just because we don't want to release timely cross platform
versions.
BIG GRUMBLE,
j
^--who understands time/schedules/etc. but that is MANAGEMENTS job to
make things happen to time and schedule to INSULATE customers from
these issues!
|
2926.10 | The "solution" for 2926.0 | COPCLU::PALMANN | Jan Palmann C/S Comms. Copenhagen | Tue Nov 07 1995 07:18 | 7 |
| Bye the way,
The problem discribed in 2926.0 disapeared, when the customer reloaded
the agent in the HUB900.
The customer found out about this, because he had a other problem with
HUBwatch and a HUB90. He reseated the agent for this hub, and it worked ok.
Then he try'ed reloading the HUB900 agent.
Jan.
|
2926.11 | brain in 4th fingers in 1st..... | MARVEL::PATELA | Anup Patel - Lan Technologies, CSC U.K. | Tue Nov 07 1995 10:22 | 9 |
| Bob,
re .8
You are right, my mistake the label following "FRU Mask" should have been
"Test ID".
Anup
|