riegsa
asked on
Link between HP - Cisco
Hello.
We are connecting a IBM BladeCenter H to the rest of our network.
In the BladeCenter: Cisco WS-CBS3012
Rest of network: 3 HP 2900 48G
All ports on these switches should be 1Gbps speed and all settings are Auto. Still the link say "100Mbps". The switches are running new versions of firmware.
Suggestions on how to achieve 1Gbps speed?
Thanks!
We are connecting a IBM BladeCenter H to the rest of our network.
In the BladeCenter: Cisco WS-CBS3012
Rest of network: 3 HP 2900 48G
All ports on these switches should be 1Gbps speed and all settings are Auto. Still the link say "100Mbps". The switches are running new versions of firmware.
Suggestions on how to achieve 1Gbps speed?
Thanks!
Here is the link for your information :
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/modules/ps872/ps138/index.html
Using 1000-base T Gbic
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/modules/ps872/ps138/index.html
Using 1000-base T Gbic
ASKER
How can this be?
These are internal BladeCenter modules where port 1-14 are used for the 14 blade slots and port 15-18 are standard ethernet ports at the back of the module. No room for installing a Gbic module anywhere.
Look at this link:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/blades/3110/hardware/installation/guide/HIGOVERV.html
See Figure 1-2 Catalyst Switch Module 3012, #5 states "10/100/1000 Ethernet ports". Also, according to the module's Web Interface, the ports should be 1Gbps capable.
Please explain.
These are internal BladeCenter modules where port 1-14 are used for the 14 blade slots and port 15-18 are standard ethernet ports at the back of the module. No room for installing a Gbic module anywhere.
Look at this link:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/blades/3110/hardware/installation/guide/HIGOVERV.html
See Figure 1-2 Catalyst Switch Module 3012, #5 states "10/100/1000 Ethernet ports". Also, according to the module's Web Interface, the ports should be 1Gbps capable.
Please explain.
Perhaps I mistake your switch with other switches. Sorry
ASKER
Perhaps.
Just for the record, this is a switch mounted in a bay in the IBM BladeCenter H. The switch is manufactured by Cisco only for this purpose.
I suspect some port configuration must be made on either the Cisco or the HP switch.
Comments anyone?
Just for the record, this is a switch mounted in a bay in the IBM BladeCenter H. The switch is manufactured by Cisco only for this purpose.
I suspect some port configuration must be made on either the Cisco or the HP switch.
Comments anyone?
ASKER
Doesn't anyone have a comment on this?
I assume there must be a lot of BladeCenter users out here?
I assume there must be a lot of BladeCenter users out here?
have you tried to set the speed to 1gig manualy on both switchs?
this will at least prove that both are capable of 1 gig speeds...
Also don't relie on auto negoatation.. its generaaly suggested to use auto negoation for switch to PC /Printer, and set switch to switch and switch to server Links manualy.
even between switchs of the same make there can be issues with autonegoation, between different makes the problems can be worse.
this will at least prove that both are capable of 1 gig speeds...
Also don't relie on auto negoatation.. its generaaly suggested to use auto negoation for switch to PC /Printer, and set switch to switch and switch to server Links manualy.
even between switchs of the same make there can be issues with autonegoation, between different makes the problems can be worse.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
Actually I belive I used a Cat 6 patch cord. If I have the time, I'll check when I'm at work tomorrow.
ASKER
You were right, mikebernhardt...!
It was a used (old) Cat5e cable, and by closer inspection it seems to have been damaged. Perhaps it have been damaged by the rack door some time earlier; I don't know. I replaced it with a new one, and the link speed is now reported as "1000Mbps".
Thanks !!
It was a used (old) Cat5e cable, and by closer inspection it seems to have been damaged. Perhaps it have been damaged by the rack door some time earlier; I don't know. I replaced it with a new one, and the link speed is now reported as "1000Mbps".
Thanks !!
Just to say, a cat5e cable would be fine for patching in a 1 gig connection. CAt5e should run at 1gbs up to 10 meters in lenth.
Not suggesting you use cat5e as a rule of course!
Not suggesting you use cat5e as a rule of course!
Cat5e can run Gig at the normal 100 meters, not 10 meters. But Cat 6 will perform better. Here, we installed Cat 6 infrastructure but we still use Cat5e patch cords.
sorry i should have put a "no problem" after the statement up to 10 meters in lenth. I wasnt not suggesting it can't run at a gig for longer distances, jsut that at up to 10 meters you will see no difference in proformance between cat 5e and cat6.
I would also suggestes that a good cat5e instualtion will perform exactly the same as a cat6 install at 1gig (or at least it should)
I would also suggestes that a good cat5e instualtion will perform exactly the same as a cat6 install at 1gig (or at least it should)
If no, that is your problem.