SF302-08P small buisiness switch with CNA

I've been using the CNA for our 3560X type switches and really like it.
I saw the lastest version would support the Sx300 switches.
I tried it on some of our SF302-08P switches and it worked great!
But then I tried it on a new one, with newer firmware (1.3.7.18) I got a connection error (said something about not specifying a host name with DNS, but I didn't copy it all down).
Anyone know if that version of firmware has an issue with the latest CNA?  (6.1)
I also couldn't update the firmware on the switch to the 1.4.x firmware on the cisco site. Said a mismatch.
Mark

Hi,
 Thanks for the response.
the firmware is for the  SF302-08P switches.
I use the latest CNA to connect with other 302 switches (older firmware) but not this one with the newer firmware.
That was what I was trying to find out. Is there an issue with the 1.3.7.18 firmware on the  302 switches AND CNA.
Or if possibly I'm doing something else wrong (certainly probable)
thanks
mark

Similar Messages

  • Small/cheap switch with EtherType 0x9100 / tunneling? 2960G?

    I have a pair of 2960G switches with vlans I'd like shared over a circuit provided by Yipes. Yipes says in order to pass my tags unmolested I need to hand them ethertype 0x9100 instead of 0x8100. Apparently the command to set this for an interface is
    dot1q tunneling ethertype
    I only see it mentioned in the docs for 10000 or 12000 series hardware. Can my little 2960G switches pass 0x9100 over the trunk port? If not, what will do it?
    Thanks,
    Andrew

  • 19" Rackmount-kit included with 8-port switch SF302-08P?

    Hi, distribution can´t tell me if rackmount kit 19" is included in 8-port models... can anybody tell me? Thanks a lot!

    Yes, it is.  From techdata.com:
    WHAT'S IN THE BOX
    Cisco Small Business SF302-08P
    Serial cable
    Rack mounting kit

  • Installing SF302-08p with VOIP and Vlans

    I am installing this switch to a new departement. The reason of this is to share networks and bring POE over there as we will be istalling VOIP phones next month. We already have a network in place:
    -Cisco me 3400 from the ISP
    -Cisco ASA 5510 firewall
    -Cisco ESW 520 (x3) where access points are connected as well as most part of the network
    -Cisco catalyst 3900 (x3) for extra ports
    I am actually adding these 2 devices:
    -SF302-08P
    -WES610N
    The SF302-08P will be used for network and VOIP, while the WES610n connects 2 industrial printers to the network.
    The network uses VLANS (10 WAN for office, 100 VOIP, 300 WIFI and 309 for management)
    Here are my troubles:
    The SF302-08P refuse VOIP registration but allows computers
    The WES610n connects to access point, allows devices to fetch info from DHCP but blocks every connection except tracert
    Any advices or help on this would be greatly appreciated

    David
    This forum deals primarily with the Cisco Enterprise switches and as such that is the expertise people have here. You have a Small Business switch. No offense intended but you should move this to the Small Business switches forum where you should get the help you need -
    https://supportforums.cisco.com/community/netpro/small-business/switches
    Jon

  • VLAN setup on SF302-08P switch

    I have the following setup using two SF302-08P PoE switches:
    1st floor
    =========
    Switch #1 <-------> private network
              <-------> public network
    2nd floor
    =========
    Switch #2 <-------> private network
                ....    public network (visible but devices can't connect)
    I have tried to make the config in switch #2 identical to switch #1, but something is still wrong.
    Is this most likely a VLAN setup problem, or what?
    Thanks.
    Ken Watkins

    Tom,
    Thanks so much for your help. In my case, the second VLAN is VLAN 50. Here are the pics of what I think you are talking about through the web interface. Do these look like what you are suggesting?
    Thanks again.
    Ken

  • Issues with Small Business Switch config

    Hi, I know that if I read the documentation I will come to the answers but I would really like some input from someone with more knowledge than me. I have an issue with Cisco SF300 , one of the Small Business Switches. I have a single interface on my router and I need to separate my internal networks , I thought that one way would be to use VLANs. On my two internal networks one network only has unmanaged D-Link switches, the other has the Cisco SF300 so I did as follows. 
    On the Cisco Switch, all ports default to Trunk ports. I have changed FE1-FE24 and GE1-2 to access ports.
    Created two VLANS and placed FE1-FE24 in VLAN10 (also my management VLAN) , GE3 is a trunk Port for VLAN20 untagged, VLAN 20 uplinks to my DiLink Switches. This way traffic from my unmanaged switches comes in on a trunk port untagged on VLAN20.
    GE4 is a trunk port and I have assigned  VLAN1 untagged, VLAN10 tagged and VLAN20 tagged. VLAN 10 and VLAN 20 then forward to my Router.
    The plan was to connect GE4 to my router however I had two things happen I can not explain.
    Firstly as soon as I connected my D-Link to GE3 the LAN on VLAN20 went down, I could not ping Servers from PCs etc, all devices are connected to the unmanaged D-Links. Secondly the VLAN Assigment changed on GE3 and GE4 , VLANs 10 and 20 disappeared and only the default VLAN was assigned, also under VLAN Settings my VLAN interface state for VLAN20 shows Disabled. Also one of my access ports FE12 keeps changing VLAN.
    Can anyone offer any suggestions as to what might have crashed the LAN and why my VLANs change. I did write my running config to the start up config by the way.
    I added two screen shots. 
    I would seriously appreciate some help.
    Thanks 
    Bob

    Hi Garrett, thanks for your reply to my post, I hope you are well. I called Cisco support, they told me that they could not understand why this was happening and suggested a firmware upgrade, usually something I should have considered right from the beginning. This solved the issue for me.
    Thanks
    Bob

  • Cisco SF302-08P (SRW208P-K9-NA) Support for Cisco IP 7942 Phones

    Hi All,
    I am looking at quoting the SF302-08P for a client which will have three small offices interconnected via single mode fiber. I am planning on connecting them to a 3560 switch. Each office will have no more than 3 - 7942 phones. I reviewed the notes on this switch and it seems it should support this phone type without any issues. Could you advise if you have run into any support/reliability issues with this switch and the 7942s?
    Thank You,

    Hi RevereORL,
    My concern is there are;
    slight nuances or differences between the CLI configuration on the SG300 compared to the Catalyst range.
    I am also very very slightly concerned about post sales support interaction between TAC and SBSC, but these days there is much more cross talking between these two support groups.
    Different SFP SKU's for fiber connectivity GLC- series for catalyst and MGB series on 300, even though I have no issue with plugging the GLC SKU's into my 300 series product.
    The SF302-8P has a POE budget defined as 62W across all 8 ports or 62watts / 8 ports= 7.75 approx watts that can be drawn from each port.
    With the software upgrade to 1.1.1.8 the 300 series now also supports pre-standard POE as well as the 802.3af, power should not be a issue..
    I guess the beauty of buying from a distributor, and keeping the packaging, is that your can validate your application.
    Give it a try,.
    regards Dave

  • SF302-08P layer 3 mode

    Hi,
    i'm trying to configure SF302-08P in layer 3 mode.
    ports 1 to 8 have ip phones and desktops, port GE1 in connected to a router (not cisco) that links to the internet.
    i created vlan 100 and assigned to ports 1 to 8 (untagged)
    i created vlan 200 and assigned to port ge1 (untagged)
    activated dhcp server , created pool with 192.168.26.0/24 gw 192.168.26.1
                           |router A| (192.168.16.0/24 gw 192.168.16.1)
                               |
                               |
                               | GE1 (192.168.16.14)
                           | SF302-08P |
                                     |
                                     |
    SPA504G+DESKTOP |    SPA504G+DESKTOP
            192.168.26.2                      192.168.26.4
             192.168.26.3                      192.168.26.5
    the problem that i'm facing is that SPA504G and desktops access the internet with their inter address 192.168.26.0/24 and not 192.168.16.14.
    is there a way to achieve what i'm looking ? how does routing work in this case ? shouldn't there be some kind of NAT ?
    thank you

    Hello Luis,
    Is there a particular reason that the switch needs to be in Layer 3 Mode?
    I think your scenario would work better if you configure NAT on your router and let the router act as the DHCP server. Then, the switch could be in Layer 2 Mode.
    Alex

  • LMS 3.2 and Cisco Small Business Switches

    Hi there,
    I'm currently using LMS 3.2 to monitor my network. We've recently purchsed a few of the Cisco Small Business Switches, the SF 300-24 model to be exact. They're considered 'managed switches' (tho thier CLI is terrible) and I would like to monitor them in CWLMS. My problem is that once I add it to CS, it doesn't resolve to anything, just sits there as a blue box with a question mark. I'm assuming this means that these devices are not (currently) supported by LMS 3.2 - do you know if that will change, or how I can go about managing this device with LMS 3.2?
    Thanks

    Unfortunately that series of products is not supported in any version of LMS (or even Cisco Network Assistant - CNA).
    Cisco provides the FindIt utility to manage them:
    http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps10660/tsd_products_support_series_home.html
    Hope this helps.

  • Small Office Switch Questions

    Hi Guys,
    Have a small office I need to setup with a few requirements.
    I need to replace some unmanaged switches with one or two managed devices to better facilitate bandwith and general managment. There will be 5/6 VLANS (VOIP, Users, Wifi, CCTV ect), between 24 and 48 workstations requiring gigabit speeds and around 15 VOIP phones and 5 IP Cameras.
    Due to costs, i'm quite happy to go with a 24port 1000base switch and a 48port 10/100base POE switch (as I can bounce lots of devices that don't need 1000 like printers and accesspoints down to the POE switch). I was looking originally at the 3750 series (1000 and 100 and using the stacking ports) but the cost may be a little high.
    Used switches are not a real problem (unless anyone can advise on some really good reasons why) so picking up old cat hardware and getting the latest images are a option. Ideally, I want to spend under 1500 USD on something like this, but if it could be sub $1000 that would be great. In terms of the POE device, it needs to be standard POE not Cisco Pre-Standard.
    Happy to keep in the same series even if it's older.
    I've seen the small business series, but it seems that by the time you spend the money on two switches, you're nearly upto the prices of two used cats.
    Any thoughts on those?
    Thanks.

    I was looking originally at the 3750 series (1000 and 100 and using the stacking ports) but the cost may be a little high.
    You will no longer be able to purchase FastEthernet 3750 as Cisco has announced the End-of-Sale of the 10/100BaseTx of the 3560 and 3750 since January 2011.  Cisco has also announced the End-of-Sale of the 3560G/E and 3750G/E back in March 2012.
    So this leaves you with the 3560X and the 3750X and I can assure you this variety doesn't come cheap at all. 
    This leaves you with the last remaining stack-capable model, the 2960S.  Like what Paul has said, the 2960S is a "triple speed" variety:  10/100/1000BaseTx.  You can have uplinks of 1 Gbps fibre or 10 Gbps fibre.  You can have "half" PoE or Full PoE.
    But what sets the 2960S different from the 3750X (in terms of stacking) is the amount of switches in a stack.  The 3750X can support up to nine but the 2960S can support up to four.  This factor was set deliberately to prevent potential users to choose the cheaper 2960S instead of the 3750X.

  • Font Size too small to work with

    In the code view, the Font Size is too small to work with and the zoom in/out and magnification are grayed out.
    How do I increase the font size so I can see what I'm doing?
    Many thanks!

    Edit > Preferences > Fonts > Code View.
    HINT:  If you switch between Western European and Unicode, be sure to set-up font-sizes for both.
    Nancy O.
    Alt-Web Design & Publishing
    Web | Graphics | Print | Media  Specialists
    http://alt-web.com/
    http://twitter.com/altweb
    http://alt-web.blogspot.com

  • Small DC Switch Design

    Hello,
    I'm working on options for a small DC switch design.  This DC has 5
    virtual hosts with 10-20 guest vm's each.  Each server has two quad
    port gig nics with 6 of the 8 gig ports connected (3 for iSCSI and 3
    for data or management.  It also has two 3 node sans each with 2 gig
    ports per node, a host of other small servers including voice servers,
    management servers, asa firewall, and a few routers.  Total of 50-60
    ports as of right now.
    Connected to the DC is 7 other buildings each with there own 1 gig
    fiber connection serving about 3000 devices in total including
    desktops, laptops, ip phones, wireless ap's, building automation,
    alarm panels, etc....
    Right now in each of the 7 buildings has a 3560G as an aggregation
    switch connected back to the DC.  The DC also has a few 3560G's and
    3750G's for the sans and servers.  The system seems to work ok for the
    most part aside from micro bursts overwhelming the buffers on these
    switches and the etherchannel trunks between them dropping a minor
    amount of packets.  QOS is configured for the voice network and there
    are little to no complaints.
    What I would like to know (costs being the biggest factor) is what
    would be a better switch design for the current and future traffic in
    this network.  Some options I was thinking about are as follows:
    I would needs at least 96 ports.
    So option A is to go with a 4506-E bundle with 2 48 port line cards,
    sup 6l-e and a WS-X4712-SFP+E or something of the sorts.   And then
    upgrade to the enterprise services license and do all of the routing
    and switching for the DC on this one switch.  Means little redundancy
    and no failover.
    Option B was to go with the same 4506-E bundle, without the extra
    license and without the SFP line card and put in some sort of layer
    three aggregation switch, possibly an me3600x.
    Option C Is to go with the 4503-E, the SFP line card and the IP
    Enterprise services license.  And two top of rack switches, either
    2360's or 4948's.
    I would like to do some PBR on the aggregation switch, but I am unsure if the me3600x is capable of doing that.
    I have no experience in this matter so any other thoughts or
    suggestions would be appreciated.
    Thanks,
    Dan.

    Disclaimer
    The   Author of this posting offers the information contained within this   posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that   there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose.   Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not   be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of  this  posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.
    Liability Disclaimer
    In   no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including,   without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising  out  of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if  Author  has been advised of the possibility of such damage.
    Posting
    If cost is the biggest factor, and the only notable issue now is occasional packet drops due to insufficient buffers, perhaps some buffer tuning would be something to consider.
    A really important question to answer is how important redundancy. At lower port densities (3 to 4 stack members), the switch stack is less expensive than a chassis that supports redundancy.  At very low port densities (2 to 3 stack members) the stack might be less expensive than even a non-redundant chassis.
    BTW, the 3750-E/X offers much more performance than the original 3750 series.  If offers wire-speed PPS and fabric per switch, twice the ring bandwidth and uses the ring, for unicast, much "smarter".
    Perhaps a dual WS-C3750X-12S or WS-C3750X-24S for your core with dual MEC fiber etherchannl links to your aggregation switches?  In the DC itself, you might also use 2960s to provide DC edge ports.  For growth, a dual 3750-X stack would support four 10 gig ports which could be used with 10 gig servers or 10 gig SAN or as a 10gig link to other DC switches, such as the 2960S (which support their own stacking technology).

  • Unmanaged switch with CDP?

    I am trying to find an unmanaged cisco switch that has cdp.  Technically the switch doesn't have to be unmanaged, but I am looking for a cheep switch with only 5-10 ports that also has cdp.  I can't be sure if the small cisco SD series switches, formerly s***sys, have cdp now or not.

    Brannor:
    E.g. switch (testString.hashCode()) {
    case ("case 1".hashCode())...This won't work. You need a constant expressions for the cases, a method like hashCode() won't work there.
    Yogee:
    1. Different Strings are not guaranteed to generate different hashcodes.True, but its such a unlikely event that the strings' hashcodes will be equal that someone would still be able to do this reasonably in some situations. but I wouldn't do this in my code
    2. The algorithm used to generate the hashcode is not guaranteed to be the same on different platforms.There is a String hashcode formula, and its not ambiguous. The method is implemented entirely in java and so it will be the same on different platforms. Object.hashCode() though can be different on different platforms.
    3. The algorithm used to generate the hashcode is not guaranteed to be the same on different
    java versions.We can use that argument against writing anything in the API though, since the language can always change. Has Sun ever indicated that they might want to change the API specs for Strings's hashCode?

  • Power adaptor of the sf302-08p

    Hey,
    We are looking for a power adaptor for a cisco switch Sf302-08p. We can't find the adaptor anymore and we have to orde a new one, but we can't figure out the order number of the adaptor. The voltages is 48vdc and has an 4 pin connector . Do someone know the type or ordernumber of this adaptor?
    Thanks a lot.
    Stefan

    Hi Stefan, the power adapter does not have a separate part number. What you can do is call the SBSC, a lot of times they will RMA a whole unit to you then you may remove the power adapter and ship back the unit that was sent. The SX300 RMA process is always advance replacement since it is the defined service level for the warranty.
    -Tom
    Please mark answered for helpful posts

  • SF302-08P & MP

    What is the difference between SF302-08P and SF302-08MP Switches? Comparison Chart is identical.
    Thanks
    DJE

    Hi Douglas,
    MP means "Maximum PoE" meaning that the full PoE specified 15,4 Watts are available simultaniously on all ports.
    Best regards,
    Zsolt

Maybe you are looking for