ADSM-L

Re: TSM network problem

2002-04-16 09:13:07
Subject: Re: TSM network problem
From: Jim Healy <James.Healy AT AXA-TECH DOT COM>
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 09:13:24 -0400
Don

Are you sure you're using CAT-5 cable?
     Definitely Cat-t
You say the NIC's are forced at 100/full -- how about the switch ports?
     Switch ports are forced 100/full also
Is there adjacent "noise" that might be emitting across the network?
     I don't know about adjacent noise, how do I look for that?
Do you have old vs. current switch HW?  Is it up to date, microcode?
     I'm having the network guys check the microcode
VLAN's -- are you sure it's a point-to-point and not getting re-routed due
to DNS "mistakes" (eg, any potential router involved, multiple DNS entries
for the same hostname, local hosts file on the client, local routing table
on the client)???
     The clients only have one physical path to use to get to the TSM
server thats the way we designed it, no routers  involved either.

Your msg got garbled when stating specifics of your client situation... is
the problem only on one (of many) clients using the same switch?
     We are down to only 2 clients on the v-lan, they are both NT4

Finally, what OS platforms (and switch vendor & model) are involved?
     its a cisco 5000 switch

Both clients behave the same on this segment.








"Don France (TSMnews)" <DFrance-TSM AT ATT DOT NET>@VM.MARIST.EDU> on 04/15/2002
07:34:50 PM

Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>

Sent by:  "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>


To:   ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
cc:

Subject:  Re: TSM network problem


Are you sure you're using CAT-5 cable?
You say the NIC's are forced at 100/full -- how about the switch ports?
Is there adjacent "noise" that might be emitting across the network?
Do you have old vs. current switch HW?  Is it up to date, microcode?
VLAN's -- are you sure it's a point-to-point and not getting re-routed due
to DNS "mistakes" (eg, any potential router involved, multiple DNS entries
for the same hostname, local hosts file on the client, local routing table
on the client)???

Your msg got garbled when stating specifics of your client situation... is
the problem only on one (of many) clients using the same switch?

Finally, what OS platforms (and switch vendor & model) are involved?

These are buggers to solve, unless you can find some consistency -- eg, one
client fails but others run fine (typical, and helps reduce the focus to
identify the delta between good client and failing client -- for Win2K,
we've seen flaky OEM-NIC's cause this kind of problem;  also, one switch
vendor didn't work well with forced 100/full, simply insisted on
auto-negotiate.)


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>