RE: POWER-ETHERNET-MIB query: Enabled but disabled?

"Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email protected]> Tue, 16 Oct 2007 14:00:31 +0200
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.hubmib
Message-ID <EDC652A26FB23C4EB6384A4584434A044EF6B3@307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com>
It looks to me that you are dealing with a faulty or non-standard
implementation of the state machine. I would suspect one of the two -
either there is an extra non-standard switch that activates the
detection mechanism on the port (maybe a left-over from a pre-standard
implementation) and which prevents the state machine to work although
pethPsePortAdminEnable=3Dtrue or the implementation is buggy and while
searching it returns the initial pethPsePortDetectionStatus=3Ddisabled
value instead of the searching(2) value that should be returned for any
'state other than those listed above'. =20

Dan

=20

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Fenner [mailto:[email protected]]=20
> Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 11:25 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [Hubmib] POWER-ETHERNET-MIB query: Enabled but disabled?
>=20
>=20
> I'm seeing a device where, on some ports, it reports=20
> pethPsePortAdminEnable=3Dtrue but =
pethPsePortDetectionStatus=3Ddisabled .
> As far as I can tell, this combination of states isn't=20
> allowed by the state diagram in figure 33-6 of 802.1af-2003 -=20
> it's only permitted to be in the DISABLED state when=20
> mr_pse_enable is "disabled".  Assuming that=20
> pethPsePortAdminEnable reflects the "disable/enable" states=20
> of mr_pse_enable, this means that it's both disabled and not disabled.
>=20
> Since this isn't the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, any=20
> wisdom as to how a management station should interpret this=20
> combination of values?  Should I just ignore the value of=20
> AdminEnable and pretend that these ports were=20
> administratively disabled too?
>=20
> Thanks,
>   Bill
>=20
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> Hubmib mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hubmib
>=20