9

We've a Cisco 2960e that services our VoIP phones and other things. I inherited it.

The question I have is the cut cables: there are about four network connectors that are cut about 1cm away from the end - making it nothing more than a physical connector. These connectors are paired with a working cable either on above or beneath.

I feel certain these connectors are some sort of flag; they can't be loop-backs as there is no cabling to do so (the connectors are cut and nothing else). There's no electrical connections: the only indicator the switch might realize is there is a physical presence in the jack - and I doubt that too.

The free ports are ominously quiet (of network traffic) as well: is this related? Are these connectors marking active ports?

UPDATE: I thought I was very clear; I don't know how I could have explained it any better. In any case, here's a picture:

Connections on Ethernet Switch

Mei
  • 4,590
  • 8
  • 45
  • 53
  • Can you post a picture? It's possible these were [at one time] just delivering power, not traffic. Something [like this](http://tuxgraphics.org/common/images2/article09033/poe-cable.jpg). – jscott Feb 23 '12 at 03:24
  • They don't look like that; it's nothing more than a connector with a stub of a cable left over from having been cut. The entire thing isn't much larger than a grape. There's no cable to speak of. – Mei Feb 23 '12 at 03:30
  • What do you mean "These connectors are paired with a working cable either on above or beneath"? Also, what do you mean by "The free ports are ominously quiet (of network traffic) as well"? An empty port won't show any network activity... naturally. – joeqwerty Feb 23 '12 at 13:00
  • I connected a host to the free ports - and found no network activity - quite _unnatural_ (there should be broadcast traffic at least). However, I suspect these extra ports are disabled. Also, the ports are two-by-two: you know, one port on top of another like switches always are. – Mei Feb 23 '12 at 15:55
  • 6
    Doing this on a PoE switch is just.. just... oh god – pauska Feb 23 '12 at 16:38
  • 3
    You may have thought you were clear, but when you describe something that is rather insane and has no best-practices reason for being what you're describing,...I'd ask for a picture if someone was saying they had a foal born with a golden spiraling pointy bone sticking out of its forehead. Just because it couldn't be what they're describing. Jus' saying... – Bart Silverstrim Feb 23 '12 at 16:40
  • Bart: Unicorns do exist! – joeqwerty Feb 23 '12 at 16:44
  • @joeqwerty: was that before or after you licked that "special" sugar cube? – Bart Silverstrim Feb 23 '12 at 16:50
  • You guys are just _too_ funny! – Mei Feb 23 '12 at 17:04

3 Answers3

16

Test the ports thoroughly before trying to use them. I can't speak for your predecessor, but one reason I've seen that done (with cut ends or empty crimped ends) is to "mark" bad or sketchy/lossy ports on a switch; it's a great way to see at a glance that a port should not be used.

Shane Madden
  • 114,520
  • 13
  • 181
  • 251
  • A better way would be to label the dead ports "NFG" or simply "DEAD." – Ward - Trying Codidact Feb 23 '12 at 06:06
  • @Ward we used to use this method for switches in buildings that had building IT admins that would have a high turnaround and only had physical access to the switches. Probably the best way to do this is to use an empty crimped rj-45 connector. – resmon6 Feb 23 '12 at 14:22
  • @shane-madden: That's an excellent idea. Yet, this switch has either three or four of these: that many bad ports? Yow. – Mei Feb 23 '12 at 16:35
  • 2
    ...why not just do what we do with cars that have those annoying little oil and engine lights? Black electrical tape over them? – Bart Silverstrim Feb 23 '12 at 16:41
  • 7
    If these ports weren't dead before plugging a cut cable in could certainly finish them off. I typically mark dead ports with an ***empty*** RJ45 head (one crimped with no cable attached) to avoid funky shorts upsetting the switch -- I would advise that over the "cut cable" plugs, ***ESPECIALLY ON A PoE SWITCH*** :) – voretaq7 Feb 23 '12 at 16:41
  • If a connector was just left in the port like that and I didn't know why I'd just think, "Who's the idiot that left that there?" *yoink* – Bart Silverstrim Feb 23 '12 at 16:42
  • 1
    @BartSilverstrim I've seen that done - in "warmer" datacenters the glue melts off the tape and now you don't know which ports are dead *and* you have sticky bits of tape to clean up. (yuck!) – voretaq7 Feb 23 '12 at 16:42
  • @voretaq7 Very good point on the cut copper shorts. – Shane Madden Feb 23 '12 at 16:43
  • 2
    Datacenters warm enough to melt the glue? NEED MOAR AC! – Bart Silverstrim Feb 23 '12 at 16:46
  • @BartSilverstrim switch ports are usually on the hot side of the rack :) – voretaq7 Feb 23 '12 at 16:48
  • @BartSilverstrim Electrical tape glue gets nasty and gummy even at pretty low temperatures. And a chunk of tape over the port (or a label, as Ward suggested) isn't nearly as visible when looking for free ports in a dense switch (or rack full of messily-wired dense switches). – Shane Madden Feb 23 '12 at 16:49
3

It looks like the cut connector is being used to identify that as a port that shouldn't be used. I use a similar method but always use a non terminated connecter and affix a label or tag to the connector.

In addition, just to be clear, the physical ports (and cables connected to them) aren't "paired" together. They may be configured as a LAG, but their physical adjacency is not an indicator that they're "paired" together in any way, shape or form.

One final note, plugging a host into an empty port and seeing no activity lights on the port is not a guarantee that there is no activity on that port or that the port is disabled, shut down, faulty, etc. The only guarantee would be to run a packet capture on the host connected to that port and verify whether there's traffic or not.

joeqwerty
  • 109,901
  • 6
  • 81
  • 172
  • Actually, that's what I did: _tcpdump_ (packet capture) on the specified port. No traffic. Oh - and I didn't expect the "pair" to necessarily be significant. It's probably just dead or flaky ports. – Mei Feb 23 '12 at 16:59
  • 1
    @David The ports are *probably* dead (either they were dead when they were plugged, or they died when that pigtail of wire shorted something it shouldn't have). I would replace these with blind plugs ASAP to avoid potential problems in the future though. – voretaq7 Feb 23 '12 at 17:05
2

I've done something similar in the past.

I've taken an empty RJ45 plug, and crimped it without installing a cable (otherwise you might damage the port on the switch)

This was done on a switch that had a shared port, (i.e. a logical port that had both a fibre and copper port). There was a fibre installed in the fibre port which was the uplink to the rest of the network.

This was done because a while ago, somebody (who shall remain nameless), once plugged something into the port, reconfigured the port to the required VLAN, and then wondered why the switch suddenly disappeared off the network.

The most important thing here (which I'm guessing your predecessor didn't do) is to document why you've done it.

All our admins review changes to the systems documentation, and the blank plug serves as a physical reminder, just in case.

Community
  • 1
Bryan
  • 7,628
  • 15
  • 69
  • 94
  • +1: for documentation. At our organization we used crimped ends ("blind connectors") to fill disabled ports on switches the public can get their grubby little hands on such as in conference or training rooms. That way when they call complaining they "can't get the internet" - we can ask them if they removed a small plastic plug from the port first... –  Feb 23 '12 at 21:36