Brand: SIEMENS
Category: Control Unit
Document Type: Manual
Language: EN
Brand: SIEMENS
Category: Control Unit
Document Type: Manual
Language: EN
Uploaded: Nov. 21, 2025, 8:03 p.m.
Manual Publish Date: 2014-12-01
Refer to the License Agreement for applicable warranty terms and conditions.
| Problem | Solution |
|---|---|
| A file-based feature key does not match the hardware | Each file-based feature key is licensed to a particular device. When transferring a feature key from one device to another, such as when configuring a backup unit to replace a malfunctioning device, the device will detect a hardware mismatch with the key and trigger an alarm. Do not transfer file-based feature keys between devices. Contact a Siemens Canada Ltd. sales representative to order a feature key matching the serial numbers of the hardware in the destination device. |
| A link seems fine when traffic levels are low, but fails as traffic rates increase OR a link can be pinged but has problems with FTP/SQL/HTTP/etc. | A possible cause of intermittent operation is that of a 'duplex mismatch'. If one end of the link is fixed to full-duplex and the peer auto-negotiates, the auto-negotiating end falls back to half-duplex operation. At lower traffic volumes, the link may display few if any errors. As the traffic volume rises, the fixed negotiation side will begin to experience dropped packets while the auto-negotiating side will experience collisions. Ultimately, as traffic loads approach 100%, the link will become entirely unusable. The ping command with flood options is a useful tool for testing commissioned links. The command ping 192.168.0.1 500 2 can be used to issue 500 pings each separated by two milliseconds to the next switch. If the link used is of high quality, then no pings should be lost and the average round trip time should be small. |
| Links are inaccessible, even when using the Logical File Inclusion (LFI) protection feature. | Make sure LFI is not enabled on the peer as well. If both sides of the link have LFI enabled, then both sides will withhold link signal generation from each other. |
| When started, a multicast traffic feed is always distributed to all members of the VLAN. | Is IGMP enabled for the VLAN? Multicasts will be distributed to all members of the VLAN unless IGMP is enabled. |
| Computers connected to the switch receive multicast traffic, but not when they are connected to a router. | Is the port used to connect the router included in the Router Ports list? To determine whether the multicast stream is being delivered to the router, view the statistics collected for switched Ethernet ports. For more information, refer to Section 3.18.4, "Viewing Switched Ethernet Port Statistics". Verify the traffic count transmitted to the router is the same as the traffic count received from the multicasting source. |
| The video stream at an end station is of poor quality. | Video serving is a resource-intensive application. Because it uses isochronous workload, data must be fed at a prescribed rate or end users will see glitches in the video. Networks that carry data from the server to the client must be engineered to handle this heavy, isochronous workload. Video streams can consume large amounts of bandwidth. Features and capacity of both server and network (including routers, bridges, switches and interfaces) impact the streams. Do not exceed 60% of the maximum interface bandwidth. For example, if using a 10 Mbps Ethernet, run a single multicasting source at no more than 6 Mbps, or two sources at 3 Mbps. It is important to consider these ports in the network design, as router ports will carry the traffic of all multicast groups. ! IMPORTANT! Multicasting will introduce latency in all traffic on the network. Plan the network carefully in order to account for capacity and latency concerns. |
| Multicast streams of some groups are not forwarded properly. Some segments without subscribers receive the traffic, while some segments with subscribers do not. | Make sure different multicast groups do not have multicast IP addresses that map to the same multicast MAC address. The switch forwarding operation is MAC address-based and will not work properly for several groups mapping to the same MAC address. |
| Computers on the switch issue join requests, but do not receive multicast streams from a router. | Is the multicast route running IGMP version 2? It must run IGMP version 2 in order for IGMP Snooping to operate properly. |
| Unable to connect or disconnect some switch ports, and multicast goes everywhere. Is IGMP broken? | IGMP is not broken. This may in fact be proper switch behavior. When the switch detects a change in the network topology through RSTP, it acts to avoid loss of multicast traffic. If configured to do so, it starts forwarding all multicast traffic to all ports that are not RSTP Edge ports (because they may potentially link to routers). This may result in some undesired flooding of multicast traffic, which will stop after a few minutes. However, it guarantees that all devices interested in the traffic will keep receiving it without interruption. The same behavior will be observed when the switch resets or when IGMP Snooping is being disabled for the VLAN. |
| The network locks up when a new port is connected and the port status LEDs are flashing rapidly. | Is it possible that one of the switches in the network or one of the ports on a switch in the network has STP disabled and accidentally connects to another switch? If this has occurred, then a traffic loop has been formed. |
| Occasionally, the ports seem to experience significant flooding for a brief period of time. | If the problem appears to be transient in nature, it is possible that ports that are part of the spanning tree have been configured as edge ports. After the link layers have come up on edge ports, STP will directly transition them (perhaps improperly) to the forwarding state. If an RSTP configuration message is then received, the port will be returned to blocking. A traffic loop may be formed for the length of time the port was in forwarding. |
| A switch displays a strange behavior where the root port hops back and forth between two switch ports and never settles down. | If one of the switches appears to flip the root from one port to another, the problem may be one of traffic prioritization. For more information refer to "The network becomes unstable when a specific application is started." Another possible cause of intermittent operation is that of an auto-negotiation mismatch. If one end of the link is fixed to full-duplex mode and the peer auto-negotiates, the auto-negotiating end will fall back to half-duplex operation. At lower traffic, the volumes the link may display few if any errors. As the traffic volume rises, the fixed negotiation side will begin to experience dropped packets while the auto-negotiating side will experience collisions. Ultimately, as traffic loads approach 100%, the link will become entirely unusable. At this point, RSTP will not be able to transmit configuration messages over the link and the spanning tree topology will break down. If an alternate trunk exists, RSTP will activate it in the place of the congested port. Since activation of the alternate port often relieves the congested port of its traffic, the congested port will once again become reliable. RSTP will promptly enter it back into service, beginning the cycle once again. The root port will flip back and forth between two ports on the switch. |
| A computer or device is connected to a switch. After the switch is reset, it takes a long time for it to come up. | Is it possible that the RSTP edge setting for this port is set to false? If Edge is set to false, the bridge will make the port go through two forward delay times before the port can send or receive frames. If Edge is set to true, the bridge will transition the port directly to forwarding upon link up. |
| When the switch is tested by deliberately breaking a link, it takes a long time before devices beyond the switch can be polled. | Another possible explanation is that some links in the network run in half-duplex mode. RSTP uses a peer-to-peer protocol called Proposal-Agreement to ensure transitioning in the event of a link failure. This protocol requires full-duplex operation. When RSTP detects a non-full duplex port, it cannot rely on Proposal-Agreement protocol and must make the port transition the slow (i.e. STP) way. If possible, configure the port for full-duplex operation. Otherwise, configure the port's point-to-point setting to true. Either one will allow the Proposal-Agreement protocol to be used. |
| The network is composed of a ring of bridges, of which two (connected to each other) are managed and the rest are unmanaged. Why does the RSTP protocol work quickly when a link is broken between the managed bridges, but not in the unmanaged bridge part of the ring? | Is it possible that some ports participating in the topology have been configured to STP mode or that the port's point-to-point parameter is set to false? STP and multipoint ports converge slowly after failures occur. |
| Delays on the order of tens or hundreds of milliseconds can result in circumstances where the link broken is the sole link to the root bridge and the secondary root bridge is poorly chosen. The worst of all possible designs occurs when the secondary root bridge is located at the farthest edge of the network from the root. In this case, a configuration message will have to propagate out to the edge and then back in order to reestablish the topology. | A properly operating unmanaged bridge is transparent to STP configuration messages. The managed bridges will exchange configuration messages through the unmanaged bridge part of the ring as if it is non-existent. When a link in the unmanaged part of the ring fails however, the managed bridges will only be able to detect the failure through timing out of hello messages. Full connectivity will require three hello times plus two forwarding times to be restored. |
| The network becomes unstable when a specific application is started. The network returns to normal when the application is stopped. | RSTP sends its configuration messages using the highest possible priority level. If CoS is configured to allow traffic flows at the highest priority level and these traffic flows burst continuously to 100% of the line bandwidth, STP may be disrupted. It is therefore advised not to use the highest CoS. |
| When a new port is brought up, the root moves on to that port instead of the port it should move to or stay on. | Is it possible that the port cost is incorrectly programmed or that auto-negotiation derives an undesired value? Inspect the port and path costs with each port active as root. |
| An IED/controller does not work with the device. | Certain low CPU bandwidth controllers have been found to behave less than perfectly when they receive unexpected traffic. Try disabling STP for the port. If the controller fails around the time of a link outage, there is the remote possibility that frame disordering or duplication may be the cause of the problem. Try setting the root port of the failing controller's bridge to STP. |
| Polls to other devices are occasionally lost. | Review the network statistics to determine whether the root bridge is receiving TCNs around the time of observed frame loss. It may be possible there are problems with intermittent links in the network. |
| The root is receiving a number of TCNs. Where are they coming from? | Examine the RSTP port statistics to determine the port from which the TCNs are arriving. Sign-on to the switch at the other end of the link attached to that port. Repeat this step until the switch generating the TCNs is found (i.e. the switch that is itself not receiving a large number of TCNs). Determine the problem at that switch. |
| VLANs are not needed on the network. Can they be turned off? | Yes. Simply leave all ports set to type edge and leave the native VLAN set to 1. This is the default configuration for the switch. |
| Two VLANs were created and a number of ports were made members of them. Now some of the devices in one VLAN need to send messages to devices in the other VLAN. | If the devices need to communicate at the physical address layer, they must be members of the same VLAN. If they can communicate in a Layer 3 fashion (i.e. using a protocol such as IP or IPX), use a router. The router will treat each VLAN as a separate interface, which will have its own associated IP address space. |