Detailed Device Report not showing "Number of Ports"

Answered Question
Feb 5th, 2009
User Badges:

I have a 2621XM device, when I generate the detailed device report, under Module Information, I get the following info, when I look at Ciscoview I can see two 10/100 ports, fa0/0 and fa0/1, why are does this report show Number of Ports as ZERO:

Module Index 3

Parent Index 2

Parent Type container

Slot Number 0

Description C2600 Mainboard

Serial Number

Vendor Type cevModuleUnknownCard

Model Name

Physical Entity Name

Slot Configuration

Manufacturer Name

Operational Status

HW Version

SW Version

FW Version

Number of Slots

Number of Ports 0

Multiservice false

Inline Power Capable false

Hardware Encryption

Module IP Address

Additional Status

Admin Status

Reset Reason

Unique Device Identifier PID : C2600 Mainboard VID : SN

Correct Answer by Joe Clarke about 8 years 4 months ago

Yes, there is a problem here. The ports should be contained by entPhysicalIndex.3 not .1. This is bug CSCeg01295 which is fixed in 12.4.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 5 (1 ratings)
Joe Clarke Sat, 02/07/2009 - 15:54
User Badges:
  • Cisco Employee,
  • Hall of Fame,

    Founding Member

This could be an ENTITY-MIB bug. I have a 2651XM, and it is showing the number of ports per module (as well as the mainboard) correctly. What version of code is running on this device? What version of RME? What versions of the Rtr2600XM and SharedInventoryRouter RME packages do you have loaded?

sirbaughmf Mon, 02/09/2009 - 05:01
User Badges:

Code Version on Device: Version 12.1(17)

RME Version: 4.0.6

Rtr2600XM Version: Cisco 2621 Multiservice Platform Rtr2600XM 1.1

I'm not seeing SharedInventoryRouter package, I looked in the Device Map and i only see packages for SharedInventoryFastSwitch, SharedInventoryCat3900, SharedInventoryCat3900, SharedInventoryCallManager.

Joe Clarke Mon, 02/09/2009 - 10:22
User Badges:
  • Cisco Employee,
  • Hall of Fame,

    Founding Member

This could be an ENTITY-MIB problem. My 2651 is running 12.4. You must have a SharedInventoryRouter package, or things wouldn't be working very well at all.

Please post an SNMP walk of the entPhysicalTable (

sirbaughmf Mon, 02/09/2009 - 10:36
User Badges:

Sorry, here is the SharedInventoryRouter package info:

SharedInventoryRouter 1.5.1 SharedInventoryRouter device package


The following is a SNMP walk of device starting from .

SNMP Walk Output:

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalDescr.1 = STRING: 2621XM chassis, Hw Serial#: 3842832241, Hw Revision: 0x100

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalDescr.2 = STRING: 2600 Chassis Slot

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalDescr.3 = STRING: C2600 Mainboard

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalDescr.4 = STRING: 2600 DaughterCard Slot

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalDescr.5 = STRING: 2600 DaughterCard Slot

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalDescr.6 = STRING: 2600 Chassis Slot

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalDescr.7 = STRING: AmdFE

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalDescr.8 = STRING: AmdFE

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalVendorType.1 = OID: CISCO-ENTITY-VENDORTYPE-OID-MIB::cevChassis2621XM

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalVendorType.2 = OID: CISCO-ENTITY-VENDORTYPE-OID-MIB::cevContainerSlot

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalVendorType.3 = OID: CISCO-ENTITY-VENDORTYPE-OID-MIB::cevModuleUnknownCard

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalVendorType.4 = OID: CISCO-ENTITY-VENDORTYPE-OID-MIB::cevContainerDaughterCard

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalVendorType.5 = OID: CISCO-ENTITY-VENDORTYPE-OID-MIB::cevContainerDaughterCard

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalVendorType.6 = OID: CISCO-ENTITY-VENDORTYPE-OID-MIB::cevContainerSlot



ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalContainedIn.1 = INTEGER: 0

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalContainedIn.2 = INTEGER: 1

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalContainedIn.3 = INTEGER: 2

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalContainedIn.4 = INTEGER: 3

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalContainedIn.5 = INTEGER: 3

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalContainedIn.6 = INTEGER: 1

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalContainedIn.7 = INTEGER: 1

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalContainedIn.8 = INTEGER: 1

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalClass.1 = INTEGER: chassis(3)

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalClass.2 = INTEGER: container(5)

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalClass.3 = INTEGER: module(9)

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalClass.4 = INTEGER: container(5)

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalClass.5 = INTEGER: container(5)

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalClass.6 = INTEGER: container(5)

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalClass.7 = INTEGER: port(10)

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalClass.8 = INTEGER: port(10)

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalParentRelPos.1 = INTEGER: -1

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalParentRelPos.2 = INTEGER: 0

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalParentRelPos.3 = INTEGER: 0

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalParentRelPos.4 = INTEGER: 0

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalParentRelPos.5 = INTEGER: 1

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalParentRelPos.6 = INTEGER: 1

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalParentRelPos.7 = INTEGER: 0

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalParentRelPos.8 = INTEGER: 1

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalName.1 = STRING:

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalName.2 = STRING:

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalName.3 = STRING:

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalName.4 = STRING:

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalName.5 = STRING:

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalName.6 = STRING:

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalName.7 = STRING: FastEthernet0/0

ENTITY-MIB::entPhysicalName.8 = STRING: FastEthernet0/1

Correct Answer
Joe Clarke Mon, 02/09/2009 - 10:48
User Badges:
  • Cisco Employee,
  • Hall of Fame,

    Founding Member

Yes, there is a problem here. The ports should be contained by entPhysicalIndex.3 not .1. This is bug CSCeg01295 which is fixed in 12.4.


This Discussion