Cisco Support Community
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Welcome to Cisco Support Community. We would love to have your feedback.

For an introduction to the new site, click here. And see here for current known issues.

New Member

Catalyst 4006-S2 with WS-X4148RJ Module and Release 6.3(1)

can somebody decipher the error code:

%SYS-4-P2_WARN:1/Astro(6/6)-timeout is persisting.



Cisco Employee

Re: Catalyst 4006-S2 with WS-X4148RJ Module and Release 6.3(1)

New error message added to 6.2(3) and 6.3(1) software.

This error message indicates the Supervisor has lost inband communication to the Astro ASIC on 10/100 Line Cards. There are multiple possible causes

for this loss of communication:

1) Layer 2 Loop or Broadcast Storm that results in high traffic load that causes loss of inband traffic.

2) If the module number and Astro Reference are consistent, (always 6/6) and a layer 2 loop is not occuring, the problem is most likely a faulty hardware component on either the Supervisor or Line Card.

3) If the module number and Astro reference in respect to the error message is alternating modules and Astros, then the error message could be

indicating a different supervisor hardware problem. Generally, this failure is

accompanied by both the Astro Timeout Error Message and BlockTXQueue and BlockedGigaport Error Messages.

Swap out the line card first and see if the error message stops.

New Member

Re: Catalyst 4006-S2 with WS-X4148RJ Module and Release 6.3(1)


I have been to a site with a very similar problem and replaced the 4148-RJ in slot 6

There is no physical loop.

The problem is only ever seen on slot 6 ports 1-6

If the devices in these ports are moved elsewhere the problems do not move with the devices.

If a totally independed device (my laptop) is introduced to one of these ports, the problem is seen within a few minutes.

I upgraded to 6.2(3) - made no difference to the problem

I put bpduguard on and this helped because instead of the entire switch suffering and propogating the problem when it occurred, the affected ports went into errdisable state.

Is the next step to swap out the cat supervisor?

Any other ideas please?



CreatePlease to create content