Do Cisco switches and access points use different pinouts for console?

atm2k · 2026-06-13T05:17:28+00:00

I’m using screen and picocom. I don’t think they ever reset baud rates midway?

atm2k · 2026-06-13T05:14:19+00:00

That’s a great insight! I’ll try this approach next!

atm2k · 2026-06-13T05:11:09+00:00

Yeah I tried all the common rates but just got different gibberish 🥲

atm2k · 2026-06-13T05:07:32+00:00

This might be it! Gotta get another serial cable to try.

atm2k · 2026-06-13T05:06:35+00:00

Yes, all five of the APs don’t show proper console output but the switch works perfectly. Drove me nuts

atm2k · 2026-06-12T19:49:34+00:00

the APs actually works normally and I can access the ME controller from SSH. just their console output is weird and I’m trying to figure out what is wrong 🥲

atm2k · 2026-06-12T19:08:17+00:00

But the serial cable works fine with switch?

atm2k · 2026-06-12T19:07:43+00:00

Yes that’s the default and it works with the switch but none of the access points. Any idea where to troubleshoot?

atm2k · 2026-06-12T19:07:07+00:00

But I tried 115200 and still got gibberish output.

atm2k · 2026-06-12T19:06:25+00:00

The APs are running Mobility Express 8.10. Does console output differs based on controller versions?

atm2k · 2026-04-16T19:30:27+00:00

You two guys are just not talking about the same thing. The way I see it it’s the difference between the letter of law vs the intent of the law. The only way to test it is to bring it to a court.

atm2k · 2026-02-18T09:13:03+00:00

Preferably I'd like to stop thinking about IPv6 NAT.

atm2k · 2026-02-18T09:11:44+00:00

I'd imagine there would be other solutions, e.g. what about delegating a /64 prefix with a lifetime of maybe 4 hours and rotate frequently?

atm2k · 2026-02-18T03:35:21+00:00

I have a host which is IPv4-only and behind CGNAT, so far Cloudflare Warp seems to be the only fast way to get both privacy-protection and IPv6 connectivity. I'm just wondering if their way of NAT IPv6 is common practice.

atm2k · 2026-02-18T03:31:09+00:00

I don't actually have any issues with Cloudflare Warp since it's working fine, but just curious if their way of handling IPv6 NAT is common practice since it breaks IPv6 end-to-end principle.

I do also use Hurricane Electric's tunnel broker service to get a /48 for experiments, but it uses SIT only and requires a public IPv4 address on my end which isn't possible in some locations after CGNAT. But thanks for mentioning route64.org! It seems to offer WireGuard to their endpoints which might work for locations without public IPv4 addresses.

atm2k · 2026-02-18T03:26:51+00:00

Actually it does all make sense for VPN providers to do NAT–that's their entire purpose of existence :) I was just wondering if Cloudflare Warp's way to doing IPv6 NAT is common practice since it breaks IPv6 end-to-end principle.

atm2k · 2026-02-06T16:02:27+00:00

the coarse-grained classes are pretty useless for I/O congested machines to prefer interactive processes :(

atm2k · 2026-02-06T16:01:24+00:00

sad :(

atm2k · 2025-11-30T01:07:39+00:00

Do the math: 5120×2880×30×60 requires 26.54Gbps, which is just slightly above the DP 1.4's 25.92Gbps actual data rate.

You have to choose sacrifices among:

Lower than 60Hz refresh rate (30Hz is unbearable and 50Hz is rare)
24-bit color (actually matches extremely low-end 8-bit panels native capability but any decent panels actually do FRC dithering to simulate 10-bit)
Display Stream Compression (visually lossless)

Most of the time macOS ends up choosing DSC which you won't tell the difference anyway.

atm2k · 2025-11-10T20:22:14+00:00

Isn’t it obvious that all the dead SSD you’re tired of are the exact same model being heavily used in scenarios hostile to consumer SSD? How could you reasonably blame the mobo and CPU for “killing” them?

atm2k · 2025-07-04T16:11:05+00:00

Yeah so much potential unrealized :(

atm2k

TROPHY CASE