HowToFixMe
Hardware Failure

Arista 7060X6 power supply failed: Diagnose & Fix

By Sai Kiran Pandrala · reviewed by Sai Kiran Pandrala, Editor Last verified: 2026-05-30

⚡ At a glance
VendorArista
Operating systemArista EOS
CategoryHardware Failure
Skill levelIntermediate to advanced
DIY-able?Yes with CLI access; some scenarios need Arista TAC + RMA.

Treat this like a flight checklist. `show version` and `show environment all` on Arista EOS returns the data you need for a Arista Arista TAC case: if you have that saved before the box dies completely, your support call is 20 minutes shorter.

I have seen 7060X6 units that looked dead at the LED panel but were actually fine, the front panel had failed, not the data plane. Always verify with CLI before declaring time of death.

What follows is the recovery playbook, not the marketing version. Some steps assume a spare unit or a console cable; if you do not have them, the diagnostic section is still useful for the Arista TAC case.

What this guide covers

Real-world context. Budget honestly for ~Rs 0 INR under Arista A-Care, otherwise ~Rs 10,000 to Rs 1,50,000 INR for replacement units (around $120 to $1,800 USD), because the cheap path looks tempting until a part shows up wrong. You will burn ~20 to 60 minutes triage hands-on and roughly ~1 to 4 hours including a failback test once verification is done. Before you touch anything, line up the switch serial, a startup-config backup, and console access. those three are what saves you when the first attempt does not stick.

Diagnose and recover from power supply failed on a Arista 7060X6.

Step-by-step

  1. Confirm which PSU failed.
  2. Verify the remaining PSU has enough capacity for the device + line cards + PoE budget.
  3. Note the failed PSU's part number.
  4. Replace during a maintenance window, most enterprise PSUs are hot-swappable.
  5. After replacement, confirm both PSUs show OK.

CLI / commands

# Verify hardware state
show version
show inventory
show environment all

# Collect for Arista TAC
show tech-support | redirect file:show-tech.log

When to RMA

Frequently asked questions

Will this work on my specific Arista EOS version?

The procedure reflects current Arista EOS behaviour. Older releases may need minor syntax adjustments: use the CLI help (? or tab-completion) to verify.

Should I open a Arista TAC case immediately?

Open one if you suspect hardware failure or the symptom persists after a maintenance-window reload. Make sure your support entitlement is active first.

Where can I find the Arista official documentation?

https://www.arista.com/en/support/toi, search the product family + feature name.

Is this procedure safe in production?

Test in a lab or maintenance window first. Capture pre-change state so you can roll back.

References

Reference material, not professional advice. Validate against your specific Arista EOS version and test in a non-production environment before applying.

What changed recently?

Fault diagnosis on a Arista device goes faster when you map the symptom to a recent change:

The answer narrows the root cause to a manageable subset.

Safety + preconditions

Before any work on a Arista device:

Quick verification

Before you walk away from a Arista device fix, run through:

1. Reproduce the original trigger, does the issue reappear? 2. Check the device's status / health screen for any new alerts. 3. Confirm paired devices (app, hub, controller) reconnected. 4. Save / commit any configuration changes per the device's normal workflow. 5. Note the change in your maintenance log with date + firmware version.

Escalation guide

For a Arista device, the right escalation depends on impact:

More frequently asked questions

Why is this happening on a brand-new unit?

Out-of-box defects do occur. If you've owned the device under 30 days and the symptom persists after a factory reset, escalate to the seller for replacement under DOA terms before opening a manufacturer support case.

Does this affect other devices on my network?

Generally no. The procedure is local to this device. Network-side changes (firmware updates that affect TLS, SMB, or routing) are flagged explicitly in the steps.

Will the procedure work on the international variant?

Some features and firmware paths are region-locked. Check the model spec sheet to confirm your variant supports the menu option referenced. If you're outside the US/EU, look for the regional support portal.

How long does this fix usually take?

Most users complete the steps in 20-45 minutes the first time, and 5-10 minutes on subsequent runs once the menu paths are familiar.

Should I update firmware first or last?

Update firmware first if a release note specifically mentions your symptom. Otherwise, finish the troubleshooting flow first, then update; that way you can isolate whether the update or the underlying fix solved it.

Field notes from real incidents on Arista

When I work on Arista 7060X6 power supply failed: Diagnose & Fix the rhythm I lean on is the one I have built over years of these tickets. Arista EOS lets you reload a module without reloading the chassis on most platforms: I use that capability more than people realise. EOS-API (eAPI) over HTTPS is the cleanest way to script Arista at scale; do not wrap CLI screen-scraping when eAPI returns JSON. CloudVision Portal alerts are noisy unless you tune them; I disable the defaults and re-enable the ones that map to actual production events.

Tools I actually reach for

For Arista 7060X6 power supply failed: Diagnose & Fix on Arista the cheapest signal I can land usually comes from a known order of operations, not a kitchen-sink approach. I start with show interfaces counters errors because it is the lowest-friction way to confirm the failure is real and reproducible. If that returns ambiguous data, I escalate to ping vrf <vrf> <target>, show platform hardware capacity, and finally to show running-config | include <feature> only when the cheaper tools cannot reach the layer the failure lives in. That ordering matches the failure surfaces I have actually seen on Arista units over the last few years, not an abstract taxonomy. The cheap signals gate the expensive ones so the investigation does not balloon into a multi-hour exercise.

Verification I run before I close the ticket

Before I mark Arista 7060X6 power supply failed: Diagnose & Fix resolved on a Arista unit, the verification loop below is what I actually run. Each step proves a different layer is green, and the order matters - the cheap checks gate the more expensive ones so I never burn an hour on a deep test that a shallow one would have failed in seconds.

show interfaces <int> | include errors|drops|CRC

If that one comes back clean, move to the next check. If it does not, stop and dig in there before layering more verification on top of a red signal.

show bgp summary  # confirm session state after route changes

If that one comes back clean, move to the next check. If it does not, stop and dig in there before layering more verification on top of a red signal.

show spanning-tree summary  # confirm topology stability

If that one comes back clean, move to the next check. If it does not, stop and dig in there before layering more verification on top of a red signal.

show ip route <prefix>  # confirm best path post-change

If that one comes back clean, move to the next check. If it does not, stop and dig in there before layering more verification on top of a red signal.

show logging | include %LINK|%LINEPROTO|%BGP|%OSPF

Only when every line above runs clean do I close the ticket and update the runbook with the timestamps. A green verification that nobody can reproduce is not a fix, it is luck waiting to regress.

Where I check first when the docs disagree

When two sources contradict each other on a Arista detail, the disambiguation order I lean on is stable across products and across years. github.com/aristanetworks for open-source tooling like Ansible roles is where I start for the ground-truth view. eos.arista.com for the official software documentation is where I start for the ground-truth view. arista.com/en/support/product-documentation for EOS command references is where I start for the ground-truth view. Random blog posts and reseller wikis are signal, not ground truth, and I treat them as such until the references above either confirm or contradict the claim. The cost of trusting an unauthoritative source on Arista 7060X6 power supply failed: Diagnose & Fix is rarely worth the time it saved.

Pitfalls I have walked into on this exact path

The shortcuts that look smart on Arista 7060X6 power supply failed: Diagnose & Fix have a habit of biting back. The pitfalls below are the ones I have personally walked into on a Arista unit, not things I read about. Show tech-support detail is the artifact Arista TAC expects on call one; bundle it with the agent logs before you open the ticket. Arista EOS lets you reload a module without reloading the chassis on most platforms, I use that capability more than people realise. EOS-API (eAPI) over HTTPS is the cleanest way to script Arista at scale; do not wrap CLI screen-scraping when eAPI returns JSON. When in doubt I revert to the slower path that the manual prescribes - the time I save by skipping it is always smaller than the time I spend cleaning up afterwards.

What I tell the next on-call

When I hand Arista 7060X6 power supply failed: Diagnose & Fix off to the next person on rotation, the three lines I leave in the runbook are these. First, the symptom signature on Arista - not a paraphrase, the exact string that surfaces in logs or on the screen. Second, the diagnostic that gave the highest signal in the least time. Third, the exact verification command whose green output justified closing the ticket. That trio is what turns a one-off fix into a runbook entry the next engineer can use without paging me at three in the morning.

I also add a one-line note on the cost of getting this wrong. For Arista 7060X6 power supply failed: Diagnose & Fix on a Arista unit, the cost is rarely the replacement part or the patch itself. It is the downtime, the second site visit, and the trust deficit you spend with whoever owns the asset when the fix does not hold. That framing keeps the next on-call from choosing the cheap-looking shortcut that ends up costing the most in elapsed hours and goodwill.

Related guides worth a look while you sort this one out:

People also ask

Will this work on my specific Arista EOS version?

The procedure reflects current Arista EOS behaviour. Older releases may need minor syntax adjustments. use the CLI help (`?` or tab-completion) to verify.

Should I open a Arista TAC case immediately?

Open one if you suspect hardware failure or the symptom persists after a maintenance-window reload. Make sure your support entitlement is active first.

Where can I find the Arista official documentation?

https://www.arista.com/en/support/toi, search the product family + feature name.

Is this procedure safe in production?

Test in a lab or maintenance window first. Capture pre-change state so you can roll back.