ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/usr-tc/archive/usr-tc.200103

Internet Message Format | 2001-03-30 | 270KB

From: "Kevin Hemsley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) Dead HiperDSPs with one Utilization LED
Date: 01 Mar 2001 14:08:33 -0700

I have two HiperDSP card sets which TCM doesn't recognize.  After a reboot,
one Utilization LED lights up - the 4th LED from the bottom is amber. Also
the Run/Fail LED is red.  These cards were operating fine as hot spares in a
different chassis, but after moving to another chassis, they wouldn't boot.
Moving the cards back to the original chassis results in the same problem.
I have tried reloading the software via the AUX port which was successful,
except the same problem is happening after the software reload.  Any ideas?

Kevin Hemsley
Systems Engineer
Microserv Computer Technologies, Inc.
[e-mail]
KB7TYA


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Randy Cosby" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) Mac Problems with Open Transport 1.1.x
Date: 05 Mar 2001 12:53:38 -0700

Here is a note from my Mac tech.  He's seeing strange problems with our
older Mac users, where the first time they log on, they don't get in.  After
that, they're fine until they reboot.   I think it's been going on for a
long
time, but he just got very annoyed about it last week.  Our radius logs
show that the user DOES authenticate successfully.

---

This is true for any Macintosh (68k or PPC) running Open Transport (version
1.1.1 and 1.1.2).

The first time they dial-up after every boot, they get an authentication
failed error.  It is successful every time after that until they restart the
computer again, where it fails the first time again.

This is generally only a problem on macs running System 7.5 to 7.6.1.  The
highest that can be installed on 68k machines is System 7.6.1.  If they are
running System 7.1, they need to install MacTCP, which does not have the
problem.  If they have System 8.1 or higher, Open Transport 1.3.1 can be
installed (I believe I noticed that Open Transport 1.3.0 had the same
problem as 1.1.1 and 1.1.2, but I don't have another computer to verify
that), which also does not have the problem.

It is a problem that exists on macs running Mac OS 8.0, because you can't
install Open Transport 1.3 or higher on Mac OS 8.0, but you can update Mac
OS 8.0 to 8.1, and then install Open Transport 1.3, then update to 1.3.1 to
correct the problem.

---

HiperARC 4.1.59-6
HiperDSP's running 2.0.60

Ideas?



-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jorge Lozano" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2001 16:51:34 -0500
Date: 05 Mar 2001 14:45:05 -0700

Hi everybody!
I was looking in my hiper ARC, and when I try to view the PPP call events, I
have a lot of messages like:

PPP Auth Failed, PAP Mismatch. PPP link down to .
PPP Auth Failed, PAP Mismatch. PPP link down to .

anybody know what means this?

Thkans,


Jorge Lozano <[e-mail]>
NA and ISSO Andinet On Line <http://www.andinet.com>
The only way to predict the future is... to create it!


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Brian Becker" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (usr-tc) Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2001 16:51:34 -0500
Date: 05 Mar 2001 15:58:12 -0600

With ours, it usually means they attempted to do chap.

SET PPP AUTHENTICATION_PREFERENCE PAP

Brian

Brian Becker
President, Poplar Bluff Internet, Inc. (www.semo.net)
Home of TotallyFabricated.com Software:
  Total Scrutinizer (www.TotalScrutinizer.com) - Tech Support Just Got Easier!
  WebGabber (www.WebGabber.com) - html-based Chat Software

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Jorge Lozano
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 3:45 PM


Hi everybody!
I was looking in my hiper ARC, and when I try to view the PPP call events, I
have a lot of messages like:

PPP Auth Failed, PAP Mismatch. PPP link down to .
PPP Auth Failed, PAP Mismatch. PPP link down to .

anybody know what means this?

Thkans,


Jorge Lozano <[e-mail]>
NA and ISSO Andinet On Line <http://www.andinet.com>
The only way to predict the future is... to create it!


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.



-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Steve Johnson <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) add ip defaultroute command
Date: 05 Mar 2001 15:17:17 -0800

I am trying to change the default route for my USR Total Control chassie.

So I enter the command like this

add ip deFAULTROUTE gaTEWAY 208.201.224.230

and I get this message back

ERROR - Specified gateway is not on a directly connected network.


Now this address is on the exact same netowork as the box.

Here is what show ip network shows.

SHOW IP  NETWORK ip SETTINGS:
Interface:                                 eth:1
Network Address:                           208.201.224.181/C
Frame Type:                                ETHERNET_II
Status:                                    ENABLED
Reconfigure Needed:                        FALSE
Mask:                                      255.255.255.0
Station:                                   208.201.224.181
Broadcast Algorithm:                       IETF
Max Reassembly Size:                       3464
WAN Type:                                  N/A
Remote IP Address:                         0.0.0.0
IP Routing Protocols:
                                            RIPV2
                                           OSPF
IP Routing Metric:                         1
RIP Interface Export Metric:               0
IP RIP Routing Policies:
                                           SEND_ROUTES
                                           SPLIT_HORIZON
                                           FLASH_UPDATE
                                           SEND_COMPAT
                                           RIPV1_RECEIVE
                                           RIPV2_RECEIVE
IP RIP Authentication Key:


Also the current default route is this

nas24>> list ip defAULTROUTE

CONFIGURED DEFAULT ROUTERS
  Address  Mask     Gateway           Metric State
  0.0.0.0  0.0.0.0  208.201.224.1     1      ENABLED


What is weird is I deleted this route once and then tried to add the same
exact default route and got the same error.

I am assuming that I have entered the syntax incorrectly.  Can someone clue
me in here =)  Thanks


-Steve




--
Steve Johnson - [e-mail]      Sonic.net, Inc.
System Administrator                    300 B Street #100
707.522.1000 (Voice)                    Santa Rosa, CA 95404
707.547.2199 (Fax)                      http://www.sonic.net/

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: mark ross <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) Basic TC Question
Date: 08 Mar 2001 21:15:28 -0800

Hi Jeff,

Not much activity on the usr-tc list lately ......

I re-read your email tonight and I had a couple more questions for
you...
What is "MPIP" ?
Any idea which version of the Netserver code seemed to work the best ?

TIA.....

Jeff Mcadams wrote:
>
> Also sprach mark ross
> >Jeff Mcadams wrote:
> >> I'll say ahead of time...the NETServer PRI is a bad idea.  They have
> >> been end-of-lifed at 3Com (read: no support at all), and had quite a
> >> few rather significant bugs in their software code at the time they
> >> were discontinued.
>
> >Are you refering to the "NETServer PRI" or "NETServer's" in general ?
>
> Uhm...I'm referring to NETServer cards in the TC chassis in general.
> Note that this doesn't necessarily cover the NETServer units which are
> not chassis based and are just generally inferior all the way around.
> To the best of my knowledge, the code base is the same for the NETServer
> card, and the NETServer PRI card that I believe you are asking about.
>
> >My understanding was that the only difference was that the "NETServer
> >PRI" was able to do ISDN calls with less overhead, somthing about an
> >enhanced packet bus and a munich daughter card...
>
> I wouldn't say less overhead.
>
> Uhm...this is gonna proly get into more than you really cared to know
> about TC chassis history.  :)
>
> Originally, the TC chassis was not capable of doing ISDN at all...it
> came out before ISDN really existed to any real degree.  You had (this
> is neglecting the age of dual modem cards, of which I still have a few
> in service believe it or not!) a channelized T1 card, modem cards and
> the NETServer card to be the gateway.  The modem cards were just that,
> modems only.  When ISDN started to become prevelent, USR/3Com came out
> with the Courier I-modem high-end consumer equipment, which was a device
> that could do either ISDN, or modem protocols over an ISDN line.  The
> decision was made that the TC chassis should have essentially the same
> capability.  The modem cards were slated to be upgraded to handle ISDN,
> and essentially be I-modems, but in the meantime, a solution was needed
> to handle ISDN calls on the current modem card software base.  The
> NETServer PRI was introduced.  The enhanced packet bus is basically
> irrelevant in this, but the NETServer PRI card did have the Munich
> daughter card, which was essentially a co-processor card that handled
> termination and signaling for ISDN in the chassis.  Essentially, the
> card handle some number of ISDN terminations in the place of the modems.
> Eventually, the modem card code was developed to handle ISDN as well as
> modem, and they became I-modems, and the Munich daughter card became
> redundant.  For some time, while the modem card code was still working
> out some of its bugs, it was a good idea to switch back to using the
> Munich daughter card to troubleshoot problems.  Eventually, since the
> development effort was being put into the modem card code, the modem
> cards became considerably more reliable and gave better performance than
> the Munich daughtercard for terminating ISDN, so pretty much everyone
> switched to using the quad cards for ISDN termination.  With the switch
> to the HiPer Arc, they don't even have the Munich daughtercard, so it
> quads and DSPs for ISDN termination, or nothing.
>
> >Looking at the 3com software matrix I don't see different versions of
> >software for the "PRI" vs "non PRI" netservers.
>
> To the best of my knowledge, they use the same code base.
>
> >So a "HiPer Arc" can just be installed in place of the Netserver card ?
> >Is the command line syntax for the HiPer Arc the same as Netserver ?
>
> Yup, the Arc would take the place of the NETServer card (minus the
> Munich daughtercard of course ;).  The syntax is radically different,
> but also rather better.  The processor on the Arc is also rather more
> powerful (a PPC 603e I believe it is, compared to the NETServer's 486)
> The NETServer started running into performance issues (the dreaded
> so-called "Quake Lag") at around 30 ports of usage (note that this is
> less than the number of ports that you'll be dealing with), and running
> it in a double-play chassis (12 quads and 2 dsps) as was originally
> suggested when the dsps were first announced was virtually suicide for
> an ISPs with any significant number of gamers.
>
> The NETServer code base was derived (very directly) from the Livingston
> ComOS code-base.  USRobotics originally had licensed ComOS from
> Livingston to use in the NETServer, USR got bought by 3Com, and
> Livingston got bought by Lucent.  3Com never did develop the "Pilgrim"
> code base (the code base of what now runs on the HiPer Arc, and several
> other 3Com products) to run on the NETServer as they promised.  Instead,
> the NETServer product was End-Of-Lifed with all of about 4 months notice
> to those of us using them.
>
> If you'd like, I can probably dig up versions of code for the NETServer
> right up until the last day that 3Com has the legal rights to work with
> the code.  I was working desperately with 3Com to find and squash a bug
> in the MPIP handling code of the NETServers...I was not successful in
> that quest.  There are other outstanding bugs in the NETServer code,
> which, due to the lack of source code access at 3Com, and that the
> product is long-dead at 3Com, will never be fixed.  Among these, the
> MPIP bug(s) I mentioned, the Quake Lag (which 3Com will claim was just a
> performance limitation inherent in the NETServer card...I think that's a
> load of hooey to this day), and probably others that I have (thankfully)
> forgotten.
>
> Anyway...if you're still reading at this point, hopefully you've got
> some idea of why you *really* *really* want to stay away from the
> NETServer.
> --
> Jeff McAdams                            Email: [e-mail]
> Head Network Administrator              Voice: [phone]
> IgLou Internet Services                        [phone]
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jeff Mcadams <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) Basic TC Question
Date: 09 Mar 2001 07:22:12 -0500

Also sprach mark ross
>I re-read your email tonight and I had a couple more questions for
>you...

>What is "MPIP" ?

Multi-link Ppp Interspan Protocol.  Its the proprietary (there is no
open standard that does this really) protocol that 3Com uses to
coordinate the bundling of multi-link ppp links that belong in the same
bundle but get connected to different access servers.

>Any idea which version of the Netserver code seemed to work the best ?

Don't really remember...I don't remember any version of code doing MPIP
anywhere near correctly.
--
Jeff McAdams                            Email: [e-mail]
Head Network Administrator              Voice: [phone]
IgLou Internet Services                        [phone]

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Mies <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) Secondary radius
Date: 11 Mar 2001 17:03:05 -0600

Today my primary radius failed, and the ARC didn't switch over to the
secondary automatically. What command setting would have been blown away
and have to be re-entered?


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Brian <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) WTB: HDM NIC ONLY!!!
Date: 12 Mar 2001 13:14:31 -0600 (CST)


If anyone has an HDM NIC and is willing to part with it, please let me
know a reasonable price.

Brian


          I'm buying used CISCO gear!!
              email me for a quote

Brian Feeny             e:[e-mail]
CCNP+Voice/ATM/Security        p:318.222.2638x109
CCDP                 f:318.221.6612
Network Administrator
ShreveNet Inc. (ASN 11881)


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Donald Baud" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) Local Out of Service on 5.x.x HARC branch
Date: 12 Mar 2001 19:23:56 -0500

I am trying to move to the 5.x.x Hiper Arc code branch but for some reason
The DSP's running in the same chassis start to show Local Out Of Service on
one or two channels after a few days of service.
The chassis is configured as a regular IP only dial-in service.

Here are my observations:
- The issue happens with all recent DSP codes (up to 2.1.9)
- The issue happens with all Hiper ARC 5.x.x (up to 5.1.99-8 including
5.0.x)
- The issue does NOT happen with Hiper Arc 4.2.x (up to 4.2.78)
- The issue happened with DMS100 and 5ESS switches connected to the DSPs
- I am running PRI with no NFAS (i.e 23 channels + D channel)
- The issue does NOT affect the PRI T1/E1 Quad Modems
- I tried NMC and HiperNMC without any difference
- In all my tests I was running ospf
- I have tried 64Megs and 128Megs HiperArc cards
- I made sure to enable ppp offloading
- the issue happens with chassis of 2 DSP's up to 10 DSPs

When the problem happens I get the Service state 8 on TCM.  If I busy/Unbusy
the DSP card the channels lock out and show a "Remote Out Of Service"
message and the PRI channels can nolonger be busied/unbusied until I reboot
the DSP card. I usually also reboot the HiperArc just in case.

I refuse to think that this is related to telco because I have been able to
repeat the issue with two different PRI providers with two different
switches. And the issue happens only with HiperArc 5.x.x (never with 4.2.x)

Donald




-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: (usr-tc) USR Netserver V34 Analog - modems question
Date: 12 Mar 2001 21:46:51 -0300


Hello.. Hei thanks for the help before.., really  change my internal ip
network, and now my Tc is working in a ip pool, without problem..

But i have a new question....
Okss..
Sometime ago, i hemember see in 3com something about the Update the TC v34
analog  modems to 56k. ( long long time ago, beta version i think)..
but now i cant see thiss...
A lot of peoples say to me, that only digital modems have or user the v90 x2
protocol.. but i have couriers modem from 3com, analog 56k v90 and x2.. (
humm i think that in TC use modems like courier....and to TC modempool have
this update..)
why the Netserver no?
How i do this??

Pleasee. some help??

thankss


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Timothy C. Bohen" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) Transition from Netserver to ARC
Date: 12 Mar 2001 22:11:47 -0500

I have been using tons of Netserver PRI's in the past and just recently got
my first Arc.

I know there is no future in the Netserver so I will continue to get more
Arcs, but I have a few issues.

Whats the easiest way to get a Arc up and running?
I have a chassis with seven DSP's and just want to do basic dialin access.
Assign DNS numbers, assign an address from a pool and authenticate against a
RADIUS server.

Thanks.



Timothy C. Bohen
CMSInter.Net / Crystal MicroSystems
============================
web   : www.cmsinter.net
email : [e-mail]
phone : [phone] x22


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: mark ross <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) USR Netserver V34 Analog - modems question
Date: 12 Mar 2001 20:02:54 -0800

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> Hello.. Hei thanks for the help before.., really  change my internal ip
> network, and now my Tc is working in a ip pool, without problem..
>
> But i have a new question....
> Okss..
> Sometime ago, i hemember see in 3com something about the Update the TC v34
> analog  modems to 56k. ( long long time ago, beta version i think)..
> but now i cant see thiss...
> A lot of peoples say to me, that only digital modems have or user the v90 x2
> protocol.. but i have couriers modem from 3com, analog 56k v90 and x2.. (
> humm i think that in TC use modems like courier....and to TC modempool have
> this update..)
> why the Netserver no?
> How i do this??
>
> Pleasee. some help??
>
> thankss
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

Hi
If you want to support x2/v90 then you must have an x2 enable key in
your netserver card. If you dont have one you will have to buy one, try
this link
To Join: mailto:[e-mail]

It will work with either the digital modems or the digital/analog
modems. I don't think it will work with the analog only modems, I have
never even seen a analog only modem. Also for the v90 to work you must
have a T-1 card in the t/c box and you t-1 line must be connected to the
digital side of your local Centeral office, A line side connection will
not work...

I hope this helps

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marshall Morgan" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) Local Out of Service on 5.x.x HARC branch
Date: 12 Mar 2001 23:30:59 -0600

I have the same setup minus the OSPF without issue on DMS100 switches (ARC
5.1.99-8 - 128M, DSP 2.1.9).

Marshall Morgan

Internet Doorway, Inc (aka NETDOOR)
http://www.netdoor.com

601.969.1434 x28 | 800.952.1570 x28 | 601.969.3629 x28 | Fax [phone]
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 6:23 PM


> I am trying to move to the 5.x.x Hiper Arc code branch but for some reason
> The DSP's running in the same chassis start to show Local Out Of Service
on
> one or two channels after a few days of service.
> The chassis is configured as a regular IP only dial-in service.
>
> Here are my observations:
> - The issue happens with all recent DSP codes (up to 2.1.9)
> - The issue happens with all Hiper ARC 5.x.x (up to 5.1.99-8 including
> 5.0.x)
> - The issue does NOT happen with Hiper Arc 4.2.x (up to 4.2.78)
> - The issue happened with DMS100 and 5ESS switches connected to the DSPs
> - I am running PRI with no NFAS (i.e 23 channels + D channel)
> - The issue does NOT affect the PRI T1/E1 Quad Modems
> - I tried NMC and HiperNMC without any difference
> - In all my tests I was running ospf
> - I have tried 64Megs and 128Megs HiperArc cards
> - I made sure to enable ppp offloading
> - the issue happens with chassis of 2 DSP's up to 10 DSPs
>
> When the problem happens I get the Service state 8 on TCM.  If I
busy/Unbusy
> the DSP card the channels lock out and show a "Remote Out Of Service"
> message and the PRI channels can nolonger be busied/unbusied until I
reboot
> the DSP card. I usually also reboot the HiperArc just in case.
>
> I refuse to think that this is related to telco because I have been able
to
> repeat the issue with two different PRI providers with two different
> switches. And the issue happens only with HiperArc 5.x.x (never with
4.2.x)
>
> Donald



-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marshall Morgan" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) Transition from Netserver to ARC
Date: 13 Mar 2001 02:00:35 -0600

goes a little something like this .... (version 5.1.99-8 mostly) ... please
change the servers!

=== CONSOLE ==
add ip net ip address 208.148.192.36/255.255.255.128 inter eth:1 enable y
add ip defAULTROUTE gaTEWAY 208.148.192.1 metric 1
add user "administrator" password "XXXXXX" type login,manage enable y
disablE nmC chASSIS_AWARENESS
set chassis slot 1-14 o y card_type hdm_24 ports 24 console n type static
enable secURITY_OPTION rEMOTE_USER_ADMINISTRATION tELNET
add snMP community public acCESS ro adDRESS 0.0.0.0
set modem_group all message ""
set modem_group all prompt "\nlogin: "
disaBLE auTHENTICATION lOCAL
set authENTICATION vSA enable
set accounTING vsA enable
set accountING loG_UNAUTHENTICATED_CALLS enABLED
enable ip security_option disallow_source_route_options
set commAND logiN_REQUIRED yes
set radiUS authENTICATION_ALGORITHM falL_THROUGH
add dns server 208.137.128.x preference 1
add dns server 208.137.128.y preference 2
set dns domain_name netdoor.com
set ntp primary_server ntp.netdoor.com
enable ntp
set ppp ccP_MODEMTYPE_ACCEPT all
set ppp reCEIVE_AUTHENTICATION pap
set ppp DNS_USAGE system
set ppp authentication_preference pap
enable ppp offloading
add ip pool ippool INITIAL_POOL_ADDRESS 208.148.211.1 size 252 route
aggregate state public
set authentication primary_server 208.137.128.x
set authentication secondary_server 208.137.128.x
set accounting primary_server 208.137.128.x
set accounting secondary_server 208.148.196.x
set authentication primary_secret blahblah
set authentication secondary_secret blahblah
set accounting primary_secret blahblah
set accounting secondary_secret blahblah
add sysLOG 208.137.128.x aLLOW_ALL_AUTH_LEVELS n faCILITY log_auth logleVEL
crITICAL
========================

a Cisco would then route the ARC (208.148.192.36) the network
208.148.211.0/255.255.255.0 in our env


GOOD LUCK!

Marshall Morgan

Internet Doorway, Inc (aka NETDOOR)
http://www.netdoor.com

601.969.1434 x28 | 800.952.1570 x28 | 601.969.3629 x28 | Fax [phone]
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 9:11 PM


> I have been using tons of Netserver PRI's in the past and just recently
got
> my first Arc.
>
> I know there is no future in the Netserver so I will continue to get more
> Arcs, but I have a few issues.
>
> Whats the easiest way to get a Arc up and running?
> I have a chassis with seven DSP's and just want to do basic dialin access.
> Assign DNS numbers, assign an address from a pool and authenticate against
a
> RADIUS server.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> Timothy C. Bohen
> CMSInter.Net / Crystal MicroSystems
> ============================
> web   : www.cmsinter.net
> email : [e-mail]
> phone : [phone] x22
>
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>
>


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) Local Out of Service on 5.x.x HARC branch
Date: 13 Mar 2001 02:38:27 -0800 (PST)

On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, Donald Baud wrote:
> I am trying to move to the 5.x.x Hiper Arc code branch but for some reason
> The DSP's running in the same chassis start to show Local Out Of Service on
> one or two channels after a few days of service.
> The chassis is configured as a regular IP only dial-in service.

I just found one of my channels in this state, it was channel 1 of a
.49 hardware, 2.1.9 software card.

--
Aaron Nabil


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Rob" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) !Root Password question and version info
Date: 13 Mar 2001 08:28:43 -0500

In the course of reorganizing our POP, we have cleverly mixed up all the TC
boxes and lost the !root passwords. Our goal is to reset the passwords on
the units without erasing the other flashed configuration information (v90)
and to pull the v34 units from service. My questions then are:

(1) Will enabling Dip Switch 5 erase our v90 flash as well as reset the
password (obviously not what we want)? If so, is there another way to reset
the !root password (maybe using the adm account?) without losing our v90
flash?
(2) Short of reconnecting the entire unit, is there a way to determine if
the unit is v90 flashed or just v34 (like a version number, maybe?)?

Thanks - in advance - for any help.

Rob




-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) !Root Password question and version info
Date: 13 Mar 2001 08:05:13 -0700

At 08:28 AM 3/13/01 -0500, you wrote:
>In the course of reorganizing our POP, we have cleverly mixed up all the TC
>boxes and lost the !root passwords. Our goal is to reset the passwords on
>the units without erasing the other flashed configuration information (v90)
>and to pull the v34 units from service. My questions then are:
>
>(1) Will enabling Dip Switch 5 erase our v90 flash as well as reset the
>password (obviously not what we want)? If so, is there another way to reset
>the !root password (maybe using the adm account?) without losing our v90
>flash?
>(2) Short of reconnecting the entire unit, is there a way to determine if
>the unit is v90 flashed or just v34 (like a version number, maybe?)?

Rob,
The v90 enabler is on the nmc not the netserver.  The !root password is
needed to get into the netserver not the nmc.  For that use the console
cable and set the password.  The dip switch 5 does not erase the v.90 enabling
code.  You will however have to reconfigure the nmc or the netserver, ie setting
the ip address, gateway etc when you use switch #5, after saving everything
make sure you pull the card and put switch 5 back otherwise it will forget
what you just configured.  Total control manager is used to check the enabling
go to configure / program settings / added cost features
I am unsure about arc configurations as we don't use them.
eric




>
>Thanks - in advance - for any help.
>
>Rob
>
>
>
>
>-
> To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Timothy C. Bohen" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (usr-tc) Transition from Netserver to ARC
Date: 13 Mar 2001 12:24:25 -0500

Thanks everyone who answered this for me, all the replys were very helpful.



Timothy C. Bohen
CMSInter.Net / Crystal MicroSystems
===================================
web   : www.cmsinter.net
email : [e-mail]
phone : [phone] x22


-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Timothy C. Bohen
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 10:12 PM


I have been using tons of Netserver PRI's in the past and just recently got
my first Arc.

I know there is no future in the Netserver so I will continue to get more
Arcs, but I have a few issues.

Whats the easiest way to get a Arc up and running?
I have a chassis with seven DSP's and just want to do basic dialin access.
Assign DNS numbers, assign an address from a pool and authenticate against a
RADIUS server.

Thanks.



Timothy C. Bohen
CMSInter.Net / Crystal MicroSystems
============================
web   : www.cmsinter.net
email : [e-mail]
phone : [phone] x22


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Donald Baud" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) Local Out of Service on 5.x.x HARC branch
Date: 13 Mar 2001 14:40:27 -0500

I have tried all kinds of DSP cards .49 .51 and .53
At this point, I am suspecting ospf being the cause of this since Marshall
Morgan says he does not see this behaviour on a non ospf hiperarc setup.
If anyone is running ospf without any problems, let me know so I don't start
converting to RIP for nothing.

One other observation:
- Once a channel is stuck in LocalOutOfService, any further call beyond that
channel on the PRI gives a fast busy signal

Donald


> On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, Donald Baud wrote:
>
> I just found one of my channels in this state, it was channel 1 of a
> .49 hardware, 2.1.9 software card.
>
> --
> Aaron Nabil
>
> > I am trying to move to the 5.x.x Hiper Arc code branch but for some
reason
> > The DSP's running in the same chassis start to show Local Out Of Service
> on
> > one or two channels after a few days of service.
> > The chassis is configured as a regular IP only dial-in service.
> >
> > Here are my observations:
> > - The issue happens with all recent DSP codes (up to 2.1.9)
> > - The issue happens with all Hiper ARC 5.x.x (up to 5.1.99-8 including
> > 5.0.x)
> > - The issue does NOT happen with Hiper Arc 4.2.x (up to 4.2.78)
> > - The issue happened with DMS100 and 5ESS switches connected to the DSPs
> > - I am running PRI with no NFAS (i.e 23 channels + D channel)
> > - The issue does NOT affect the PRI T1/E1 Quad Modems
> > - I tried NMC and HiperNMC without any difference
> > - In all my tests I was running ospf
> > - I have tried 64Megs and 128Megs HiperArc cards
> > - I made sure to enable ppp offloading
> > - the issue happens with chassis of 2 DSP's up to 10 DSPs
> >
> > When the problem happens I get the Service state 8 on TCM.  If I
> busy/Unbusy
> > the DSP card the channels lock out and show a "Remote Out Of Service"
> > message and the PRI channels can nolonger be busied/unbusied until I
> reboot
> > the DSP card. I usually also reboot the HiperArc just in case.
> >
> > I refuse to think that this is related to telco because I have been able
> to
> > repeat the issue with two different PRI providers with two different
> > switches. And the issue happens only with HiperArc 5.x.x (never with
> 4.2.x)
> >
> > Donald



-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jeff Mcadams <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) Local Out of Service on 5.x.x HARC branch
Date: 13 Mar 2001 14:55:45 -0500

Also sprach Donald Baud
>I have tried all kinds of DSP cards .49 .51 and .53 At this point, I am
>suspecting ospf being the cause of this since Marshall Morgan says he
>does not see this behaviour on a non ospf hiperarc setup.  If anyone is
>running ospf without any problems, let me know so I don't start
>converting to RIP for nothing.

I find it hard to believe that much of anything on the Arc could be
causing channels to be going to LocalOutOfService.  Do you have any
autoresponse stuff set up on the NMC?  That's the only thing I can think
of there.

>One other observation:
>- Once a channel is stuck in LocalOutOfService, any further call beyond
>that channel on the PRI gives a fast busy signal

Sounds like you're running NI-2 translation on it.  NI-2 doesn't have
service message, so the switch doesn't know the channel is
LocalOutOfService, so it keeps sending calls down that channel.  The DSP
does the only thing it knows to do and rejects the call resulting in the
fast busy.  Switch to a custom-5ESS or custom-DMS100 (or whatever switch
type your telco has) and you should be able to get service messages and
get the behaviour you're expecting here (LocalOutOfService channels get
skipped)
--
Jeff McAdams                            Email: [e-mail]
Head Network Administrator              Voice: [phone]
IgLou Internet Services                        [phone]

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: (usr-tc) t1 service considerations with ami/sf
Date: 13 Mar 2001 13:45:15 -0700

Our local podunk (sp) phone company can now deliver phone lines to
me on t1s, with Super Frame and AMI encoding.  vs all our other
pops which are PRI based.  What are my quality of service
expectations for sf/ami?  This an upgrade in their CO from
regular pots lines which we have been using for quite some time.
My bottom line is to now be able to deliver x2/v90 to my customers
vs the v.34 connections I have been  giving them. Will I or
my customers notice the difference in quality vs a pri based system?
thanks
eric




-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Mark Thornton" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) t1 service considerations with ami/sf
Date: 13 Mar 2001 15:08:49 -0600

I can't speak to the ami/sf specifically, but our b8zs/esf lines show a
connect speed of about 2 kbits/sec slower than our PRI's. This difference is
pretty consistent across every time I make the comparison. We haven't
noticed any difference in the stability of the connection though. PRI's are
very expensive here so we cannot afford them on all of our lines, only those
doing ISDN.

Mark Thornton
San Marcos Internet, Inc.
512-393-5300


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 2:45 PM


> Our local podunk (sp) phone company can now deliver phone lines to
> me on t1s, with Super Frame and AMI encoding.  vs all our other
> pops which are PRI based.  What are my quality of service
> expectations for sf/ami?  This an upgrade in their CO from
> regular pots lines which we have been using for quite some time.
> My bottom line is to now be able to deliver x2/v90 to my customers
> vs the v.34 connections I have been  giving them. Will I or
> my customers notice the difference in quality vs a pri based system?
> thanks
> eric
>
>
>
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Donald Baud" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) Local Out of Service on 5.x.x HARC branch
Date: 13 Mar 2001 17:05:21 -0500

Hello,

- I have tried several NMCs (including HiperNMC) none of them had anything
customised other than the snmp community strings.  BTW, I do have chassis
awareness enabled on the HARC.

- I had suspected in the past an NI-2 issue but how do you explain that when
I "manually" busy out a channel, the switch skips the channel correctly ?
It is only when the DSP locks into LOOS that I get a fast busy.

- One thing I forgot to mention is that some dial-in users (very few) get a
Radius Attribute of Tunnel-Server-Endpoint.  In other words, the HiperArc is
acting as a LAC for an L2TP tunnel.  This is probably unrelated but at this
point I am suspecting anything...

- One of 3com tech support did acknowledge the issue a while ago, he sent me
a special HARC code (5.0.81) but it did not fix the problem. He suggested I
go back to 4.2.73
I'm just curious on what exactly is causing this behaviour

Donald

> Also sprach Donald Baud
>
> I find it hard to believe that much of anything on the Arc could be
> causing channels to be going to LocalOutOfService.  Do you have any
> autoresponse stuff set up on the NMC?  That's the only thing I can think
> of there.
>
> >One other observation:
> >- Once a channel is stuck in LocalOutOfService, any further call beyond
> >that channel on the PRI gives a fast busy signal
>
> Sounds like you're running NI-2 translation on it.  NI-2 doesn't have
> service message, so the switch doesn't know the channel is
> LocalOutOfService, so it keeps sending calls down that channel.  The DSP
> does the only thing it knows to do and rejects the call resulting in the
> fast busy.  Switch to a custom-5ESS or custom-DMS100 (or whatever switch
> type your telco has) and you should be able to get service messages and
> get the behaviour you're expecting here (LocalOutOfService channels get
> skipped)
> --
> Jeff McAdams                            Email: [e-mail]
> Head Network Administrator              Voice: [phone]
> IgLou Internet Services                        [phone]
>
>---- Original message ----------------
> I am trying to move to the 5.x.x Hiper Arc code branch but for some reason
> The DSP's running in the same chassis start to show Local Out Of Service
on
> one or two channels after a few days of service.
> The chassis is configured as a regular IP only dial-in service.
>
> Here are my observations:
> - The issue happens with all recent DSP codes (up to 2.1.9)
> - The issue happens with all Hiper ARC 5.x.x (up to 5.1.99-8 including
> 5.0.x)
> - The issue does NOT happen with Hiper Arc 4.2.x (up to 4.2.78)
> - The issue happened with DMS100 and 5ESS switches connected to the DSPs
> - I am running PRI with no NFAS (i.e 23 channels + D channel)
> - The issue does NOT affect the PRI T1/E1 Quad Modems
> - I tried NMC and HiperNMC without any difference
> - In all my tests I was running ospf
> - I have tried 64Megs and 128Megs HiperArc cards
> - I made sure to enable ppp offloading
> - the issue happens with chassis of 2 DSP's up to 10 DSPs
>
> When the problem happens I get the Service state 8 on TCM.  If I
busy/Unbusy
> the DSP card the channels lock out and show a "Remote Out Of Service"
> message and the PRI channels can nolonger be busied/unbusied until I
reboot
> the DSP card. I usually also reboot the HiperArc just in case.
>
> I refuse to think that this is related to telco because I have been able
to
> repeat the issue with two different PRI providers with two different
> switches. And the issue happens only with HiperArc 5.x.x (never with
4.2.x)
>



-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Cheryl Johnson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 14 Mar 2001 12:15:58 -0500

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_01F2_01C0AC80.872A6DB0
Content-Type: text/plain;
    charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Well its been a while since I have been on the list. I save the messages =
and go back and read whenever possible. Seems as though some modem =
manufacturer's are supposively now selling v.92 modems. My question is, =
has anyone seen any software for the TC Chassis that supports the new =
feature? I am just looking ahead. We have had a few customers ask if we =
supported it but not to many at this point. Anyone heard any news on =
this lately? I have this strange feeling this is only going to be =
offered on the new line of TC 1000.=20

CJ
Network Admin
SEI Communications
[e-mail]=20



------=_NextPart_000_01F2_01C0AC80.872A6DB0
Content-Type: text/html;
    charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>

<META content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Diso-8859-1 =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D'"MSHTML 4.72.3110.7"' name=3DGENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial size=3D2>Well its been a while =
since I have=20
been on the list. I save the messages and go back and read whenever =
possible.=20
Seems as though some modem manufacturer's are supposively now selling =
v.92=20
modems. My question is, has anyone seen any software for the TC Chassis =
that=20
supports the new feature? I am just looking ahead. We have had a few =
customers=20
ask if we supported it but not to many at this point. Anyone heard any =
news on=20
this lately? I have this strange feeling this is only going to be =
offered on the=20
new line of TC 1000. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial size=3D2>CJ</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>Network Admin</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial size=3D2>SEI =
Communications</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT><FONT =
face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"mailto:[e-mail]">[e-mail]</A> =
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial =
size=3D2></FONT> </DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_01F2_01C0AC80.872A6DB0--


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Curt Shambeau <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 14 Mar 2001 11:42:57 -0600 (CST)

> Well its been a while since I have been on the list. I save the
> messages and go back and read whenever possible. Seems as though some
> modem manufacturer's are supposively now selling v.92 modems. My
> question is, has anyone seen any software for the TC Chassis that
> supports the new feature? I am just looking ahead. We have had a few
> customers ask if we supported it but not to many at this point. Anyone
> heard any news on this lately? I have this strange feeling this is only
> going to be offered on the new line of TC 1000.

If you mean it won't be offered on Quad Modem, I would guess the same.
But TC1000 is really just a new name for all the total control gear out
there.  It really isn't anything new.

As far as news from 3COM... My rep has said he thinks general release of
v92 code will be sometime June/July.

| Curtis V. Shambeau  |  [e-mail] |  Sr Vice President |
|  CoreComm, LTD, formerly Voyager.net and ExecPC - Wisconsin Office    |
|    "Those who can't laugh at themselves leave the job to others"      |


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Cheryl Johnson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 14 Mar 2001 14:13:13 -0500

Thanks for the info on the date. I think the 1000 have a different midplane
as opposed to the older TC Chassis? It seemed to have a totally different
architecture. I thought I read that somewhere on 3com/Commworks page. I
haven't looked into it too much though.

-----Original Message-----


>> Well its been a while since I have been on the list. I save the
>> messages and go back and read whenever possible. Seems as though some
>> modem manufacturer's are supposively now selling v.92 modems. My
>> question is, has anyone seen any software for the TC Chassis that
>> supports the new feature? I am just looking ahead. We have had a few
>> customers ask if we supported it but not to many at this point. Anyone
>> heard any news on this lately? I have this strange feeling this is only
>> going to be offered on the new line of TC 1000.
>
>If you mean it won't be offered on Quad Modem, I would guess the same.
>But TC1000 is really just a new name for all the total control gear out
>there.  It really isn't anything new.
>
>As far as news from 3COM... My rep has said he thinks general release of
>v92 code will be sometime June/July.
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>| Curtis V. Shambeau  |  [e-mail] |  Sr Vice President |
>|  CoreComm, LTD, formerly Voyager.net and ExecPC - Wisconsin Office    |
>|    "Those who can't laugh at themselves leave the job to others"      |
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>-
> To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jeff Mcadams <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 14 Mar 2001 15:22:16 -0500

Also sprach Cheryl Johnson
>Thanks for the info on the date. I think the 1000 have a different
>midplane as opposed to the older TC Chassis? It seemed to have a
>totally different architecture. I thought I read that somewhere on
>3com/Commworks page. I haven't looked into it too much though.

The TC 1000 is the chassis with the integrated fan tray.  The old school
chassis (without the integrated chassis) are basically compatible with
what's now the TC 1000, but lower capacity (fewer timeslots on TDM,
slower packet bus I believe, etc.) but otherwise is basically the
same...cards are swappable between the two chassis etc.

There is now (I think) also a TC 2000 that's a wholy new product, and to
the best of my knowledge, can't swap cards with the TC 1000 or older
non-integrated-fan-tray chassis.  I haven't ever messed with a TC 2000
at all.

Re: v.92, v.44, and v.59 on quads...if 3Com/Commworks doesn't offer an
upgrade to it, they're going to get an earful...won't be the first
earful they've gotten from me, and probably won't be the last either.

I don't think IgLou is unusual in this respect, but a significant
majority of our dial-in modems are still quads.  For 3Com/Commworks to
forsake this installed base, while being par for the course for
3Com/Commworks, isn't just shooting themselves in the foot, its more
tantamount to unloading a full clip on full automatic into their own
foot.
--
Jeff McAdams                            Email: [e-mail]
Head Network Administrator              Voice: [phone]
IgLou Internet Services                        [phone]

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Ronald Kushner <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 14 Mar 2001 16:44:21 -0500



Jeff Mcadams wrote:
>
> There is now (I think) also a TC 2000 that's a wholy new product, and to
> the best of my knowledge, can't swap cards with the TC 1000 or older
> non-integrated-fan-tray chassis.  I haven't ever messed with a TC 2000
> at all.

The TC-2000 junk is much bigger than the Bay Networks 5000MSX chassis,
and uses blades just like the 5000MSX did. Just the TC-2000 is much
higher capacity than Bay ever had in the 5000 chassis w/5399 cards.

I'd have to say the TC-2000 was designed with AT&T or AOL in mind.
Nothing most people with TC-1000's would be interested in.

-Ron

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Curt Shambeau <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 14 Mar 2001 16:01:54 -0600 (CST)

> > There is now (I think) also a TC 2000 that's a wholy new product, and to
> > the best of my knowledge, can't swap cards with the TC 1000 or older
> > non-integrated-fan-tray chassis.  I haven't ever messed with a TC 2000
> > at all.
>
> The TC-2000 junk is much bigger than the Bay Networks 5000MSX chassis,
> and uses blades just like the 5000MSX did. Just the TC-2000 is much
> higher capacity than Bay ever had in the 5000 chassis w/5399 cards.
>
> I'd have to say the TC-2000 was designed with AT&T or AOL in mind.
> Nothing most people with TC-1000's would be interested in.

Actually, the TC-2000 is designed with VOIP and transaction calls in mind.
It is being released as a VOIP box, and later will act as a RAS box.
I don't care who you are, there aren't too many POPs large enough to
warrant the need of a TC-2000 for RAS.

Our largest POP is in Milwaukee, and I could almost fit the whole city's
worth of dial in on one single TC-2000.  I would never do that for reasons
of equipment failure in any case.

The first chassis is the control chassis.  You can (I believe) fit 7 DS3's
worth of lines on it.  You can then link 5 additional chassis to the first
control chassis.  Each of them can have 14 DS3's worth of lines.  That's
2156 DS1's or 51,744 lines (in the case of CHT1).  And that all fits in 2
standard 19" racks.

Quite impressive, but not all that realistic for just about every ISP out
there.

The TC-1000 with DS3 ingress card and Quad-DSP cards is a much more likely
scenario for 99% of the POPs out there, including AOL and AT&T.

I wouldn't mind playing with one just for the fun of it, though... <grin>


| Curtis V. Shambeau  |  [e-mail] |  Sr Vice President |
|  CoreComm, LTD, formerly Voyager.net and ExecPC - Wisconsin Office    |
|    "Those who can't laugh at themselves leave the job to others"      |



-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dale Hege <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 15 Mar 2001 17:45:11 -0500 (EST)



On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Jeff Mcadams wrote:

> Also sprach Cheryl Johnson
> >Thanks for the info on the date. I think the 1000 have a different
> >midplane as opposed to the older TC Chassis? It seemed to have a
> >totally different architecture. I thought I read that somewhere on
> >3com/Commworks page. I haven't looked into it too much though.
>
> The TC 1000 is the chassis with the integrated fan tray.  The old school
> chassis (without the integrated chassis) are basically compatible with
> what's now the TC 1000, but lower capacity (fewer timeslots on TDM,
> slower packet bus I believe, etc.) but otherwise is basically the
> same...cards are swappable between the two chassis etc.
>
> There is now (I think) also a TC 2000 that's a wholy new product, and to
> the best of my knowledge, can't swap cards with the TC 1000 or older
> non-integrated-fan-tray chassis.  I haven't ever messed with a TC 2000
> at all.
>
> Re: v.92, v.44, and v.59 on quads...if 3Com/Commworks doesn't offer an
> upgrade to it, they're going to get an earful...won't be the first
> earful they've gotten from me, and probably won't be the last either.
>
> I don't think IgLou is unusual in this respect, but a significant
> majority of our dial-in modems are still quads.  For 3Com/Commworks to
> forsake this installed base, while being par for the course for
> 3Com/Commworks, isn't just shooting themselves in the foot, its more
> tantamount to unloading a full clip on full automatic into their own
> foot.

The really sad thing is I was told by my vendor this afternoon that v.92
will only be supported on the 96Port dsps. Also that the chassis with fan
tray will not support the 96Port cards you need to buy the TC1000
Enhanced chassis. :(


-Dale

> --
> Jeff McAdams                            Email: [e-mail]
> Head Network Administrator              Voice: [phone]
> IgLou Internet Services                        [phone]
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Mike Andrews <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 15 Mar 2001 18:21:20 -0500 (EST)

On Thu, 15 Mar 2001, Dale Hege wrote:

> The really sad thing is I was told by my vendor this afternoon that v.92
> will only be supported on the 96Port dsps. Also that the chassis with fan
> tray will not support the 96Port cards you need to buy the TC1000
> Enhanced chassis. :(

Well, that would sure piss me off...  I wasn't planning on buying any of
those anytime soon.  I figured the codebase for the 24 port vs 96 port
cards is similar enough that they should both support it.  Quads I can
kinda-understand...  it's not a big deal to us as we just pulled our last
Quads out of service last week (hey Jeff, want a pair of Dual PRI cards?)
but I can see where that would annoy folks.  I think they've said they're
not going to do v.92 on the Couriers either (which would kinda explain why
it's not on Quads either) -- still seems a bit odd tho.

Odder still is that nobody at 3Com seems to want to give a definitive
answer here.  This has been asked before and nobody ever got a good
answer.  I'm not in a huge rush for v.92 (though I DO wanna see v.59) but
it'd be nice to know what to tell customers that ask.


Mike Andrews * [e-mail] * [e-mail] * http://www.bit0.com
VP, sysadmin, & network guy, Digital Crescent Inc, Frankfort KY
Internet access for Frankfort, Lexington, Louisville and surrounding counties
www.fark.com: If it's not news, it's Fark.  (Or something like that.)


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Ronald Kushner <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 15 Mar 2001 18:37:23 -0500



Dale Hege wrote:
>
> The really sad thing is I was told by my vendor this afternoon that v.92
> will only be supported on the 96Port dsps. Also that the chassis with fan
> tray will not support the 96Port cards you need to buy the TC1000
> Enhanced chassis. :(

Sounds like someone is trying to sell you some hardware. I'll personally
drive to Chicago and burn down the 3Com building if the HiPer DSP cards
do not support V.92.

-Ron

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Andrew \(NetFlash System Administrator\)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 15 Mar 2001 20:27:51 -0500

Just to have my say,  All v.90 modems and our equipment should support the
v.92 protocol.  Our modems are digital, and we are only changing a protocol,
our modems are flash capable, so there shouldn't be a issue other then price
for the modem code update.

Andrew

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Ronald Kushner
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 6:37 PM




Dale Hege wrote:
>
> The really sad thing is I was told by my vendor this afternoon that v.92
> will only be supported on the 96Port dsps. Also that the chassis with fan
> tray will not support the 96Port cards you need to buy the TC1000
> Enhanced chassis. :(

Sounds like someone is trying to sell you some hardware. I'll personally
drive to Chicago and burn down the 3Com building if the HiPer DSP cards
do not support V.92.

-Ron

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Lance Eves" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 15 Mar 2001 20:12:28 -0600

Is there not anyone besides myself that has the 96 port cards?  As far as I
can tell they integrate in just fine with everything else.  Of course there
is the code upgrade....  The newer chassis has a bigger and badder (or is
that more bad) ARC and NMC, and I believe that the backplane is also
enhanced.  I played around with it all when I got the new chassis.  It all
seems to play nice with one another in one of the older chassis that I have.
Of course when it was all said and done, I put all the pieces back in the
enhanced chassis and put it into production.  I have the 96 port and 7-24
port DSP cards in the chassis and it is all working like a charm.

Lance



> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail]
> [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Ronald Kushner
> Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 5:37 PM
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
>
>
>
>
> Dale Hege wrote:
> >
> > The really sad thing is I was told by my vendor this afternoon that v.92
> > will only be supported on the 96Port dsps. Also that the
> chassis with fan
> > tray will not support the 96Port cards you need to buy the TC1000
> > Enhanced chassis. :(
>
> Sounds like someone is trying to sell you some hardware. I'll personally
> drive to Chicago and burn down the 3Com building if the HiPer DSP cards
> do not support V.92.
>
> -Ron
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Curt Shambeau <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 15 Mar 2001 20:28:43 -0600 (CST)

> The really sad thing is I was told by my vendor this afternoon that v.92
> will only be supported on the 96Port dsps. Also that the chassis with fan
> tray will not support the 96Port cards you need to buy the TC1000
> Enhanced chassis. :(

No way... Your vendor is wrong.  The code for the 24-port card and the 96
port card is the same, with only minor changes.  I doubt VERY much that
they would not release v92 for the standard HDM.

I have no idea about the Quad modems however.  I'm sure it could be done,
but I'm not sure how much R&D money 3COM will stick into quad modem cards.

| Curtis V. Shambeau  |  [e-mail] |  Sr Vice President |
|  CoreComm, LTD, formerly Voyager.net and ExecPC - Wisconsin Office    |
|    "Those who can't laugh at themselves leave the job to others"      |


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: mark ross <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 15 Mar 2001 18:18:27 -0800


Hi
By "newer chassis" are you talking about the one with the Intergrated
fan tray ? or is there something else thats newer now ?

How may t-1's can you cram into a chassis until you start running up
against I/O bandwidth of the packet bus ??

I am still using 4 of the old chassis with quads and netserver cards

just wondering ??

see ya...

Lance Eves wrote:
>
> Is there not anyone besides myself that has the 96 port cards?  As far as I
> can tell they integrate in just fine with everything else.  Of course there
> is the code upgrade....  The newer chassis has a bigger and badder (or is
> that more bad) ARC and NMC, and I believe that the backplane is also
> enhanced.  I played around with it all when I got the new chassis.  It all
> seems to play nice with one another in one of the older chassis that I have.
> Of course when it was all said and done, I put all the pieces back in the
> enhanced chassis and put it into production.  I have the 96 port and 7-24
> port DSP cards in the chassis and it is all working like a charm.
>
> Lance
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [e-mail]
> > [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Ronald Kushner
> > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 5:37 PM
> > To: [e-mail]
> > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Dale Hege wrote:
> > >
> > > The really sad thing is I was told by my vendor this afternoon that v.92
> > > will only be supported on the 96Port dsps. Also that the
> > chassis with fan
> > > tray will not support the 96Port cards you need to buy the TC1000
> > > Enhanced chassis. :(
> >
> > Sounds like someone is trying to sell you some hardware. I'll personally
> > drive to Chicago and burn down the 3Com building if the HiPer DSP cards
> > do not support V.92.
> >
> > -Ron
> >
> > -
> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jeff Mcadams <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 15 Mar 2001 22:03:03 -0500

Also sprach mark ross
>How may t-1's can you cram into a chassis until you start running up
>against I/O bandwidth of the packet bus ??

A *lot*.  I believe I remember being told 2Gbps, but that the backplane
(midplane really) was totally passive wrt the packet bus, so upping the
cards talking on the packet bus let's everything talk faster.  Depending
on the equipment you're using, the TDM bus may be the limiting factor.
If you're running your ingress lines into a NIC going straight to a NAC,
ie, not having to be shipped across the midplane at all, then you're
fine...if it has to go across the midplane though, you might end up
being limited by the timeslots in the TDM bus.

>I am still using 4 of the old chassis with quads and netserver cards

This is what 3Com/Commworks needs to realize...there's a *HUGE*
installed base of older equipment out there, and every time they EOL a
product so quickly after the End Of Sales of that product, they piss off
their customers even more.  3com/Commworks has a nasty habit of doing
this...NETServer PRI, 486 based NMC, now quads and dual-pri cards...not
to mention the absolute insanity of their support contracts...even after
3 years of screaming and yelling of people on this list.

Now 3Com/Commworks doesn't even officially monitor this list anymore.

I was wrong on one thing though, this isn't 3Com/Commworks unloading a
full clip on full automatic into their foot, this is dropping a 500 lb.
*bomb* on their foot!

Get a clue 3Com/Commworks, you've watched your stock price go *nowhere*
for 3 years now (if you factor out the influence of Palm for a short
time before the spin-off...fairly reasonably done since Palm was *never*
really a very integral part of 3Com), perhaps, just maybe, you should
consider the possibility that its because you're regularly screwing your
customers over!

>Lance Eves wrote:
>> Is there not anyone besides myself that has the 96 port cards?  As far as I
>> can tell they integrate in just fine with everything else.  Of course there
>> is the code upgrade....  The newer chassis has a bigger and badder (or is
>> that more bad) ARC and NMC, and I believe that the backplane is also
>> enhanced.  I played around with it all when I got the new chassis.  It all
>> seems to play nice with one another in one of the older chassis that I have.
>> Of course when it was all said and done, I put all the pieces back in the
>> enhanced chassis and put it into production.  I have the 96 port and 7-24
>> port DSP cards in the chassis and it is all working like a charm.
>>
>> Lance
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: [e-mail]
>> > [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Ronald Kushner
>> > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 5:37 PM
>> > To: [e-mail]
>> > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Dale Hege wrote:
>> > >
>> > > The really sad thing is I was told by my vendor this afternoon that v.92
>> > > will only be supported on the 96Port dsps. Also that the
>> > chassis with fan
>> > > tray will not support the 96Port cards you need to buy the TC1000
>> > > Enhanced chassis. :(
>> >
>> > Sounds like someone is trying to sell you some hardware. I'll personally
>> > drive to Chicago and burn down the 3Com building if the HiPer DSP cards
>> > do not support V.92.
>> >
>> > -Ron
>> >
>> > -
>> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>>
>> -
>>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>
>-
> To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

--
Jeff McAdams                            Email: [e-mail]
Head Network Administrator              Voice: [phone]
IgLou Internet Services                        [phone]

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Mark Thornton" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 15 Mar 2001 22:25:26 -0600

We need to get some clarification on the status of the V.92 and everything
else. If there is no forward growth on this product I need to begin
replacements now, as we need to expand and I am not going to put money into
new product that they will not support. The second thing I need to do is
begin going through my old Boardwatch mags and emails and compile the
evidence for a lawsuit. We were promised this hardware base was the future
and fully upgradeable. I do believe the promise was made in print and
contained text such as V.90 and 'other features'.

As another thread, does 3Com maintain any presence for support in any public
location? Even evil Microsoft provides support for many products via lurkers
on newsgroups. I was promised a new proposal for support contracts that last
time this debacle came up when we needed code but I have yet to see it. I
talked with at least six different people at 3Com who all acknowledged the
problem and indicated a solution was forthcoming. Obviously they lied. I
think 3Com is onlky building product for AOL and other ISP's of that level.
I see absolutely no commitment to support a local ISP such as mine. I regret
not having made the move to a Cisco based solution at our last major
upgrade. The support from Cisco is phenominal. They have pulled my ass out
of the fire on three seperate products very quickly, in one case building a
software release to patch a bug that paralyzed our DSL router. My
recollection of 3Com support was repeated calls, bad music, clueless techs,
too much money, pissed of customers, more clueless techs, then finally after
having blown my temper and said some really choice things being forwarded to
a tech with a clue who resolved the problem. My current plan with them is
for software only and even that was a real pain in the ass to get set up.
This is a company that doesn't want to make money. There is no other
explanation for their behavior. If the provide excellent support and code
base we grow and buy more of their product. Don't they understand that?
Instead, they are spending development time on cable headend equipment that
is of now value to me at all. It says a lot about what market and which
customers they really want.

Mark Thornton
San Marcos Internet, Inc.
512-393-5300



-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "CJ" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 16 Mar 2001 11:21:20 -0500

Well from what I know there is an older chassis that does not have the
integrated fan tray, the newer chassis with the integrated fan tray which I
think most ISPs that use TC are currently using from what I have read, and
then the brand new TC 1000, pretty blue tabs and fancy new architecture.
Yippee!! New equipment mean more money.....

And yes Jeff, I would have to agree the support contracts are ridiculious.
And they probably won't get any better.

Getting a lot of mixed ideas of if the v.92/v.44 code will be able to be
used on the 24 port DSP cards? Or will have to upgrade to the new 96 port?
Lance, above said he has tested the 96 port DSP in an older chassis. Great
for you. But haven't used this in the field. I guess, what everyone and
myself wants to know is if the 24 port DSP will be compatible for v.92, are
the new cards *really* compatible with the now older chassis (not the TC
1000), and when will we get the answers needed.

The way I see it the ISPs get screwed (excuse my french) one way or another
by the manufacturer's who supply the access equipment. They will market a
new line which will require upgrades of equipment to make more money off the
ISPs.

Fortunately, I use another type of access equipment for our larger markets.
The only thing that is supposed to be required is a simple upgrade of a
flash card and new modem code. **Knock on wood**....Never assume anything. I
am hopeful to have this up and running on this equipment by May/June. But
usually add about two to three months to the expected due date and your
usually right.  Plus working out all the bugs from the initial codes.

CJ

-----Original Message-----


>
>Hi
>By "newer chassis" are you talking about the one with the Intergrated
>fan tray ? or is there something else thats newer now ?
>
>How may t-1's can you cram into a chassis until you start running up
>against I/O bandwidth of the packet bus ??
>
>I am still using 4 of the old chassis with quads and netserver cards
>
>just wondering ??
>
>see ya...
>
>Lance Eves wrote:
>>
>> Is there not anyone besides myself that has the 96 port cards?  As far as
I
>> can tell they integrate in just fine with everything else.  Of course
there
>> is the code upgrade....  The newer chassis has a bigger and badder (or is
>> that more bad) ARC and NMC, and I believe that the backplane is also
>> enhanced.  I played around with it all when I got the new chassis.  It
all
>> seems to play nice with one another in one of the older chassis that I
have.
>> Of course when it was all said and done, I put all the pieces back in the
>> enhanced chassis and put it into production.  I have the 96 port and 7-24
>> port DSP cards in the chassis and it is all working like a charm.
>>
>> Lance
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: [e-mail]
>> > [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Ronald Kushner
>> > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 5:37 PM
>> > To: [e-mail]
>> > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Dale Hege wrote:
>> > >
>> > > The really sad thing is I was told by my vendor this afternoon that
v.92
>> > > will only be supported on the 96Port dsps. Also that the
>> > chassis with fan
>> > > tray will not support the 96Port cards you need to buy the TC1000
>> > > Enhanced chassis. :(
>> >
>> > Sounds like someone is trying to sell you some hardware. I'll
personally
>> > drive to Chicago and burn down the 3Com building if the HiPer DSP cards
>> > do not support V.92.
>> >
>> > -Ron
>> >
>> > -
>> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>>
>> -
>>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>
>-
> To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Andrew \(NetFlash System Administrator\)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) Are Hiper DSP 24 port compatibile with the old chassis
Date: 16 Mar 2001 12:03:42 -0500

I have two of the older chassis,  the ones where the fan tray's are
seperate.  I had to upgrade my NETSERVER board to the HIPER ARC, and then
everything was fine.

I have quad cards and 1 hiper DSP , with a HIPER ARC card in the old
chassis.

Andrew

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of CJ
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 11:21 AM


Well from what I know there is an older chassis that does not have the
integrated fan tray, the newer chassis with the integrated fan tray which I
think most ISPs that use TC are currently using from what I have read, and
then the brand new TC 1000, pretty blue tabs and fancy new architecture.
Yippee!! New equipment mean more money.....

And yes Jeff, I would have to agree the support contracts are ridiculious.
And they probably won't get any better.

Getting a lot of mixed ideas of if the v.92/v.44 code will be able to be
used on the 24 port DSP cards? Or will have to upgrade to the new 96 port?
Lance, above said he has tested the 96 port DSP in an older chassis. Great
for you. But haven't used this in the field. I guess, what everyone and
myself wants to know is if the 24 port DSP will be compatible for v.92, are
the new cards *really* compatible with the now older chassis (not the TC
1000), and when will we get the answers needed.

The way I see it the ISPs get screwed (excuse my french) one way or another
by the manufacturer's who supply the access equipment. They will market a
new line which will require upgrades of equipment to make more money off the
ISPs.

Fortunately, I use another type of access equipment for our larger markets.
The only thing that is supposed to be required is a simple upgrade of a
flash card and new modem code. **Knock on wood**....Never assume anything. I
am hopeful to have this up and running on this equipment by May/June. But
usually add about two to three months to the expected due date and your
usually right.  Plus working out all the bugs from the initial codes.

CJ

-----Original Message-----


>
>Hi
>By "newer chassis" are you talking about the one with the Intergrated
>fan tray ? or is there something else thats newer now ?
>
>How may t-1's can you cram into a chassis until you start running up
>against I/O bandwidth of the packet bus ??
>
>I am still using 4 of the old chassis with quads and netserver cards
>
>just wondering ??
>
>see ya...
>
>Lance Eves wrote:
>>
>> Is there not anyone besides myself that has the 96 port cards?  As far as
I
>> can tell they integrate in just fine with everything else.  Of course
there
>> is the code upgrade....  The newer chassis has a bigger and badder (or is
>> that more bad) ARC and NMC, and I believe that the backplane is also
>> enhanced.  I played around with it all when I got the new chassis.  It
all
>> seems to play nice with one another in one of the older chassis that I
have.
>> Of course when it was all said and done, I put all the pieces back in the
>> enhanced chassis and put it into production.  I have the 96 port and 7-24
>> port DSP cards in the chassis and it is all working like a charm.
>>
>> Lance
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: [e-mail]
>> > [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Ronald Kushner
>> > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 5:37 PM
>> > To: [e-mail]
>> > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Dale Hege wrote:
>> > >
>> > > The really sad thing is I was told by my vendor this afternoon that
v.92
>> > > will only be supported on the 96Port dsps. Also that the
>> > chassis with fan
>> > > tray will not support the 96Port cards you need to buy the TC1000
>> > > Enhanced chassis. :(
>> >
>> > Sounds like someone is trying to sell you some hardware. I'll
personally
>> > drive to Chicago and burn down the 3Com building if the HiPer DSP cards
>> > do not support V.92.
>> >
>> > -Ron
>> >
>> > -
>> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>>
>> -
>>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>
>-
> To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Ronald Kushner <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 16 Mar 2001 12:42:59 -0500



CJ wrote:
>
> The way I see it the ISPs get screwed (excuse my french) one way or another
> by the manufacturer's who supply the access equipment. They will market a
> new line which will require upgrades of equipment to make more money off the
> ISPs.

It appears from what I read the EOL'ed Nortel/Bay Networks 5399 card
will be getting V.92 modem code for people with support contracts, so I
can't see why 3Com wouldn't do this as well for any of their currently
supported products. If they are selling support contracts on quads or
HiPer DSPs, they should release new code for them...

-Ron

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Shawn Brown <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 16 Mar 2001 17:35:02 -0500

Informational Input regarding v.92
Hello, I want to update all the folks on this list regarding what is
happening with Total Control and V.92
This is an email from Amit Tiwari, Director of Product Management from
Commworks.

-----Original Message-----
Sent:    Friday, March 16, 2001 5:05 PM



i) V.92 will be supported on the TC 1000 chassis.
ii) V.92 will be supported via a SOFTWARE upgrade SKU on both the 24 port
HDSP
modem and the 96 port modem.

Thanks,
Amit Tiwari
Director, Product Management, Enhanced Data Systems, CommWorks, a 3Com
Company

Thanks,
Shawn Brown
Founder Source Technology

> -----Original Message-----
> From:    CJ [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> Sent:    Friday, March 16, 2001 11:21 AM
> To:    [e-mail]
> Subject:    Re: (usr-tc) V.92
>
> Well from what I know there is an older chassis that does not have the
> integrated fan tray, the newer chassis with the integrated fan tray which
> I
> think most ISPs that use TC are currently using from what I have read, and
> then the brand new TC 1000, pretty blue tabs and fancy new architecture.
> Yippee!! New equipment mean more money.....
>
> And yes Jeff, I would have to agree the support contracts are ridiculious.
> And they probably won't get any better.
>
> Getting a lot of mixed ideas of if the v.92/v.44 code will be able to be
> used on the 24 port DSP cards? Or will have to upgrade to the new 96 port?
> Lance, above said he has tested the 96 port DSP in an older chassis. Great
> for you. But haven't used this in the field. I guess, what everyone and
> myself wants to know is if the 24 port DSP will be compatible for v.92,
> are
> the new cards *really* compatible with the now older chassis (not the TC
> 1000), and when will we get the answers needed.
>
> The way I see it the ISPs get screwed (excuse my french) one way or
> another
> by the manufacturer's who supply the access equipment. They will market a
> new line which will require upgrades of equipment to make more money off
> the
> ISPs.
>
> Fortunately, I use another type of access equipment for our larger
> markets.
> The only thing that is supposed to be required is a simple upgrade of a
> flash card and new modem code. **Knock on wood**....Never assume anything.
> I
> am hopeful to have this up and running on this equipment by May/June. But
> usually add about two to three months to the expected due date and your
> usually right.  Plus working out all the bugs from the initial codes.
>
> CJ
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mark ross <[e-mail]>
> To: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
> Date: Thursday, March 15, 2001 9:38 PM
> Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
>
>
> >
> >Hi
> >By "newer chassis" are you talking about the one with the Intergrated
> >fan tray ? or is there something else thats newer now ?
> >
> >How may t-1's can you cram into a chassis until you start running up
> >against I/O bandwidth of the packet bus ??
> >
> >I am still using 4 of the old chassis with quads and netserver cards
> >
> >just wondering ??
> >
> >see ya...
> >
> >Lance Eves wrote:
> >>
> >> Is there not anyone besides myself that has the 96 port cards?  As far
> as
> I
> >> can tell they integrate in just fine with everything else.  Of course
> there
> >> is the code upgrade....  The newer chassis has a bigger and badder (or
> is
> >> that more bad) ARC and NMC, and I believe that the backplane is also
> >> enhanced.  I played around with it all when I got the new chassis.  It
> all
> >> seems to play nice with one another in one of the older chassis that I
> have.
> >> Of course when it was all said and done, I put all the pieces back in
> the
> >> enhanced chassis and put it into production.  I have the 96 port and
> 7-24
> >> port DSP cards in the chassis and it is all working like a charm.
> >>
> >> Lance
> >>
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: [e-mail]
> >> > [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Ronald Kushner
> >> > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 5:37 PM
> >> > To: [e-mail]
> >> > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Dale Hege wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > The really sad thing is I was told by my vendor this afternoon that
> v.92
> >> > > will only be supported on the 96Port dsps. Also that the
> >> > chassis with fan
> >> > > tray will not support the 96Port cards you need to buy the TC1000
> >> > > Enhanced chassis. :(
> >> >
> >> > Sounds like someone is trying to sell you some hardware. I'll
> personally
> >> > drive to Chicago and burn down the 3Com building if the HiPer DSP
> cards
> >> > do not support V.92.
> >> >
> >> > -Ron
> >> >
> >> > -
> >> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> >> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> >> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> >> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> >>
> >> -
> >>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> >>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> >>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> >>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> >
> >-
> > To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> > with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> > "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> >
>
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Seth Jacobs" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 16 Mar 2001 14:45:57 -0800

Dear Shawn,

Many thanks for the update re v.92.  It IS appreciated!  :)

Seth Jacobs
OnRamp113
A TC1000 HyperDSP/24 owner

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 2:35 PM


> Informational Input regarding v.92
> Hello, I want to update all the folks on this list regarding what is
> happening with Total Control and V.92
> This is an email from Amit Tiwari, Director of Product Management from
> Commworks.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 5:05 PM
> To: Shawn Brown
> Subject: V.92 statement
>
>
>
> i) V.92 will be supported on the TC 1000 chassis.
> ii) V.92 will be supported via a SOFTWARE upgrade SKU on both the 24 port
> HDSP
> modem and the 96 port modem.
>
> Thanks,
> Amit Tiwari
> Director, Product Management, Enhanced Data Systems, CommWorks, a 3Com
> Company
>
> Thanks,
> Shawn Brown
> Founder Source Technology
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: CJ [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 11:21 AM
> > To: [e-mail]
> > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> >
> > Well from what I know there is an older chassis that does not have the
> > integrated fan tray, the newer chassis with the integrated fan tray
which
> > I
> > think most ISPs that use TC are currently using from what I have read,
and
> > then the brand new TC 1000, pretty blue tabs and fancy new architecture.
> > Yippee!! New equipment mean more money.....
> >
> > And yes Jeff, I would have to agree the support contracts are
ridiculious.
> > And they probably won't get any better.
> >
> > Getting a lot of mixed ideas of if the v.92/v.44 code will be able to be
> > used on the 24 port DSP cards? Or will have to upgrade to the new 96
port?
> > Lance, above said he has tested the 96 port DSP in an older chassis.
Great
> > for you. But haven't used this in the field. I guess, what everyone and
> > myself wants to know is if the 24 port DSP will be compatible for v.92,
> > are
> > the new cards *really* compatible with the now older chassis (not the TC
> > 1000), and when will we get the answers needed.
> >
> > The way I see it the ISPs get screwed (excuse my french) one way or
> > another
> > by the manufacturer's who supply the access equipment. They will market
a
> > new line which will require upgrades of equipment to make more money off
> > the
> > ISPs.
> >
> > Fortunately, I use another type of access equipment for our larger
> > markets.
> > The only thing that is supposed to be required is a simple upgrade of a
> > flash card and new modem code. **Knock on wood**....Never assume
anything.
> > I
> > am hopeful to have this up and running on this equipment by May/June.
But
> > usually add about two to three months to the expected due date and your
> > usually right.  Plus working out all the bugs from the initial codes.
> >
> > CJ
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: mark ross <[e-mail]>
> > To: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
> > Date: Thursday, March 15, 2001 9:38 PM
> > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> >
> >
> > >
> > >Hi
> > >By "newer chassis" are you talking about the one with the Intergrated
> > >fan tray ? or is there something else thats newer now ?
> > >
> > >How may t-1's can you cram into a chassis until you start running up
> > >against I/O bandwidth of the packet bus ??
> > >
> > >I am still using 4 of the old chassis with quads and netserver cards
> > >
> > >just wondering ??
> > >
> > >see ya...
> > >
> > >Lance Eves wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Is there not anyone besides myself that has the 96 port cards?  As
far
> > as
> > I
> > >> can tell they integrate in just fine with everything else.  Of course
> > there
> > >> is the code upgrade....  The newer chassis has a bigger and badder
(or
> > is
> > >> that more bad) ARC and NMC, and I believe that the backplane is also
> > >> enhanced.  I played around with it all when I got the new chassis.
It
> > all
> > >> seems to play nice with one another in one of the older chassis that
I
> > have.
> > >> Of course when it was all said and done, I put all the pieces back in
> > the
> > >> enhanced chassis and put it into production.  I have the 96 port and
> > 7-24
> > >> port DSP cards in the chassis and it is all working like a charm.
> > >>
> > >> Lance
> > >>
> > >> > -----Original Message-----
> > >> > From: [e-mail]
> > >> > [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Ronald Kushner
> > >> > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 5:37 PM
> > >> > To: [e-mail]
> > >> > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Dale Hege wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > The really sad thing is I was told by my vendor this afternoon
that
> > v.92
> > >> > > will only be supported on the 96Port dsps. Also that the
> > >> > chassis with fan
> > >> > > tray will not support the 96Port cards you need to buy the TC1000
> > >> > > Enhanced chassis. :(
> > >> >
> > >> > Sounds like someone is trying to sell you some hardware. I'll
> > personally
> > >> > drive to Chicago and burn down the 3Com building if the HiPer DSP
> > cards
> > >> > do not support V.92.
> > >> >
> > >> > -Ron
> > >> >
> > >> > -
> > >> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to
"[e-mail]"
> > >> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > >> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages
send
> > >> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > >>
> > >> -
> > >>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> > >>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > >>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> > >>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > >
> > >-
> > > To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> > > with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > > For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> > > "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > >
> >
> >
> > -
> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Sheldon Koehler" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 16 Mar 2001 14:52:35 -0800

In short, all of us that have Quad Modem cards are screwed. And from what I
have been reading, there are a lot of us!

Sheldon

_____________________________
Sheldon Koehler, Founder/Partner
Ten Forward Communications
360-457-9023
http://www.tenforward.com
E-Commerce that makes sense!
http://store.tenforward.com
_____________________________

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 2:35 PM


> Informational Input regarding v.92
> Hello, I want to update all the folks on this list regarding what is
> happening with Total Control and V.92
> This is an email from Amit Tiwari, Director of Product Management from
> Commworks.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 5:05 PM
> To: Shawn Brown
> Subject: V.92 statement
>
>
>
> i) V.92 will be supported on the TC 1000 chassis.
> ii) V.92 will be supported via a SOFTWARE upgrade SKU on both the 24 port
> HDSP
> modem and the 96 port modem.
>
> Thanks,
> Amit Tiwari
> Director, Product Management, Enhanced Data Systems, CommWorks, a 3Com
> Company
>
> Thanks,
> Shawn Brown
> Founder Source Technology
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: CJ [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 11:21 AM
> > To: [e-mail]
> > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> >
> > Well from what I know there is an older chassis that does not have the
> > integrated fan tray, the newer chassis with the integrated fan tray
which
> > I
> > think most ISPs that use TC are currently using from what I have read,
and
> > then the brand new TC 1000, pretty blue tabs and fancy new architecture.
> > Yippee!! New equipment mean more money.....
> >
> > And yes Jeff, I would have to agree the support contracts are
ridiculious.
> > And they probably won't get any better.
> >
> > Getting a lot of mixed ideas of if the v.92/v.44 code will be able to be
> > used on the 24 port DSP cards? Or will have to upgrade to the new 96
port?
> > Lance, above said he has tested the 96 port DSP in an older chassis.
Great
> > for you. But haven't used this in the field. I guess, what everyone and
> > myself wants to know is if the 24 port DSP will be compatible for v.92,
> > are
> > the new cards *really* compatible with the now older chassis (not the TC
> > 1000), and when will we get the answers needed.
> >
> > The way I see it the ISPs get screwed (excuse my french) one way or
> > another
> > by the manufacturer's who supply the access equipment. They will market
a
> > new line which will require upgrades of equipment to make more money off
> > the
> > ISPs.
> >
> > Fortunately, I use another type of access equipment for our larger
> > markets.
> > The only thing that is supposed to be required is a simple upgrade of a
> > flash card and new modem code. **Knock on wood**....Never assume
anything.
> > I
> > am hopeful to have this up and running on this equipment by May/June.
But
> > usually add about two to three months to the expected due date and your
> > usually right.  Plus working out all the bugs from the initial codes.
> >
> > CJ
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: mark ross <[e-mail]>
> > To: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
> > Date: Thursday, March 15, 2001 9:38 PM
> > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> >
> >
> > >
> > >Hi
> > >By "newer chassis" are you talking about the one with the Intergrated
> > >fan tray ? or is there something else thats newer now ?
> > >
> > >How may t-1's can you cram into a chassis until you start running up
> > >against I/O bandwidth of the packet bus ??
> > >
> > >I am still using 4 of the old chassis with quads and netserver cards
> > >
> > >just wondering ??
> > >
> > >see ya...
> > >
> > >Lance Eves wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Is there not anyone besides myself that has the 96 port cards?  As
far
> > as
> > I
> > >> can tell they integrate in just fine with everything else.  Of course
> > there
> > >> is the code upgrade....  The newer chassis has a bigger and badder
(or
> > is
> > >> that more bad) ARC and NMC, and I believe that the backplane is also
> > >> enhanced.  I played around with it all when I got the new chassis.
It
> > all
> > >> seems to play nice with one another in one of the older chassis that
I
> > have.
> > >> Of course when it was all said and done, I put all the pieces back in
> > the
> > >> enhanced chassis and put it into production.  I have the 96 port and
> > 7-24
> > >> port DSP cards in the chassis and it is all working like a charm.
> > >>
> > >> Lance
> > >>
> > >> > -----Original Message-----
> > >> > From: [e-mail]
> > >> > [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Ronald Kushner
> > >> > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 5:37 PM
> > >> > To: [e-mail]
> > >> > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Dale Hege wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > The really sad thing is I was told by my vendor this afternoon
that
> > v.92
> > >> > > will only be supported on the 96Port dsps. Also that the
> > >> > chassis with fan
> > >> > > tray will not support the 96Port cards you need to buy the TC1000
> > >> > > Enhanced chassis. :(
> > >> >
> > >> > Sounds like someone is trying to sell you some hardware. I'll
> > personally
> > >> > drive to Chicago and burn down the 3Com building if the HiPer DSP
> > cards
> > >> > do not support V.92.
> > >> >
> > >> > -Ron
> > >> >
> > >> > -
> > >> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to
"[e-mail]"
> > >> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > >> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages
send
> > >> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > >>
> > >> -
> > >>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> > >>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > >>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> > >>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > >
> > >-
> > > To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> > > with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > > For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> > > "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > >
> >
> >
> > -
> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "albert" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) and what if not..??.. V.92
Date: 16 Mar 2001 17:29:05 -0600

I see all the Hoop-al about the V.92,..as far as i understand it will
not really be a great benefit to the ISP/dial-up seller,.. will it?

what i understand is it will be a 44k-48k up and 56k to the client, whereas
most of you are now 33.6 up and 56k to client,.. now i ask where is the
big advantage?

Now for a unit/modem pool in service as a dial up to a business i can see
a slight benefit, but for internet access ??

can someone straighten me out if i am way off base please.

albert.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail]
> [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Seth Jacobs
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 4:46 PM
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
>
>
> Dear Shawn,
>
> Many thanks for the update re v.92.  It IS appreciated!  :)
>
> Seth Jacobs
> OnRamp113
> A TC1000 HyperDSP/24 owner
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Shawn Brown" <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 2:35 PM
> Subject: RE: (usr-tc) V.92
>
>
> > Informational Input regarding v.92
> > Hello, I want to update all the folks on this list regarding what is
> > happening with Total Control and V.92
> > This is an email from Amit Tiwari, Director of Product Management from
> > Commworks.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [e-mail] [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 5:05 PM
> > To: Shawn Brown
> > Subject: V.92 statement
> >
> >
> >
> > i) V.92 will be supported on the TC 1000 chassis.
> > ii) V.92 will be supported via a SOFTWARE upgrade SKU on both
> the 24 port
> > HDSP
> > modem and the 96 port modem.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Amit Tiwari
> > Director, Product Management, Enhanced Data Systems, CommWorks, a 3Com
> > Company
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Shawn Brown
> > Founder Source Technology
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: CJ [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 11:21 AM
> > > To: [e-mail]
> > > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> > >
> > > Well from what I know there is an older chassis that does not have the
> > > integrated fan tray, the newer chassis with the integrated fan tray
> which
> > > I
> > > think most ISPs that use TC are currently using from what I have read,
> and
> > > then the brand new TC 1000, pretty blue tabs and fancy new
> architecture.
> > > Yippee!! New equipment mean more money.....
> > >
> > > And yes Jeff, I would have to agree the support contracts are
> ridiculious.
> > > And they probably won't get any better.
> > >
> > > Getting a lot of mixed ideas of if the v.92/v.44 code will be
> able to be
> > > used on the 24 port DSP cards? Or will have to upgrade to the new 96
> port?
> > > Lance, above said he has tested the 96 port DSP in an older chassis.
> Great
> > > for you. But haven't used this in the field. I guess, what
> everyone and
> > > myself wants to know is if the 24 port DSP will be compatible
> for v.92,
> > > are
> > > the new cards *really* compatible with the now older chassis
> (not the TC
> > > 1000), and when will we get the answers needed.
> > >
> > > The way I see it the ISPs get screwed (excuse my french) one way or
> > > another
> > > by the manufacturer's who supply the access equipment. They
> will market
> a
> > > new line which will require upgrades of equipment to make
> more money off
> > > the
> > > ISPs.
> > >
> > > Fortunately, I use another type of access equipment for our larger
> > > markets.
> > > The only thing that is supposed to be required is a simple
> upgrade of a
> > > flash card and new modem code. **Knock on wood**....Never assume
> anything.
> > > I
> > > am hopeful to have this up and running on this equipment by May/June.
> But
> > > usually add about two to three months to the expected due
> date and your
> > > usually right.  Plus working out all the bugs from the initial codes.
> > >
> > > CJ
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: mark ross <[e-mail]>
> > > To: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
> > > Date: Thursday, March 15, 2001 9:38 PM
> > > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >Hi
> > > >By "newer chassis" are you talking about the one with the Intergrated
> > > >fan tray ? or is there something else thats newer now ?
> > > >
> > > >How may t-1's can you cram into a chassis until you start running up
> > > >against I/O bandwidth of the packet bus ??
> > > >
> > > >I am still using 4 of the old chassis with quads and netserver cards
> > > >
> > > >just wondering ??
> > > >
> > > >see ya...
> > > >
> > > >Lance Eves wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Is there not anyone besides myself that has the 96 port cards?  As
> far
> > > as
> > > I
> > > >> can tell they integrate in just fine with everything else.
>  Of course
> > > there
> > > >> is the code upgrade....  The newer chassis has a bigger and badder
> (or
> > > is
> > > >> that more bad) ARC and NMC, and I believe that the
> backplane is also
> > > >> enhanced.  I played around with it all when I got the new chassis.
> It
> > > all
> > > >> seems to play nice with one another in one of the older
> chassis that
> I
> > > have.
> > > >> Of course when it was all said and done, I put all the
> pieces back in
> > > the
> > > >> enhanced chassis and put it into production.  I have the
> 96 port and
> > > 7-24
> > > >> port DSP cards in the chassis and it is all working like a charm.
> > > >>
> > > >> Lance
> > > >>
> > > >> > -----Original Message-----
> > > >> > From: [e-mail]
> > > >> > [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of
> Ronald Kushner
> > > >> > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 5:37 PM
> > > >> > To: [e-mail]
> > > >> > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Dale Hege wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > The really sad thing is I was told by my vendor this afternoon
> that
> > > v.92
> > > >> > > will only be supported on the 96Port dsps. Also that the
> > > >> > chassis with fan
> > > >> > > tray will not support the 96Port cards you need to buy
> the TC1000
> > > >> > > Enhanced chassis. :(
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Sounds like someone is trying to sell you some hardware. I'll
> > > personally
> > > >> > drive to Chicago and burn down the 3Com building if the HiPer DSP
> > > cards
> > > >> > do not support V.92.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > -Ron
> > > >> >
> > > >> > -
> > > >> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to
> "[e-mail]"
> > > >> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > > >> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages
> send
> > > >> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > > >>
> > > >> -
> > > >>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to
> "[e-mail]"
> > > >>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > > >>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old
> messages send
> > > >>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > > >
> > > >-
> > > > To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> > > > with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > > > For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> > > > "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> > >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> > >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> >
> > -
> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Ronald Kushner <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) and what if not..??.. V.92
Date: 16 Mar 2001 19:41:30 -0500

albert wrote:
>
> I see all the Hoop-al about the V.92,..as far as i understand it will
> not really be a great benefit to the ISP/dial-up seller,.. will it?
>
> what i understand is it will be a 44k-48k up and 56k to the client, whereas
> most of you are now 33.6 up and 56k to client,.. now i ask where is the
> big advantage?
>
> Now for a unit/modem pool in service as a dial up to a business i can see
> a slight benefit, but for internet access ??
>
> can someone straighten me out if i am way off base please.

The way I see it is the customer is going to call, "I have a new V.92
modem, do you support V.92?"

Saying "Yes" and not actually having V.92 modems will cause ill will. To
try to tell them V.92 is worthless, is well, worthless. This is the
upgrade game, and let's play it to our advantage. Anyone with PM3's out
there can't upgrade either and are being forced to set up new pools for
V.92 or do a fork lift upgrade.

I spent the $$ a few years ago to get rid of all my quads. I think it
didn't cost me much since all I had to do is buy HiPer DSP cards and
they would upgrade my Quads to HiPer DSP's for free. Buy two DSP cards
and they'd upgrade 48 modems for free.. I also got rid of my Netserver
card as well.

Since I was growing fairly quickly at the time and buying hardware
anyway, it really didn't cost me a cent outside the cost of mailing back
the old Quads.

-Ron

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: mark ross <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) and what if not..??.. V.92
Date: 16 Mar 2001 18:09:23 -0800

Hi Albert,
I agree technology wise its not that big of deal, buttttt when joe
consumer shows up with his brand new shinny v.92 modem and you (or I)
can't support it, it's just one more reason for him to go across the
street...

albert wrote:
>
> I see all the Hoop-al about the V.92,..as far as i understand it will
> not really be a great benefit to the ISP/dial-up seller,.. will it?
>
> what i understand is it will be a 44k-48k up and 56k to the client, whereas
> most of you are now 33.6 up and 56k to client,.. now i ask where is the
> big advantage?
>
> Now for a unit/modem pool in service as a dial up to a business i can see
> a slight benefit, but for internet access ??
>
> can someone straighten me out if i am way off base please.
>
> albert.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [e-mail]
> > [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Seth Jacobs
> > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 4:46 PM
> > To: [e-mail]
> > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> >
> >
> > Dear Shawn,
> >
> > Many thanks for the update re v.92.  It IS appreciated!  :)
> >
> > Seth Jacobs
> > OnRamp113
> > A TC1000 HyperDSP/24 owner
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Shawn Brown" <[e-mail]>
> > To: <[e-mail]>
> > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 2:35 PM
> > Subject: RE: (usr-tc) V.92
> >
> >
> > > Informational Input regarding v.92
> > > Hello, I want to update all the folks on this list regarding what is
> > > happening with Total Control and V.92
> > > This is an email from Amit Tiwari, Director of Product Management from
> > > Commworks.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: [e-mail] [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 5:05 PM
> > > To: Shawn Brown
> > > Subject: V.92 statement
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > i) V.92 will be supported on the TC 1000 chassis.
> > > ii) V.92 will be supported via a SOFTWARE upgrade SKU on both
> > the 24 port
> > > HDSP
> > > modem and the 96 port modem.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Amit Tiwari
> > > Director, Product Management, Enhanced Data Systems, CommWorks, a 3Com
> > > Company
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Shawn Brown
> > > Founder Source Technology
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: CJ [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > > > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 11:21 AM
> > > > To: [e-mail]
> > > > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> > > >
> > > > Well from what I know there is an older chassis that does not have the
> > > > integrated fan tray, the newer chassis with the integrated fan tray
> > which
> > > > I
> > > > think most ISPs that use TC are currently using from what I have read,
> > and
> > > > then the brand new TC 1000, pretty blue tabs and fancy new
> > architecture.
> > > > Yippee!! New equipment mean more money.....
> > > >
> > > > And yes Jeff, I would have to agree the support contracts are
> > ridiculious.
> > > > And they probably won't get any better.
> > > >
> > > > Getting a lot of mixed ideas of if the v.92/v.44 code will be
> > able to be
> > > > used on the 24 port DSP cards? Or will have to upgrade to the new 96
> > port?
> > > > Lance, above said he has tested the 96 port DSP in an older chassis.
> > Great
> > > > for you. But haven't used this in the field. I guess, what
> > everyone and
> > > > myself wants to know is if the 24 port DSP will be compatible
> > for v.92,
> > > > are
> > > > the new cards *really* compatible with the now older chassis
> > (not the TC
> > > > 1000), and when will we get the answers needed.
> > > >
> > > > The way I see it the ISPs get screwed (excuse my french) one way or
> > > > another
> > > > by the manufacturer's who supply the access equipment. They
> > will market
> > a
> > > > new line which will require upgrades of equipment to make
> > more money off
> > > > the
> > > > ISPs.
> > > >
> > > > Fortunately, I use another type of access equipment for our larger
> > > > markets.
> > > > The only thing that is supposed to be required is a simple
> > upgrade of a
> > > > flash card and new modem code. **Knock on wood**....Never assume
> > anything.
> > > > I
> > > > am hopeful to have this up and running on this equipment by May/June.
> > But
> > > > usually add about two to three months to the expected due
> > date and your
> > > > usually right.  Plus working out all the bugs from the initial codes.
> > > >
> > > > CJ
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: mark ross <[e-mail]>
> > > > To: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
> > > > Date: Thursday, March 15, 2001 9:38 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >Hi
> > > > >By "newer chassis" are you talking about the one with the Intergrated
> > > > >fan tray ? or is there something else thats newer now ?
> > > > >
> > > > >How may t-1's can you cram into a chassis until you start running up
> > > > >against I/O bandwidth of the packet bus ??
> > > > >
> > > > >I am still using 4 of the old chassis with quads and netserver cards
> > > > >
> > > > >just wondering ??
> > > > >
> > > > >see ya...
> > > > >
> > > > >Lance Eves wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Is there not anyone besides myself that has the 96 port cards?  As
> > far
> > > > as
> > > > I
> > > > >> can tell they integrate in just fine with everything else.
> >  Of course
> > > > there
> > > > >> is the code upgrade....  The newer chassis has a bigger and badder
> > (or
> > > > is
> > > > >> that more bad) ARC and NMC, and I believe that the
> > backplane is also
> > > > >> enhanced.  I played around with it all when I got the new chassis.
> > It
> > > > all
> > > > >> seems to play nice with one another in one of the older
> > chassis that
> > I
> > > > have.
> > > > >> Of course when it was all said and done, I put all the
> > pieces back in
> > > > the
> > > > >> enhanced chassis and put it into production.  I have the
> > 96 port and
> > > > 7-24
> > > > >> port DSP cards in the chassis and it is all working like a charm.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Lance
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > -----Original Message-----
> > > > >> > From: [e-mail]
> > > > >> > [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of
> > Ronald Kushner
> > > > >> > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 5:37 PM
> > > > >> > To: [e-mail]
> > > > >> > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Dale Hege wrote:
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > The really sad thing is I was told by my vendor this afternoon
> > that
> > > > v.92
> > > > >> > > will only be supported on the 96Port dsps. Also that the
> > > > >> > chassis with fan
> > > > >> > > tray will not support the 96Port cards you need to buy
> > the TC1000
> > > > >> > > Enhanced chassis. :(
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Sounds like someone is trying to sell you some hardware. I'll
> > > > personally
> > > > >> > drive to Chicago and burn down the 3Com building if the HiPer DSP
> > > > cards
> > > > >> > do not support V.92.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > -Ron
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > -
> > > > >> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to
> > "[e-mail]"
> > > > >> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > > > >> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages
> > send
> > > > >> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> -
> > > > >>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to
> > "[e-mail]"
> > > > >>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > > > >>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old
> > messages send
> > > > >>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > > > >
> > > > >-
> > > > > To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> > > > > with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > > > > For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> > > > > "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> > > >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > > >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> > > >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > >
> > > -
> > >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> > >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> > >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> >
> >
> > -
> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> >
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Lists <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 17 Mar 2001 20:43:47 +1100 (EST)


> This is what 3Com/Commworks needs to realize...there's a *HUGE*
> installed base of older equipment out there, and every time they EOL a
> product so quickly after the End Of Sales of that product, they piss
> off their customers even more.  3com/Commworks has a nasty habit of
> doing this...NETServer PRI, 486 based NMC, now quads and dual-pri
> cards...not to mention the absolute insanity of their support
> contracts...even after 3 years of screaming and yelling of people on
> this list.

I must admit, if there's no V92 for Quads this will almost surely see us
convert our 1000 or so ports to Cisco.

We have no interest in HiPerDSP cards - they are too dense for us.  Quad
cards suit us *just*fine*.

We have an interest in HiPerARC server cards, but they're just too damn
expensive.  Unlike in the US, I don't believe there have been any
particularly attractive trade-up promotions here (if there were, 3COM kept
them all to themselves).

> I was wrong on one thing though, this isn't 3Com/Commworks unloading a
> full clip on full automatic into their foot, this is dropping a 500 lb.
> *bomb* on their foot!

Yeah, that about sums it up.

The only thing that keeps us with 3COM is the modems.  If they drop
support/features for the Quads we have then we have no reason to stay with
3COM.  If Cisco had USR modems (AS5100 springs to mind) we'd be gone
already.



-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Lists <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) and what if not..??.. V.92
Date: 17 Mar 2001 20:48:49 +1100 (EST)


> Since I was growing fairly quickly at the time and buying hardware
> anyway, it really didn't cost me a cent outside the cost of mailing
> back the old Quads.

That'd be nice.

Back when that was happening in the US, they were selling the same cards
here for $14k each and no trade-up deals were available...


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Mark Thornton" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 17 Mar 2001 08:55:32 -0600

What about v.44 and v.59? It doesn't end with just v.92. The customer will
expect us to be compatible with all of these for different reasons. While
v.92 has gotten the early press I fully expect v.44 to come on as the
interest in better compression grows when users don't get dsl speeds from
their dialup modems like they seem to think they wil with v.92.

I am still in a quandry over what to do. There was never really was a good
upgrade option provided when we had the cash to make a move, so now we have
a fair number of quads that continue to perform well. I have not been able
to detect any real difference to the clients between the quads or hipers so
I am not in a hurry to get rid of them. I suspect 3Com will drop them out of
the HiperArc code long before they lose value to our customers.

Mark Thornton
San Marcos Internet, Inc.
512-393-5300


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 4:35 PM


> Informational Input regarding v.92
> Hello, I want to update all the folks on this list regarding what is
> happening with Total Control and V.92
> This is an email from Amit Tiwari, Director of Product Management from
> Commworks.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 5:05 PM
> To: Shawn Brown
> Subject: V.92 statement
>
>
>
> i) V.92 will be supported on the TC 1000 chassis.
> ii) V.92 will be supported via a SOFTWARE upgrade SKU on both the 24 port
> HDSP
> modem and the 96 port modem.
>
> Thanks,
> Amit Tiwari
> Director, Product Management, Enhanced Data Systems, CommWorks, a 3Com
> Company
>
> Thanks,
> Shawn Brown
> Founder Source Technology
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: CJ [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 11:21 AM
> > To: [e-mail]
> > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> >
> > Well from what I know there is an older chassis that does not have the
> > integrated fan tray, the newer chassis with the integrated fan tray
which
> > I
> > think most ISPs that use TC are currently using from what I have read,
and
> > then the brand new TC 1000, pretty blue tabs and fancy new architecture.
> > Yippee!! New equipment mean more money.....
> >
> > And yes Jeff, I would have to agree the support contracts are
ridiculious.
> > And they probably won't get any better.
> >
> > Getting a lot of mixed ideas of if the v.92/v.44 code will be able to be
> > used on the 24 port DSP cards? Or will have to upgrade to the new 96
port?
> > Lance, above said he has tested the 96 port DSP in an older chassis.
Great
> > for you. But haven't used this in the field. I guess, what everyone and
> > myself wants to know is if the 24 port DSP will be compatible for v.92,
> > are
> > the new cards *really* compatible with the now older chassis (not the TC
> > 1000), and when will we get the answers needed.
> >
> > The way I see it the ISPs get screwed (excuse my french) one way or
> > another
> > by the manufacturer's who supply the access equipment. They will market
a
> > new line which will require upgrades of equipment to make more money off
> > the
> > ISPs.
> >
> > Fortunately, I use another type of access equipment for our larger
> > markets.
> > The only thing that is supposed to be required is a simple upgrade of a
> > flash card and new modem code. **Knock on wood**....Never assume
anything.
> > I
> > am hopeful to have this up and running on this equipment by May/June.
But
> > usually add about two to three months to the expected due date and your
> > usually right.  Plus working out all the bugs from the initial codes.
> >
> > CJ
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: mark ross <[e-mail]>
> > To: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
> > Date: Thursday, March 15, 2001 9:38 PM
> > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> >
> >
> > >
> > >Hi
> > >By "newer chassis" are you talking about the one with the Intergrated
> > >fan tray ? or is there something else thats newer now ?
> > >
> > >How may t-1's can you cram into a chassis until you start running up
> > >against I/O bandwidth of the packet bus ??
> > >
> > >I am still using 4 of the old chassis with quads and netserver cards
> > >
> > >just wondering ??
> > >
> > >see ya...
> > >
> > >Lance Eves wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Is there not anyone besides myself that has the 96 port cards?  As
far
> > as
> > I
> > >> can tell they integrate in just fine with everything else.  Of course
> > there
> > >> is the code upgrade....  The newer chassis has a bigger and badder
(or
> > is
> > >> that more bad) ARC and NMC, and I believe that the backplane is also
> > >> enhanced.  I played around with it all when I got the new chassis.
It
> > all
> > >> seems to play nice with one another in one of the older chassis that
I
> > have.
> > >> Of course when it was all said and done, I put all the pieces back in
> > the
> > >> enhanced chassis and put it into production.  I have the 96 port and
> > 7-24
> > >> port DSP cards in the chassis and it is all working like a charm.
> > >>
> > >> Lance
> > >>
> > >> > -----Original Message-----
> > >> > From: [e-mail]
> > >> > [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Ronald Kushner
> > >> > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 5:37 PM
> > >> > To: [e-mail]
> > >> > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Dale Hege wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > The really sad thing is I was told by my vendor this afternoon
that
> > v.92
> > >> > > will only be supported on the 96Port dsps. Also that the
> > >> > chassis with fan
> > >> > > tray will not support the 96Port cards you need to buy the TC1000
> > >> > > Enhanced chassis. :(
> > >> >
> > >> > Sounds like someone is trying to sell you some hardware. I'll
> > personally
> > >> > drive to Chicago and burn down the 3Com building if the HiPer DSP
> > cards
> > >> > do not support V.92.
> > >> >
> > >> > -Ron
> > >> >
> > >> > -
> > >> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to
"[e-mail]"
> > >> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > >> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages
send
> > >> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > >>
> > >> -
> > >>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> > >>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > >>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> > >>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > >
> > >-
> > > To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> > > with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > > For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> > > "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > >
> >
> >
> > -
> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Terry Kennedy" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 17 Mar 2001 08:15:02 -0800

Just a little off topic, but would anyone care to comment
what code revs you using the HiperArc, HiperDsp and Quad
modems? We are running all of these and I haven't upgraded
them in a while. With all this discusion of new code I am
also wondering if it isn't time to make a move. The service
contracts I had ran out to renew them with 3com always seemed,
well you all know.. I am running 2.0.19 on the dsp,4.2.32 on
the Arc.

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Mark Thornton
Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2001 6:56 AM


What about v.44 and v.59? It doesn't end with just v.92. The customer will
expect us to be compatible with all of these for different reasons. While
v.92 has gotten the early press I fully expect v.44 to come on as the
interest in better compression grows when users don't get dsl speeds from
their dialup modems like they seem to think they wil with v.92.

I am still in a quandry over what to do. There was never really was a good
upgrade option provided when we had the cash to make a move, so now we have
a fair number of quads that continue to perform well. I have not been able
to detect any real difference to the clients between the quads or hipers so
I am not in a hurry to get rid of them. I suspect 3Com will drop them out of
the HiperArc code long before they lose value to our customers.

Mark Thornton
San Marcos Internet, Inc.
512-393-5300


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 4:35 PM


> Informational Input regarding v.92
> Hello, I want to update all the folks on this list regarding what is
> happening with Total Control and V.92
> This is an email from Amit Tiwari, Director of Product Management from
> Commworks.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 5:05 PM
> To: Shawn Brown
> Subject: V.92 statement
>
>
>
> i) V.92 will be supported on the TC 1000 chassis.
> ii) V.92 will be supported via a SOFTWARE upgrade SKU on both the 24 port
> HDSP
> modem and the 96 port modem.
>
> Thanks,
> Amit Tiwari
> Director, Product Management, Enhanced Data Systems, CommWorks, a 3Com
> Company
>
> Thanks,
> Shawn Brown
> Founder Source Technology
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: CJ [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 11:21 AM
> > To: [e-mail]
> > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> >
> > Well from what I know there is an older chassis that does not have the
> > integrated fan tray, the newer chassis with the integrated fan tray
which
> > I
> > think most ISPs that use TC are currently using from what I have read,
and
> > then the brand new TC 1000, pretty blue tabs and fancy new architecture.
> > Yippee!! New equipment mean more money.....
> >
> > And yes Jeff, I would have to agree the support contracts are
ridiculious.
> > And they probably won't get any better.
> >
> > Getting a lot of mixed ideas of if the v.92/v.44 code will be able to be
> > used on the 24 port DSP cards? Or will have to upgrade to the new 96
port?
> > Lance, above said he has tested the 96 port DSP in an older chassis.
Great
> > for you. But haven't used this in the field. I guess, what everyone and
> > myself wants to know is if the 24 port DSP will be compatible for v.92,
> > are
> > the new cards *really* compatible with the now older chassis (not the TC
> > 1000), and when will we get the answers needed.
> >
> > The way I see it the ISPs get screwed (excuse my french) one way or
> > another
> > by the manufacturer's who supply the access equipment. They will market
a
> > new line which will require upgrades of equipment to make more money off
> > the
> > ISPs.
> >
> > Fortunately, I use another type of access equipment for our larger
> > markets.
> > The only thing that is supposed to be required is a simple upgrade of a
> > flash card and new modem code. **Knock on wood**....Never assume
anything.
> > I
> > am hopeful to have this up and running on this equipment by May/June.
But
> > usually add about two to three months to the expected due date and your
> > usually right.  Plus working out all the bugs from the initial codes.
> >
> > CJ
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: mark ross <[e-mail]>
> > To: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
> > Date: Thursday, March 15, 2001 9:38 PM
> > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> >
> >
> > >
> > >Hi
> > >By "newer chassis" are you talking about the one with the Intergrated
> > >fan tray ? or is there something else thats newer now ?
> > >
> > >How may t-1's can you cram into a chassis until you start running up
> > >against I/O bandwidth of the packet bus ??
> > >
> > >I am still using 4 of the old chassis with quads and netserver cards
> > >
> > >just wondering ??
> > >
> > >see ya...
> > >
> > >Lance Eves wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Is there not anyone besides myself that has the 96 port cards?  As
far
> > as
> > I
> > >> can tell they integrate in just fine with everything else.  Of course
> > there
> > >> is the code upgrade....  The newer chassis has a bigger and badder
(or
> > is
> > >> that more bad) ARC and NMC, and I believe that the backplane is also
> > >> enhanced.  I played around with it all when I got the new chassis.
It
> > all
> > >> seems to play nice with one another in one of the older chassis that
I
> > have.
> > >> Of course when it was all said and done, I put all the pieces back in
> > the
> > >> enhanced chassis and put it into production.  I have the 96 port and
> > 7-24
> > >> port DSP cards in the chassis and it is all working like a charm.
> > >>
> > >> Lance
> > >>
> > >> > -----Original Message-----
> > >> > From: [e-mail]
> > >> > [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Ronald Kushner
> > >> > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 5:37 PM
> > >> > To: [e-mail]
> > >> > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Dale Hege wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > The really sad thing is I was told by my vendor this afternoon
that
> > v.92
> > >> > > will only be supported on the 96Port dsps. Also that the
> > >> > chassis with fan
> > >> > > tray will not support the 96Port cards you need to buy the TC1000
> > >> > > Enhanced chassis. :(
> > >> >
> > >> > Sounds like someone is trying to sell you some hardware. I'll
> > personally
> > >> > drive to Chicago and burn down the 3Com building if the HiPer DSP
> > cards
> > >> > do not support V.92.
> > >> >
> > >> > -Ron
> > >> >
> > >> > -
> > >> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to
"[e-mail]"
> > >> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > >> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages
send
> > >> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > >>
> > >> -
> > >>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> > >>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > >>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> > >>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > >
> > >-
> > > To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> > > with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > > For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> > > "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > >
> >
> >
> > -
> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Mike Andrews <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 18 Mar 2001 14:45:38 -0500 (EST)

v.59 is actually what I'm looking forward to more than v.92 or v.44.
Anything that gives me more debugging output is way cool in my book. :)

v.92 and v.44 are just little incremental speed bumps for our customers
who can't get our ADSL service and can't afford ISDN...

For what it's worth, 3Com (err, CommWorks, whatever) is running a deal til
the end of the month (in the USA anyway), where if you buy a Double Play
kit and ship back 12 Quads, you'll get a $1200 check back.  It's not as
nice as their older tradeup programs, but hey, it's better than nothing,
and as we only had 12 Quads left anyway...

http://www.commworks.com/svprovider/programs/total_control_eds/


Mike Andrews * [e-mail] * [e-mail] * http://www.bit0.com
VP, sysadmin, & network guy, Digital Crescent Inc, Frankfort KY
Internet access for Frankfort, Lexington, Louisville and surrounding counties
www.fark.com: If it's not news, it's Fark.  (Or something like that.)

On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, Mark Thornton wrote:

> What about v.44 and v.59? It doesn't end with just v.92. The customer will
> expect us to be compatible with all of these for different reasons. While
> v.92 has gotten the early press I fully expect v.44 to come on as the
> interest in better compression grows when users don't get dsl speeds from
> their dialup modems like they seem to think they wil with v.92.
>
> I am still in a quandry over what to do. There was never really was a good
> upgrade option provided when we had the cash to make a move, so now we have
> a fair number of quads that continue to perform well. I have not been able
> to detect any real difference to the clients between the quads or hipers so
> I am not in a hurry to get rid of them. I suspect 3Com will drop them out of
> the HiperArc code long before they lose value to our customers.
>
> Mark Thornton
> San Marcos Internet, Inc.
> 512-393-5300
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Shawn Brown" <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 4:35 PM
> Subject: RE: (usr-tc) V.92
>
>
> > Informational Input regarding v.92
> > Hello, I want to update all the folks on this list regarding what is
> > happening with Total Control and V.92
> > This is an email from Amit Tiwari, Director of Product Management from
> > Commworks.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [e-mail] [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 5:05 PM
> > To: Shawn Brown
> > Subject: V.92 statement
> >
> >
> >
> > i) V.92 will be supported on the TC 1000 chassis.
> > ii) V.92 will be supported via a SOFTWARE upgrade SKU on both the 24 port
> > HDSP
> > modem and the 96 port modem.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Amit Tiwari
> > Director, Product Management, Enhanced Data Systems, CommWorks, a 3Com
> > Company
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Shawn Brown
> > Founder Source Technology
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: CJ [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 11:21 AM
> > > To: [e-mail]
> > > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> > >
> > > Well from what I know there is an older chassis that does not have the
> > > integrated fan tray, the newer chassis with the integrated fan tray
> which
> > > I
> > > think most ISPs that use TC are currently using from what I have read,
> and
> > > then the brand new TC 1000, pretty blue tabs and fancy new architecture.
> > > Yippee!! New equipment mean more money.....
> > >
> > > And yes Jeff, I would have to agree the support contracts are
> ridiculious.
> > > And they probably won't get any better.
> > >
> > > Getting a lot of mixed ideas of if the v.92/v.44 code will be able to be
> > > used on the 24 port DSP cards? Or will have to upgrade to the new 96
> port?
> > > Lance, above said he has tested the 96 port DSP in an older chassis.
> Great
> > > for you. But haven't used this in the field. I guess, what everyone and
> > > myself wants to know is if the 24 port DSP will be compatible for v.92,
> > > are
> > > the new cards *really* compatible with the now older chassis (not the TC
> > > 1000), and when will we get the answers needed.
> > >
> > > The way I see it the ISPs get screwed (excuse my french) one way or
> > > another
> > > by the manufacturer's who supply the access equipment. They will market
> a
> > > new line which will require upgrades of equipment to make more money off
> > > the
> > > ISPs.
> > >
> > > Fortunately, I use another type of access equipment for our larger
> > > markets.
> > > The only thing that is supposed to be required is a simple upgrade of a
> > > flash card and new modem code. **Knock on wood**....Never assume
> anything.
> > > I
> > > am hopeful to have this up and running on this equipment by May/June.
> But
> > > usually add about two to three months to the expected due date and your
> > > usually right.  Plus working out all the bugs from the initial codes.
> > >
> > > CJ
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: mark ross <[e-mail]>
> > > To: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
> > > Date: Thursday, March 15, 2001 9:38 PM
> > > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >Hi
> > > >By "newer chassis" are you talking about the one with the Intergrated
> > > >fan tray ? or is there something else thats newer now ?
> > > >
> > > >How may t-1's can you cram into a chassis until you start running up
> > > >against I/O bandwidth of the packet bus ??
> > > >
> > > >I am still using 4 of the old chassis with quads and netserver cards
> > > >
> > > >just wondering ??
> > > >
> > > >see ya...
> > > >
> > > >Lance Eves wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Is there not anyone besides myself that has the 96 port cards?  As
> far
> > > as
> > > I
> > > >> can tell they integrate in just fine with everything else.  Of course
> > > there
> > > >> is the code upgrade....  The newer chassis has a bigger and badder
> (or
> > > is
> > > >> that more bad) ARC and NMC, and I believe that the backplane is also
> > > >> enhanced.  I played around with it all when I got the new chassis.
> It
> > > all
> > > >> seems to play nice with one another in one of the older chassis that
> I
> > > have.
> > > >> Of course when it was all said and done, I put all the pieces back in
> > > the
> > > >> enhanced chassis and put it into production.  I have the 96 port and
> > > 7-24
> > > >> port DSP cards in the chassis and it is all working like a charm.
> > > >>
> > > >> Lance
> > > >>
> > > >> > -----Original Message-----
> > > >> > From: [e-mail]
> > > >> > [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Ronald Kushner
> > > >> > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 5:37 PM
> > > >> > To: [e-mail]
> > > >> > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Dale Hege wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > The really sad thing is I was told by my vendor this afternoon
> that
> > > v.92
> > > >> > > will only be supported on the 96Port dsps. Also that the
> > > >> > chassis with fan
> > > >> > > tray will not support the 96Port cards you need to buy the TC1000
> > > >> > > Enhanced chassis. :(
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Sounds like someone is trying to sell you some hardware. I'll
> > > personally
> > > >> > drive to Chicago and burn down the 3Com building if the HiPer DSP
> > > cards
> > > >> > do not support V.92.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > -Ron
> > > >> >
> > > >> > -
> > > >> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to
> "[e-mail]"
> > > >> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > > >> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages
> send
> > > >> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > > >>
> > > >> -
> > > >>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> > > >>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > > >>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> > > >>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > > >
> > > >-
> > > > To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> > > > with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > > > For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> > > > "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> > >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> > >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> >
> > -
> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dale Hege <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 19 Mar 2001 09:33:14 -0500 (EST)

I called 3com and asked them about this. They told me that the 24 port
dsps will support v92 sometime this summer and the chassis will support
the 96 port cards. :) Sorry, I didn't ask about the quads.

-Dale

On Thu, 15 Mar 2001, Dale Hege wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Jeff Mcadams wrote:
>
> > Also sprach Cheryl Johnson
> > >Thanks for the info on the date. I think the 1000 have a different
> > >midplane as opposed to the older TC Chassis? It seemed to have a
> > >totally different architecture. I thought I read that somewhere on
> > >3com/Commworks page. I haven't looked into it too much though.
> >
> > The TC 1000 is the chassis with the integrated fan tray.  The old school
> > chassis (without the integrated chassis) are basically compatible with
> > what's now the TC 1000, but lower capacity (fewer timeslots on TDM,
> > slower packet bus I believe, etc.) but otherwise is basically the
> > same...cards are swappable between the two chassis etc.
> >
> > There is now (I think) also a TC 2000 that's a wholy new product, and to
> > the best of my knowledge, can't swap cards with the TC 1000 or older
> > non-integrated-fan-tray chassis.  I haven't ever messed with a TC 2000
> > at all.
> >
> > Re: v.92, v.44, and v.59 on quads...if 3Com/Commworks doesn't offer an
> > upgrade to it, they're going to get an earful...won't be the first
> > earful they've gotten from me, and probably won't be the last either.
> >
> > I don't think IgLou is unusual in this respect, but a significant
> > majority of our dial-in modems are still quads.  For 3Com/Commworks to
> > forsake this installed base, while being par for the course for
> > 3Com/Commworks, isn't just shooting themselves in the foot, its more
> > tantamount to unloading a full clip on full automatic into their own
> > foot.
>
> The really sad thing is I was told by my vendor this afternoon that v.92
> will only be supported on the 96Port dsps. Also that the chassis with fan
> tray will not support the 96Port cards you need to buy the TC1000
> Enhanced chassis. :(
>
>
> -Dale
>
> > --
> > Jeff McAdams                            Email: [e-mail]
> > Head Network Administrator              Voice: [phone]
> > IgLou Internet Services                        [phone]
> >
> > -
> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> >
>
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Sheldon Koehler" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 19 Mar 2001 13:24:54 -0800

I just got off the phone with 3Com and the Quad cards will NOT do v.92. The
24 and 96 port cards will.

Sheldon

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 6:33 AM


> I called 3com and asked them about this. They told me that the 24 port
> dsps will support v92 sometime this summer and the chassis will support
> the 96 port cards. :) Sorry, I didn't ask about the quads.
>
> -Dale
>
> On Thu, 15 Mar 2001, Dale Hege wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Jeff Mcadams wrote:
> >
> > > Also sprach Cheryl Johnson
> > > >Thanks for the info on the date. I think the 1000 have a different
> > > >midplane as opposed to the older TC Chassis? It seemed to have a
> > > >totally different architecture. I thought I read that somewhere on
> > > >3com/Commworks page. I haven't looked into it too much though.
> > >
> > > The TC 1000 is the chassis with the integrated fan tray.  The old
school
> > > chassis (without the integrated chassis) are basically compatible with
> > > what's now the TC 1000, but lower capacity (fewer timeslots on TDM,
> > > slower packet bus I believe, etc.) but otherwise is basically the
> > > same...cards are swappable between the two chassis etc.
> > >
> > > There is now (I think) also a TC 2000 that's a wholy new product, and
to
> > > the best of my knowledge, can't swap cards with the TC 1000 or older
> > > non-integrated-fan-tray chassis.  I haven't ever messed with a TC 2000
> > > at all.
> > >
> > > Re: v.92, v.44, and v.59 on quads...if 3Com/Commworks doesn't offer an
> > > upgrade to it, they're going to get an earful...won't be the first
> > > earful they've gotten from me, and probably won't be the last either.
> > >
> > > I don't think IgLou is unusual in this respect, but a significant
> > > majority of our dial-in modems are still quads.  For 3Com/Commworks to
> > > forsake this installed base, while being par for the course for
> > > 3Com/Commworks, isn't just shooting themselves in the foot, its more
> > > tantamount to unloading a full clip on full automatic into their own
> > > foot.
> >
> > The really sad thing is I was told by my vendor this afternoon that v.92
> > will only be supported on the 96Port dsps. Also that the chassis with
fan
> > tray will not support the 96Port cards you need to buy the TC1000
> > Enhanced chassis. :(
> >
> >
> > -Dale
> >
> > > --
> > > Jeff McAdams                            Email: [e-mail]
> > > Head Network Administrator              Voice: [phone]
> > > IgLou Internet Services                        [phone]
> > >
> > > -
> > >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> > >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> > >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> > >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> > >
> >
> >
> > -
> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> >
>
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Rob" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) Upgrading a TC
Date: 19 Mar 2001 17:36:17 -0500

What is the *least* expensive way to upgrade a TC v34 system to v90? Is
there one? Feel free to write me offlist at mailto:[e-mail].

Thenks!
Rob




-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Greg Coffey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) Upgrading a TC
Date: 19 Mar 2001 15:41:37 -0700

If using quads, you need to upgrade the nmc card.  That used to be about
$1000 for the key I think from 3Com.  You can find a x2 enabled  used nmc
card for much less on the net, prob around $3-400.  If using HiperDSP
cards, you don't need to have the key in the nmc for the x2/v90 to work.

I've seen whole chassis with 48 modems and x2 enabled for under $2k
recently.  That may be your best bet.

At 05:36 PM 3/19/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>What is the *least* expensive way to upgrade a TC v34 system to v90? Is
>there one? Feel free to write me offlist at mailto:[e-mail].
>
>Thenks!
>Rob
>
>
>
>
>-
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


Thanks, Greg Coffey                                   <[e-mail]>
Visionary Communications  V 307-234-5443
100 N. Center Suite #100, Casper, WY  82601    www.vcn.com
_________________________________________________________


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jaye Mathisen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) Upgrading a TC
Date: 19 Mar 2001 15:19:16 -0800

Buy the V.90 key from 3com.

On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 05:36:17PM -0500, Rob wrote:
> there one? Feel free to write me offlist at mailto:[e-mail].
>
> Thenks!
> Rob
>
>
>
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Lists <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 20 Mar 2001 14:45:35 +1100 (EST)


> I just got off the phone with 3Com and the Quad cards will NOT do
> v.92. The 24 and 96 port cards will.

This is precisely why I'm talking to Cisco about trading our 900 or so
ports for Cisco gear...


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jeff Mcadams <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 19 Mar 2001 22:46:35 -0500

Also sprach Lists
>> I just got off the phone with 3Com and the Quad cards will NOT do
>> v.92. The 24 and 96 port cards will.

>This is precisely why I'm talking to Cisco about trading our 900 or so
>ports for Cisco gear...

Might I suggest that you let folks at 3Com/Commworks know this...and not
through this list...as I mentioned, they don't officially monitor this
list anymore.

Might I suggest that you go to 3Com's web page and look at the executive
bios and pick the relevant ones to send email to about your reasons.

I'll point out that 3Com email addresses take the form of
[e-mail], so pretty much anyone, from the bottom to
the top can be reached by email that way.

A couple that I'm not sure are on there that you might want to include
as well:

Irfan Ali, President of Commworks (a 3Com company), [e-mail]

and if it concerns an issue (as I suspect it at least partially does)
with support contracts,

Al Huefner, [e-mail]

I'm unsure of the "official" title of Mr. Huefner, but I understand he
is the mastermind behind the support contract setup at CommWorks, and
previously in the Carrier Systems Group of 3Com.
--
Jeff McAdams                            Email: [e-mail]
Head Network Administrator              Voice: [phone]
IgLou Internet Services                        [phone]

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jamie Orzechowski" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) Radius ALive Records??
Date: 19 Mar 2001 23:11:28 -0500

Hello ... I am getting ALOT of Alive records in my radius logs .. I was told
this is coming form my NAS ... does anyone know how to disable Alive records
as I only want Start / Stop ... thanks!


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Lists <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 20 Mar 2001 18:52:52 +1100 (EST)


> >This is precisely why I'm talking to Cisco about trading our 900 or so
> >ports for Cisco gear...
>
> Might I suggest that you let folks at 3Com/Commworks know this...and
> not through this list...as I mentioned, they don't officially monitor
> this list anymore.

I've already told them this.

I e-mailed 4-5 of their people.  You can guess how many replies I
got.  That's right - zero.

Did I hear right recently that AOL are migrating away from 3COM NAS gear?


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Wayne Barber" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) ISDN over CT1?
Date: 20 Mar 2001 08:44:04 -0500

Ok, it has always been my understanding that to support ISDN my
T1 lines would need to be BRI or PRI and not CT1. Another ISP in
the area thinks it will be supporting ISDN over CT1 on its Lucent(?)
equipment. Currently, my CT1 is set for AMI/SF. Is it possible to
support ISDN on the TC1000 using CT1? I cannot currently get
anything other than AMI on the CT1 at this time.

I just reread that paragraph and the number of acronyms would
choke a horse.


Wayne Barber
Coastal Telco Services

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jeff Mcadams <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) ISDN over CT1?
Date: 20 Mar 2001 09:42:34 -0500

Also sprach Wayne Barber
>Ok, it has always been my understanding that to support ISDN my T1
>lines would need to be BRI or PRI and not CT1. Another ISP in the area
>thinks it will be supporting ISDN over CT1 on its Lucent(?) equipment.
>Currently, my CT1 is set for AMI/SF. Is it possible to support ISDN on
>the TC1000 using CT1? I cannot currently get anything other than AMI on
>the CT1 at this time.

You can do (at least in theory...not sure if I've ever heard anyone
actually doing it) what's called Data Over Voice Bearer Service, (let's
go ahead and finish the horse off!) or DOVBS.  I don't believe the TC
has the best DOVBS support...you have to have a different DNIS number or
something like that so that the chassis knows that the calls is coming
in as DOVBS rather than a regular data bearer service.

Don't quote me on all this as I've never done it...just remember
responses from the past about this.

I believe, also, that DOVBS limits you to 56kbps channels.
--
Jeff McAdams                            Email: [e-mail]
Head Network Administrator              Voice: [phone]
IgLou Internet Services                        [phone]

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Mike Wilker" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 20 Mar 2001 10:21:05 -0600

Does Cisco still have a low-density unit?  Has it been confirmed that they
will support V.92?


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 9:45 PM



> I just got off the phone with 3Com and the Quad cards will NOT do
> v.92. The 24 and 96 port cards will.

This is precisely why I'm talking to Cisco about trading our 900 or so
ports for Cisco gear...


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jeff Mcadams <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 20 Mar 2001 11:38:04 -0500

Also sprach Mike Wilker
>Does Cisco still have a low-density unit?  Has it been confirmed that
>they will support V.92?

They've got a 1U unit now that does 2 PRI, dual 10/100 ethernet, and 2
v.35 ports (seperate from the t1/e1/pri ports)  The DSPs are pretty
generic as far as their capabilities...so it would only be a software
upgrade to support v.92 (and others) with them.
--
Jeff McAdams                            Email: [e-mail]
Head Network Administrator              Voice: [phone]
IgLou Internet Services                        [phone]

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Mike Andrews <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 20 Mar 2001 11:39:04 -0500 (EST)

They have the new AS5350, a two-PRI fixed-config unit.  (Think "PM3
replacement".)  I've been told by several people at Cisco that v.92 is a
sure thing.


Mike Andrews * [e-mail] * [e-mail] * http://www.bit0.com
VP, sysadmin, & network guy, Digital Crescent Inc, Frankfort KY
Internet access for Frankfort, Lexington, Louisville and surrounding counties
www.fark.com: If it's not news, it's Fark.  (Or something like that.)

On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, Mike Wilker wrote:

> Does Cisco still have a low-density unit?  Has it been confirmed that they
> will support V.92?
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Lists" <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 9:45 PM
> Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
>
>
>
> > I just got off the phone with 3Com and the Quad cards will NOT do
> > v.92. The 24 and 96 port cards will.
>
> This is precisely why I'm talking to Cisco about trading our 900 or so
> ports for Cisco gear...


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Randy Cosby" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 20 Mar 2001 10:14:56 -0700

From http://www.808hi.com/56k/v92s.htm

8-Dec-00 - V.92 servers - Cisco has revealed plans for V.92: There will be
no V.92 support for AS5200 servers.  3600, AS5300 and AS5800 servers with
Mica modems will support V.44 compression, Modem-on-Hold, and Quick Connect
around April, 2001 - there will be no support for V.92 PCM upstream for Mica
modems. AS5350, 5400 and 5800 servers using NextPort CSMv6 modems will have
V.44 compression, Modem-on-Hold and Quick Connect around March, 2001, and
V.92 PCM upstream support is projected for this modem card between July and
September, 2001. Note - AS5300's with older Microcom modems will not support
V.92 or V.44. [Wording revised 15-Dec-00]

They don't site sources for this information and I haven't found anything on
Cisco's site yet.  Anyone?

Randy



> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail]
> [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Mike Andrews
> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2001 9:39 AM
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
>
>
> They have the new AS5350, a two-PRI fixed-config unit.  (Think "PM3
> replacement".)  I've been told by several people at Cisco that v.92 is a
> sure thing.
>
>
> Mike Andrews * [e-mail] * [e-mail] * http://www.bit0.com
> VP, sysadmin, & network guy, Digital Crescent Inc, Frankfort KY
> Internet access for Frankfort, Lexington, Louisville and
> surrounding counties
> www.fark.com: If it's not news, it's Fark.  (Or something like that.)
>
> On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, Mike Wilker wrote:
>
> > Does Cisco still have a low-density unit?  Has it been
> confirmed that they
> > will support V.92?
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Lists" <[e-mail]>
> > To: <[e-mail]>
> > Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 9:45 PM
> > Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
> >
> >
> >
> > > I just got off the phone with 3Com and the Quad cards will NOT do
> > > v.92. The 24 and 96 port cards will.
> >
> > This is precisely why I'm talking to Cisco about trading our 900 or so
> > ports for Cisco gear...
>
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Curt Shambeau <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 20 Mar 2001 11:23:47 -0600 (CST)

> >From http://www.808hi.com/56k/v92s.htm
>
> 8-Dec-00 - V.92 servers - Cisco has revealed plans for V.92: There will be
> no V.92 support for AS5200 servers.  3600, AS5300 and AS5800 servers with


I find it funny that people want to switch to Cisco because they will not
support v92 on the Quad modems, yet Cisco is doing the same thing to their
customers by not supporting the AS5200 and AS5xxx with MICA modems.

Of course, they can't do an easy software upgrade, but who knows that the
future holds.  Will everyone switch back to 3COM/Commworks when Cisco
doesn't support the AS5300 on the next upgrade?

There has to be someplace to draw the line.  Personally, I'd rather see
3COM put their R&D effort into the HiperDSP and QuadDSP.  And yes, I still
have Quad modems in my network... A whole boatload.


| Curtis V. Shambeau  |  [e-mail] |  Sr Vice President |
|  CoreComm, LTD, formerly Voyager.net and ExecPC - Wisconsin Office    |
|    "Those who can't laugh at themselves leave the job to others"      |


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Clayton Zekelman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) ISDN over CT1?
Date: 20 Mar 2001 12:06:43 -0500

We do DOVBS 56k on our Lucent PM3's all the time.  Have tried to get it to
work on our TC's, but never could.  Then again, we never really tried too
hard, because in each POP we always had the PM3's available as an option.

Suffice to say, the trunking *CAN* support it.  The TC is another question...

At 08:44 AM 3/20/01 -0500, you wrote:
>Ok, it has always been my understanding that to support ISDN my
>T1 lines would need to be BRI or PRI and not CT1. Another ISP in
>the area thinks it will be supporting ISDN over CT1 on its Lucent(?)
>equipment. Currently, my CT1 is set for AMI/SF. Is it possible to
>support ISDN on the TC1000 using CT1? I cannot currently get
>anything other than AMI on the CT1 at this time.
>
>I just reread that paragraph and the number of acronyms would
>choke a horse.
>
>
>Wayne Barber
>Coastal Telco Services
>
>-
> To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>
---
Clayton Zekelman
Managed Network Systems Inc. (MNSi)
875 Ouellette Avenue
Windsor, Ontario
N9A 4J6

tel. [phone]
fax. [phone]

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jeff Mcadams <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 20 Mar 2001 12:37:20 -0500

Also sprach Curt Shambeau
>I find it funny that people want to switch to Cisco because they will
>not support v92 on the Quad modems, yet Cisco is doing the same thing
>to their customers by not supporting the AS5200 and AS5xxx with MICA
>modems.

>Of course, they can't do an easy software upgrade, but who knows that
>the future holds.  Will everyone switch back to 3COM/Commworks when
>Cisco doesn't support the AS5300 on the next upgrade?

>There has to be someplace to draw the line.  Personally, I'd rather see
>3COM put their R&D effort into the HiperDSP and QuadDSP.  And yes, I
>still have Quad modems in my network... A whole boatload.

Please...don't even *try* to rag on Cisco for not supporting old
hardware.  I just checked this out to be sure of my numbers, but Cisco
is not only still *supporting*, but is still *selling* their little 2500
routers.  This product design is over 7 years old now.  Cisco seems to
provide hardware and software support for products that have reached
end-of-sales for 2 or 3 *years* before they're end-of-life'd.  Compare
this to 3Com that will put a product in end-of-sales within a few years
of announcing it, and will end-of-life a products within 6 months of
end-of-sales.

Cisco may not be perfect on supporting their older equipment, but at
least they *try*...you can load 12.x IOS versions on the 2500's, TCS 4.0
doesn't have a version of code for the quads.

I'm honestly amazed that people still seem to be proud to work for 3Com.
If I worked there, I think I'd be walking around with a paper bag over
my head because of their treatement of their customers...particularly
their long-term customers.
--
Jeff McAdams                            Email: [e-mail]
Head Network Administrator              Voice: [phone]
IgLou Internet Services                        [phone]

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Mark Thornton" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 20 Mar 2001 12:02:35 -0600

There also is a problem comparing the Cisco modems to the 3Com modems. Cisco
has used modems in the past that were a combination of hardware and
programable software. There is no way to use software to fix hardware that
is deficient. However, it was always my understanding that the quads were
entirely software based. There may be a realistic limitation due to a
limited number of programable nodes in the DSP's or insufficient memory to
host the required code. If that is in fact the reason for the lack of
support then they should say so. The reality is that we suspect they just
don't want to even work on the code for those modems, not that it can't be
done. Maybe they don't see it as a financially viable option? What would be
the money we would be willing to pay for a code upgrade on the quads to
avoid buying new hardware? What is the effort they are willing to spend to
keep us in the 3Com product and off the competitor's products?

Mark Thornton
San Marcos Internet, Inc.
512-393-5300


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2001 11:37 AM


> Also sprach Curt Shambeau
> >I find it funny that people want to switch to Cisco because they will
> >not support v92 on the Quad modems, yet Cisco is doing the same thing
> >to their customers by not supporting the AS5200 and AS5xxx with MICA
> >modems.
>
> >Of course, they can't do an easy software upgrade, but who knows that
> >the future holds.  Will everyone switch back to 3COM/Commworks when
> >Cisco doesn't support the AS5300 on the next upgrade?
>
> >There has to be someplace to draw the line.  Personally, I'd rather see
> >3COM put their R&D effort into the HiperDSP and QuadDSP.  And yes, I
> >still have Quad modems in my network... A whole boatload.
>
> Please...don't even *try* to rag on Cisco for not supporting old
> hardware.  I just checked this out to be sure of my numbers, but Cisco
> is not only still *supporting*, but is still *selling* their little 2500
> routers.  This product design is over 7 years old now.  Cisco seems to
> provide hardware and software support for products that have reached
> end-of-sales for 2 or 3 *years* before they're end-of-life'd.  Compare
> this to 3Com that will put a product in end-of-sales within a few years
> of announcing it, and will end-of-life a products within 6 months of
> end-of-sales.
>
> Cisco may not be perfect on supporting their older equipment, but at
> least they *try*...you can load 12.x IOS versions on the 2500's, TCS 4.0
> doesn't have a version of code for the quads.
>
> I'm honestly amazed that people still seem to be proud to work for 3Com.
> If I worked there, I think I'd be walking around with a paper bag over
> my head because of their treatement of their customers...particularly
> their long-term customers.
> --
> Jeff McAdams                            Email: [e-mail]
> Head Network Administrator              Voice: [phone]
> IgLou Internet Services                        [phone]
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Curt Shambeau <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 20 Mar 2001 12:15:39 -0600 (CST)

> Also sprach Curt Shambeau
> >I find it funny that people want to switch to Cisco because they will
> >not support v92 on the Quad modems, yet Cisco is doing the same thing
> >to their customers by not supporting the AS5200 and AS5xxx with MICA
> >modems.
>
> >Of course, they can't do an easy software upgrade, but who knows that
> >the future holds.  Will everyone switch back to 3COM/Commworks when
> >Cisco doesn't support the AS5300 on the next upgrade?
>
> >There has to be someplace to draw the line.  Personally, I'd rather see
> >3COM put their R&D effort into the HiperDSP and QuadDSP.  And yes, I
> >still have Quad modems in my network... A whole boatload.
>
> Please...don't even *try* to rag on Cisco for not supporting old
> hardware.

I'm not *trying* to rag on Cisco.  My point was that people are all up in
arms about v.92 not being supported on the Quad modems, and are threatening
to go buy Cisco RAS gear, when Cisco is not supporting v.92 on older
equipment either.  Isn't there some irony in that?  I sure think so.

I'm not always thrilled with 3COM, but in this case, I *personally* feel it
was not a bad decision to stick v92 on HDM & newer equipment.  The code
base for the quad modem is very ugly, and would no doubt entail a LOT of
R&D to get it up to speed on v92, v44, v59, and whatever else may need to
be modified.

Heck... Is there even enough space for all that code on the quad modems?
Back a few years ago I remember them having to pull support for things like
v.terbo to fit the new v.90 code into Couriers.  Didn't they pull it from
quad modem support as well, because of code size??


| Curtis V. Shambeau  |  [e-mail] |  Sr Vice President |
|  CoreComm, LTD, formerly Voyager.net and ExecPC - Wisconsin Office    |
|    "Those who can't laugh at themselves leave the job to others"      |


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Timothy C. Bohen" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) HD Chassis and 486 NMC
Date: 20 Mar 2001 13:53:38 -0500

I am replacing some old quads chassis with Arc's and DSP's can I reuse my
old 486 NMC's with the ARC and DSP setup in an HD chassis?

Thanks

Timothy C. Bohen
CMSInter.Net / Crystal MicroSystems
===================================
web   : www.cmsinter.net
email : [e-mail]
phone : [phone] x22


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Curt Shambeau <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) HD Chassis and 486 NMC
Date: 20 Mar 2001 13:10:30 -0600 (CST)

> I am replacing some old quads chassis with Arc's and DSP's can I reuse my
> old 486 NMC's with the ARC and DSP setup in an HD chassis?

Yes.  It will work fine with the HiperDSP & HiperARC.  I'm told it will not
work with the Quad-DSP cards though.

| Curtis V. Shambeau  |  [e-mail] |  Sr Vice President |
|  CoreComm, LTD, formerly Voyager.net and ExecPC - Wisconsin Office    |
|    "Those who can't laugh at themselves leave the job to others"      |


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Lon R. Stockton, Jr." <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 20 Mar 2001 15:05:50 -0500 (EST)


On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, Curt Shambeau wrote:

> My point was that people are all up in
> arms about v.92 not being supported on the Quad modems, and are threatening
> to go buy Cisco RAS gear, when Cisco is not supporting v.92 on older
> equipment either.  Isn't there some irony in that?  I sure think so.

It's more than just them not supporting the v.92 on the quads; that's
just another straw on the camel's back. I don't own any quads and am
still considering switching (except my plan is Ariel cards in a linux
box rather than Cisco gear). My bitch is about the dismal level of support
which is consistantly getting worse (unless, of course, the customer
has more money than brains). It's the feeling/observation that 3com
no longer gives a shit about the smaller ISPs who built their business
for them because they're spending too much time as a wannabe-NorTel,
chasing the business of the big telcos. Telcos have no problem with
extortionate service contracts, as those costs can simply fuel another
rate increase.



-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dayton Internet <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) Reset back to primary
Date: 21 Mar 2001 10:18:00 -0500 (EST)

I think this was brought up earlier, but I cant find any information to answer
the question.

I find that the TS1000 HyperARC doesnt revert back to the primary authentication
server. When the primary fails and the arc switches to the secondary, the arc
does not switch back to the primary after the primary is restored.

Several questions? Is there a setting in the arc to cause it to look/watch for
the primary to come back online and switch back to it.

What is the command to manually switch it back.

Does any one have experience showing what will happen if the primary is restored
to servers but the arc is using the secondary, and the secondary is
disabled. Will the arc swicth back to the primary?

--
 --Rich Adams, President-Dayton Internet Services, Dayton, Ohio--
[e-mail]--937-586-2500--



-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jeff Mcadams <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) Reset back to primary
Date: 21 Mar 2001 10:34:53 -0500

Also sprach Dayton Internet
>I find that the TS1000 HyperARC doesnt revert back to the primary
>authentication server. When the primary fails and the arc switches to
>the secondary, the arc does not switch back to the primary after the
>primary is restored.

>Several questions? Is there a setting in the arc to cause it to
>look/watch for the primary to come back online and switch back to it.

set radIUS auTHENTICATION_ALGORITHM faLL_THROUGH

>What is the command to manually switch it back.

Not sure that there is one to manually do it.

>Does any one have experience showing what will happen if the primary is
>restored to servers but the arc is using the secondary, and the
>secondary is disabled. Will the arc swicth back to the primary?

It should, yes.
--
Jeff McAdams                            Email: [e-mail]
Head Network Administrator              Voice: [phone]
IgLou Internet Services                        [phone]

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Michael Fingerson <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) erickson switch - long distance calls
Date: 21 Mar 2001 10:43:08 -0600

Has anyone heard of this problem: On 5 of our 3com TC Chassis's which are
all on Erickson switches and using D4-AMI, we cannot get connected via a
long distance call. The local dial-up customers are connecting just fine.
Using hyperterminal, we get repeating "U"'s on the screen for about 50
seconds, then the connection drops. If we dial in using a 1010321 (MCI I
believe), we get a clean connection for about 110 seconds, then that
connection drops. We had a similar problem occur in a different town, but
that was on a DMS-10 switch and a telco translator fixed the problem with a
switch setting.
On the call I make, the disconnect reason is "remote hungup during training
(80)".
I have talked to our telco (Qwest) and they have checked with translations
and everything is set up correctly (or so they say).
We had a similar problem with a 3com on a DMS-10 switch and the local telco
(Citizens) was able to fix the problem that time. It had to do with a
"answer supervision" setting on the switch.
Help!


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Steve Monkhouse" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (usr-tc) v.92
Date: 22 Mar 2001 12:08:35 +1000

Ok..

Ive been reading with interest the on-going v.92 discussions over the last
couple of weeks..

One question thats bugging me is..

Everyone is talking about the support for 24port and 96 port DSP....
However what about us non-US people with DSP30port E1's ????

I assume its an oversight that it hasnt been mentioned at all.... ??

Steve Monkhouse
Network Engineer
EtherTech Computer Services
Ph : [phone]
Fx : [phone]
http://www.ethertech.com.au



-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jeff Mcadams <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) v.92
Date: 21 Mar 2001 21:46:27 -0500

Also sprach Steve Monkhouse
>Ive been reading with interest the on-going v.92 discussions over the
>last couple of weeks..

>One question thats bugging me is..

>Everyone is talking about the support for 24port and 96 port DSP....
>However what about us non-US people with DSP30port E1's ????

The 30 port E1 cards are, for all intents and purposes, the same beast
as the 24 port T1 cards.  I understand that they run different software
releases, but they're largely the same.  I would assume that if support
for v.92 is in the 24 ports DSPs, it'll be in the 30 port versions as
well.
--
Jeff McAdams                            Email: [e-mail]
Head Network Administrator              Voice: [phone]
IgLou Internet Services                        [phone]

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Curt Shambeau <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (usr-tc) v.92
Date: 21 Mar 2001 20:52:01 -0600 (CST)

> Everyone is talking about the support for 24port and 96 port DSP....
> However what about us non-US people with DSP30port E1's ????

Pretty much same card... You can usually assume that anything for the
24-port card is the same for the 30-port one.  I don't ever think I've seen
a code relase for 24-port cards, and not for the 30-port ones.

| Curtis V. Shambeau  |  [e-mail] |  Sr Vice President |
|  CoreComm, LTD, formerly Voyager.net and ExecPC - Wisconsin Office    |
|    "Those who can't laugh at themselves leave the job to others"      |


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) erickson switch - long distance calls
Date: 22 Mar 2001 06:29:13 -0800 (PST)


I really don't know anything about Erickson switches, and I don't think
this would even be possible on a nortel or lucent w/o building a separate
trunk group.  But you might check to see what they are sending you for
digits on long distance calls with a T1 test set.  It's possible they are
sending you two strings instead of one, the first (for example) containing
the II and ANI digits, the second containing the DNIS.  If your chassis is
only expecting one string, it's going to cut thru the call while the
switch is waiting for the chassis to wink back the second
string.  Eventually the swicth times out waiting for the second wink back.

-a


On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Michael Fingerson wrote:
> Has anyone heard of this problem: On 5 of our 3com TC Chassis's which are
> all on Erickson switches and using D4-AMI, we cannot get connected via a
> long distance call. The local dial-up customers are connecting just fine.
> Using hyperterminal, we get repeating "U"'s on the screen for about 50
> seconds, then the connection drops. If we dial in using a 1010321 (MCI I
> believe), we get a clean connection for about 110 seconds, then that
> connection drops. We had a similar problem occur in a different town, but
> that was on a DMS-10 switch and a telco translator fixed the problem with a
> switch setting.
> On the call I make, the disconnect reason is "remote hungup during training
> (80)".
> I have talked to our telco (Qwest) and they have checked with translations
> and everything is set up correctly (or so they say).
> We had a similar problem with a 3com on a DMS-10 switch and the local telco
> (Citizens) was able to fix the problem that time. It had to do with a
> "answer supervision" setting on the switch.
> Help!
>
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>

Aaron Nabil


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Timothy C. Bohen" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) Concurrent Logins on Hiper ARC
Date: 22 Mar 2001 14:07:51 -0500

Is there any easy way to limit concurrent dialin sessions on a HiperArc?

Thanks


Timothy C. Bohen
CMSInter.Net / Crystal MicroSystems
===================================
web   : www.cmsinter.net
email : [e-mail]
phone : [phone] x22


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Dave Ashworth" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) TC Hubs??
Date: 22 Mar 2001 17:27:43 -0600

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0079_01C0B2F5.67178460
Content-Type: text/plain;
    charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

We're using TC chassis presently as our local telco is still 33.6 POTS =
connections. We're looking at buying other RASs and going PRI when the =
telco turns up their 56k/ISDN service next week.

I'm not that familiar with any other RAS products out there and would =
appreciate some feedback on what to look for as far as price, =
reliability, support and leasing. Are there any decent discussion groups =
to join to get better informed or can you enlighten me here?

Thanks in advance!

Dave Ashworth
Jam21.Net
Fort Frances, ON=20

------=_NextPart_000_0079_01C0B2F5.67178460
Content-Type: text/html;
    charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4611.1300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>
<DIV>We're using TC chassis presently as our local telco is still 33.6 =
POTS=20
connections. We're looking at buying other RASs and going PRI when =
the=20
telco turns up their 56k/ISDN service next week.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I'm not that familiar with any other RAS products out there and =
would=20
appreciate some feedback on what to look for as far as price, =
reliability,=20
support and leasing. Are there any decent discussion groups to join =
to get=20
better informed or can you enlighten me here?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thanks in advance!</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dave Ashworth</DIV>
<DIV>Jam21.Net</DIV>
<DIV>Fort Frances, ON </DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0079_01C0B2F5.67178460--


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Brian Becker" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (usr-tc) Concurrent Logins on Hiper ARC
Date: 22 Mar 2001 18:06:45 -0600

We do it from Radius...doing it from the Hiper Arc won't help if you have more than one POP or two hiper's at the same location.

Brian Becker
President, Poplar Bluff Internet, Inc. (www.semo.net)
Home of TotallyFabricated.com Software:
  Total Scrutinizer (www.TotalScrutinizer.com) - Tech Support Just Got Easier!
  WebGabber (www.WebGabber.com) - html-based Chat Software

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Timothy C. Bohen
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 1:08 PM


Is there any easy way to limit concurrent dialin sessions on a HiperArc?

Thanks


Timothy C. Bohen
CMSInter.Net / Crystal MicroSystems
===================================
web   : www.cmsinter.net
email : [e-mail]
phone : [phone] x22


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.



-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kirk Mitchell <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 22 Mar 2001 19:11:49 -0500

At 05:35 PM 3/16/01 -0500, Shawn Brown wrote:
>Informational Input regarding v.92
>Hello, I want to update all the folks on this list regarding what is
>happening with Total Control and V.92

  Any word on support for v44/v59 on HiPer DSPs? Also, what's the ante
going to be to keep playing the game for those(many) that haven't found
3Com support contracts to be worth the investement?


--
Kirk Mitchell-General Manager    [e-mail]
Keystone Connect                 Unlock Your World
Altoona, PA  814-941-5000   http://www.keyconn.net


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Lists <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 23 Mar 2001 14:38:09 +1100 (EST)


> I'm not *trying* to rag on Cisco.  My point was that people are all up
> in arms about v.92 not being supported on the Quad modems, and are
> threatening to go buy Cisco RAS gear, when Cisco is not supporting
> v.92 on older equipment either.  Isn't there some irony in that?  I
> sure think so.

Our point is that if we have to spend money upgrading, we'll probably
spend it on Cisco after the treatment we've had from 3COM.

We stay with 3COM because it does the job and a change would be
expensive.  If we have to spend money...


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Brian Becker" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 23 Mar 2001 08:13:50 -0600

We are demoing a 5400 from Cisco and I can tell you that it doesn't give
any better performance than the Total Control. We don't have their
CiscoWorks software so I'm not sure what it can do, but I REALLY like
TCManager for figuring out problems.

We are about to decide to stay all 3Com but the v92 issue (or lack of
issues <grin) is alarming.

We'll see what the hype is at ISPCon.

Brian

Brian Becker
President, Poplar Bluff Internet, Inc. (www.semo.net)
Home of TotallyFabricated.com Software:
  Total Scrutinizer (www.TotalScrutinizer.com) - Tech Support Just Got Easier!
  WebGabber (www.WebGabber.com) - html-based Chat Software

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Lists
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 9:38 PM



> I'm not *trying* to rag on Cisco.  My point was that people are all up
> in arms about v.92 not being supported on the Quad modems, and are
> threatening to go buy Cisco RAS gear, when Cisco is not supporting
> v.92 on older equipment either.  Isn't there some irony in that?  I
> sure think so.

Our point is that if we have to spend money upgrading, we'll probably
spend it on Cisco after the treatment we've had from 3COM.

We stay with 3COM because it does the job and a change would be
expensive.  If we have to spend money...


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.



-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Timothy C. Bohen" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (usr-tc) Concurrent Logins on Hiper ARC
Date: 24 Mar 2001 08:43:09 -0500

Well we are looking at putting in a better RADIUS solution, but right now we
just have a particular POP with one chassis that seems to have a problem
with people using multiple sessions, I don't know if its in the water in
that town or what? :)

So just to get me by, is there a way to limit it on an Arc?

Thanks

Timothy C. Bohen
CMSInter.Net / Crystal MicroSystems
============================
web   : www.cmsinter.net
email : [e-mail]
phone : [phone] x22

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Brian Becker
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 7:07 PM


We do it from Radius...doing it from the Hiper Arc won't help if you have
more than one POP or two hiper's at the same location.

Brian Becker
President, Poplar Bluff Internet, Inc. (www.semo.net)
Home of TotallyFabricated.com Software:
  Total Scrutinizer (www.TotalScrutinizer.com) - Tech Support Just Got
Easier!
  WebGabber (www.WebGabber.com) - html-based Chat Software

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Timothy C. Bohen
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 1:08 PM


Is there any easy way to limit concurrent dialin sessions on a HiperArc?

Thanks


Timothy C. Bohen
CMSInter.Net / Crystal MicroSystems
===================================
web   : www.cmsinter.net
email : [e-mail]
phone : [phone] x22


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.



-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Mies <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) TCM 7.0.7
Date: 24 Mar 2001 14:50:45 -0600

Was there a fix on this rather than going to 8.0.1? I was told by 3Com
support to use 7.0.7 to be able to upgrade the NMC and ARC.

At 01:15 AM 10/19/00 -0500, you wrote:

>It's my assumption that 3com is not going to fix TCM 7.0.7 for Windows -
>after 5 months.  Are we going to get a new version soon to fix the problem I
>mentioned the other day (and found listed in the Known Bugs section of the
>release pdf?)  Anyone have the word on this?
>
>ref:
>
>"Eureka!  It's not the NMC code - it's TCM 7.0.7!  Try looking at a chassis
>with 6.0.23 and you will see that all 24 DS0 channels are available on CT1
>trunks and 23 Timeslots when PRI trunks are there no no matter the NMC code
>version."
>
>
>Marshall Morgan
>
>Internet Doorway, Inc (aka NETDOOR)
>http://www.netdoor.com
>
>601.969.1434 x28 | 800.952.1570 x28 | 601.969.3629 x28 | Fax [phone]
>
>
>-
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>
>
>-=-=-
>SBG-Priority: 3 (Normal) http://www.internz.com/SpamBeGone/


John Mies
Illinet.com

http://www.illinet.com


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Scrivner <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) FS: AS51 (Cisco) cards
Date: 25 Mar 2001 03:00:19 -0600

I have a need for a router card. Still have any by chance? Please reply to
[e-mail].
Thanks,
John Scrivner

Brian wrote:

> I have some AS51 cards for Total Controls.  These are the cisco router
> cards.  $250 each.  Includes NIC/NAC
>
> Brian
>
> -----------------------------------------------
> Brian Feeny                 e:[e-mail]
> CCNP+Voice/ATM/Security     p:318.222.2638x109
> CCDP                        f:318.221.6612
> Network Administrator
> ShreveNet Inc. (ASN 11881)
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Brad Gass <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) Need Config Help, TC NetServer w/ Quads
Date: 25 Mar 2001 16:52:08 -0600

Hello.

OK, I'm stumped on something, and I'm hoping it's something really stupid
and simple that I overlooked.  Unfortunately, I can't quite seem to find
what it is that I overlooked.

I've got a used TC Chassis, loaded with v.34 Quad Modem Cards, a dual T1
NIC, NetServer, and NMC.

When configuring the modem-DS0 assignments in the T1 NIC, I get this for
status after doing an "N: 1-48 to 1-48":

T1 Span Line 1 DS0/Modem Status


  DS0 DS0          Modem        Slot/   DS0 DS0          Modem        SLOT/
      Status       Status       Chan        Status       Status       chan

  1   IDLE         UNAVAIL      2\1     13  IDLE         IDLE         5\1
  2   IDLE         UNAVAIL      2\2     14  IDLE         IDLE         5\2
  3   IDLE         UNAVAIL      2\3     15  IDLE         IDLE         5\3
  4   IDLE         UNAVAIL      2\4     16  IDLE         IDLE         5\4
  5   IDLE         IDLE         3\1     17  IDLE         UNAVAIL      6\1
  6   IDLE         IDLE         3\2     18  IDLE         UNAVAIL      6\2
  7   IDLE         IDLE         3\3     19  IDLE         UNAVAIL      6\3
  8   IDLE         IDLE         3\4     20  IDLE         UNAVAIL      6\4
  9   IDLE         IDLE         4\1     21  IDLE         IDLE         7\1
  10  IDLE         IDLE         4\2     22  IDLE         IDLE         7\2
  11  IDLE         IDLE         4\3     23  IDLE         IDLE         7\3
  12  IDLE         IDLE         4\4     24  IDLE         IDLE         7\4

I have a quad modem cards in slots 2 and 6, but no matter what, they show
up unavailable.  I am guessing that configuration in the NetServer can
affect this, but all modems are "on" as far as I can tell.

Also, how does one get ahold of updated firmware for the v.34 modems, NMC,
NIC, and NetServer cards and also the Total Control Manager software from
Commworks?  I'm guessing via "service contract" may be my only hope, which
from what I read is potentially a mammoth joke.  Worth
it?  Advice?  (NAC/NIC running 3.2.0, NetServer running 3.2.27, and NMC
running 4.1.3)

I bought this beast used w/o software, and I'm guessing the TCM interface
may be a little more user friendly, and maybe show me the error of my
ways.  Don't get me wrong, I'm no stranger to CLI's, just that I don't
particularly care for USR's CLI on the total control!

I'm hoping I'll be happy with this thing once I have it running, otherwise
I have a very large and heavy door stop.

Thanks for any and all help in advance.


Brad


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) Need Config Help, TC NetServer w/ Quads
Date: 25 Mar 2001 17:34:29 -0600 (CST)


The simplest reason why the modems may be unavailable because the modems
may be setup in analog mode.  If you have TCM you can set up the modems to
either analog or digital mode.  You can also do this on the modem there is
a %d command and I think the command on the modem is
at%d1 to set the quad modems to digital signalling.

Life is a little easy to setup the modem if you have tcm.

-V


On Sun, 25 Mar 2001, Brad Gass wrote:

> Hello.
>
> OK, I'm stumped on something, and I'm hoping it's something really stupid
> and simple that I overlooked.  Unfortunately, I can't quite seem to find
> what it is that I overlooked.
>
> I've got a used TC Chassis, loaded with v.34 Quad Modem Cards, a dual T1
> NIC, NetServer, and NMC.
>
> When configuring the modem-DS0 assignments in the T1 NIC, I get this for
> status after doing an "N: 1-48 to 1-48":
>
> T1 Span Line 1 DS0/Modem Status
>
>
>   DS0 DS0          Modem        Slot/   DS0 DS0          Modem        SLOT/
>       Status       Status       Chan        Status       Status       chan
>
>   1   IDLE         UNAVAIL      2\1     13  IDLE         IDLE         5\1
>   2   IDLE         UNAVAIL      2\2     14  IDLE         IDLE         5\2
>   3   IDLE         UNAVAIL      2\3     15  IDLE         IDLE         5\3
>   4   IDLE         UNAVAIL      2\4     16  IDLE         IDLE         5\4
>   5   IDLE         IDLE         3\1     17  IDLE         UNAVAIL      6\1
>   6   IDLE         IDLE         3\2     18  IDLE         UNAVAIL      6\2
>   7   IDLE         IDLE         3\3     19  IDLE         UNAVAIL      6\3
>   8   IDLE         IDLE         3\4     20  IDLE         UNAVAIL      6\4
>   9   IDLE         IDLE         4\1     21  IDLE         IDLE         7\1
>   10  IDLE         IDLE         4\2     22  IDLE         IDLE         7\2
>   11  IDLE         IDLE         4\3     23  IDLE         IDLE         7\3
>   12  IDLE         IDLE         4\4     24  IDLE         IDLE         7\4
>
> I have a quad modem cards in slots 2 and 6, but no matter what, they show
> up unavailable.  I am guessing that configuration in the NetServer can
> affect this, but all modems are "on" as far as I can tell.
>
> Also, how does one get ahold of updated firmware for the v.34 modems, NMC,
> NIC, and NetServer cards and also the Total Control Manager software from
> Commworks?  I'm guessing via "service contract" may be my only hope, which
> from what I read is potentially a mammoth joke.  Worth
> it?  Advice?  (NAC/NIC running 3.2.0, NetServer running 3.2.27, and NMC
> running 4.1.3)
>
> I bought this beast used w/o software, and I'm guessing the TCM interface
> may be a little more user friendly, and maybe show me the error of my
> ways.  Don't get me wrong, I'm no stranger to CLI's, just that I don't
> particularly care for USR's CLI on the total control!
>
> I'm hoping I'll be happy with this thing once I have it running, otherwise
> I have a very large and heavy door stop.
>
> Thanks for any and all help in advance.
>
>
> Brad
>
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marshall Morgan" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) TCM 7.0.7
Date: 25 Mar 2001 21:53:06 -0600

> Was there a fix on this rather than going to 8.0.1? I was told by 3Com
> support to use 7.0.7 to be able to upgrade the NMC and ARC.

Don't know - 8.0.10 works on CT1 and PRI configured DSP cards as it should
(with 24 and 23 channels respectively).  Either way, if they can't provide
you with a working code version in the 7.0 thread then I would insist they
provide you with whatever software fixes the bugs in the 7.0.7 TCM.

> At 01:15 AM 10/19/00 -0500, you wrote:
>
> >It's my assumption that 3com is not going to fix TCM 7.0.7 for Windows -
> >after 5 months.  Are we going to get a new version soon to fix the
problem I
> >mentioned the other day (and found listed in the Known Bugs section of
the
> >release pdf?)  Anyone have the word on this?
> >
> >ref:
> >
> >"Eureka!  It's not the NMC code - it's TCM 7.0.7!  Try looking at a
chassis
> >with 6.0.23 and you will see that all 24 DS0 channels are available on
CT1
> >trunks and 23 Timeslots when PRI trunks are there no no matter the NMC
code
> >version."
> >
> >
> >Marshall Morgan
> >
> >Internet Doorway, Inc (aka NETDOOR)
> >http://www.netdoor.com
> >
> >601.969.1434 x28 | 800.952.1570 x28 | 601.969.3629 x28 | Fax [phone]
> >
> >
> >-
> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
> >
> >
> >-=-=-
> >SBG-Priority: 3 (Normal) http://www.internz.com/SpamBeGone/
>
>
> John Mies
> Illinet.com
>
> http://www.illinet.com
>
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>
>


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jonathan Byrne <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 26 Mar 2001 13:07:50 +0900

Brian Becker ([e-mail]) wrote:

> We are demoing a 5400 from Cisco and I can tell you that it doesn't give
> any better performance than the Total Control.

We're demoing an AS5300 right now and are pretty happy with it.
The only items still pending evaluation are the PIAFS code and
Cisco Works, but if we don't hit a showstopper, we've probably
bought our last 3Com RAS.

Do you plan to put Cisco support into Total Scrutinizer, BTW?

> We don't have their
> CiscoWorks software so I'm not sure what it can do, but I REALLY like
> TCManager for figuring out problems.

TCM is a very good product, and I will certainly be comparing CiscoWorks
against that standard.  In fact, TCM is what we like best about 3Com
gear.  As you say, it's pretty good for figuring out problems (basic
ones, anyway).  But then, so is the debugging output in IOS :-)

Cheers,

Jonathan Byrne, CCNA                            Network Engineer

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Curt Shambeau <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) Need Config Help, TC NetServer w/ Quads
Date: 26 Mar 2001 10:51:24 -0600 (CST)


It's been a long time since I played on a Netserver, but a couple things
come to mind.

First off, have you tried a different chassis?  It could be a problem with
the backplane on the thing.

Also, as I remember, you have to tell the netserver which slot the modems
start in, or they default to slot 1, which is the T1 card.

That's all that pops into my head... Hope it helps.

-----------------

> OK, I'm stumped on something, and I'm hoping it's something really stupid
> and simple that I overlooked.  Unfortunately, I can't quite seem to find
> what it is that I overlooked.
>
> I've got a used TC Chassis, loaded with v.34 Quad Modem Cards, a dual T1
> NIC, NetServer, and NMC.
>
> When configuring the modem-DS0 assignments in the T1 NIC, I get this for
> status after doing an "N: 1-48 to 1-48":
>
> T1 Span Line 1 DS0/Modem Status
>
>
>   DS0 DS0          Modem        Slot/   DS0 DS0          Modem        SLOT/
>       Status       Status       Chan        Status       Status       chan
>
>   1   IDLE         UNAVAIL      2\1     13  IDLE         IDLE         5\1
>   2   IDLE         UNAVAIL      2\2     14  IDLE         IDLE         5\2
>   3   IDLE         UNAVAIL      2\3     15  IDLE         IDLE         5\3
>   4   IDLE         UNAVAIL      2\4     16  IDLE         IDLE         5\4
>   5   IDLE         IDLE         3\1     17  IDLE         UNAVAIL      6\1
>   6   IDLE         IDLE         3\2     18  IDLE         UNAVAIL      6\2
>   7   IDLE         IDLE         3\3     19  IDLE         UNAVAIL      6\3
>   8   IDLE         IDLE         3\4     20  IDLE         UNAVAIL      6\4
>   9   IDLE         IDLE         4\1     21  IDLE         IDLE         7\1
>   10  IDLE         IDLE         4\2     22  IDLE         IDLE         7\2
>   11  IDLE         IDLE         4\3     23  IDLE         IDLE         7\3
>   12  IDLE         IDLE         4\4     24  IDLE         IDLE         7\4
>
> I have a quad modem cards in slots 2 and 6, but no matter what, they show
> up unavailable.  I am guessing that configuration in the NetServer can
> affect this, but all modems are "on" as far as I can tell.
>
> Also, how does one get ahold of updated firmware for the v.34 modems, NMC,
> NIC, and NetServer cards and also the Total Control Manager software from
> Commworks?  I'm guessing via "service contract" may be my only hope, which
> from what I read is potentially a mammoth joke.  Worth
> it?  Advice?  (NAC/NIC running 3.2.0, NetServer running 3.2.27, and NMC
> running 4.1.3)
>
> I bought this beast used w/o software, and I'm guessing the TCM interface
> may be a little more user friendly, and maybe show me the error of my
> ways.  Don't get me wrong, I'm no stranger to CLI's, just that I don't
> particularly care for USR's CLI on the total control!
>
> I'm hoping I'll be happy with this thing once I have it running, otherwise
> I have a very large and heavy door stop.
>
> Thanks for any and all help in advance.
>
>
> Brad
>
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>

| Curtis V. Shambeau  |  [e-mail] |  Sr Vice President |
|  CoreComm, LTD, formerly Voyager.net and ExecPC - Wisconsin Office    |
|    "Those who can't laugh at themselves leave the job to others"      |


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) Need Config Help, TC NetServer w/ Quads
Date: 26 Mar 2001 10:20:26 -0700

With tcm manager you tell the modem whether it should be on a pri, t1 or nic
card for analog modems.  I am not sure how this is done from the command
prompt. I would put the console cable on the nmc and see if you can get to the
switch setting from there.  It is probably set for nic so the t1 card thinks
it is unavailable.
eric



At 10:51 AM 3/26/01 -0600, Curt Shambeau wrote:
>
>It's been a long time since I played on a Netserver, but a couple things
>come to mind.
>
>First off, have you tried a different chassis?  It could be a problem with
>the backplane on the thing.
>
>Also, as I remember, you have to tell the netserver which slot the modems
>start in, or they default to slot 1, which is the T1 card.
>
>That's all that pops into my head... Hope it helps.
>
>-----------------
>
>> OK, I'm stumped on something, and I'm hoping it's something really stupid
>> and simple that I overlooked.  Unfortunately, I can't quite seem to find
>> what it is that I overlooked.
>>
>> I've got a used TC Chassis, loaded with v.34 Quad Modem Cards, a dual T1
>> NIC, NetServer, and NMC.
>>
>> When configuring the modem-DS0 assignments in the T1 NIC, I get this for
>> status after doing an "N: 1-48 to 1-48":
>>
>> T1 Span Line 1 DS0/Modem Status
>>
>>
>>   DS0 DS0          Modem        Slot/   DS0 DS0          Modem        SLOT/
>>       Status       Status       Chan        Status       Status       chan
>>
>>   1   IDLE         UNAVAIL      2\1     13  IDLE         IDLE         5\1
>>   2   IDLE         UNAVAIL      2\2     14  IDLE         IDLE         5\2
>>   3   IDLE         UNAVAIL      2\3     15  IDLE         IDLE         5\3
>>   4   IDLE         UNAVAIL      2\4     16  IDLE         IDLE         5\4
>>   5   IDLE         IDLE         3\1     17  IDLE         UNAVAIL      6\1
>>   6   IDLE         IDLE         3\2     18  IDLE         UNAVAIL      6\2
>>   7   IDLE         IDLE         3\3     19  IDLE         UNAVAIL      6\3
>>   8   IDLE         IDLE         3\4     20  IDLE         UNAVAIL      6\4
>>   9   IDLE         IDLE         4\1     21  IDLE         IDLE         7\1
>>   10  IDLE         IDLE         4\2     22  IDLE         IDLE         7\2
>>   11  IDLE         IDLE         4\3     23  IDLE         IDLE         7\3
>>   12  IDLE         IDLE         4\4     24  IDLE         IDLE         7\4
>>
>> I have a quad modem cards in slots 2 and 6, but no matter what, they show
>> up unavailable.  I am guessing that configuration in the NetServer can
>> affect this, but all modems are "on" as far as I can tell.
>>
>> Also, how does one get ahold of updated firmware for the v.34 modems, NMC,
>> NIC, and NetServer cards and also the Total Control Manager software from
>> Commworks?  I'm guessing via "service contract" may be my only hope, which
>> from what I read is potentially a mammoth joke.  Worth
>> it?  Advice?  (NAC/NIC running 3.2.0, NetServer running 3.2.27, and NMC
>> running 4.1.3)
>>
>> I bought this beast used w/o software, and I'm guessing the TCM interface
>> may be a little more user friendly, and maybe show me the error of my
>> ways.  Don't get me wrong, I'm no stranger to CLI's, just that I don't
>> particularly care for USR's CLI on the total control!
>>
>> I'm hoping I'll be happy with this thing once I have it running, otherwise
>> I have a very large and heavy door stop.
>>
>> Thanks for any and all help in advance.
>>
>>
>> Brad
>>
>>
>> -
>>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>| Curtis V. Shambeau  |  [e-mail] |  Sr Vice President |
>|  CoreComm, LTD, formerly Voyager.net and ExecPC - Wisconsin Office    |
>|    "Those who can't laugh at themselves leave the job to others"      |
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>-
> To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Brian Becker" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (usr-tc) V.92
Date: 26 Mar 2001 12:51:07 -0600

The 5x00 code is now in Total Scrutinizer and will be released tomorrow along with Patton and Ascend Max/TNT. Unfortunately, 3Com
again wins on what you can get on a modem. NONE of the other products allows Signal-to-Noise to be grabbed over SNMP. A Cisco
product manager for RAS has asked for a list of items that don't work or aren't available and said they would correct that..but who
knows how long that takes.

Ascend sucks with their info...all the modem info is only available on TNT AND then only when you install a specific card for
diagnostic testing.

Our Techs rely heavily on TotalScrutinizer so I'm not sure we can't jump ship from 3Com until the other manufacturers catch up.
Which might not ever happen.

We are seeing the identical connection rates between the 5400 and the 3Com box. But link timeouts and retrains seem much higher with
3Com. So I seem to like the 5400 at this point.

One thing you can't do on the 5400 (you can on 53xx) is init the modems differently for a different DNIS number so limiting to v.34
for a certain phone number won't be possible without that being fixed.

Brian


Brian Becker
President, Poplar Bluff Internet, Inc. (www.semo.net)
Home of TotallyFabricated.com Software:
  Total Scrutinizer (www.TotalScrutinizer.com) - Tech Support Just Got Easier!
  WebGabber (www.WebGabber.com) - html-based Chat Software

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Jonathan Byrne
Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2001 10:08 PM


Brian Becker ([e-mail]) wrote:

> We are demoing a 5400 from Cisco and I can tell you that it doesn't give
> any better performance than the Total Control.

We're demoing an AS5300 right now and are pretty happy with it.
The only items still pending evaluation are the PIAFS code and
Cisco Works, but if we don't hit a showstopper, we've probably
bought our last 3Com RAS.

Do you plan to put Cisco support into Total Scrutinizer, BTW?

> We don't have their
> CiscoWorks software so I'm not sure what it can do, but I REALLY like
> TCManager for figuring out problems.

TCM is a very good product, and I will certainly be comparing CiscoWorks
against that standard.  In fact, TCM is what we like best about 3Com
gear.  As you say, it's pretty good for figuring out problems (basic
ones, anyway).  But then, so is the debugging output in IOS :-)

Cheers,

Jonathan Byrne, CCNA                            Network Engineer

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.



-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jorge Lozano" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) HiperDSP with Netserver
Date: 27 Mar 2001 17:22:01 -0500

Hello world!
Can I use a HiperDSP with a Netserver Card? if yes... can you give any
information about how can I configure my Netserver?
If I use a HiperDSP, and Dual E1/Quad cards in same chassis, and Netserver
but I dont have a V90 feature enabled in NMC, can I use V90 with DSP ports?

Thanks for all!


Jorge Lozano <[e-mail]>
NA and ISSO Andinet On Line <http://www.andinet.com>
The only way to predict the future is... to create it!


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Steve Monkhouse" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (usr-tc) HiperDSP with Netserver
Date: 28 Mar 2001 08:24:13 +1000

Yep.. I do exactly the same thing..

The x2/v90 is in the DSP code, so it dosent matter whether you have enable
feature in the NMC..

The Dual e-1 will handle the PRI's for the quads... The only problem you may
run into is that the netserver ( both 4mb and 16mb models im sure ). can
only terminate up to 90 calls per card.. and therefore you'll need
multinetservers..

Solution.. if you dont have any spare netservers.. get an arc..

Steve


-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Jorge Lozano
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 8:22 AM


Hello world!
Can I use a HiperDSP with a Netserver Card? if yes... can you give any
information about how can I configure my Netserver?
If I use a HiperDSP, and Dual E1/Quad cards in same chassis, and Netserver
but I dont have a V90 feature enabled in NMC, can I use V90 with DSP ports?

Thanks for all!


Jorge Lozano <[e-mail]>
NA and ISSO Andinet On Line <http://www.andinet.com>
The only way to predict the future is... to create it!


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jeff Mcadams <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) HiperDSP with Netserver
Date: 27 Mar 2001 22:39:25 -0500

Also sprach Steve Monkhouse
>Yep.. I do exactly the same thing..

>The x2/v90 is in the DSP code, so it dosent matter whether you have
>enable feature in the NMC..

>The Dual e-1 will handle the PRI's for the quads... The only problem
>you may run into is that the netserver ( both 4mb and 16mb models im
>sure ). can only terminate up to 90 calls per card.. and therefore
>you'll need multinetservers..

Uhm...you sure of that?  ISTR that depending on the code version, the
NETServer supported something like 60 ports, then 96, then 100.  Of
course, I use the term "support" here fairly lightly, as running 96
ports of modems against a NETServer is a *SURE* way to get your
customers to complain about Quake Lag.

Of course, running E1, 96 wouldn't be enough, so you are still talking
multi-NETServers...of course, that cuts down the number of E1's you can
handle, which puts it back under the 96/100'ish limit on the
NETServer...sucks to be you.  :)  It works nicely (except for the Quake
Lag) with T1.
--
Jeff McAdams                            Email: [e-mail]
Head Network Administrator              Voice: [phone]
IgLou Internet Services                        [phone]

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) HiperDSP with Netserver
Date: 28 Mar 2001 07:05:16 -0700

I use Total Control Manager Version 5.5.1 what version of tcm begins to
support the hyper dsp cards and how can it be obtained?
thanks
eric



At 10:39 PM 3/27/01 -0500, you wrote:
>Also sprach Steve Monkhouse
>>Yep.. I do exactly the same thing..
>
>>The x2/v90 is in the DSP code, so it dosent matter whether you have
>>enable feature in the NMC..
>
>>The Dual e-1 will handle the PRI's for the quads... The only problem
>>you may run into is that the netserver ( both 4mb and 16mb models im
>>sure ). can only terminate up to 90 calls per card.. and therefore
>>you'll need multinetservers..
>
>Uhm...you sure of that?  ISTR that depending on the code version, the
>NETServer supported something like 60 ports, then 96, then 100.  Of
>course, I use the term "support" here fairly lightly, as running 96
>ports of modems against a NETServer is a *SURE* way to get your
>customers to complain about Quake Lag.
>
>Of course, running E1, 96 wouldn't be enough, so you are still talking
>multi-NETServers...of course, that cuts down the number of E1's you can
>handle, which puts it back under the 96/100'ish limit on the
>NETServer...sucks to be you.  :)  It works nicely (except for the Quake
>Lag) with T1.
>--
>Jeff McAdams                            Email: [e-mail]
>Head Network Administrator              Voice: [phone]
>IgLou Internet Services                        [phone]
>
>-
> To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Robert Jimenez" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) Total Control Manager
Date: 28 Mar 2001 14:55:27 -0700


Recently we bought another ISP and their equipment which included a USR
Total Control 1000.  We have an old copy of the Total Control Manager, but
it will only work on Windows 95/98.  The only machine running windows 98
finally died and now we do not have access to the total control manager.  Is
there another way to get a more current copy of that software that will run
on windows NT/2000 or even Linux without paying Commworks exorbatant prices?

Thanks for any info you have.

Robert Jimenez -- System/Network Administrator
Singlepoint Resources
http://www.singlepoint.net
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Mike Andrews <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) PRI service message docs
Date: 29 Mar 2001 01:56:54 -0500 (EST)

Hey folks...  Anyone have any good low-level docs on PRI service messages?
Anyone know q.931 and q.921 really well?

I'm trying to track down a really bizarre PRI problem I'm having with the
telco in one city.  The HiPer DSP software (2.1.9) doesn't appear to give
you much in the way of D-channel debugging at all... except for the
"trc debug 25 2" command that gives a hex dump of the packets on the
console.

So, I'm writing a program to take that hex dump and turn it into something
readable.  (Hey, it's a good excuse to finally learn about q.931, too.)
It mostly works, except for service messages -- it doesn't really grok
them correctly.  In particular they come in with weird protocol
discriminator numbers like 0x03 and 0x43 instead of the usual 0x08.
Unfortunately, Google is not helping me as much as it usually does here.

The specific PRI problem is calls aren't hitting my PRI's; it takes about
10 calls and starts to fast-busy or dead-air... *sometimes* calls will
roll over to the next PRI, sometimes not.  Every so often the switch sends
a series of service messages with protocol discriminator 0x43, with a list
of B-channels -- probably the switch thinks my lines are busied out and it
wants me to restore them.  The DSP does not acknowledge these packets.
I've been able to fix this condition before by rebooting the DSP's, but
that doesn't exactly tell me why it's happening in the first place....
One theory is that maybe the telco is set to NI-2 instead of DMS-100
Custom... of course they say it's set to DMS anyway...


Mike Andrews * [e-mail] * [e-mail] * http://www.bit0.com
VP, sysadmin, & network guy, Digital Crescent Inc, Frankfort KY
Internet access for Frankfort, Lexington, Louisville and surrounding counties
www.fark.com: If it's not news, it's Fark.  (Or something like that.)


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Aaron Nabil <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) Wanted: quad nics
Date: 28 Mar 2001 23:03:50 -0800 (PST)


I need some quad modem nics for a project, they can be either
analog/digital or just digital, I only need the rs-232 port.  Need the
special cables too. :)

I might have a few netserver cards around in case a trade is possible, and
I have plenty of blank panels in case you need to fill the holes.

Reply via email to me, [e-mail], not to the list.

thx,

-a


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Brian Becker" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (usr-tc) Wanted: quad nics
Date: 29 Mar 2001 06:13:00 -0600

I'm pretty sure I have some cables if you run short

Brian Becker
President, Poplar Bluff Internet, Inc. (www.semo.net)
Home of TotallyFabricated.com Software:
  Total Scrutinizer (www.TotalScrutinizer.com) - Tech Support Just Got Easier!
  WebGabber (www.WebGabber.com) - html-based Chat Software

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Aaron Nabil
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 1:04 AM



I need some quad modem nics for a project, they can be either
analog/digital or just digital, I only need the rs-232 port.  Need the
special cables too. :)

I might have a few netserver cards around in case a trade is possible, and
I have plenty of blank panels in case you need to fill the holes.

Reply via email to me, [e-mail], not to the list.

thx,

-a


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.



-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Brian Becker" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (usr-tc) PRI service message docs
Date: 29 Mar 2001 06:18:30 -0600

Hi Mike,
We've seen something similar to your description several times with different telcos (not pri though...channelized T1s) and
requested the tester to submit a ticket to switch to a spare circuit. Every time we've been told we would have to pay for rolling
the trucks and we agreed...knowing that if it fixed the problem then they couldn't charge us. Never paid yet!

Brian Becker
President, Poplar Bluff Internet, Inc. (www.semo.net)
Home of TotallyFabricated.com Software:
  Total Scrutinizer (www.TotalScrutinizer.com) - Tech Support Just Got Easier!
  WebGabber (www.WebGabber.com) - html-based Chat Software

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Mike Andrews
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 12:57 AM


Hey folks...  Anyone have any good low-level docs on PRI service messages?
Anyone know q.931 and q.921 really well?

I'm trying to track down a really bizarre PRI problem I'm having with the
telco in one city.  The HiPer DSP software (2.1.9) doesn't appear to give
you much in the way of D-channel debugging at all... except for the
"trc debug 25 2" command that gives a hex dump of the packets on the
console.

So, I'm writing a program to take that hex dump and turn it into something
readable.  (Hey, it's a good excuse to finally learn about q.931, too.)
It mostly works, except for service messages -- it doesn't really grok
them correctly.  In particular they come in with weird protocol
discriminator numbers like 0x03 and 0x43 instead of the usual 0x08.
Unfortunately, Google is not helping me as much as it usually does here.

The specific PRI problem is calls aren't hitting my PRI's; it takes about
10 calls and starts to fast-busy or dead-air... *sometimes* calls will
roll over to the next PRI, sometimes not.  Every so often the switch sends
a series of service messages with protocol discriminator 0x43, with a list
of B-channels -- probably the switch thinks my lines are busied out and it
wants me to restore them.  The DSP does not acknowledge these packets.
I've been able to fix this condition before by rebooting the DSP's, but
that doesn't exactly tell me why it's happening in the first place....
One theory is that maybe the telco is set to NI-2 instead of DMS-100
Custom... of course they say it's set to DMS anyway...


Mike Andrews * [e-mail] * [e-mail] * http://www.bit0.com
VP, sysadmin, & network guy, Digital Crescent Inc, Frankfort KY
Internet access for Frankfort, Lexington, Louisville and surrounding counties
www.fark.com: If it's not news, it's Fark.  (Or something like that.)


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.



-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: LUIS MIRABAL <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) DNIS on Quads
Date: 29 Mar 2001 11:28:05 AST

Hi all

Somebody knows if Quad Modems can get DNIS/ANI from Telco and pass it to =
the
RADIUS via NetServer/ARC ?
How can I set up that ?

Regards

Luis Mirabal


____________________________________________________________________
Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=3D=
1

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Mark Thornton" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) PRI service message docs
Date: 29 Mar 2001 09:40:47 -0600

We had a similar situation here. Remember that PRI's are really T1's with
differentl stripes. T1's are typically delivered via HDSL in two 768kbps
segments. You can lose half a T1 and still keep going. In our case the half
that failed on the PRI did not include the B channel so the switch and our
end thought everything was OK. When we brought it up to the telco they found
the problem rather quickly, a bad splice in the pair to our facility.

Mark Thornton
San Marcos Internet, Inc.
512-393-5300


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 12:56 AM


> Hey folks...  Anyone have any good low-level docs on PRI service messages?
> Anyone know q.931 and q.921 really well?
>
> I'm trying to track down a really bizarre PRI problem I'm having with the
> telco in one city.  The HiPer DSP software (2.1.9) doesn't appear to give
> you much in the way of D-channel debugging at all... except for the
> "trc debug 25 2" command that gives a hex dump of the packets on the
> console.
>
> So, I'm writing a program to take that hex dump and turn it into something
> readable.  (Hey, it's a good excuse to finally learn about q.931, too.)
> It mostly works, except for service messages -- it doesn't really grok
> them correctly.  In particular they come in with weird protocol
> discriminator numbers like 0x03 and 0x43 instead of the usual 0x08.
> Unfortunately, Google is not helping me as much as it usually does here.
>
> The specific PRI problem is calls aren't hitting my PRI's; it takes about
> 10 calls and starts to fast-busy or dead-air... *sometimes* calls will
> roll over to the next PRI, sometimes not.  Every so often the switch sends
> a series of service messages with protocol discriminator 0x43, with a list
> of B-channels -- probably the switch thinks my lines are busied out and it
> wants me to restore them.  The DSP does not acknowledge these packets.
> I've been able to fix this condition before by rebooting the DSP's, but
> that doesn't exactly tell me why it's happening in the first place....
> One theory is that maybe the telco is set to NI-2 instead of DMS-100
> Custom... of course they say it's set to DMS anyway...
>
>
> Mike Andrews * [e-mail] * [e-mail] * http://www.bit0.com
> VP, sysadmin, & network guy, Digital Crescent Inc, Frankfort KY
> Internet access for Frankfort, Lexington, Louisville and surrounding
counties
> www.fark.com: If it's not news, it's Fark.  (Or something like that.)
>
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Mike Andrews <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) PRI service message docs
Date: 30 Mar 2001 01:27:07 -0500 (EST)

Definitely not what I'm seeing here; the channels that were out were
scattered across the whole range of 24.  Turns out my first guess was
right; the telco was set to NI-2 instead of DMS-100 custom.  But for some
reason it looked to them like it was on DMS-100 at first glance; they had
to dig around to find it.  (Probably because these are on a remote
switch.)

Anyway, I could still use some docs on DMS-100 and NI-2 service messages
(and 5ESS) if anyone's got 'em. :)


Mike Andrews * [e-mail] * [e-mail] * http://www.bit0.com
VP, sysadmin, & network guy, Digital Crescent Inc, Frankfort KY
Internet access for Frankfort, Lexington, Louisville and surrounding counties
www.fark.com: If it's not news, it's Fark.  (Or something like that.)

On Thu, 29 Mar 2001, Mark Thornton wrote:

> We had a similar situation here. Remember that PRI's are really T1's with
> differentl stripes. T1's are typically delivered via HDSL in two 768kbps
> segments. You can lose half a T1 and still keep going. In our case the half
> that failed on the PRI did not include the B channel so the switch and our
> end thought everything was OK. When we brought it up to the telco they found
> the problem rather quickly, a bad splice in the pair to our facility.
>
> Mark Thornton
> San Marcos Internet, Inc.
> 512-393-5300
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Andrews" <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 12:56 AM
> Subject: (usr-tc) PRI service message docs
>
>
> > Hey folks...  Anyone have any good low-level docs on PRI service messages?
> > Anyone know q.931 and q.921 really well?
> >
> > I'm trying to track down a really bizarre PRI problem I'm having with the
> > telco in one city.  The HiPer DSP software (2.1.9) doesn't appear to give
> > you much in the way of D-channel debugging at all... except for the
> > "trc debug 25 2" command that gives a hex dump of the packets on the
> > console.
> >
> > So, I'm writing a program to take that hex dump and turn it into something
> > readable.  (Hey, it's a good excuse to finally learn about q.931, too.)
> > It mostly works, except for service messages -- it doesn't really grok
> > them correctly.  In particular they come in with weird protocol
> > discriminator numbers like 0x03 and 0x43 instead of the usual 0x08.
> > Unfortunately, Google is not helping me as much as it usually does here.
> >
> > The specific PRI problem is calls aren't hitting my PRI's; it takes about
> > 10 calls and starts to fast-busy or dead-air... *sometimes* calls will
> > roll over to the next PRI, sometimes not.  Every so often the switch sends
> > a series of service messages with protocol discriminator 0x43, with a list
> > of B-channels -- probably the switch thinks my lines are busied out and it
> > wants me to restore them.  The DSP does not acknowledge these packets.
> > I've been able to fix this condition before by rebooting the DSP's, but
> > that doesn't exactly tell me why it's happening in the first place....
> > One theory is that maybe the telco is set to NI-2 instead of DMS-100
> > Custom... of course they say it's set to DMS anyway...
> >
> >
> > Mike Andrews * [e-mail] * [e-mail] * http://www.bit0.com
> > VP, sysadmin, & network guy, Digital Crescent Inc, Frankfort KY
> > Internet access for Frankfort, Lexington, Louisville and surrounding
> counties
> > www.fark.com: If it's not news, it's Fark.  (Or something like that.)
> >
> >
> > -
> >  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> >  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
> >  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> >  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>


-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Mark Thornton" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (usr-tc) Minimum Power Supply requirements?
Date: 30 Mar 2001 18:26:31 -0600

What is the minimum power supply requirements for a loaded dsp chassis, say
10 dsp's and 2 arc's? What is required to have redundancy within the
chassis? At what number of cards does a dual 70 amp chassis not provide
redundancy if this is a problem?

Another related question, how many dsp's can be handled by an arc? With the
new multi trunk dsp's the limit must be fairly high. Is there a realistic
need for more than one in a chassis containing only single trunk dsp's?

Mark Thornton
San Marcos Internet, Inc.
512-393-5300




-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe usr-tc" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.