September 2002 - USR-TC - mailman.xmission.com

Disable v.90 based on DNIS
by Mike Wilker 26 Sep '02

26 Sep '02

Does anyone have the steps to set it up so I can have a incoming connection to my HiperDSPs be limited to v.34 based on DNIS? I'd like to set up an alternate number so that customers with problems connecting at v.90 would have that disabled when they use that number. Thanks. Mike Wilker Director of Network Operations Tiger Communications & Local Link USA

1 0

slow connection speeds
by Ralph Forsythe 25 Sep '02

25 Sep '02

Ok, this one is odd. Connecting to a TC chassis (quad analog cards, netserver), I get faster connect speeds from an old Motorola 33.6k modem than from a USR 56k. Does anyone have some magical init string for the USR that would make it connect at higher speeds? Thanks, -rf

2 1

(no subject)
by Jim Sheldon 25 Sep '02

25 Sep '02

I want to be absolutely sure of this. Is there a way to confirm a modem is connected using v.92 via the TCM? I have a lucent v.92 modem. I installed the v.92 modem driver that came with it. I have not been able to test modem on hold yet, but I detect no discernable difference in the length of negotiation. Everything in the TCM call statistics looks the same as a v.90 modem. I also heard there should be a program along with the driver that lets you set upload speed and handles modem on hold. Am I missing something? Jim Sheldon Texas Communications 979-775-6239 x340

3 2

RE: [USR-TC] slow connection speeds
by Joel - Fox Computers 25 Sep '02

25 Sep '02

Something I've noticed along the same lines... With an external USR 33.6 modem, I can dial into a Quad Analog V.34 card at 33.6. But if I dial into a DSP card, I can only get 28.8. What does this mean? Am I getting poor quality into my DSP cards? Even worse - I have two POTS lines - a bad phone line and a good phone line. With a 56K modem, I dial into a DSP on the good line at 49.3K. But using the bad line, I only get 45.3K. However, if I plug the bad phone line into a Quad analog card, I still get 33.6K, whereas I can still only get 28.8 dialing into a DSP from the good line. Also, when I get 45.3K dialing from my "bad" line, I can still dial into my competitors' TC at 49.3K. On my good line, I dial my DSP's at 49.3, but I get 50.6 or 52K dialing my competitor. All this seems to indicate poor quality on my CT1's. But where should a guy start to try to fix this? Telco insists the CT1 lines test perfectly and there's nothing else they can do. Any ideas? Thanks, Joel -----Original Message----- From: Ralph Forsythe [mailto:rf-list@centerone.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 8:29 PM To: usr-tc(a)mailman.xmission.com Subject: [USR-TC] slow connection speeds Ok, this one is odd. Connecting to a TC chassis (quad analog cards, netserver), I get faster connect speeds from an old Motorola 33.6k modem than from a USR 56k. Does anyone have some magical init string for the USR that would make it connect at higher speeds? Thanks, -rf _______________________________________________ USR-TC mailing list USR-TC(a)mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc

1 0

RE: [USR-TC] NAT on TC-1000
by Joel - Fox Computers 25 Sep '02

25 Sep '02

Never played with it - but I have heard that the built-in NAT isn't that good. I have run a TC behind a discrete NAT device without any technical problems. However, we ditched the NAT due to certain things not working. For example - I find that about 90% of my users are using MSN Messenger these days. If you're behind a NAT, you can't send a file to another user or use voice chat. Also had a user that was doing some kind of ham radio streaming audio deal that wouldn't work behind the NAT. So we ditched it. - Joel -----Original Message----- From: Gen Camiling [mailto:gcamiling@imvi.com.ph] Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 8:25 PM To: usr-tc(a)mailman.xmission.com Subject: [USR-TC] NAT on TC-1000 TC-1000 has Hiper System with TCS 4.3 codes loaded on the modules, talk about the NAT feature, is this the same as in the Cisco router's implemention of NAT? In Cisco you assign a particular pool of private IP addresses to the Async modules, then you add a range of public IP address where the private IP address would be translated. Been checking the docs and the KB with not enuff info, anything from anyone on the list will be much appreciated. -- Best regards, Gen ================================== Gen Camiling Chief Technical Officer International Micro Village, Inc. PHILIPPINES (63)(2) 7512130 http://www.imvi.com.ph mailto:gcamiling@imvi.com.ph ================================== _______________________________________________ USR-TC mailing list USR-TC(a)mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc

1 0

It is the TELCO..... =)
by Gen Camiling 25 Sep '02

25 Sep '02

oh by the way with respect on the post i made sometime ago ....with the HiperDSPs showing full utilization once you plugged-in the E1/R2....it is on the TELCO side issue...finally i get to close that deal. -- Best regards, Gen ================================== Gen Camiling Chief Technical Officer International Micro Village, Inc. PHILIPPINES (63)(2) 7512130 http://www.imvi.com.ph mailto:gcamiling@imvi.com.ph ==================================

1 0

NAT on TC-1000
by Gen Camiling 25 Sep '02

25 Sep '02

TC-1000 has Hiper System with TCS 4.3 codes loaded on the modules, talk about the NAT feature, is this the same as in the Cisco router's implemention of NAT? In Cisco you assign a particular pool of private IP addresses to the Async modules, then you add a range of public IP address where the private IP address would be translated. Been checking the docs and the KB with not enuff info, anything from anyone on the list will be much appreciated. -- Best regards, Gen ================================== Gen Camiling Chief Technical Officer International Micro Village, Inc. PHILIPPINES (63)(2) 7512130 http://www.imvi.com.ph mailto:gcamiling@imvi.com.ph ==================================

1 0

how to format flash on NMC?
by Mike Greene 24 Sep '02

24 Sep '02

Still dealing with the NMC problem. Would like to format the flash and reload a new image on the card. The instructions say to enter AT{ZF} to initiate a format before the image is uploaded, however the NMC ignores that command, the only thing it appears to recognize is AT{Z}. The problem I'm having is that slot 15 (rear view) is showing a red ?, it doesn't matter what chassis I have this NMC card in, so it is definitely NMC card related. The hardware rev on the NMC is 3.0 it is the newest version of NMC. - Mike ------------------------------------------------ Rock Island Communications, Inc. (360)-378-5884 http://www.rockisland.com/ San Juan Islands, WA ------------------------------------------------

4 13

EdgeServer PRO power source question...
by Stephen Rivera - WRCA.Net 24 Sep '02

24 Sep '02

I have several dead edgeserver pro cards here and I am trying to identify the power source for the card. Any hints? Can it be replaced with new power? Any information would be helpful. **************************************** Had a delivery come in.... Hiper NMC 33Mhz 3C0504218-00 $2900 each set....only have a couple... - used - 30 day warranty Hiper NMC 003440-00 $1250 each set. - used - 30 day warranty Hiper ARC 128MB $950ea Multi-Span 96 port T1 NIC and NAC - supports NFAS. $4500 each set. - used - 30 day warranty. Hiper DSP T1 - (NIC/NAC set) LIMITED TIME $495.00 each set with a 30 day warranty Hiper DSP E1 - (NIC/NAC set) $1500 each set with 30 day warranty Steve Rivera IM: srivera711 Toll Free: (877)WRCANET x102 DIRECT: 732-833-2034 Fax available equipment to: (732)833-2115 for more product info got www.wrca.net

1 0

RE: [USR-TC] Problem on Multilink
by Joel - Fox Computers 24 Sep '02

24 Sep '02

There lies the problem. You don't know what problems are solved until you get it, and then you still might not know what it fixed unless you get the release notes with it. The issue is this: Something is wrong with version X, they came out with new code to fix it, I'd rather have the update and get it fixed than wait and see if the problem takes me offline some night at 3:00am. ER code tends to fix minor things, that you might not even know are a problem, but would want fixed if you knew about it. Example: You might have one customer with a Brand-X modem getting crappy connections and you don't even know it. But it just might be something that 3Com found and fixed in the latest ER release. Example: If I remember correctly, one of the latest ER releases fixed something in the dictionary which related to how V92 connections are displayed. Nice to have, but probably not any problem you would have opened a service ticket on. Example: I think DSP release 3.5.103 removed a bunch of garbage debugging code from the DSPs. Nothing causing a problem, but I imagine it didn't perform quite as well with a bunch of useless debug code in there. My point is, there's a problem, there's a fix, and because I don't see the problem I can't have the fix. If it was worth some engineer spending a bunch of time fixing, it's probably worth having, whether you need it or not. Additionally, when I bought my support contract from Source-T, I specifically asked if I would have access to latest software and code releases for my hardware. That's what I wanted. This was the #1 reason I paid the $1500. Here I am 3 months later and I don't have that. What I do have is some customers with crappy connections and typically lower connection speeds than my competitors, and no help on that. My only hope was that some code update would make an improvement somewhere along the way. Oh well. - Joel -----Original Message----- From: Cyrus Smith [mailto:cyrus@mtio.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 1:36 PM To: usr-tc(a)mailman.xmission.com Subject: Re: [USR-TC] Problem on Multilink So what are the problems with the older release? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lewis Bergman" <lbergman(a)abi.tconline.net> To: <usr-tc(a)mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 12:11 PM Subject: Re: [USR-TC] Problem on Multilink > On Tuesday 24 September 2002 12:57 pm, Joel - Fox Computers wrote: > > OK - now I'm really unhappy with Source-T. > > > > Finally got them to acknowledge that there are newer ER releases of ARC and > > DSP code available, but they are telling me I'm not allowed to have them > > unless I have the specific problem that is corrected by the new release. > > > > I'm thinking that when the year is up I'm not going to have a specific > > problem that's going to require me to renew my contract with them. > I hate to tell you but that is pretty much the contract that they sign with > 3com. I did sign a contract with solunet and they are obligated to the same > lign. > -- > Lewis Bergman > Texas Communications > 4309 Maple St. > Abilene, TX 79602-8044 > 915-695-6962 ext 115 > > _______________________________________________ > USR-TC mailing list > USR-TC(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc > _______________________________________________ USR-TC mailing list USR-TC(a)mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc

1 0