- USR-TC - mailman.xmission.com

NFAS and Qwest
by Randy Cosby 13 Aug '02

13 Aug '02

Qwest is going to be offering PRI in one of our service areas soon. We have always used chan-t1 on our total controls up to now. I've read through some of the comments about the hassle of coordinating NFAS with the phone company. If we can convert our lines to PRI, we really don't save much money unless we can run NFAS. Has anyone had experience with Qwest and NFAS? Is it worth the hassle? Randy Cosby Vice President InfoWest, Inc. P: 435-674-0165 x 11 F: 435-674-9654

4 7

RE: [USR-TC] V92 Press Release Offer
by Joel - Fox Computers 12 Aug '02

12 Aug '02

FYI - I'm running V.92 with 3.5.103 on my DSPs and haven't had any other problems. Some users with "V.92" modems get the quick-connect, but don't see any upstream PCM. Others, mostly with USR modems, are getting PCM upstream with speeds like 50.7K-down/30.7K-up. No one is complaining about anything, so it must be doing OK. Of course I don't have 12000 customers either. Joel -----Original Message----- From: Cindy Smith [mailto:cindyo@ktc.com] Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 11:15 AM To: usr-tc(a)mailman.xmission.com Cc: thomas_goodman(a)3com.com Subject: Re: [USR-TC] V92 Press Release Offer Question -- Is this code actually good enough to deploy on wide scale. V.90 was a nightmare for us. We have around 12,000 customers. It took as a very long time to tweak all the different types of modems with various strings. Are we now going to have to go back and undo all of that when we move to V.92? We have the contract for the code. We added the memory, replaced the various cards that needed replacing. I have not upgraded the hubs to the new code out of fear. Fear of the calls pouring in from customers with connection issues that will take us months to straighten out. Thanks in advance for your insight, On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Thomas_Goodman(a)3com.com wrote: > ISPs looking to inform or attract customers about the use of V92 can > contact me OFF LIST about putting out a Joint Press Release. > -- ---------------------------- Cindy Smith 830-896-1111 KTC iNet SysAdmin ---------------------------- _______________________________________________ USR-TC mailing list USR-TC(a)mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc

3 2

RE: [USR-TC] V92 Press Release Offer
by Joel - Fox Computers 12 Aug '02

12 Aug '02

I should qualify that - for those of you that have seen me post on here, I've had a mess of problems, but it turns out none were caused by the DSPs or the version of code we're running. -----Original Message----- From: Joel - Fox Computers Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 12:01 PM To: usr-tc(a)mailman.xmission.com Subject: RE: [USR-TC] V92 Press Release Offer FYI - I'm running V.92 with 3.5.103 on my DSPs and haven't had any other problems. Some users with "V.92" modems get the quick-connect, but don't see any upstream PCM. Others, mostly with USR modems, are getting PCM upstream with speeds like 50.7K-down/30.7K-up. No one is complaining about anything, so it must be doing OK. Of course I don't have 12000 customers either. Joel -----Original Message----- From: Cindy Smith [mailto:cindyo@ktc.com] Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 11:15 AM To: usr-tc(a)mailman.xmission.com Cc: thomas_goodman(a)3com.com Subject: Re: [USR-TC] V92 Press Release Offer Question -- Is this code actually good enough to deploy on wide scale. V.90 was a nightmare for us. We have around 12,000 customers. It took as a very long time to tweak all the different types of modems with various strings. Are we now going to have to go back and undo all of that when we move to V.92? We have the contract for the code. We added the memory, replaced the various cards that needed replacing. I have not upgraded the hubs to the new code out of fear. Fear of the calls pouring in from customers with connection issues that will take us months to straighten out. Thanks in advance for your insight, On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Thomas_Goodman(a)3com.com wrote: > ISPs looking to inform or attract customers about the use of V92 can > contact me OFF LIST about putting out a Joint Press Release. > -- ---------------------------- Cindy Smith 830-896-1111 KTC iNet SysAdmin ---------------------------- _______________________________________________ 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

RE: [USR-TC] V92 Press Release Offer
by Joel - Fox Computers 12 Aug '02

12 Aug '02

I did notice that going from older versions, like 3.1.7 to 3.5.x seemed to lose the settings, but smaller upgrades, like 3.5.12->3.5.103 seem to hold settings no problem. -----Original Message----- From: Cindy Smith [mailto:cindyo@ktc.com] Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 12:53 PM To: usr-tc(a)mailman.xmission.com Subject: RE: [USR-TC] V92 Press Release Offer Any weird "gotchas" on the upgrade. Like loosing all the T1 settings? Thanks -- Cindy On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Joel - Fox Computers wrote: > FYI - I'm running V.92 with 3.5.103 on my DSPs and haven't had any other problems. > > Some users with "V.92" modems get the quick-connect, but don't see any upstream PCM. Others, mostly with USR modems, are getting PCM upstream with speeds like 50.7K-down/30.7K-up. No one is complaining about anything, so it must be doing OK. Of course I don't have 12000 customers either. > > Joel > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Cindy Smith [mailto:cindyo@ktc.com] > Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 11:15 AM > To: usr-tc(a)mailman.xmission.com > Cc: thomas_goodman(a)3com.com > Subject: Re: [USR-TC] V92 Press Release Offer > > > > Question -- Is this code actually good enough to deploy on wide scale. > V.90 was a nightmare for us. We have around 12,000 customers. It took as a > very long time to tweak all the different types of modems with various > strings. Are we now going to have to go back and undo all of that when we > move to V.92? > > We have the contract for the code. We added the memory, replaced the > various cards that needed replacing. I have not upgraded the hubs to the > new code out of fear. Fear of the calls pouring in from customers with > connection issues that will take us months to straighten out. > > Thanks in advance for your insight, > > On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Thomas_Goodman(a)3com.com wrote: > > > ISPs looking to inform or attract customers about the use of V92 can > > contact me OFF LIST about putting out a Joint Press Release. > > > > > -- ---------------------------- Cindy Smith 830-896-1111 KTC iNet SysAdmin ---------------------------- _______________________________________________ USR-TC mailing list USR-TC(a)mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc

1 0

I know this is a long shot....but
by Stephen Rivera - WRCA.Net 09 Aug '02

09 Aug '02

does anyone have a cisco NM-1FE-TX they can part with? I have a customer town and looking to help him out. 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

Fw: [USR-TC] fail calls counters/modem monitoring
by pankaj 09 Aug '02

09 Aug '02

I have console access do dsp, Code is 2.0.50 I done chdev span cmd sunblock But I am eager to to know how it happened to be blocked. --pankaj ----- Original Message ----- From: "pankaj" <pankaj(a)worldgatein.net> To: "Noriega, Alejandro" <ANoriega(a)prima.com.ar> Cc: <usr-tc(a)mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 8:17 PM Subject: Re: [USR-TC] fail calls counters/modem monitoring > Thanks Alejandro, > Its good info for me. > I dont know how do I do telnet to DSP, I normally do telnet the ARC. > Dont know how to see Code for dsps also, Arc is running 4.2.32 > > Is there any docs or manuals or books available for DSP and e1, > t1.....etc...or such a command lists ???? > > > > Thanks > pankaj

1 0

fail calls counters/modem monitoring
by pankaj 09 Aug '02

09 Aug '02

I am observing fail calls(badmodems.pl) for DSPs( e1/r2 lines) performance monitoring. Now I want to reset that calls statistics counters for one DSP only, and want to observe from 1 now. How do I do counter reset for that dsp only ??? I gone through TCS docs online ,but unable to find any proper command. I have 30 channel( slot:1/mod:[1-30]) in one e1/r2, now my telco complaining me that, few out of it are blocked or looped from my end, and so that customers are not able to use all 30 channel, he gave me that channel numbers also. Now I dont know how do I troubleshoot it. and any good way to monitor it in proper way. Regards Pankaj

1 0

Re: [USR-TC] fail calls counters/modem monitoring
by pankaj 09 Aug '02

09 Aug '02

Thanks Alejandro, Its good info for me. I dont know how do I do telnet to DSP, I normally do telnet the ARC. Dont know how to see Code for dsps also, Arc is running 4.2.32 Is there any docs or manuals or books available for DSP and e1, t1.....etc...or such a command lists ???? Thanks pankaj ----- Original Message ----- From: "Noriega, Alejandro" <ANoriega(a)prima.com.ar> To: <pankaj(a)worldgatein.net> Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 6:15 PM Subject: RE: [USR-TC] fail calls counters/modem monitoring Hi Pankaj, You can telnet to yours DSP and do this: chdev span di ata and you will see: Timeslot ABCD ABCD Timeslot ABCD ABCD 00 RX 0000 TX 0000 16 RX 0000 TX 0000 01 RX 1001 TX 1001 17 RX 1001 TX 1001 02 RX 1001 TX 1001 18 RX 1001 TX 1001 03 RX 1001 TX 1001 19 RX 1001 TX 1001 04 RX 1001 TX 1001 20 RX 0001 TX 0101 05 RX 1001 TX 1001 21 RX 1001 TX 1001 06 RX 1001 TX 1001 22 RX 1001 TX 1001 07 RX 1001 TX 1001 23 RX 0001 TX 0101 08 RX 1001 TX 1001 24 RX 1001 TX 1001 09 RX 1001 TX 1001 25 RX 0001 TX 0101 10 RX 1001 TX 1001 26 RX 1001 TX 1001 11 RX 1001 TX 1001 27 RX 0001 TX 0101 12 RX 1001 TX 1001 28 RX 1001 TX 1001 13 RX 1001 TX 1001 29 RX 1001 TX 1001 14 RX 1001 TX 1001 30 RX 0001 TX 0101 15 RX 0001 TX 0101 31 RX 0001 TX 0101 RX 0001 TX 0101 means that you have a call conected. RX 1001 TX 1001 means that you have that ds0 idle RX 1001 TX 1101 means that you are sending block signal RX 1101 TX 1001 means that your telco is sending block signal I have E1 working too :) Where are you from? What code version are you using in yours HiPerDSP. We could exchange a lot of information. There isn't much peoplo in the list who share the information and/or software. Best Regards, Alejandro. -----Original Message----- From: pankaj [mailto:pankaj@worldgatein.net] Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 7:50 AM To: usr-tc(a)mailman.xmission.com Subject: [USR-TC] fail calls counters/modem monitoring I am observing fail calls(badmodems.pl) for DSPs( e1/r2 lines) performance monitoring. Now I want to reset that calls statistics counters for one DSP only, and want to observe from 1 now. How do I do counter reset for that dsp only ??? I gone through TCS docs online ,but unable to find any proper command. I have 30 channel( slot:1/mod:[1-30]) in one e1/r2, now my telco complaining me that, few out of it are blocked or looped from my end, and so that customers are not able to use all 30 channel, he gave me that channel numbers also. Now I dont know how do I troubleshoot it. and any good way to monitor it in proper way. Regards Pankaj _______________________________________________ USR-TC mailing list USR-TC(a)mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc

1 0

Dufus question perhaps: DHCP on ethernet possible with ARC? How t o setup if so?
by Scott Trautman 08 Aug '02

08 Aug '02

I looked around, saw DHCP proxy, but not DHCP. I'm simply looking to be able to plug in at my pop location with a laptop and go. It's not a big deal at all, it's gotten real simple with Win2K/XP to set IP's, but I'd like it to be ...brainless... which DHCP usually is. Thanks mucho! SMT Scott Trautman President/Owner www.gdinet.com Global Dialog Internet 608-240-4638,7fax scott(a)gdinet.com Internet Service across southern Wisconsin

1 0

RE: [USR-TC] NFAS and Qwest
by BSmith＠solunet.com 08 Aug '02

08 Aug '02

Randy, >From my experiences with NFAS, it is pretty easy to setup, as long as your Telco knows how to do it properly. The only thing that I do not really like with NFAS is that you need to have at least 3 or 4 PRIs to make it worth the trouble. The reason being, you can have 2 PRIs running NFAS with only 1 D channel, but what happens when that D channel goes out? You loose BOTH PRIs. Ahhh, not to good. So, then you would want to have a backup D channel. So, that would put it at 2 PRIs. Still not really saving anything, but when you go to 3 PRI then you get 1 channel back. Depending on how many PRIs you have coming into your POP should determine if you want to run NFAS. Most of the features you get with a PRI you can order with a Channelized T1. The best feature you would get is the 64K ISDN, but then you also loose a channel. I would say if you were going to get at least 3 PRIs, and Qwest knows how to setup NFAS, get it. But, if your only getting like 2 PRIs, do not bother! Hope that helps! Brian Smith CCNA, NCSA Network Support Engineer SOLUSERVE www.solunet.com 1571 Robert J. Conlan Blvd., Suite 110 Palm Bay, FL 32905 (888)449-5766 fax: (321)-676-1287 -----Original Message----- From: Randy Cosby [mailto:dcosby@infowest.com] Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 1:36 PM To: usr-tc(a)mailman.xmission.com Subject: [USR-TC] NFAS and Qwest Qwest is going to be offering PRI in one of our service areas soon. We have always used chan-t1 on our total controls up to now. I've read through some of the comments about the hassle of coordinating NFAS with the phone company. If we can convert our lines to PRI, we really don't save much money unless we can run NFAS. Has anyone had experience with Qwest and NFAS? Is it worth the hassle? Randy Cosby Vice President InfoWest, Inc. P: 435-674-0165 x 11 F: 435-674-9654 _______________________________________________ USR-TC mailing list USR-TC(a)mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc

1 0