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: Amit_Tiwari(a)3com.com [SMTP:Amit_Tiwari@3com.com]
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:netadmin@seidata.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 11:21 AM
> To: usr-tc(a)lists.xmission.com
> 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 <mark(a)ccis.com>
> To: usr-tc(a)lists.xmission.com <usr-tc(a)lists.xmission.com>
> 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: owner-usr-tc(a)lists.xmission.com
> >> > [mailto:owner-usr-tc@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Ronald Kushner
> >> > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 5:37 PM
> >> > To: usr-tc(a)lists.xmission.com
> >> > 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 "majordomo(a)xmission.com"
> >> > 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 "majordomo(a)xmission.com"
> >> 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 "majordomo(a)xmission.com"
> > 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 "majordomo(a)xmission.com"
> 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 "majordomo(a)xmission.com"
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.
