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----- From: Curt Shambeau <curt@execpc.com> To: USR <usr-tc@lists.xmission.com> Date: Wednesday, March 14, 2001 12:48 PM Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
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 | curt.shambeau@voyager.net | 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 "majordomo@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@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.
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: jeffm@iglou.com Head Network Administrator Voice: (502) 966-3848 IgLou Internet Services (800) 436-4456 - To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "majordomo@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.
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 "majordomo@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.
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 | curt.shambeau@voyager.net | 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 "majordomo@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.
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: jeffm@iglou.com Head Network Administrator Voice: (502) 966-3848 IgLou Internet Services (800) 436-4456
- To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "majordomo@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@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.
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 * mandrews@dcr.net * mandrews@bit0.com * 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 "majordomo@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.
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@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.
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----- From: owner-usr-tc@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-usr-tc@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Ronald Kushner Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 6:37 PM To: usr-tc@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@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@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.
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@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@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@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@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.
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@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@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@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@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@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.
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: owner-usr-tc@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@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@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@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@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.
-- Jeff McAdams Email: jeffm@iglou.com Head Network Administrator Voice: (502) 966-3848 IgLou Internet Services (800) 436-4456 - To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "majordomo@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.
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 "majordomo@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.
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 "majordomo@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.
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 | curt.shambeau@voyager.net | 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 "majordomo@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.
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: jeffm@iglou.com Head Network Administrator Voice: (502) 966-3848 IgLou Internet Services (800) 436-4456
- To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "majordomo@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@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@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.
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 ----- From: "Dale Hege" <fhege@sover.net> To: <usr-tc@lists.xmission.com> Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 6:33 AM Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
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: jeffm@iglou.com Head Network Administrator Voice: (502) 966-3848 IgLou Internet Services (800) 436-4456
- To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "majordomo@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@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@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@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.
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 "majordomo@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.
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 firstname_lastname@3com.com, 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), Irfan_Ali@3com.com and if it concerns an issue (as I suspect it at least partially does) with support contracts, Al Huefner, Al_Huefner@3com.com 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: jeffm@iglou.com Head Network Administrator Voice: (502) 966-3848 IgLou Internet Services (800) 436-4456 - To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "majordomo@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.
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 "majordomo@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.
Does Cisco still have a low-density unit? Has it been confirmed that they will support V.92? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lists" <lists@aussie.nu> To: <usr-tc@lists.xmission.com> 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 "majordomo@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@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.
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: jeffm@iglou.com Head Network Administrator Voice: (502) 966-3848 IgLou Internet Services (800) 436-4456 - To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "majordomo@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.
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 * mandrews@dcr.net * mandrews@bit0.com * 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" <lists@aussie.nu> To: <usr-tc@lists.xmission.com> 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 "majordomo@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.
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: owner-usr-tc@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-usr-tc@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Mike Andrews Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2001 9:39 AM To: usr-tc@lists.xmission.com 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 * mandrews@dcr.net * mandrews@bit0.com * 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" <lists@aussie.nu> To: <usr-tc@lists.xmission.com> 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 "majordomo@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@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.
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 | curt.shambeau@voyager.net | 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 "majordomo@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.
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: jeffm@iglou.com Head Network Administrator Voice: (502) 966-3848 IgLou Internet Services (800) 436-4456 - To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "majordomo@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.
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 ----- From: "Jeff Mcadams" <jeffm@iglou.com> To: <usr-tc@lists.xmission.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2001 11:37 AM Subject: Re: (usr-tc) V.92
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: jeffm@iglou.com Head Network Administrator Voice: (502) 966-3848 IgLou Internet Services (800) 436-4456
- To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "majordomo@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@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.
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 | curt.shambeau@voyager.net | 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 "majordomo@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.
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 "majordomo@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.
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 "majordomo@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.
participants (15)
-
Andrew (NetFlash System Administrator) -
Cheryl Johnson -
Curt Shambeau -
Dale Hege -
Jeff Mcadams -
Lance Eves -
Lists -
Lon R. Stockton, Jr. -
mark ross -
Mark Thornton -
Mike Andrews -
Mike Wilker -
Randy Cosby -
Ronald Kushner -
Sheldon Koehler