Let me start out by saying WOW, it seems that whenever there is a posting from CommWorks to the List it causes a volley of flames. The sad part is some feel that we at CommWorks don't care about the small ISPs. When we try to let you know about something happening for the TC1000 it is met with some strange comments. For those that don't go to the Total Service or CommWorks web site from time to time I post things to make you aware. I monitor this list just to keep myself aware of what's going on. Its great to see a community of Technical people helping each other out on USR-TC. I know that many people use this list because the have no other access to Technical Support. Some may not have a Contracts while others have no Warrantee because the bought used. My apologies for the disruptions that my postings seem to cause. To set some things straight: CommWorks is a wholly owned subsidiary of 3Com. 3Com sold off Palm and spun off the Courier and Sportster Modem division which bought the name US Robotics. 3Com and USR are not structured apart they are two different companies. CommWorks has no say in what other companies do on end user modems or any other product you sell to the end user. If you have complaints about software not doing something open a Service Ticket so its addressed. Posting or Complaining on the USR-TC list does not accomplish this. If its not resolved escalate it with us. If you don't need the ability to put 1,152 ports in one chassis using Mulit-Spans look at the TCS 4.7 release notes and decide if there is really any need to move past TCS 4.5 and the ER code for DSPs. If not then TCM is not an issue. TCM had a cost associated with it. It came with the bundles. CEM has a cost associated which is $1,000 list price for the entry level 1-5 element version. TCM was about $2,059 list price that would allow control of 1 element. Most ISP open several windows to view more. CEM has had an Evaluation Program going on for months. If you bought gear from Authorized Reseller you would have known this. Yes, you need a Support Contract to have access to download the Evaluation Software. About the Green. We are a business just as your ISP is a business. We help out customers just as you help out customers. One difference we have Partners that sell yearly contracts for Support and ISPs sell monthly access to the Internet. Let me know if you give out Free access to people that built your company. Changing to a another RAS vendor, As much as it would pain me to loose some of you as customers I realize that churn is part of the industry you deal with every day. I have traded out several Cisco, Lucent, (Ascend & Livingston) and even Patton boxes. I have even had people come back when the as you do when they find the other guy is not better but just different. There were comments from both bigger and smaller ISPs on there experiences with other vendors. I also sit on the user lists of my competition and see the negativity posted there too. Frankly some posts on the USR-TC list back in Feb/Mar when V92 was released stated they were trading out all there gear and 9 months later they still have the same comment. We are not perfect but strive to be. We create programs to help out the smaller ISPs with price. We offer Competitive Trade outs that gives you a way out of older technologies. Thanks for reading, Tom Goodman Channel Account Manager
In regards to all the comparisons with my ISP and charging money, let's make one of those comparisons. Suppose that I, the ISP, upgrade to V92/V44 and then require my customers to connect with V92 and V44 or else they get no connection. I've made them pay for a year up front for service, and they are a few months into the year. They call, and I say "sorry, the new modem code requires you to go out and buy a new modem to use the service." No suppose they ask for a refund. Do I give it to them? Well, most likely YES I would if I didn't want to be sued or have them bad mouthing me to all their friends and business associates. So, let's compare that to Commworks. "We sold you a year contract for software upgrades, oh yeah, for $2000+ -- but we're sorry, even though you paid for software updates you can't use them without spending another $1000" So, is Commworks now offering to refund the money of those service support contracts that are now useless without CEM? Steve
-----Original Message----- From: usr-tc-admin@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:usr-tc-admin@mailman.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Thomas_Goodman@3com.com Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 9:10 AM To: usr-tc@mailman.xmission.com Subject: [USR-TC] Response
We are not perfect but strive to be. We create programs to help out the smaller ISPs with price. We offer Competitive Trade outs that gives you a way out of older technologies.
Rebates are great, if you get them. I'm still trying to get my 3600.00 check from 3COM for a competitive trade-in, going on 10 months now. Many emails, phone calls and faxes and still no resolution. I love the product, but I question the customer service capability. - Mike ------------------------------------------------ Rock Island Communications, Inc. (360)-378-5884 http://www.rockisland.com/ San Juan Islands, WA ------------------------------------------------
I would question whether 3Com is striving to be perfect, or even be amiable. It would seem to me that one of the qualities in seeking perfection is to shed arrogance. If there is one thing that 3Com has, it is an abundance of its arrogance. At 09:30 AM 11/20/2002 -0800, you wrote:
We are not perfect but strive to be. We create programs to help out the smaller ISPs with price. We offer Competitive Trade outs that gives you a way out of older technologies.
Rebates are great, if you get them. I'm still trying to get my 3600.00 check from 3COM for a competitive trade-in, going on 10 months now.
Many emails, phone calls and faxes and still no resolution.
I love the product, but I question the customer service capability.
- Mike
------------------------------------------------ Rock Island Communications, Inc. (360)-378-5884 http://www.rockisland.com/ San Juan Islands, WA ------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ USR-TC mailing list USR-TC@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc
Tom, Thanks for your comments. Seth ----- Original Message ----- From: <Thomas_Goodman@3com.com> To: <usr-tc@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 9:10 AM Subject: [USR-TC] Response
Let me start out by saying WOW, it seems that whenever there is a posting from CommWorks to the List it causes a volley of flames. The sad part is some feel that we at CommWorks don't care about the small ISPs. When we try to let you know about something happening for the TC1000 it is met with some strange comments.
For those that don't go to the Total Service or CommWorks web site from time to time I post things to make you aware. I monitor this list just to keep myself aware of what's going on. Its great to see a community of Technical people helping each other out on USR-TC. I know that many people use this list because the have no other access to Technical Support. Some may not have a Contracts while others have no Warrantee because the bought used. My apologies for the disruptions that my postings seem to cause.
To set some things straight: CommWorks is a wholly owned subsidiary of 3Com. 3Com sold off Palm and spun off the Courier and Sportster Modem division which bought the name US Robotics. 3Com and USR are not structured apart they are two different companies. CommWorks has no say in what other companies do on end user modems or any other product you sell to the end user.
If you have complaints about software not doing something open a Service Ticket so its addressed. Posting or Complaining on the USR-TC list does not accomplish this. If its not resolved escalate it with us.
If you don't need the ability to put 1,152 ports in one chassis using Mulit-Spans look at the TCS 4.7 release notes and decide if there is really any need to move past TCS 4.5 and the ER code for DSPs. If not then TCM is not an issue.
TCM had a cost associated with it. It came with the bundles. CEM has a cost associated which is $1,000 list price for the entry level 1-5 element version. TCM was about $2,059 list price that would allow control of 1 element. Most ISP open several windows to view more.
CEM has had an Evaluation Program going on for months. If you bought gear from Authorized Reseller you would have known this. Yes, you need a Support Contract to have access to download the Evaluation Software.
About the Green. We are a business just as your ISP is a business. We help out customers just as you help out customers. One difference we have Partners that sell yearly contracts for Support and ISPs sell monthly access to the Internet. Let me know if you give out Free access to people that built your company.
Changing to a another RAS vendor, As much as it would pain me to loose some of you as customers I realize that churn is part of the industry you deal with every day. I have traded out several Cisco, Lucent, (Ascend & Livingston) and even Patton boxes. I have even had people come back when the as you do when they find the other guy is not better but just different. There were comments from both bigger and smaller ISPs on there experiences with other vendors. I also sit on the user lists of my competition and see the negativity posted there too. Frankly some posts on the USR-TC list back in Feb/Mar when V92 was released stated they were trading out all there gear and 9 months later they still have the same comment.
We are not perfect but strive to be. We create programs to help out the smaller ISPs with price. We offer Competitive Trade outs that gives you a way out of older technologies.
Thanks for reading,
Tom Goodman Channel Account Manager
_______________________________________________ USR-TC mailing list USR-TC@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc
Unbelievable! You really want to loss the ISP business don't you. Here's the deal... It's tough for ISP's to just move to another product. HOWEVER, when they do they are gone forever. They will also tell all their ISP's friends to move on... as well as encourage all their customers not to buy products from that company. Thus anything remotely associated with 3com as a whole. We don't care if CommDontWorks is a separate division... The cause is the parent company... In most industries you don't get the time that 3com has had to make changes. They are VERY lucky that ISP's require time to convert to another product. You see some of the ISP's posting still... But I assure you that you have lost many... And will lose many more. To make the statement "Frankly some posts on the USR-TC list back in Feb/Mar when V92 was released stated they were trading out all there gear and 9 months later they still have the same comment." means you don't take us at ALL serious... you will see... but I fear it will be too late for you by then. -- Edgar D. Taylor President/CEO FIRST NET -- -----Original Message----- From: usr-tc-admin@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:usr-tc-admin@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Thomas_Goodman@3com.com Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 12:10 PM To: usr-tc@mailman.xmission.com Subject: [USR-TC] Response Let me start out by saying WOW, it seems that whenever there is a posting from CommWorks to the List it causes a volley of flames. The sad part is some feel that we at CommWorks don't care about the small ISPs. When we try to let you know about something happening for the TC1000 it is met with some strange comments. For those that don't go to the Total Service or CommWorks web site from time to time I post things to make you aware. I monitor this list just to keep myself aware of what's going on. Its great to see a community of Technical people helping each other out on USR-TC. I know that many people use this list because the have no other access to Technical Support. Some may not have a Contracts while others have no Warrantee because the bought used. My apologies for the disruptions that my postings seem to cause. To set some things straight: CommWorks is a wholly owned subsidiary of 3Com. 3Com sold off Palm and spun off the Courier and Sportster Modem division which bought the name US Robotics. 3Com and USR are not structured apart they are two different companies. CommWorks has no say in what other companies do on end user modems or any other product you sell to the end user. If you have complaints about software not doing something open a Service Ticket so its addressed. Posting or Complaining on the USR-TC list does not accomplish this. If its not resolved escalate it with us. If you don't need the ability to put 1,152 ports in one chassis using Mulit-Spans look at the TCS 4.7 release notes and decide if there is really any need to move past TCS 4.5 and the ER code for DSPs. If not then TCM is not an issue. TCM had a cost associated with it. It came with the bundles. CEM has a cost associated which is $1,000 list price for the entry level 1-5 element version. TCM was about $2,059 list price that would allow control of 1 element. Most ISP open several windows to view more. CEM has had an Evaluation Program going on for months. If you bought gear from Authorized Reseller you would have known this. Yes, you need a Support Contract to have access to download the Evaluation Software. About the Green. We are a business just as your ISP is a business. We help out customers just as you help out customers. One difference we have Partners that sell yearly contracts for Support and ISPs sell monthly access to the Internet. Let me know if you give out Free access to people that built your company. Changing to a another RAS vendor, As much as it would pain me to loose some of you as customers I realize that churn is part of the industry you deal with every day. I have traded out several Cisco, Lucent, (Ascend & Livingston) and even Patton boxes. I have even had people come back when the as you do when they find the other guy is not better but just different. There were comments from both bigger and smaller ISPs on there experiences with other vendors. I also sit on the user lists of my competition and see the negativity posted there too. Frankly some posts on the USR-TC list back in Feb/Mar when V92 was released stated they were trading out all there gear and 9 months later they still have the same comment. We are not perfect but strive to be. We create programs to help out the smaller ISPs with price. We offer Competitive Trade outs that gives you a way out of older technologies. Thanks for reading, Tom Goodman Channel Account Manager
With the low cost of aftermarket 3com hardware its to damn expensive to swap out completely, If you haven't done it by now, you won't. Can you justify $15K for 96 ports from anther RAS or $1K of DSP's from a reseller (heck I picked up 14 DSP's - 336 ports - for $2k on e-bay) Sold them and paid for my support for a year PLUS. I'll pay thier support costs for dirt cheap hardware like that. Stop trying to make them care..... treat them as the commodity (sp?) that they are and get on with business. -- Paul Farber Farber Technology farber@admin.f-tech.net Ph 570-628-5303 Fax 570-628-5545 On Fri, 20 Dec 2002, Ed Taylor wrote:
Unbelievable!
You really want to loss the ISP business don't you.
Here's the deal... It's tough for ISP's to just move to another product. HOWEVER, when they do they are gone forever. They will also tell all their ISP's friends to move on... as well as encourage all their customers not to buy products from that company. Thus anything remotely associated with 3com as a whole. We don't care if CommDontWorks is a separate division... The cause is the parent company...
In most industries you don't get the time that 3com has had to make changes. They are VERY lucky that ISP's require time to convert to another product. You see some of the ISP's posting still... But I assure you that you have lost many... And will lose many more. To make the statement "Frankly some posts on the USR-TC list back in Feb/Mar when V92 was released stated they were trading out all there gear and 9 months later they still have the same comment." means you don't take us at ALL serious... you will see... but I fear it will be too late for you by then.
-- Edgar D. Taylor President/CEO FIRST NET --
-----Original Message----- From: usr-tc-admin@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:usr-tc-admin@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Thomas_Goodman@3com.com Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 12:10 PM To: usr-tc@mailman.xmission.com Subject: [USR-TC] Response
Let me start out by saying WOW, it seems that whenever there is a posting from CommWorks to the List it causes a volley of flames. The sad part is some feel that we at CommWorks don't care about the small ISPs. When we try to let you know about something happening for the TC1000 it is met with some strange comments.
For those that don't go to the Total Service or CommWorks web site from time to time I post things to make you aware. I monitor this list just to keep myself aware of what's going on. Its great to see a community of Technical people helping each other out on USR-TC. I know that many people use this list because the have no other access to Technical Support. Some may not have a Contracts while others have no Warrantee because the bought used. My apologies for the disruptions that my postings seem to cause.
To set some things straight: CommWorks is a wholly owned subsidiary of 3Com. 3Com sold off Palm and spun off the Courier and Sportster Modem division which bought the name US Robotics. 3Com and USR are not structured apart they are two different companies. CommWorks has no say in what other companies do on end user modems or any other product you sell to the end user.
If you have complaints about software not doing something open a Service Ticket so its addressed. Posting or Complaining on the USR-TC list does not accomplish this. If its not resolved escalate it with us.
If you don't need the ability to put 1,152 ports in one chassis using Mulit-Spans look at the TCS 4.7 release notes and decide if there is really any need to move past TCS 4.5 and the ER code for DSPs. If not then TCM is not an issue.
TCM had a cost associated with it. It came with the bundles. CEM has a cost associated which is $1,000 list price for the entry level 1-5 element version. TCM was about $2,059 list price that would allow control of 1 element. Most ISP open several windows to view more.
CEM has had an Evaluation Program going on for months. If you bought gear from Authorized Reseller you would have known this. Yes, you need a Support Contract to have access to download the Evaluation Software.
About the Green. We are a business just as your ISP is a business. We help out customers just as you help out customers. One difference we have Partners that sell yearly contracts for Support and ISPs sell monthly access to the Internet. Let me know if you give out Free access to people that built your company.
Changing to a another RAS vendor, As much as it would pain me to loose some of you as customers I realize that churn is part of the industry you deal with every day. I have traded out several Cisco, Lucent, (Ascend & Livingston) and even Patton boxes. I have even had people come back when the as you do when they find the other guy is not better but just different. There were comments from both bigger and smaller ISPs on there experiences with other vendors. I also sit on the user lists of my competition and see the negativity posted there too. Frankly some posts on the USR-TC list back in Feb/Mar when V92 was released stated they were trading out all there gear and 9 months later they still have the same comment.
We are not perfect but strive to be. We create programs to help out the smaller ISPs with price. We offer Competitive Trade outs that gives you a way out of older technologies.
Thanks for reading,
Tom Goodman Channel Account Manager
_______________________________________________ USR-TC mailing list USR-TC@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc
Thomas_Goodman@3com.com Wrote:
To set some things straight: CommWorks is a wholly owned subsidiary of 3Com. 3Com sold off Palm and spun off the Courier and Sportster Modem division which bought the name US Robotics. 3Com and USR are not structured apart they are two different companies. CommWorks has no say in what other companies do on end user modems or any other product you sell to the end user.
Snips- off the Commworks site... http://www.commworks.com/programs/v.92_switchboard/default.asp U.S. Robotics is a leading provider of modems worldwide, and has formed an interoperability partnership with CommWorks to give subscribers the full capabilities of V.92. Their V.90 modems are easily upgradeable to V.92 with a software download from the U.S. Robotics website (www.usr.com/v92), to be fully supported by the CommWorks Total Control 1000 enhanced data system. http://www.commworks.com/images/logo.gif Guess what else, I was in Wal-Mart today.. in audio/video/computer section... there were two modems on their shelf, only two, an external and internal. Both were v.92. Both said US Robotics on the box.. and I'll be darned... guess what else was on the box... the 3Com logo. Wierd. I've been a 3Com junky ever since 3Com bought Chipcom. I was burned on a $60,000 CB9000 chassis which was end of lifed 6 months later.. and now I see it in the RAS arena. I've spent the $300/hour on tech support to a guy who could barely speak english. Tom, please don't sell try to sell this... not on this list... really. I do want to thank you for being here... on the list..though... it's one thing 3com/Usr/Commworks has to it's favor. We're glad you are here. But let's keep it real at the very least. Thanks for listening to us grip.. just the same.. ;) Actually, the feeling of being reemed at every corner is real, and as business, one would think USR3Commworks would try to ease the feeling. However, as Paul put it.... "Stop trying to make them care..... treat them as the commodity (sp?) that they are and get on with business." HERE HERE... Be good, -Tom H.
here here Tom .... I do want to thank you for being here... on the list..though... it's one thing 3com/Usr/Commworks has to it's favor.
Thanks for being on the list Tom. Let me make an inquirey of Tom so that he can clear up some confusion on my part. There have been a few statements that assume CommWorks will make any improvements to the 4.5 code base. Is this correct? If I want newer (presumebly more compatable and capable) software I must by the CEM? I'm not trying to be smart (obviously). I want the scoop straight from the horses mouth. -- Lewis Bergman Texas Communications 4309 Maple St. Abilene, TX 79602-8044 915-695-6962 ext 115
Thomas_Goodman@3com.com writes:
If you don't need the ability to put 1,152 ports in one chassis using Mulit-Spans look at the TCS 4.7 release notes and decide if there is really any need to move past TCS 4.5 and the ER code for DSPs. If not then TCM is not an issue.
Yup, I see many issues on the HiperARC that no one with less than 1,152 ports would possibly want! Some of the issues fixed since 4.5 that a small ISP could care less about are: o ARC crashes for no reason o IP Pools stuck in "removing state" o ARC does not release IP's from IP pool o ARC crashes if you type "list interfaces" when the system is idle Obviously these are all trivial bugs unworthy of wasting time on an upgrade. Steve
hahahahahaha yeah, us small ISP we dont need that thar 'reliability' the you city slicker folks talk about so much. I gotta go to the outhouse now.... be back soon. Commworks... why do we even bother? :) -- Paul Farber Farber Technology farber@admin.f-tech.net Ph 570-628-5303 Fax 570-628-5545 On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Steve Brown wrote:
Thomas_Goodman@3com.com writes:
If you don't need the ability to put 1,152 ports in one chassis using Mulit-Spans look at the TCS 4.7 release notes and decide if there is really any need to move past TCS 4.5 and the ER code for DSPs. If not then TCM is not an issue.
Yup, I see many issues on the HiperARC that no one with less than 1,152 ports would possibly want! Some of the issues fixed since 4.5 that a small ISP could care less about are:
o ARC crashes for no reason o IP Pools stuck in "removing state" o ARC does not release IP's from IP pool o ARC crashes if you type "list interfaces" when the system is idle
Obviously these are all trivial bugs unworthy of wasting time on an upgrade.
Steve
_______________________________________________ USR-TC mailing list USR-TC@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc
CEM is only $750 or so from a reseller for 1-5 devices and unlimited clients but we have to wait for some time to get it though - I *really* don't understand that - still waiting to hear back from Souce-T on the "to my door" details. The only thing I think sucks is that the DSP v92 code that most of us paid for last year is just now getting usable and then 4.7 comes out with new DSP code almost a year to date after the supposed offical release that probably works better. Making us up our contracts, buy new management software to get fixed code we were promised last year is the kicker - and potentially the only real legal snag in their release. If I were Commworks I would ensure their server base of v.92 was better than the competitors and everyone out there had the most stable and compatible code - no amount of income would offset consumer's bad reaction to an ISPs server platform (AKA the old days and pre-v90 56k vendor standards - mostly chaos). I've been doing this since 1995 and can tell you it was better years ago in terms of a two-way street between USR server (Commworks) and it's customers who purchased the hardware. But the hardware was about $30k or more for a 48 port chassis. It's been dropping for years. The late release of the ARC, code bugs in all of their Hiper products over time and software support issues haven't made the last three years fun - isn't that the time since 3com has owned them? Funny huh. Marshall Morgan Internet Doorway, Inc (aka NETDOOR) http://www.netdoor.com 601.969.1434 x28 | 800.952.1570 x28 | 601.969.3629 x28 | Fax 601.969.3838 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Farber" <farber@admin.f-tech.net> To: <usr-tc@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 2:20 PM Subject: Re: [USR-TC] 4.7 worth it ??
hahahahahaha
yeah, us small ISP we dont need that thar 'reliability' the you city slicker folks talk about so much.
I gotta go to the outhouse now.... be back soon.
Commworks... why do we even bother? :)
-- Paul Farber Farber Technology farber@admin.f-tech.net Ph 570-628-5303 Fax 570-628-5545
On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Steve Brown wrote:
Thomas_Goodman@3com.com writes:
If you don't need the ability to put 1,152 ports in one chassis using Mulit-Spans look at the TCS 4.7 release notes and decide if there is really any need to move past TCS 4.5 and the ER code for DSPs. If not then TCM is not an issue.
Yup, I see many issues on the HiperARC that no one with less than 1,152 ports would possibly want! Some of the issues fixed since 4.5 that a small ISP could care less about are:
o ARC crashes for no reason o IP Pools stuck in "removing state" o ARC does not release IP's from IP pool o ARC crashes if you type "list interfaces" when the system is idle
Obviously these are all trivial bugs unworthy of wasting time on an upgrade.
Steve
_______________________________________________ USR-TC mailing list USR-TC@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc
_______________________________________________ USR-TC mailing list USR-TC@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc
Marshall, So is it $750 for UP TO 5 devices, or $750 per device up to 5 devices? And is a device a chassis, or a card? Seth ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marshall Morgan" <marshall@netdoor.com> To: <usr-tc@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2002 3:57 PM Subject: Re: [USR-TC] 4.7 worth it ??
CEM is only $750 or so from a reseller for 1-5 devices and unlimited clients but we have to wait for some time to get it though - I *really* don't understand that - still waiting to hear back from Souce-T on the "to my door" details. The only thing I think sucks is that the DSP v92 code that most of us paid for last year is just now getting usable and then 4.7 comes out with new DSP code almost a year to date after the supposed offical release that probably works better. Making us up our contracts, buy new management software to get fixed code we were promised last year is the kicker - and potentially the only real legal snag in their release. If I were Commworks I would ensure their server base of v.92 was better than the competitors and everyone out there had the most stable and compatible code - no amount of income would offset consumer's bad reaction to an ISPs server platform (AKA the old days and pre-v90 56k vendor standards - mostly chaos).
I've been doing this since 1995 and can tell you it was better years ago in terms of a two-way street between USR server (Commworks) and it's customers who purchased the hardware. But the hardware was about $30k or more for a 48 port chassis. It's been dropping for years. The late release of the ARC, code bugs in all of their Hiper products over time and software support issues haven't made the last three years fun - isn't that the time since 3com has owned them? Funny huh.
Marshall Morgan
Internet Doorway, Inc (aka NETDOOR) http://www.netdoor.com
601.969.1434 x28 | 800.952.1570 x28 | 601.969.3629 x28 | Fax 601.969.3838 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Farber" <farber@admin.f-tech.net> To: <usr-tc@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 2:20 PM Subject: Re: [USR-TC] 4.7 worth it ??
hahahahahaha
yeah, us small ISP we dont need that thar 'reliability' the you city slicker folks talk about so much.
I gotta go to the outhouse now.... be back soon.
Commworks... why do we even bother? :)
-- Paul Farber Farber Technology farber@admin.f-tech.net Ph 570-628-5303 Fax 570-628-5545
On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Steve Brown wrote:
Thomas_Goodman@3com.com writes:
If you don't need the ability to put 1,152 ports in one chassis using Mulit-Spans look at the TCS 4.7 release notes and decide if there is really any need to move past TCS 4.5 and the ER code for DSPs. If not then TCM is not an issue.
Yup, I see many issues on the HiperARC that no one with less than 1,152 ports would possibly want! Some of the issues fixed since 4.5 that a small ISP could care less about are:
o ARC crashes for no reason o IP Pools stuck in "removing state" o ARC does not release IP's from IP pool o ARC crashes if you type "list interfaces" when the system is idle
Obviously these are all trivial bugs unworthy of wasting time on an upgrade.
Steve
_______________________________________________ USR-TC mailing list USR-TC@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc
_______________________________________________ USR-TC mailing list USR-TC@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc
_______________________________________________ USR-TC mailing list USR-TC@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc
"I have been told by the vendor" it's ~750 for CEM that will open 5 devices AT A TIME, after you open them and do whatever you can close the device and open another one for a running total of 5. As someone else mentioned, there is nothing that is preventing you from opening more than one window of CEM though. I would expect a device is a HiperNMC (got to be really). Marshall Morgan Internet Doorway, Inc (aka NETDOOR) http://www.netdoor.com 601.969.1434 x28 | 800.952.1570 x28 | 601.969.3629 x28 | Fax 601.969.3838 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Seth Jacobs" <sjacobs@onramp113.com> To: <usr-tc@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2002 6:10 PM Subject: Re: [USR-TC] 4.7 worth it ??
Marshall,
So is it $750 for UP TO 5 devices, or $750 per device up to 5 devices?
And is a device a chassis, or a card?
Seth
----- Original Message ----- From: "Marshall Morgan" <marshall@netdoor.com> To: <usr-tc@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2002 3:57 PM Subject: Re: [USR-TC] 4.7 worth it ??
CEM is only $750 or so from a reseller for 1-5 devices and unlimited clients but we have to wait for some time to get it though - I *really* don't understand that - still waiting to hear back from Souce-T on the "to my door" details. The only thing I think sucks is that the DSP v92 code that most of us paid for last year is just now getting usable and then 4.7 comes out with new DSP code almost a year to date after the supposed offical release that probably works better. Making us up our contracts, buy new management software to get fixed code we were promised last year is the kicker - and potentially the only real legal snag in their release. If I were Commworks I would ensure their server base of v.92 was better than the competitors and everyone out there had the most stable and compatible code - no amount of income would offset consumer's bad reaction to an ISPs server platform (AKA the old days and pre-v90 56k vendor standards - mostly chaos).
I've been doing this since 1995 and can tell you it was better years ago in terms of a two-way street between USR server (Commworks) and it's customers who purchased the hardware. But the hardware was about $30k or more for a 48 port chassis. It's been dropping for years. The late release of the ARC, code bugs in all of their Hiper products over time and software support issues haven't made the last three years fun - isn't that the time since 3com has owned them? Funny huh.
Marshall Morgan
Internet Doorway, Inc (aka NETDOOR) http://www.netdoor.com
601.969.1434 x28 | 800.952.1570 x28 | 601.969.3629 x28 | Fax 601.969.3838 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Farber" <farber@admin.f-tech.net> To: <usr-tc@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 2:20 PM Subject: Re: [USR-TC] 4.7 worth it ??
hahahahahaha
yeah, us small ISP we dont need that thar 'reliability' the you city slicker folks talk about so much.
I gotta go to the outhouse now.... be back soon.
Commworks... why do we even bother? :)
-- Paul Farber Farber Technology farber@admin.f-tech.net Ph 570-628-5303 Fax 570-628-5545
On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Steve Brown wrote:
Thomas_Goodman@3com.com writes:
If you don't need the ability to put 1,152 ports in one chassis using Mulit-Spans look at the TCS 4.7 release notes and decide if there is really any need to move past TCS 4.5 and the ER code for DSPs. If not then TCM is not an issue.
Yup, I see many issues on the HiperARC that no one with less than 1,152 ports would possibly want! Some of the issues fixed since 4.5 that a small ISP could care less about are:
o ARC crashes for no reason o IP Pools stuck in "removing state" o ARC does not release IP's from IP pool o ARC crashes if you type "list interfaces" when the system is idle
Obviously these are all trivial bugs unworthy of wasting time on an upgrade.
Steve
_______________________________________________ USR-TC mailing list USR-TC@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc
_______________________________________________ USR-TC mailing list USR-TC@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc
_______________________________________________ USR-TC mailing list USR-TC@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc
_______________________________________________ USR-TC mailing list USR-TC@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc
participants (10)
-
Ed Taylor -
Lewis Bergman -
Marshall Morgan -
Mike Greene -
netboss＠cyberport.net -
Paul Farber -
Seth Jacobs -
Steve Brown -
Thomas_Goodman＠3com.com -
Tom Harberts