Sorry to disagree, but I think that's totally wrong. i've been running 3.5.105 and then 3.5.109 for months, both with all the V.92 stuff enabled, and none of my V.90 or V.34 customers have reported any problems. I did have ONE customer with an Agere modem that started seeing a lot of lost carriers with 3.5.109, but we swapped in an Aopen Conexant modem and he's working great on 109 now. - Joel -----Original Message----- From: BSmith@solunet.com [mailto:BSmith@solunet.com] Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2003 10:46 AM To: usr-tc@mailman.xmission.com Subject: RE: [USR-TC] 3.5.109 Connection Issues -----Original Message----- From: Jim Johnson [mailto:jim@perigee.net] Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2003 11:39 AM To: usr-tc@mailman.xmission.com Subject: [USR-TC] 3.5.109 Connection Issues We are having connection issues with some users who never finish training up since we changed the DSP Code to 3.5.109. We enabled all the v.92 settings and v.44 compression. Yesterday, I disabled PCM Upstream, but it hasn't made any difference that we can tell so far. Cheers, Jim _______________________________________________ Jim, The problem you are having is as such: If you enable v92, non v92 modems will NOT connect. If you want to run v92, you need to setup it's own trunk(s) and just configure those DSPs. So, your config can be as such: DSP 1-4 = v90 = 555-1212 DSP 5-8 = v92 = 555-1213 If a v90 (or below) tries to connect to span 5-8, no workie joe. Make sense? Why you ask? The v92 send back info (via the handshake), and the v90 does not know how to handle it, and it fails. Hope that helps! Brian Smith CCNA, NCSA Network Support Engineer SOLUSERVE www.solunet.com 1571 Robert J. Conlan Blvd., Suite 110 Palm Bay, FL 32905 (888)449-5766 fax: (321)-676-1287 _______________________________________________ USR-TC mailing list USR-TC@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc