Subject: (usr-tc) Upgraded TC's

From: Mark Thornton <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 17:37:40 +0000

We jsut upgraded our TC chassis to the lastest available code (yes we paid
for support) and the phones have stopped ringing. We always had a certain
level of calls with various connection problems of one sort or another, but
that seems to have dried up in the week since we installed the new code.

We made the decision to go with the paid support over replacement of our
chassis strictly on financial grounds. There was no way to amortize new
equipment costs for our dialup market. Yes, it blows to have to pay for
something others get for free, however I must say the support I have gotten
is so much better than what I ever got from 3Com directly. There has been no
backlash from the new code that I have found which is also a welcome change.

Mark Thornton
San Marcos Internet, Inc
512-393-5300

-
 To unsubscribe to usr-tc, send an email to "[email-masked]"
 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.

---

From: Wayne Barber <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 17:48:57 +0000

Can you give a list of equipment you installed onto? I'm assuming you mean the new TCS 4.3 
code level. I want to talk to management about replacing the quad modems with HiperDSPs, and 
it would be nice to know that we have the right stuff.

On 11 Oct 2001 at 10:36, Mark Thornton wrote:

> We jsut upgraded our TC chassis to the lastest available code (yes we
> paid for support) and the phones have stopped ringing. We always had a
> certain level of calls with various connection problems of one sort or
> another, but that seems to have dried up in the week since we installed
> the new code.
> 
> something others get for free, however I must say the support I have
> gotten is so much better than what I ever got from 3Com directly. There
> has been no backlash from the new code that I have found which is also a
> welcome change.
> 
> Mark Thornton
> San Marcos Internet, Inc
> 512-393-5300
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -
>  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.
> 

Wayne Barber
Coastal Telco Services

-

---

From: Craig <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 17:58:22 +0000

Hello

Can anyone tell why an NMC card will all of a sudden start continuously rebooting
itself??

-- 
Thanks,
Craig
[email-masked]

-

---

From: Mark Thornton <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 21:00:21 +0000

10 HiperDSP's - hardware version .49 & .53, software version 3.1.7
2 HiperArc - hardware version 21, 128 meg ram, 16 meg flash, software
version 5.2.102
1 HiperNMC - hardware version 5, 16 meg ram, 16 meg flash, software version
8.2.7
Total Control Manager 8.2.6
Integrated fan chassis
Dual 70 amp power supplies

This is essentially TCS 4.3 code. We have asked 3Com for the 4.5 beta which
provides the V.92 functionality. Our contract is with Source Technologies
which like I said have been very good to deal with.

The new TCM is very fast, or that may be the HiperNMC. All the software
installed without any problems at all. A number of the things we were told
to change in the configuration such as the carrier detect delay have already
been set in the defaults. The only thing I have not yet gotten to work is
the redundant HiperArc configuration, but I am waiting on info from
SourceTech to set that up. I haven't messed with the new router
configuration software as I do it by command line, but there is a new
release of it as well. There is no update to the quad code, but that doesn't
matter as dropping the quads has apparently resolved some of our random
connection problems. We are running the DSP's with both channelized T's and
PRI's at this time.

Mark Thornton
San Marcos Internet, Inc
512-393-5300

----- Original Message -----
From: "Wayne Barber" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 10:47 AM
Subject: Re: (usr-tc) Upgraded TC's

-

---

From: Mike Andrews <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 01:45:55 +0000

It's the HiperNMC making TCM fast, definitely.  We've got a mix of 486 and
P133 NMC's out there and the difference is VERY noticable.  We're thinking
about upgrading using the new NMC trade-in promo mentioned here.

(Plus it takes care of the v.92 thing -- or would if I could get the code,
I can't even get TCS 4.3 right now...)

Mike Andrews * [email-masked] * [email-masked] * 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.    # chmod a+x /bin/laden

-

---

From: Randy Cosby <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 18:04:53 +0000

You mention a change in the carrier detect delay with the new code.  The
default is 7 for carrier detect delay and 6 for the carrier loss detect
delay.  Is that what you have?   After looking through the disconnect stats,
we have more "no carrier" disconnect reasons than I'm comfortable with.  I'm
wondering if there is a better number here.

thanks,

Randy

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked]
> [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Mark Thornton
> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 12:59 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> > Can you give a list of equipment you installed onto? I'm
> assuming you mean
> the new TCS 4.3

-

---

From: Mark Thornton <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 18:10:15 +0000

I have noticed the high number of no carrier reasons as well, but the
measure that works for me is that our phones just aren't ringing with
connect problems. Usage is up, new customers get on immediately, and old
ones aren't calling and complaining. I've wondered if the no carrier reasons
come from other things such as autodialers for telemarketers and the like.

Mark Thornton
San Marcos Internet, Inc
512-393-5300

----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy Cosby" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 11:00 AM
Subject: RE: (usr-tc) Upgraded TC's

> > > code level. I want to talk to management about replacing the quad
modems
> > with HiperDSPs, and

-

---

From: Randy Cosby <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 18:16:38 +0000

I was thinking some OS's just killed the modems to end a ppp session, but
not sure.

>From 3com knowledgebase:

Explanation of carrier Loss(4):
The modem detected a loss of the remote modem's carrier and waited the time
duration specified in Register S10. This register's default is 0.7 seconds.
For higher speed modulations, carrier loss detection is disabled when other
recovery mechanisms are used (such as retraining). It is rare to see this
disconnect or fail to connect reason because other reasons are usually used
or are detected sooner.

---
So maybe this number is irrelevant if we're using retraining (x2/v90), but
may be relevant on older slower modems?

You still have yours set to 7?  I seem to recall setting old quads to 70 at
one point.

Randy

> Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 10:08 AM
> > > > > paid for support) and the phones have stopped ringing. We
> always had
> a
> > > > > certain level of calls with various connection problems
> of one sort
> or

-

---

From: Mike Andrews <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 18:24:13 +0000

> You still have yours set to 7?  I seem to recall setting old quads to 70 at

I've been using 20 for this for just about forever.  Seems to help a bit.

-

---

From: Blake Fithen <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 01:04:14 +0000

test

-

---

From: Terry Kennedy <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 23:53:30 +0000

With out coming off as a junior idiot here, I need to ask a question
about PRI. In our town they said they would never get PRI so I never
read most of the posts here concerning them. We used CT1's and I know
(basically) how they work. Now they have PRI and I am converting -- Ok,
so enough rationalizations for asking stupid questions. 

Here's the question: Do I lose 1 channel on every span for the b-channel
or does just one of the cards in the rack need to lose the channel?

Qwest says that they support 11 spans with one b-channel, so it made me
curious on the 3com equipment. 

Anyone have a quick run through on setting these up or just a link I can
read somewhere?

These are DSP's by the way.

Thanks,
Terry Kennedy

---

From: Jeff Mcadams <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 18:15:04 +0000

Also sprach Terry Kennedy

>Here's the question: Do I lose 1 channel on every span for the
>b-channel or does just one of the cards in the rack need to lose the
>channel?

>Anyone have a quick run through on setting these up or just a link I
>can read somewhere?

>These are DSP's by the way.

DSP, with anything other than an ancient vintage of software will
support NFAS.

NFAS = Non-Facility Associated Signalling

NFAS is the setup whereby one D channel (note: not B channel) carries
the call signalling for more than on PRI span.  Each B channel carries
an individual call, a D channel carries the call control information for
the B channels on the span (or multiple spans in the case of NFAS).

We don't use NFAS here because of the hassle in coordinating which spans
have the D channels (and backup D channels) with the telco.  The extra B
channels that you get from running NFAS aren't worth the hassle as far
as I'm concerned.  :)
-- 
Jeff McAdams                            Email: [email-masked]
Head Network Administrator              Voice: (502) 966-3848
IgLou Internet Services                        (800) 436-4456

---

From: V <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 00:28:21 +0000

There is an option called NFAS, using this you can use one B channel for
several cards.  3Com supports one B for 14 spans on the DSP, however you
should consider having two B support the entire chassis one main and the
other backup.

-V
----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry Kennedy" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 6:51 PM
Subject: [USR-TC] PRI and b channels

> _______________________________________________
> USR-TC mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc

---

From: Charles Sprickman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 06:02:27 +0000

> the B channels on the span (or multiple spans in the case of NFAS).

And if the span with that D channel goes down, good night. :)

> channels that you get from running NFAS aren't worth the hassle as far

Ditto.  More wacky 3Com code to troubleshoot, more coordination with the
telco on something they may or may not understand, and less reliability.

Charles

---

From: Antonio Querubin <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 08:43:10 +0000

> channels that you get from running NFAS aren't worth the hassle as far

It also makes it more difficult to quiesce PRI to do any kind of circuit
maintenance.  Definately not worth the hassle dealing with the phone
company (unless of course you are the phone company).

---

From: Todd Bertolozzi <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 13:19:05 +0000

With a PRI you will lose 1 channel.  You will have 23B channels which users
can connect to a 1 D channel which will be used for signaling, etc.

Qwest is probably talking about NFAS...Non-facilitated Associated signaling,
or something to that affect. In essence what you do with NFAS is have a span
that is your primary D channel, and another one that is your backup and then
the rest of the spans can be "pri" but have 24 B channels.

Word of caution...NFAS becomes more complicated the more spans that are in
the NFAS group. Some telcos say they can do it but really don't know what
they're doing, hence causing problems down the road.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Terry Kennedy
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 7:51 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [USR-TC] PRI and b channels

Thanks,
Terry Kennedy

---

From: Terry Kennedy <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 15:58:47 +0000

Ok guys thanks for the heads up. It's another "well it should work but
in the interest of stability stay away..." Ok I get it. So set the span
line setting from robbed bit to message oriented and away I go....

Thanks for the help.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Todd Bertolozzi
Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 6:22 AM
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [USR-TC] PRI and b channels

With a PRI you will lose 1 channel.  You will have 23B channels which
users
can connect to a 1 D channel which will be used for signaling, etc.

Qwest is probably talking about NFAS...Non-facilitated Associated
signaling,
or something to that affect. In essence what you do with NFAS is have a
span
that is your primary D channel, and another one that is your backup and
then
the rest of the spans can be "pri" but have 24 B channels.

Word of caution...NFAS becomes more complicated the more spans that are
in
the NFAS group. Some telcos say they can do it but really don't know
what
they're doing, hence causing problems down the road.

-----Original Message-----

Thanks,
Terry Kennedy

---

From: Stephen Amadei <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 18:31:02 +0000

> And if the span with that D channel goes down, good night. :)

No, not really.  The span with the backup D channel takes over.  We did
lots of (inadvertant) testing, and it works very well if setup right in
the TC and the Telco.

					----Steve
Stephen Amadei
Dandy.NET!  CTO
Atlantic City, NJ

---

From: Steve Coleman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 17:44:16 +0000

Can you insert a new PRI card into a TC unit with it still running?

Is the original Total Control unit now called the Total Control 1000, or is
that a new and improved model?  I've got the Total Control with the HiperARC
and HiperDSP cards.

---

From: "Stephen Rivera - WRCA.Net" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 19:30:11 +0000

In my experience it is better to turn off the unit when installing and 
de-installing the older quad bundle components.
No problem with HOTSWAP on hiper generation of cards

  would advise you to turn it off.
>that a new and improved model?  I've got the Total Control with the HiperARC

Steve Rivera  IM: srivera711
Toll Free: (877)WRCANET x102  DIRECT: 732-833-2034
Fax available equipment to: (732)833-2115
for more product info got www.wrca.net

---

From: Phil Schmitz <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 04:38:46 +0000

Yes you can.. that's how it's designed.
TC-1000 is a newer version of the Total Control
but there's no difference that I see.  There is 
also a TC-2000 that's different - Higher end stuff.

Phil Schmitz
phils-nos [email-masked]

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Steve Coleman
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 12:44 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [USR-TC] Hot insert

Is the original Total Control unit now called the Total Control 1000, or
is that a new and improved model?  I've got the Total Control with the
HiperARC and HiperDSP cards.

---

From: Todd Bertolozzi <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 13:30:05 +0000

Yes...the TC chassis is hot swappable.

Todd

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Steve Coleman
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 1:44 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [USR-TC] Hot insert