Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Cisco > Re: Mica Modems in Cisco AS5300, Connect Rates

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Mica Modems in Cisco AS5300, Connect Rates

 
 
azizia@gmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-25-2005

modemcap entry quazar:MSC=&f&d2s0=3 s53=0 s50=56000 s30=33600 s34=0
s39=7 s7=90 s52=1
Michael O'Reilly wrote:
> http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) (Aaron Leonard) writes:
>
> > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Michael O'Reilly

<(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> > |
> > |Terribly bad at far as I can see. We get 92% in australia from

ISDN
> > |PRI's (30 channel ea) running into as5300's with MICA modems. We

have
> > |a number of 5300s all with around that connect rate.
> > |
> > |Note that there are a number of really bad bugs relating to the

IOS or
> > |MICA somewhere. In particular, if you have a non-zero asyncmap
> > |anywhere it apparently does terrible things to the reliabilty of

the
> > |PPP connections.
> >
> > That's DDTs CSCdj71639, fixed in 11.2(11.1)x, 11.2(11)P1, 11.3(2)x.

>
> Hmm. We found it in 11.2(11)P1. Is this a different bug?
>
>
>
> (ps: what is it with all these magic Big ID's that give:
>
> Sorry -- The defect you've requested '%71639' - cannot be
> displayed.
> This may be due to one or more of the following:
>
> 1.The defect number does not exist
> 2.The defect does not have a customer-visible description

available yet
> 3.The defect has been marked Cisco Confidential which is usually
> done for security purposes or for entries that do not have
> customer impact
>
> What exactly _IS_ bug CSCdj71639?)
>
> Michael.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Aaron Leonard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-25-2005
On 25 Jan 2005 03:39:49 -0800, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:

~
~ modemcap entry quazar:MSC=&f&d2s0=3 s53=0 s50=56000 s30=33600 s34=0
~ s39=7 s7=90 s52=1
~ Michael O'Reilly wrote:
~ > (E-Mail Removed) (Aaron Leonard) writes:
~ >
~ > > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Michael O'Reilly
~ <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
~ > > |
~ > > |Terribly bad at far as I can see. We get 92% in australia from
~ ISDN
~ > > |PRI's (30 channel ea) running into as5300's with MICA modems. We
~ have
~ > > |a number of 5300s all with around that connect rate.
~ > > |
~ > > |Note that there are a number of really bad bugs relating to the
~ IOS or
~ > > |MICA somewhere. In particular, if you have a non-zero asyncmap
~ > > |anywhere it apparently does terrible things to the reliabilty of
~ the
~ > > |PPP connections.
~ > >
~ > > That's DDTs CSCdj71639, fixed in 11.2(11.1)x, 11.2(11)P1, 11.3(2)x.
~ >
~ > Hmm. We found it in 11.2(11)P1. Is this a different bug?
~ >
~ >
~ >
~ > (ps: what is it with all these magic Big ID's that give:
~ >
~ > Sorry -- The defect you've requested '%71639' - cannot be
~ > displayed.
~ > This may be due to one or more of the following:
~ >
~ > 1.The defect number does not exist
~ > 2.The defect does not have a customer-visible description
~ available yet
~ > 3.The defect has been marked Cisco Confidential which is usually
~ > done for security purposes or for entries that do not have
~ > customer impact
~ >
~ > What exactly _IS_ bug CSCdj71639?)
~ >
~ > Michael.

Re Q1 "what is it with these ...":

In order for a DDTS (new ones beginning with 'CSCsa' are now called
CDETS btw) to be customer-viewable on CCO, the following must pertain:

- the DDTS must be in a project that is declared to be customer-viewable
(e.g. CSC.sys or CSC.dialtech ... CSC.sys-wish is not customer-viewable)

- the DDTS must have a Release-note that has been approved by our
release-note vetting folks

Re Q2 "What exactly _IS_ bug CSCdj71639?):

I've updated the Release-note for this DDTS so that it should now
(soon) be visible:

CSCdj71639
Internally found moderate defect: Resolved (R)
ppp accm for microcode PPP mode not set correctly
Integrated in 011.003(001.002) 011.002(011.001) 11.3(01.02)T 11.2(11.01)P
11.3(01.02)Q 11.2(11.01)BC 11.2(11)P01 11.3(01.03)CI 11.3(02)XA

Release-note: Modified 050125 by aaron

PPP on async interfaces may not apply the negotiated
ACCM mask correctly. As a result, PPP transmissions
may fail. This is a regression introduced by CSCdj63179.

CSCdj63179 is btw:

CSCdj63179
Internally found moderate defect: Resolved (R)
incoming bytes lost by async autoselect for PPP
Integrated in 011.002(010.004) 11.2(10.04)P 011.003(001.001)
11.3(01.01)T 11.2(11)BC 11.3(01.01)Q 11.3(02)XA

So, yes, if you see some problem in 11.2(11)P1, then it would not be
CSCdj71639, but something else.

Cheers,

Aaron
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
MICA modems allocation on AS5300 Robert Hass Cisco 2 02-27-2006 07:48 PM
AS 3660 - inbound calls (mica modems) jaro@uid0.sk Cisco 0 03-17-2005 02:28 PM
3640 : MICA MODEM DIAL-OUT OVER BRI stef novo Cisco 4 02-09-2004 11:28 PM
MICA Modem firmware 2.9.5.0. What's new? Pavlov Cisco 3 01-12-2004 08:19 PM
ISDN PRI and MICA modems Andrzej Cisco 1 12-06-2003 07:24 PM



Advertisments