Mailing List Archive

We're running into something similar, however, it's on
AS5300's with 12.2-2.XB11
Our network provider who "manages" these units says that
it's due to the existence of several viruses (mblast and
nachi) on the internet causing ICMP related issues.
Apparently, the Cisco Advanced Network Services Engineers
(ANS) is working on the issue for the last three weeks, but,
they haven't found a workaround.

If anyone has seen this or is experiencing this, have a fix,
etc. please let us know (Dennis, have you seen this?).

Currently we need to have our as5300's reloaded every 2
hours to bring the unit back to a useable state (all 25 of
them). If left too long before rebooting, no traffic will
pass (so no telnet etc.), users get stuck, and we regularly
get fast busy signals. From a financial standpoint, this is
killing our business.

-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nas-bounces@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nas-bounces@puck.nether.net]On Behalf Of John
McKinney
Sent: Friday, September 5, 2003 12:53 AM
To: cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-nas] AS5350 Connection Problems


We seem to have a spuratic problem with users connecting,
but then
not being able to send/receive any data. The call will start
like normal,
then after about 8K of data, sessions just stops sending or
receiving
anything. I experienced it myself Sunday afternoon from my
dial-up
connection. Since this is a production enviroment I am
having trouble
tracking the problem. Even pings from my dialup computer to
our local
severs will stop. I could ping the AS5300, but nothing on
the ethernet
side. I switched to my laptop and it did the same thing. I
drove to the
office and everything was fine. I drove home, the problem
was gone. I have
in the past told yours to reboot, that windows was causing
the problem but
this is not the case. I think rebooting is just buying time
until the
problem goes away. This seems to come and go, but lately I
am
hearing more and more complaints. Where do we go from here?
Phone
conditions seem normal, no excessive retrains or noise.

2 AS5350's, not sure if one or both are doing it. Both are
less than 1
year old.

IOS 12.2-2.XB11

One has beening running XB11 for several weeks, the other 2
days. Before
that we were using XB8. The problem was present before the
upgrade.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Thank You,
John McKinney

_______________________________________________
cisco-nas mailing list
cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nas

We experienced this issue in March when we upgraded all 15 of our
5350s. We didn't have time to worry about it at the time so we
downgraded back to 12.1-5.xm8 which also downgraded the firmware for the
nextport modems. Now that we have time re upgraded all boxes to
12.3(1a) and added a modemcap

modemcap entry next:MSC=&FS0=0S29=6S21=3

This has corrected thing BUT we needed to put in an INIT String for GWT
v92, BCM v92 and PCTel v92 modems. Normally correcting it with +ms=v90
or +ms=v90,0

Not sure if this will clear it up for you but this was what we did to
get updated past the IPv4 bug.

thanks

Greg


"Francisco (fxdomin2)" wrote:

> We're running into something similar, however, it's on
> AS5300's with 12.2-2.XB11
> Our network provider who "manages" these units says that
> it's due to the existence of several viruses (mblast and
> nachi) on the internet causing ICMP related issues.
> Apparently, the Cisco Advanced Network Services Engineers
> (ANS) is working on the issue for the last three weeks, but,
> they haven't found a workaround.
>
> If anyone has seen this or is experiencing this, have a fix,
> etc. please let us know (Dennis, have you seen this?).
>
> Currently we need to have our as5300's reloaded every 2
> hours to bring the unit back to a useable state (all 25 of
> them). If left too long before rebooting, no traffic will
> pass (so no telnet etc.), users get stuck, and we regularly
> get fast busy signals. From a financial standpoint, this is
> killing our business.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nas-bounces@puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-nas-bounces@puck.nether.net]On Behalf Of John
> McKinney
> Sent: Friday, September 5, 2003 12:53 AM
> To: cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> Subject: [cisco-nas] AS5350 Connection Problems
>
> We seem to have a spuratic problem with users connecting,
> but then
> not being able to send/receive any data. The call will start
> like normal,
> then after about 8K of data, sessions just stops sending or
> receiving
> anything. I experienced it myself Sunday afternoon from my
> dial-up
> connection. Since this is a production enviroment I am
> having trouble
> tracking the problem. Even pings from my dialup computer to
> our local
> severs will stop. I could ping the AS5300, but nothing on
> the ethernet
> side. I switched to my laptop and it did the same thing. I
> drove to the
> office and everything was fine. I drove home, the problem
> was gone. I have
> in the past told yours to reboot, that windows was causing
> the problem but
> this is not the case. I think rebooting is just buying time
> until the
> problem goes away. This seems to come and go, but lately I
> am
> hearing more and more complaints. Where do we go from here?
> Phone
> conditions seem normal, no excessive retrains or noise.
>
> 2 AS5350's, not sure if one or both are doing it. Both are
> less than 1
> year old.
>
> IOS 12.2-2.XB11
>
> One has beening running XB11 for several weeks, the other 2
> days. Before
> that we were using XB8. The problem was present before the
> upgrade.
>
> Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thank You,
> John McKinney
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nas mailing list
> cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nas
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nas mailing list
> cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nas

> We experienced this issue in March when we upgraded all 15 of our
> 5350s. We didn't have time to worry about it at the time so we
> downgraded back to 12.1-5.xm8 which also downgraded the firmware for the
> nextport modems. Now that we have time re upgraded all boxes to
> 12.3(1a) and added a modemcap
>
> modemcap entry next:MSC=&FS0=0S29=6S21=3
>
> This has corrected thing BUT we needed to put in an INIT String for GWT
> v92, BCM v92 and PCTel v92 modems. Normally correcting it with +ms=v90
> or +ms=v90,0
>

What does the modemcap entry configure as such?
Thank you.
Lewis

On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Internet Coordinator wrote:
Greg,
Another user called in this morning with this problem. Luckily
they had 2 lines, so I was able to do a little troubleshooting. The called
looked normal. It showed V.34 and V.92. Connection speeds were
26000/24000. I had the user disconnect and enter 'AT+MS=v90,0. They
reconnected and this time it was a V.34 call and everything worked fine.
So, does this mean that the problem is a V.92 problem? Any suggestions on
how to maintain the V.92 calls and resolve the problem?

Thank You,
John McKinney
WNC ONLINE

> We experienced this issue in March when we upgraded all 15 of our
> 5350s. We didn't have time to worry about it at the time so we
> downgraded back to 12.1-5.xm8 which also downgraded the firmware for the
> nextport modems. Now that we have time re upgraded all boxes to
> 12.3(1a) and added a modemcap
>
> modemcap entry next:MSC=&FS0=0S29=6S21=3
>
> This has corrected thing BUT we needed to put in an INIT String for GWT
> v92, BCM v92 and PCTel v92 modems. Normally correcting it with +ms=v90
> or +ms=v90,0
>
> Not sure if this will clear it up for you but this was what we did to
> get updated past the IPv4 bug.
>
> thanks
>
> Greg
>
>
> "Francisco (fxdomin2)" wrote:
>
> > We're running into something similar, however, it's on
> > AS5300's with 12.2-2.XB11
> > Our network provider who "manages" these units says that
> > it's due to the existence of several viruses (mblast and
> > nachi) on the internet causing ICMP related issues.
> > Apparently, the Cisco Advanced Network Services Engineers
> > (ANS) is working on the issue for the last three weeks, but,
> > they haven't found a workaround.
> >
> > If anyone has seen this or is experiencing this, have a fix,
> > etc. please let us know (Dennis, have you seen this?).
> >
> > Currently we need to have our as5300's reloaded every 2
> > hours to bring the unit back to a useable state (all 25 of
> > them). If left too long before rebooting, no traffic will
> > pass (so no telnet etc.), users get stuck, and we regularly
> > get fast busy signals. From a financial standpoint, this is
> > killing our business.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cisco-nas-bounces@puck.nether.net
> > [mailto:cisco-nas-bounces@puck.nether.net]On Behalf Of John
> > McKinney
> > Sent: Friday, September 5, 2003 12:53 AM
> > To: cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> > Subject: [cisco-nas] AS5350 Connection Problems
> >
> > We seem to have a spuratic problem with users connecting,
> > but then
> > not being able to send/receive any data. The call will start
> > like normal,
> > then after about 8K of data, sessions just stops sending or
> > receiving
> > anything. I experienced it myself Sunday afternoon from my
> > dial-up
> > connection. Since this is a production enviroment I am
> > having trouble
> > tracking the problem. Even pings from my dialup computer to
> > our local
> > severs will stop. I could ping the AS5300, but nothing on
> > the ethernet
> > side. I switched to my laptop and it did the same thing. I
> > drove to the
> > office and everything was fine. I drove home, the problem
> > was gone. I have
> > in the past told yours to reboot, that windows was causing
> > the problem but
> > this is not the case. I think rebooting is just buying time
> > until the
> > problem goes away. This seems to come and go, but lately I
> > am
> > hearing more and more complaints. Where do we go from here?
> > Phone
> > conditions seem normal, no excessive retrains or noise.
> >
> > 2 AS5350's, not sure if one or both are doing it. Both are
> > less than 1
> > year old.
> >
> > IOS 12.2-2.XB11
> >
> > One has beening running XB11 for several weeks, the other 2
> > days. Before
> > that we were using XB8. The problem was present before the
> > upgrade.
> >
> > Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
> >
> > Thank You,
> > John McKinney
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-nas mailing list
> > cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nas
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-nas mailing list
> > cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nas
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nas mailing list
> cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nas
>

Seems like the client's circuit can only support V.34
in any case, so he'd be better off with a V.34 cap
(AT+MS=V34 or something like that.)

Perchance, when he was suffering from the problem, did
he have V.44 compression negotiated? And then, when
the problem went away, was V.42bis compression being
used instead?

There are still some V.44 issues lurking. We've found
that, on NextPort, adding S65=1024S66=1024 to the modemcap
will avoid some "illegal token" disconnects. You can try
disabling V.44 on the client or the server.

Aaron

---

> On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Internet Coordinator wrote:
> Greg,
> Another user called in this morning with this problem. Luckily
> they had 2 lines, so I was able to do a little troubleshooting. The called
> looked normal. It showed V.34 and V.92. Connection speeds were
> 26000/24000. I had the user disconnect and enter 'AT+MS=v90,0. They
> reconnected and this time it was a V.34 call and everything worked fine.
> So, does this mean that the problem is a V.92 problem? Any suggestions on
> how to maintain the V.92 calls and resolve the problem?

> Thank You,
> John McKinney
> WNC ONLINE

> > We experienced this issue in March when we upgraded all 15 of our
> > 5350s. We didn't have time to worry about it at the time so we
> > downgraded back to 12.1-5.xm8 which also downgraded the firmware for the
> > nextport modems. Now that we have time re upgraded all boxes to
> > 12.3(1a) and added a modemcap
> >
> > modemcap entry next:MSC=&FS0=0S29=6S21=3
> >
> > This has corrected thing BUT we needed to put in an INIT String for GWT
> > v92, BCM v92 and PCTel v92 modems. Normally correcting it with +ms=v90
> > or +ms=v90,0
> >
> > Not sure if this will clear it up for you but this was what we did to
> > get updated past the IPv4 bug.
> >
> > thanks
> >
> > Greg
> >
> >
> > "Francisco (fxdomin2)" wrote:
> >
> > > We're running into something similar, however, it's on
> > > AS5300's with 12.2-2.XB11
> > > Our network provider who "manages" these units says that
> > > it's due to the existence of several viruses (mblast and
> > > nachi) on the internet causing ICMP related issues.
> > > Apparently, the Cisco Advanced Network Services Engineers
> > > (ANS) is working on the issue for the last three weeks, but,
> > > they haven't found a workaround.
> > >
> > > If anyone has seen this or is experiencing this, have a fix,
> > > etc. please let us know (Dennis, have you seen this?).
> > >
> > > Currently we need to have our as5300's reloaded every 2
> > > hours to bring the unit back to a useable state (all 25 of
> > > them). If left too long before rebooting, no traffic will
> > > pass (so no telnet etc.), users get stuck, and we regularly
> > > get fast busy signals. From a financial standpoint, this is
> > > killing our business.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: cisco-nas-bounces@puck.nether.net
> > > [mailto:cisco-nas-bounces@puck.nether.net]On Behalf Of John
> > > McKinney
> > > Sent: Friday, September 5, 2003 12:53 AM
> > > To: cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> > > Subject: [cisco-nas] AS5350 Connection Problems
> > >
> > > We seem to have a spuratic problem with users connecting,
> > > but then
> > > not being able to send/receive any data. The call will start
> > > like normal,
> > > then after about 8K of data, sessions just stops sending or
> > > receiving
> > > anything. I experienced it myself Sunday afternoon from my
> > > dial-up
> > > connection. Since this is a production enviroment I am
> > > having trouble
> > > tracking the problem. Even pings from my dialup computer to
> > > our local
> > > severs will stop. I could ping the AS5300, but nothing on
> > > the ethernet
> > > side. I switched to my laptop and it did the same thing. I
> > > drove to the
> > > office and everything was fine. I drove home, the problem
> > > was gone. I have
> > > in the past told yours to reboot, that windows was causing
> > > the problem but
> > > this is not the case. I think rebooting is just buying time
> > > until the
> > > problem goes away. This seems to come and go, but lately I
> > > am
> > > hearing more and more complaints. Where do we go from here?
> > > Phone
> > > conditions seem normal, no excessive retrains or noise.
> > >
> > > 2 AS5350's, not sure if one or both are doing it. Both are
> > > less than 1
> > > year old.
> > >
> > > IOS 12.2-2.XB11
> > >
> > > One has beening running XB11 for several weeks, the other 2
> > > days. Before
> > > that we were using XB8. The problem was present before the
> > > upgrade.
> > >
> > > Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
> > >
> > > Thank You,
> > > John McKinney
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > cisco-nas mailing list
> > > cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nas
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > cisco-nas mailing list
> > > cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nas
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-nas mailing list
> > cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nas
> >

> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nas mailing list
> cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nas

On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Aaron Leonard wrote:
Aaron,

> Seems like the client's circuit can only support V.34
> in any case, so he'd be better off with a V.34 cap
> (AT+MS=V34 or something like that.)

I would agree with that.

>
> Perchance, when he was suffering from the problem, did
> he have V.44 compression negotiated? And then, when
> the problem went away, was V.42bis compression being
> used instead?
>

Yes, that is correct. Originally, when they first called, they were
showing V.44 compression. After forcing v.90 it dropped to V.42. That was
the only difference I could see in the 2 calls.

> There are still some V.44 issues lurking. We've found
> that, on NextPort, adding S65=1024S66=1024 to the modemcap
> will avoid some "illegal token" disconnects. You can try
> disabling V.44 on the client or the server.

What will this do, and how do I set it up?

>
> Aaron
>
> ---
>
> > On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Internet Coordinator wrote:
> > Greg,
> > Another user called in this morning with this problem. Luckily
> > they had 2 lines, so I was able to do a little troubleshooting. The called
> > looked normal. It showed V.34 and V.92. Connection speeds were
> > 26000/24000. I had the user disconnect and enter 'AT+MS=v90,0. They
> > reconnected and this time it was a V.34 call and everything worked fine.
> > So, does this mean that the problem is a V.92 problem? Any suggestions on
> > how to maintain the V.92 calls and resolve the problem?
>
> > Thank You,
> > John McKinney
> > WNC ONLINE
>
> > > We experienced this issue in March when we upgraded all 15 of our
> > > 5350s. We didn't have time to worry about it at the time so we
> > > downgraded back to 12.1-5.xm8 which also downgraded the firmware for the
> > > nextport modems. Now that we have time re upgraded all boxes to
> > > 12.3(1a) and added a modemcap
> > >
> > > modemcap entry next:MSC=&FS0=0S29=6S21=3
> > >
> > > This has corrected thing BUT we needed to put in an INIT String for GWT
> > > v92, BCM v92 and PCTel v92 modems. Normally correcting it with +ms=v90
> > > or +ms=v90,0
> > >
> > > Not sure if this will clear it up for you but this was what we did to
> > > get updated past the IPv4 bug.
> > >
> > > thanks
> > >
> > > Greg
> > >
> > >
> > > "Francisco (fxdomin2)" wrote:
> > >
> > > > We're running into something similar, however, it's on
> > > > AS5300's with 12.2-2.XB11
> > > > Our network provider who "manages" these units says that
> > > > it's due to the existence of several viruses (mblast and
> > > > nachi) on the internet causing ICMP related issues.
> > > > Apparently, the Cisco Advanced Network Services Engineers
> > > > (ANS) is working on the issue for the last three weeks, but,
> > > > they haven't found a workaround.
> > > >
> > > > If anyone has seen this or is experiencing this, have a fix,
> > > > etc. please let us know (Dennis, have you seen this?).
> > > >
> > > > Currently we need to have our as5300's reloaded every 2
> > > > hours to bring the unit back to a useable state (all 25 of
> > > > them). If left too long before rebooting, no traffic will
> > > > pass (so no telnet etc.), users get stuck, and we regularly
> > > > get fast busy signals. From a financial standpoint, this is
> > > > killing our business.
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: cisco-nas-bounces@puck.nether.net
> > > > [mailto:cisco-nas-bounces@puck.nether.net]On Behalf Of John
> > > > McKinney
> > > > Sent: Friday, September 5, 2003 12:53 AM
> > > > To: cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> > > > Subject: [cisco-nas] AS5350 Connection Problems
> > > >
> > > > We seem to have a spuratic problem with users connecting,
> > > > but then
> > > > not being able to send/receive any data. The call will start
> > > > like normal,
> > > > then after about 8K of data, sessions just stops sending or
> > > > receiving
> > > > anything. I experienced it myself Sunday afternoon from my
> > > > dial-up
> > > > connection. Since this is a production enviroment I am
> > > > having trouble
> > > > tracking the problem. Even pings from my dialup computer to
> > > > our local
> > > > severs will stop. I could ping the AS5300, but nothing on
> > > > the ethernet
> > > > side. I switched to my laptop and it did the same thing. I
> > > > drove to the
> > > > office and everything was fine. I drove home, the problem
> > > > was gone. I have
> > > > in the past told yours to reboot, that windows was causing
> > > > the problem but
> > > > this is not the case. I think rebooting is just buying time
> > > > until the
> > > > problem goes away. This seems to come and go, but lately I
> > > > am
> > > > hearing more and more complaints. Where do we go from here?
> > > > Phone
> > > > conditions seem normal, no excessive retrains or noise.
> > > >
> > > > 2 AS5350's, not sure if one or both are doing it. Both are
> > > > less than 1
> > > > year old.
> > > >
> > > > IOS 12.2-2.XB11
> > > >
> > > > One has beening running XB11 for several weeks, the other 2
> > > > days. Before
> > > > that we were using XB8. The problem was present before the
> > > > upgrade.
> > > >
> > > > Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
> > > >
> > > > Thank You,
> > > > John McKinney
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > cisco-nas mailing list
> > > > cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> > > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nas
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > cisco-nas mailing list
> > > > cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> > > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nas
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > cisco-nas mailing list
> > > cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nas
> > >
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-nas mailing list
> > cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nas
>

> > There are still some V.44 issues lurking. We've found
> > that, on NextPort, adding S65=1024S66=1024 to the modemcap
> > will avoid some "illegal token" disconnects. You can try
> > disabling V.44 on the client or the server.

> What will this do, and how do I set it up?

If you add S65=1024S66=1024 to your NextPort modemcap,
then this will cap the max V.44 string at 1KB in both
our transmit and receive direction. This will presumably
reduce V.44 compression somewhat in some cases but has
been seen to solve V.44 disconnects with some clients.

See http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk801/tk36/technologies_tech_note09186a008009491b.shtml
for more info on modemcaps.

If you just want to disable V.44, then use (typically)
+DS44=0
on the client side (or sometimes +DCS=1,0). Use S21=3
on the NAS side to turn off V.44 for all calls.

The downside of turning off V.44 is that you'll use (probably)
V.42bis compression instead, which isn't quite as good.

Aaron

---

> >
> > Aaron
> >
> > ---
> >
> > > On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Internet Coordinator wrote:
> > > Greg,
> > > Another user called in this morning with this problem. Luckily
> > > they had 2 lines, so I was able to do a little troubleshooting. The called
> > > looked normal. It showed V.34 and V.92. Connection speeds were
> > > 26000/24000. I had the user disconnect and enter 'AT+MS=v90,0. They
> > > reconnected and this time it was a V.34 call and everything worked fine.
> > > So, does this mean that the problem is a V.92 problem? Any suggestions on
> > > how to maintain the V.92 calls and resolve the problem?
> >
> > > Thank You,
> > > John McKinney
> > > WNC ONLINE
> >
> > > > We experienced this issue in March when we upgraded all 15 of our
> > > > 5350s. We didn't have time to worry about it at the time so we
> > > > downgraded back to 12.1-5.xm8 which also downgraded the firmware for the
> > > > nextport modems. Now that we have time re upgraded all boxes to
> > > > 12.3(1a) and added a modemcap
> > > >
> > > > modemcap entry next:MSC=&FS0=0S29=6S21=3
> > > >
> > > > This has corrected thing BUT we needed to put in an INIT String for GWT
> > > > v92, BCM v92 and PCTel v92 modems. Normally correcting it with +ms=v90
> > > > or +ms=v90,0
> > > >
> > > > Not sure if this will clear it up for you but this was what we did to
> > > > get updated past the IPv4 bug.
> > > >
> > > > thanks
> > > >
> > > > Greg
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Francisco (fxdomin2)" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > We're running into something similar, however, it's on
> > > > > AS5300's with 12.2-2.XB11
> > > > > Our network provider who "manages" these units says that
> > > > > it's due to the existence of several viruses (mblast and
> > > > > nachi) on the internet causing ICMP related issues.
> > > > > Apparently, the Cisco Advanced Network Services Engineers
> > > > > (ANS) is working on the issue for the last three weeks, but,
> > > > > they haven't found a workaround.
> > > > >
> > > > > If anyone has seen this or is experiencing this, have a fix,
> > > > > etc. please let us know (Dennis, have you seen this?).
> > > > >
> > > > > Currently we need to have our as5300's reloaded every 2
> > > > > hours to bring the unit back to a useable state (all 25 of
> > > > > them). If left too long before rebooting, no traffic will
> > > > > pass (so no telnet etc.), users get stuck, and we regularly
> > > > > get fast busy signals. From a financial standpoint, this is
> > > > > killing our business.
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: cisco-nas-bounces@puck.nether.net
> > > > > [mailto:cisco-nas-bounces@puck.nether.net]On Behalf Of John
> > > > > McKinney
> > > > > Sent: Friday, September 5, 2003 12:53 AM
> > > > > To: cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> > > > > Subject: [cisco-nas] AS5350 Connection Problems
> > > > >
> > > > > We seem to have a spuratic problem with users connecting,
> > > > > but then
> > > > > not being able to send/receive any data. The call will start
> > > > > like normal,
> > > > > then after about 8K of data, sessions just stops sending or
> > > > > receiving
> > > > > anything. I experienced it myself Sunday afternoon from my
> > > > > dial-up
> > > > > connection. Since this is a production enviroment I am
> > > > > having trouble
> > > > > tracking the problem. Even pings from my dialup computer to
> > > > > our local
> > > > > severs will stop. I could ping the AS5300, but nothing on
> > > > > the ethernet
> > > > > side. I switched to my laptop and it did the same thing. I
> > > > > drove to the
> > > > > office and everything was fine. I drove home, the problem
> > > > > was gone. I have
> > > > > in the past told yours to reboot, that windows was causing
> > > > > the problem but
> > > > > this is not the case. I think rebooting is just buying time
> > > > > until the
> > > > > problem goes away. This seems to come and go, but lately I
> > > > > am
> > > > > hearing more and more complaints. Where do we go from here?
> > > > > Phone
> > > > > conditions seem normal, no excessive retrains or noise.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2 AS5350's, not sure if one or both are doing it. Both are
> > > > > less than 1
> > > > > year old.
> > > > >
> > > > > IOS 12.2-2.XB11
> > > > >
> > > > > One has beening running XB11 for several weeks, the other 2
> > > > > days. Before
> > > > > that we were using XB8. The problem was present before the
> > > > > upgrade.
> > > > >
> > > > > Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank You,
> > > > > John McKinney
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > cisco-nas mailing list
> > > > > cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> > > > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nas
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > cisco-nas mailing list
> > > > > cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> > > > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nas

On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Lewis Watson wrote:

> Was their connection pretty much awful every time they connected until the
> string was added? If so then probably yes as that string drops the clients
> modem to V.90. If the problem has been intermittent then I bet it comes
> back..
> Lewis

From what they said, the problem started this week. The connection speeds
have not changed. So, it may come back. Actually the customer ask the same
question. "Why did we add this when nothing has changed and everything
was working until this week?"

On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Lewis Watson wrote:

The box they were connected to, 2 days ago.
12.2-2.XB8 -> 12.2-2.XB11

The other box, 6 weeks ago.

I see your point. But I experienced the same problem Sunday, before the
upgrade.The problem has been occuring for atleast 3 months, just
not as frequently. Perhaps everyone is getting tired of it and suddently
decided to complain?

Should we downgrade? 12.2-2.XB8? Something older?

Thank You,
John

> When did you guys upgrade the IOS?
> Lewis
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John McKinney" <johnm@wnconline.net>
> To: "Lewis Watson" <lists@visionsix.com>
> Cc: <cisco-nas@puck.nether.net>
> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 4:40 PM
> Subject: Re: [cisco-nas] AS5350 Connection Problems
>
>
> > On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Lewis Watson wrote:
> >
> > > Was their connection pretty much awful every time they connected until
> the
> > > string was added? If so then probably yes as that string drops the
> clients
> > > modem to V.90. If the problem has been intermittent then I bet it
> comes
> > > back..
> > > Lewis
> >
> > >From what they said, the problem started this week. The connection
> speeds
> > have not changed. So, it may come back. Actually the customer ask the
> same
> > question. "Why did we add this when nothing has changed and everything
> > was working until this week?"
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-nas mailing list
> > cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nas
> >
>
>

On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Aaron Leonard wrote:
Everyone,

I experienced the same problem again tonight, from my login.
Everyone else is assigned an IP from the pool, but I use an assigned IP.

I dialed into box A, data was being exchanged, but very very slow,
25B/s. I disconnected and dialed in as another user. Again, I dialed into
box A. Everything appeared normal with this other user.
I did a traceroute to my ip address and the first hop was box B -
what? Yes the first hop was to box B, then back to box A, then nothing.
Well the nothing I can understand since I was not logged in as myself my
IP would not have been used. But why would it first go to box B? I may
have been logged through it earlier, I'm not sure, but just 5 minutes
before I was dialed in through Box A. So, I telneted to Box B, then did a
'clear arp-cache'. Telneted into Box A, did a 'clear arp-cache'. I
disconnected and dialed back in as myself and again I hit Box A. Now
everything is working fine.
This sounds like a routing problem to me, not a v.92 problem. Since
all of these boxes are in the same class C network, I am not running any
higher level routing protocols. Simply a default route entry. Any
suggestions or comments? I am going in the right direction? It seems to me
the arp entries are not getting updated on one or both boxes?

Let me know if I didn't explain this very well and I'll try to clarify.

Thank You,
John McKinney

> > > > On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Internet Coordinator wrote:
> > > > Greg,
> > > > Another user called in this morning with this problem. Luckily
> > > > they had 2 lines, so I was able to do a little troubleshooting. The called
> > > > looked normal. It showed V.34 and V.92. Connection speeds were
> > > > 26000/24000. I had the user disconnect and enter 'AT+MS=v90,0. They
> > > > reconnected and this time it was a V.34 call and everything worked fine.
> > > > So, does this mean that the problem is a V.92 problem? Any suggestions on
> > > > how to maintain the V.92 calls and resolve the problem?
> > >
> > > > Thank You,
> > > > John McKinney
> > > > WNC ONLINE
> > >
> > > > > We experienced this issue in March when we upgraded all 15 of our
> > > > > 5350s. We didn't have time to worry about it at the time so we
> > > > > downgraded back to 12.1-5.xm8 which also downgraded the firmware for the
> > > > > nextport modems. Now that we have time re upgraded all boxes to
> > > > > 12.3(1a) and added a modemcap
> > > > >
> > > > > modemcap entry next:MSC=&FS0=0S29=6S21=3
> > > > >
> > > > > This has corrected thing BUT we needed to put in an INIT String for GWT
> > > > > v92, BCM v92 and PCTel v92 modems. Normally correcting it with +ms=v90
> > > > > or +ms=v90,0
> > > > >
> > > > > Not sure if this will clear it up for you but this was what we did to
> > > > > get updated past the IPv4 bug.
> > > > >
> > > > > thanks
> > > > >
> > > > > Greg
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > "Francisco (fxdomin2)" wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > We're running into something similar, however, it's on
> > > > > > AS5300's with 12.2-2.XB11
> > > > > > Our network provider who "manages" these units says that
> > > > > > it's due to the existence of several viruses (mblast and
> > > > > > nachi) on the internet causing ICMP related issues.
> > > > > > Apparently, the Cisco Advanced Network Services Engineers
> > > > > > (ANS) is working on the issue for the last three weeks, but,
> > > > > > they haven't found a workaround.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If anyone has seen this or is experiencing this, have a fix,
> > > > > > etc. please let us know (Dennis, have you seen this?).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Currently we need to have our as5300's reloaded every 2
> > > > > > hours to bring the unit back to a useable state (all 25 of
> > > > > > them). If left too long before rebooting, no traffic will
> > > > > > pass (so no telnet etc.), users get stuck, and we regularly
> > > > > > get fast busy signals. From a financial standpoint, this is
> > > > > > killing our business.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: cisco-nas-bounces@puck.nether.net
> > > > > > [mailto:cisco-nas-bounces@puck.nether.net]On Behalf Of John
> > > > > > McKinney
> > > > > > Sent: Friday, September 5, 2003 12:53 AM
> > > > > > To: cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> > > > > > Subject: [cisco-nas] AS5350 Connection Problems
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We seem to have a spuratic problem with users connecting,
> > > > > > but then
> > > > > > not being able to send/receive any data. The call will start
> > > > > > like normal,
> > > > > > then after about 8K of data, sessions just stops sending or
> > > > > > receiving
> > > > > > anything. I experienced it myself Sunday afternoon from my
> > > > > > dial-up
> > > > > > connection. Since this is a production enviroment I am
> > > > > > having trouble
> > > > > > tracking the problem. Even pings from my dialup computer to
> > > > > > our local
> > > > > > severs will stop. I could ping the AS5300, but nothing on
> > > > > > the ethernet
> > > > > > side. I switched to my laptop and it did the same thing. I
> > > > > > drove to the
> > > > > > office and everything was fine. I drove home, the problem
> > > > > > was gone. I have
> > > > > > in the past told yours to reboot, that windows was causing
> > > > > > the problem but
> > > > > > this is not the case. I think rebooting is just buying time
> > > > > > until the
> > > > > > problem goes away. This seems to come and go, but lately I
> > > > > > am
> > > > > > hearing more and more complaints. Where do we go from here?
> > > > > > Phone
> > > > > > conditions seem normal, no excessive retrains or noise.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2 AS5350's, not sure if one or both are doing it. Both are
> > > > > > less than 1
> > > > > > year old.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > IOS 12.2-2.XB11
> > > > > >
> > > > > > One has beening running XB11 for several weeks, the other 2
> > > > > > days. Before
> > > > > > that we were using XB8. The problem was present before the
> > > > > > upgrade.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thank You,
> > > > > > John McKinney
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > cisco-nas mailing list
> > > > > > cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> > > > > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nas
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > cisco-nas mailing list
> > > > > > cisco-nas@puck.nether.net
> > > > > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nas
>