Re: (ASCEND) 5.0Ap36, is this normal?

[Jason Nealis <nealis@babylon.erols.com>]

 Agreed, I threw AP36 on approx 100 boxes, The only wierdness I saw was
some maxes that have DMS-100 terminated PRI's into it looked to loose
ethernet now and then, It was really wierd, I would get up to 4000ms
ping times, Rebooting the box of course fixed it. I'm pushing the blame
towards the link switch though at the point.

 Ap36 overall looks pretty stable, No massive problems and the 1.140N
code seems to be working slightly better than 1.140A, Even though
all of us will be looking to upgrade again here soon when 1.160 code
hits the max, I'm guessing about a week. 

 Good Job Ascend Engineering on Ap36..

 Jason Nealis
 Director Internet Operations
 Network Access
 Erols Internet


On Thu, 4 Dec 1997, Oliver J. Albrecht wrote:

> In article <Pine.GSO.3.96.971204090724.24906G-100000@vellocet.insync.net> you wrote:
> 
> >Is this normal?
> 
> >> fat
> [...]
> 
> 5.0Ap36 has been up and running for more than 7 days at our site (max 4000
> and max 2000), the fatal history logs are still empty. We're running IP
> only with RIP (v1) on the Ethernet side, K56flex etc... Nothing special
> like OSPF or stacking...
> 
> -- 
> Oliver J. Albrecht <oj@nexus.flensbone.net>
> ++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
> To unsubscribe:	send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
> To get FAQ'd:	<http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>
> 

++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe:	send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd:	<http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>

---

References:

• Re: (ASCEND) 5.0Ap36, is this normal?
• From: "Oliver J. Albrecht" <oj@nexus.flensbone.net>

---

• Prev by Date: Re: (ASCEND) My Error: K56 boards rev. F
• Next by Date: Re: (ASCEND) Using wddialout to troubleshoot excessive dialing
• Prev by thread: Re: (ASCEND) 5.0Ap36, is this normal?
• Next by thread: Re: (ASCEND) 5.0Ap36, is this normal?
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread