> At 02:52 PM 12/3/97 +0100, Sten Bæk Sørensen wrote: > > > >When I set the customer router to callback after a few seconds it > >increases the chances of success, which seems to indicate that the MAX > >won't accept a call while it is still dialing out. > > That is correct. > > >The customer router disconnects the initial call immediately, but the MAX > >seems to keep the line open for a few seconds, and hence the problem. > > I would suggest you investigate this further, as we have seen this also > in Germany where the called-party disconnects, but the disconnect is NOT > sent to the calling end for a few seconds. The MAX did not know the remote > end had disconnected. > > >Is there any way to make the MAX accept a callback call although it is > >still actively requesting the callback? - or is there a way to make the > >MAX disconnect a callback request quicker? > > I don't think it's the MAX "holding on" to the call - but the call disconnect > message is being delayed on it's way to the MAX. > > >I tried Ascend-Shared-Profile-Enable = Yes, but it doesn't seem to have > >any effect. > > No, but I thought that: > > Ascend-Expect-Callback = Expect-Callback-Yes, > Ascend-Send-Auth=Send-Auth-None, > > would have had the desired effect. I did think that this tells the MAX to > drop the > call from this end when 'authenticated' - which *may* be the secret....have > you > tried making the MAX authenticate to the remote end with: > > Ascend-Expect-Callback = Expect-Callback-Yes, > Ascend-Send-Auth=Send-Auth-PAP, > > for example? > > >I could make the customer router wait several seconds before calling back, > >but that is not acceptable. Setting up a connection using callback is slow > >enough as it is. > > I guess while we investigate this, you may want to do that. Unless the > authenticate trick works....I'll check into it more here. Concerning the above problem. I found the following in the 5.0Ai28 release notes: TR 250162 Callback resulted in a LAN Security error The callback occurred before the initiating device was ready to receive the call. and I sort of assumed that this might be the solution to my problem, but there doesn't seem to be any difference in the way it works. What exactly has been changed, and how should it work now? BTW: Somebody asked for feedback from successful upgrades to i28. As you might have guessed I loaded i28 and it "works" for me with ei.m40. Regards, -- Sten Bæk Sørensen <A HREF="mailto:sbs@DK.net">mailto:sbs@DK.net</A> DKnet A/S, Fruebjergvej 3, DK-2100 Copenhagen <A HREF="http://www.DK.net">http://www.DK.net</A> Phone: +45 39 17 70 00, Fax: +45 39 17 70 99 ++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++ To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com To get FAQ'd: <<A HREF="http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq">http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq</A>> </PRE> <!--X-MsgBody-End--> <!--X-Follow-Ups--> <!--X-Follow-Ups-End--> <!--X-References--> <HR> <STRONG>References</STRONG>: <UL> <LI><STRONG><A HREF="msg11365.html">Re: (ASCEND) MAX 4000 Callback problem</A></STRONG></LI> <UL> <LI><EM>From</EM>: Kevin Smith <kevin@ascend.com></LI> </UL> </UL> <!--X-References-End--> <!--X-BotPNI--> <HR> <UL> <LI>Prev by Date: <STRONG><A HREF="msg11742.html">Re: (ASCEND) number of active sessions by SNMP</A></STRONG> </LI> <LI>Next by Date: <STRONG><A HREF="msg11741.html">Re: (ASCEND) number of active sessions by SNMP</A></STRONG> </LI> <LI>Prev by thread: <STRONG><A HREF="msg11365.html">Re: (ASCEND) MAX 4000 Callback problem</A></STRONG> </LI> <LI>Next by thread: <STRONG><A HREF="msg11360.html">Re: (ASCEND) MAX 4000 Callback problem</A></STRONG> </LI> <LI>Index(es): <UL> <LI><A HREF="maillist.html#11740"><STRONG>Main</STRONG></A></LI> <LI><A HREF="thrd266.html#11740"><STRONG>Thread</STRONG></A></LI> </UL> </LI> </UL> <!--X-BotPNI-End--> <!--X-User-Footer--> <!--X-User-Footer-End--> </BODY> </HTML>