RE: (ASCEND) v.90 code stable yet?

To: <RPM@GCQ.net>
Subject: RE: (ASCEND) v.90 code stable yet?
From: "Kevin A. Smith" <kevin@ascend.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1998 15:40:25 -0700
Cc: "Ascend User Group" <ascend-users@bungi.com>
In-Reply-To: <001b01bdcfae$f3422760$07e6b5cd@w1qa.gcq.net>
References: <199808241930.MAA11781>
Sender: owner-ascend-users@max.bungi.com

At 06:31 PM 8/24/98 -0400, R. P. McCormick wrote:
>On August 24, 1998 15:45 Kevin A. Smith wrote:
>
>>> >>> > We took the plunge yesterday morning (5.0 to 6.1.7).  
>>> >>> > So far, life is good: no users revolting (well, 
>>> >>> > no more than usual ;-), no signs (yet) of memory
>>> >>> > or IP Pool leaks <FX: looks for wood for touching>
>>> >
>>> >25+ days on 4048's without any problems!
>>> 
>>> With 6.1.7 ??
>>> I though 6.1.7 was only released on 8/13/98.
>
>Oops - sorry for the confusion.  We're running 6.1.3.

I thought so, but I figured others may make the same conclusion
that I initially did....

>I was responding about the stability of the v.90 code, 
>and if memory is correct, I think it is the same v.90
>modem code used in both 6.1.3 and 6.1.7.

Correct.

>27+ days on 6.1.3 without any problems ...
>now considering 6.1.7.

Thanks for the clarification.


Kevin Smith			Ascend Communications...
Customer Satisfaction	...where Network Solutions never end.

++ 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) v.90 code stable yet?

From: "R. P. McCormick" <RPM@GCQ.net>

Prev by Date: (ASCEND) Static IP Users
Next by Date: RE: (ASCEND) v.90 code stable yet?
Prev by thread: RE: (ASCEND) v.90 code stable yet?
Next by thread: (ASCEND) Odd ISDN Call Refusal on 6.1.3
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread