Ascend Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (ASCEND) 6.1.7 and randomness of the Max IP address....
Honestly, OSPF in it's current state on the MAX really causes other
weird problems with just the additional load on the max, Just, FYI, Rumor
has it that OSPF is being re-written in 7.0 from the ground up. Word
has it it will be much more stable than before.
Jason Nealis
Director Internet Operations / Network Access
Erols Internet (An RCN Company)
On Mon, 24 Aug 1998, Rob Francis wrote:
>
> Historically, the the problems we've had with IP issues in 6.1.x are
> related to OSPF.
>
>
> -rob
>
>
>
> On Mon, 24 Aug 1998, Neale Banks wrote:
>
> > Interesting... I'm running 6.1.7 (very plain, no OSPF or stacking) and can't
> > seem to reproduce this. My methodology was to take the output of "show
> > users" and traceroute to each IP in turn - in all cases the secon-last hop
> > was the ethernet interface of the MAX (and yes, we do have some customers
> > using numbered interface link). Is there something else I need to see this
> > problem?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Neale.
> >
> > At 19:38 23/08/98 -0500, Rob Myers wrote:
> > >I am experiencing a strange problem similar to what you are seeing with
> > >6.1.7. When I do a traceroute to a customer's ISDN device or modem from
> > >our cisco or one of our UNIX boxes I no longer get the Ethernet IP address
> > >of the MAX. I would prefer to get this address since I can find out what
> > >one of our MAXen they are connected to. :)
> > >
> > >This is the only thing I have seen with 6.1.7 so far that I have had any
> > >problems with. I'd like to see it fixed in a future release but it is
> > >more of an annoyance than a crippling problem.
> > >
> > >-Rob-
> > >
> > >> From: Raul Zighelboim <rzig@verio.net>
> > >> Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1998 23:11:19 -0500
> > >> Subject: (ASCEND) 6.1.7 and randomness of the Max IP address....
> > >>
> > >> Hello there; I wander is anyone else is experiencing this problem with
> > >> 6.1.7:
> > >>
> > >> I assigned numberred point to point links to isdn dialup; 1 /30 ip on my
> > >> end, and another /30 ip in the customer end.
> > >> Up to now, it all worked well.
> > >>
> > >> With the last release of Ascend, the Max IP Address (used to always be
> > >> the ip assigned to the Ethernet port) follows the WAN ip of the last
> > >> incoming call.
> > >>
> > >> So, A traceroute would show : Ethernet -> WAN13-local_ip ->
> > >> WAN27-remote_ip when it used to be :
> > >> Ethernet -> MAX-Ethernet_ip
> > >> - -> WAN27-remote_ip...
> > >>
> > >> Strange.... will Ascend ever be able to deliver code with V.90 ? I wish
> > >> the would leave 5.0p24 alone, replacing only the rockwell microcode.
> >
> > ++ 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>
>
++ 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: