Ascend Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (ASCEND) The Continuing Saga Of The Inexplicable Fast Busies
>From: William T Wilson <fluffy@dunadan.com>
>
>I have been conducting some (relatively) extensive tests involving the
>"inexplicable fast busy" issue with the Max 2000 and 4000. Using PRI on a
>Max 2000, in this case. I get the PRI from a CLEC, ICG in fact, whereas
>all the voice phones go through US West.
>
>When I set the switch to NI-2 mode, there was no particular difference.
>However, on a lark (and thinking back to someone who said it could be a
>timing issue between the Max and the telco) I set "clock source" to No
>(whereas before it had always been set to yes) and, to my astonishment,
>the line continued to work. This struck me odd, but then I figured that
>the switch might have an auto-sensing facility in place. Still, it struck
>me odd that it would work at all considering that I had both switch type
>and clock source set to the "wrong" values.
>
>What surprised me even more was that with clock source set to "No" and
>switch type set to NI-2, my user gets the fast busy only about 15-20% of
>the time now, instead of 50% as before. Frankly I am amazed. But my
>sensitivity to amazement is a bit dulled by now. :)
If your Max takes mutiple T1 types (PRI, Frame, etc.), especially from
multiple LECs, you need to make sure that:
1. Your Max takes it's clock from a PRI, and
2. The telcos providing the non-PRI circuits take their clock from you (and
hence from the PRI). The telco will refer to it as "loop timing".
If you don't do this you will get frame slips on your T1s, which is a Bad
Thing.
(Thank You, Ivan in Ascend Support)
>From: "Leon McCalla" <ascend@caribbeanlink.com>
>
>the fast busy signal is another story. I think it means that there were no
>circuits available to carry your call into the ICG switch. whatever it
>means, It is an indication that the call was rejected before its
>destination.
>
>when our company tried a certain CLEC a year ago, I think we were the first
>ISP in miami to try thier service and they didn't realize that 10 PRIs meant
>10 PRIs in use the entire day. Although thier switch had the capacity to
>handle the lines, thier backbone connection to BellSouth was only slightly
>above that. consiquently, between our high ratio of lines in use at any one
>time and thier other customers in the area, our custmers got fast busy
>signals most of the time. It took about a month for them to upgrade thier
>link to Bell.
>
>Ask them about thier capacity between thier switch to US west and how many
>other customers thay have on your switch..
>
>Leon
We also have PRIs from ICG, and callers have experienced "no circuits
available" message at times (which ICG fixed by adding more circuits to
Pacific Bell). As Leon says, this is often caused by a lack of circuits to
the ILEC when your lines are handled by a CLEC, especially if the CLEC is
expanding into your area.
Analog callers will hear a "no circuits available" message if this is the
case, and if your lines take analog calls your caller should be able to
call and hear it.
If you experience this, open a ticket with your LEC. You ain't gettin' your
money's worth.
Note that callers in some areas may be getting those messages while callers
in other will not, so calling your lines yourself may not tell you anything.
Ah, deregulation...
Peter Lalor Infoasis
plalor@infoasis.com The San Francisco Bay Area's
415-459-7991 x102 Macintosh Internet Service Provider
415-459-7992 fax http://www.infoasis.com/
++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd: <http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>