Re: (ASCEND) Ascend Disconnect Performance

[Mitchell Arnone <mitchell.arnone@occ.treas.gov>]

The percentages I mentioned represent only those two disconnects.  The 
normal disconnect Cause for the Ascend TNT is cause 45 and progress 60 (for 
Windows 95).  Our disconnects of this type averages only 60 to 70 percent.  
The rest are mostly 45/65, 11/60, 185/60, 185/31, 10/31.

So far for the month of March, we are averaging 3.82% 10/31, 5.65% 185/31, 
8.65% 45/65, 9% 185/60 and 60.22% 45/60.  These statistics are really not 
the greatest but we don't know how they compare to other sites using the 
same type of equipment and facilities (we have 11 PRI circuits plugged into 
our TNTs).

Mitch
-------------
Original Text
From: "Mike Tancsa" <mike@sentex.net>, on 3/18/99 8:56 PM:
To: SMTP@DC2@OCC["Cyril Jaouich" <twiggy@twiggy.spider.org>]
Cc: SMTP@DC2@OCC[<ascend-users@bungi.com>]

On 18 Mar 1999 12:46:05 -0500, in sentex.lists.ascend you wrote:

>On Thu, 18 Mar 1999, Mitchell Arnone wrote:
>
>> We have been running two MAX TNTs for over a year and recently purchased 
>> Navis Access.  With Navis, and other "Log Watching" tools we have been 
able 
>> to understand more about the disconnect codes and progress codes.   In 
our 
>> attempt to become more proactive to network/dial-in problems we have 
>> identified some Disconnect/Progress code combinations that could 
indicate a 
>> systemic problem.  For instance, a 185 Disconnect with a progress of 31 
>> basically states that the two modems were unable to shake hands (no 
modem 
>> tone) so the TNT disconnected.  A 10 disconnect with a progress of 31 
>> indicates the same problem differing only in that it is the client which 
>> hangs up first.  On average, about 10% of our total analog disconnects 
are 
>> either a 185/31 or 10/31, although there have been times when this 
>> percentage has been as high as 30%  with users hollering.  Ascend has 
>> acknowledged that problems like this could possibly be addressed in a 
>> recent release of TNT firmware but this is not meant to imply that all 
such 
>> codes will disappear after the upgrade.  Also, there are other 
disconnect 
>> causes that have given us concern as well.
>> 
>> We are seeking to compare notes with other TNT users to see what kind of 
>> disconnects they are receiving and at what percentages.
>
>	Well, we don't use TNTs but with about 150 Max4048, the
>combination c=185 & p=31 plus c=10 & p=31 account for 3.5% of all
>disconnected calls.

This is very interesting to me. We are currently using Livingston PM3s and
are seeing about 10% of our users sessions terminating abnormally... Either
a Call Circut Closed, or a Lost Carrier.   Does your 3.5% figure include
all abnormal terminations, or just the above 2 mentioned ?

e.g. here is one PM3 for a month.

                                           normal  90.48%  30314/33502
             "User Request - Call Circuit Closed"   8.07%   2703/33502
                                   "Lost Carrier"   0.82%    276/33502
         "User Error - PPP NCP Active to Request"   0.60%    201/33502
"Service Unavailable-Failed to detect V.42 remote"  0.01%      5/33502
          "User Error - LAPM negotiation timeout"   0.01%      2/33502
"Port Error - Exceeded LAPM retransmission limit"   0.00%      1/33502


	---Mike
Mike Tancsa  (mdtancsa@sentex.net)		
Sentex Communications Corp,   		
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
++ 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>