Message 2: Weird Modem issue
from "Matthew Andersen" <mander@logi.net>
Message 3: RE: newbies ISP setup
from "greg Lowthian" <greg@isat.com>
Message 4: RE: Weird Modem issue
from "greg Lowthian" <greg@isat.com>
Message 5: Re: Weird Modem issue
from "Danny Sinang" <danny@uplink.com.ph>
Message 6: RE: Weird Modem issue
from "Matthew Andersen" <mander@logi.net>
Message 7: Re: Weird Modem issue
from Greg Stark <stark@generation.net>
Message 8: Mail routing
from "Robert W. Downard" <downrw@sncac.snc.edu>
Message 9: Compaq vs. PM3
from Preston Korn <preston@jaycreek.com>
Message 10: Re: Mail routing
from "David Payer" <david.payer@ia-omni.com>
Message 11: RE: Compaq vs. PM3
from ronnie@itexas.net (Ronnie D. Franklin)
Message 12: DUN 1.3 Upgrade
from "Dave" <davem@netmedia.com.au>
..------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 1 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: newbies ISP setup
From: "Danny Sinang" <danny@uplink.com.ph>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1998 21:42:20 +0800
Question - do most ISDN access servers do DOV ? Do you need a special ISDN
modem on the client side to do DOV ?
- Danny Sinang
-----Original Message-----
From: greg Lowthian <greg@isat.com>
To: ntisp@iea-software.com <ntisp@iea-software.com>
Date: Sunday, August 23, 1998 8:17 AM
Subject: RE: newbies ISP setup
>Actually you don't lose ISDN you lose 64K ISDN but you can do 56K ISDN
>DOV (Data Over Voice) We do this in 4 of our locations and the customers
>are very happy with it. Ascend Max and Livingston PM3 both work well.
>
>
>>
>>
>> Actually 56k can be offered over straight T1s also but you
>> do lose you ISDN capability on straight T1 lines. We have had
>> excellent luck with our Ascend Max units.
>>
>> John David M. Miller
>> webmaster@samnet.net
>>
>> SAMnet - Software and More Inc.
>> http://www.samnet.net
>> Ipswitch WebVAR
>>
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: ntisp-request@iea-software.com
>> > [mailto:ntisp-request@iea-software.com]On Behalf Of matthew
>> > Sent: Friday, August 21, 1998 10:10 PM
>> > To: ntisp@iea-software.com
>> > Subject: Re: newbies ISP setup
>> >
>> >
>> > ok. the first thing you need to know about providing 56k access is that
>> > it isn't done over normal phone lines.
>> >
>> > it is done over what is called "pri" lines.
>> >
>> > if you know what a t-1 line is (24 channels of 64k delivered over what
>> > essentially looks like a 10 base-t network cable) a pri is almost just
>> > like that except it is 24 phone lines not 64k data lines)
>> >
>> > although if you want to get anal data lines is the proper
definition...
>> >
>> > anyway, so there are 24 lines in a pri. you lose 1 "line" for the
>> > handling of the call info so you wind up with 23 usable lines.
>> >
>> > so, 56k equipment comes in multiples of 23 because that is how many
>> > lines are in a pri and nobody really bothers with partial pri's.
>> >
>> > the short answer is you can check out the usr total control rackmount
>> > modems or you can also check out the livingston pm3 rackmount modems.
>> >
>> > www.usr.com or www.livingston.com
>> >
>> > which is better is strictly a matter of religious orientation.
>> >
>> > we use all usr total control but that is just personal preference and
>> > based on the fact that we wanted to support x2 because that was the
>> > first real "standard" that consumers had. it was admittedly a gamble at
>> > the time but it sure worked out well for us.
>> >
>> > matthew
>> >
>> > Ken Chua wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Hello
>> > >
>> > > Can anyone recommend a Access Server or a Modem rack to
>> provide about 50
>> > > lines for 56K access??
>> > >
>> > > Thank you
>> > > Kenzie
>> >
>>
>>
>
..------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 2 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Weird Modem issue
From: "Matthew Andersen" <mander@logi.net>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1998 08:52:34 -0700
I have a dedicated connection from my house to our office. 28.8 This
connection runs a couple of mailing lists. So at sometimes the bandwidth is
saturated. I have 16 IPs at home, and use RRAS on NT to handle routing.
The problem I have is when mail starts sending high volumes of mail. If I
use a USR at home, I can still get out. It is just really slow. IE (If the
mail server is delivering mail, I can ping www.excite.com -w 20000 and it
usually takes about 15000.) If I change the modem at home to a zoom I can't
get out at all when the mail server is sending. IE (The mail server sends
it mail, but when I try to ping something the request times out. I have
tried all the way up to a -w 50000)
The modem at the office is a USR Courier.
Does anyone have any ideas or solutions for this problem?
Thanks,
Matthew
..------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 3 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: RE: newbies ISP setup
From: "greg Lowthian" <greg@isat.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1998 09:09:12 -0700
I only know that Livingston and Ascend do DOV. Most every ISDN modem we
have come across does DOV there is an Init. string to set it. Yes bonded
channels work for 113k. We have been told many times that our 56k DOV is
faster than Pac Bell's 64k but I think that's a bandwidth issue.
>
>
> Thanks for the correction. I don't have any ISDN customers
> trying to use our T1 segments. Are there any additional settings
> to be changed on the client or server end? Do bonded channels
> still work?
>
> John Miller
> webmaster@samnet.net
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: greg Lowthian <greg@isat.com>
> To: ntisp@iea-software.com <ntisp@iea-software.com>
> Date: Saturday, August 22, 1998 8:12 PM
> Subject: RE: newbies ISP setup
>
>
> >Actually you don't lose ISDN you lose 64K ISDN but you can do 56K ISDN
> >DOV (Data Over Voice) We do this in 4 of our locations and the customers
> >are very happy with it. Ascend Max and Livingston PM3 both work well.
> >
> >
>
..------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 4 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: RE: Weird Modem issue
From: "greg Lowthian" <greg@isat.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1998 09:20:07 -0700
We had a similar situation with a customer doing large data transfers
I ran SNMP on our end and found that although both modems were connected
at 31.2 one was more efficient and took up more bandwidth. This was a Win 95
computer on his end so I had him play with his MTU and everything improved
on both modems.
>
>
> I have a dedicated connection from my house to our office. 28.8 This
> connection runs a couple of mailing lists. So at sometimes the
> bandwidth is
> saturated. I have 16 IPs at home, and use RRAS on NT to handle routing.
>
> The problem I have is when mail starts sending high volumes of mail. If I
> use a USR at home, I can still get out. It is just really slow.
> IE (If the
> mail server is delivering mail, I can ping www.excite.com -w 20000 and it
> usually takes about 15000.) If I change the modem at home to a
> zoom I can't
> get out at all when the mail server is sending. IE (The mail server sends
> it mail, but when I try to ping something the request times out. I have
> tried all the way up to a -w 50000)
>
> The modem at the office is a USR Courier.
>
> Does anyone have any ideas or solutions for this problem?
>
> Thanks,
> Matthew
>
>
..------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 5 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Weird Modem issue
From: "Danny Sinang" <danny@uplink.com.ph>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1998 00:24:01 +0800
How do I change the MTU on a Win 95 machine ?
- Danny Sinang
-----Original Message-----
From: greg Lowthian <greg@isat.com>
To: ntisp@iea-software.com <ntisp@iea-software.com>
Date: Monday, August 24, 1998 12:27 AM
Subject: RE: Weird Modem issue
>We had a similar situation with a customer doing large data transfers
>I ran SNMP on our end and found that although both modems were connected
>at 31.2 one was more efficient and took up more bandwidth. This was a Win
95
>computer on his end so I had him play with his MTU and everything improved
>on both modems.
>
>>
>>
>> I have a dedicated connection from my house to our office. 28.8 This
>> connection runs a couple of mailing lists. So at sometimes the
>> bandwidth is
>> saturated. I have 16 IPs at home, and use RRAS on NT to handle routing.
>>
>> The problem I have is when mail starts sending high volumes of mail. If
I
>> use a USR at home, I can still get out. It is just really slow.
>> IE (If the
>> mail server is delivering mail, I can ping www.excite.com -w 20000 and it
>> usually takes about 15000.) If I change the modem at home to a
>> zoom I can't
>> get out at all when the mail server is sending. IE (The mail server
sends
>> it mail, but when I try to ping something the request times out. I have
>> tried all the way up to a -w 50000)
>>
>> The modem at the office is a USR Courier.
>>
>> Does anyone have any ideas or solutions for this problem?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Matthew
>>
>>
>
..------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 6 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: RE: Weird Modem issue
From: "Matthew Andersen" <mander@logi.net>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1998 09:21:58 -0700
Where do I configure the MTU on NT4 SP3 with RRAS? And what should I be
looking at changing it to?
Thanks,
Matthew
_______________________________
We had a similar situation with a customer doing large data transfers
I ran SNMP on our end and found that although both modems were connected
at 31.2 one was more efficient and took up more bandwidth. This was a Win 95
computer on his end so I had him play with his MTU and everything improved
on both modems.
..------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 7 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Weird Modem issue
From: Greg Stark <stark@generation.net>
Date: 23 Aug 1998 15:47:00 -0400
"Matthew Andersen" <mander@logi.net> writes:
> Where do I configure the MTU on NT4 SP3 with RRAS? And what should I be
> looking at changing it to?
This is a tuning question and it depends a lot on the types of traffic
you actually see. You really have to do some experiments while
watching tcpdump traces to see the effects of various values to judge
what the best value is.
In general lower MTUs should result in lower total bandwidth but lower
latency while the line is under load as well. The default 1500 byte
mss is very high for a 14.4 or 28.8 kbs link. I typically saw latency
on the order of 10s on my 14.4kbs modem while an ftp transfer was
running.
I experimented with values like 296 for mtu and mru which reduced the
latency to about 6-7s but found that with the services I used they
caused more fragments, which meant more retransmits and more
delays. If you use mostly TCP traffic this may not be an issue for
you. I typically use a few UDP services which send payloads slightly
larger than 256 bytes.
I currently have them set at 400 bytes, which still causes some
fragments, but mostly avoids them. Most places will suggest values
like 576, presumably to be big enough for a 512 byte packet.
Note that you have to set both mru and mtu, mru is the value requested
for the peer to set as its mtu. I have no idea where to set these on
NT, I assume they would be in the Control Panel, Network settings
somewhere, or else the DUN settings somewhere.
greg
..------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 8 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Mail routing
From: "Robert W. Downard" <downrw@sncac.snc.edu>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1998 15:06:26 -0500
I am installing a new mail server and want it to receive mail destined
for its host name and the host names of our two existing mail servers.
I now have host1.domain.edu and host2.domain.edu. Users receive mail
addressed to user@host1.domain.edu or user@host2.domain.edu. I am
installing a new server, mail.domain.edu. I will not be shutting down
host1.domain.edu or host2.domain.edu, but I want all mail addressed to
these machines to go to mail.domain.edu. I need to migrate users to the
new mail server, but not require them to change their email addresses
right away.
What is the best way to accomplish this?
-- Robert W. DownardNetworking & Systems Spec. email: downrw@sncac.snc.eduSt. Norbert College Phone: (920) 403-3971100 Grant Street Fax: (920) 403-4084De Pere, WI 54115-2099
..------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.| Message 9 |'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'Subject: Compaq vs. PM3From: Preston Korn <preston@jaycreek.com>Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1998 14:04:29 -0700
Does anyone have any input on the compaq access servers vs the Lucent PM3?Which is better? Are they just as good? Which do you recommend?
Preston
..------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.| Message 10 |'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'Subject: Re: Mail routingFrom: "David Payer" <david.payer@ia-omni.com>Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1998 16:22:32 -0500
I need to migrate users to the>new mail server, but not require them to change their email addresses>right away.>>What is the best way to accomplish this?>-->Robert W. Downard
Robert,What are you currently using for software and what are you going to beusing? If you are still open to suggestions there may be a way to do iteasily.
One big problem is if you have duplicates between the databases.
David Payerwww.ia-omni.com
..------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.| Message 11 |'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'Subject: RE: Compaq vs. PM3From: ronnie@itexas.net (Ronnie D. Franklin)Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1998 17:20:24 -0500
I do not have any experience with the PM3, but I am using the Compaq Access Servers and am very happy with them.
We installed our first boxes the first week of January, 1998. I had some major startup problems, part of it due to the telephone company and the other part due to Compaq... However, I was the first one to get the 56k production modems and most of the problems related to them. After the telco problems and initial setup problems were solved they have worked just great....
I might add that Compaq was very very helpful... even to the point of sending 2 techs out for a week and one engineer from Boston down for a week.. all at their expense.. I was quite impressed by the service!!!!!
You may find some old stock out there.. so if you order the Compaq equipment make sure that they ship with the MNC II, that's the network controller, and the II is a better board than the original...
Thanks,
Ronnie
On Sunday, August 23, 1998 4:04 PM, Preston Korn [SMTP:preston@jaycreek. com] wrote:> Does anyone have any input on the compaq access servers vs the Lucent PM3?> Which is better? Are they just as good? Which do you recommend?>> Preston
..------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.| Message 12 |'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'Subject: DUN 1.3 UpgradeFrom: "Dave" <davem@netmedia.com.au>Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1998 08:52:52 +1000
I see there is a new upgrade for Win95 DUNhttp://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q191/4/94.asp
Dave