Always look at the client modem code first when a user has problems.
Upgrade if possible.
> b) the server modem code needs to be upgraded,
> c) THE PHONE LINES NEED TO BE UPGRADED
>
> Maybe I'm missing something, but the phone lines around here
> are so crappy, I hate to report problems because it's probably
> the phone lines. For example, my location was about 1 mile from
> the CO. I had CT-1's coming into my PM-3. A customer of mine
> lived about .5 miles in the other direction. From his home, he
> could get no better than a 24K connection. From my office, he
> could get a 46.6K connection.
>From what I've seen, if a user gets a slower speed from a certain line,
but can take their computer to another line, and it consistently works
better, it's the phone line. Maybe it's just a crappy line, or maybe
their behind a SLC. In fact my home line can only hit about 28.8, and
occasionally 31.2. If I take the same machine/modem to my office, I'm
usually on at 45,333 to 49,333. No changes other than the phone line.
>
> I've had the above described situation happen so many times that
> it's not funny. A few could not even get connected from home, but
> would connect fine from another location (not necessarily my office).
Phone line, I'd say. However, having said that, I'd report this one to
support (after looking for new client code obviously). Maybe take
another modem to their house that you know works well with your PM3, and
try using it on their line. See if it connects better. If so, I'd say
they probably have a crappy modem that doesn't like dirty lines. Lucent
may be able to fix this, and they may not, but it's worth a try. In
fact from my home phone line the Motorola SM56 still doesn't work. It
works great from my office line, and from a lot of other lines I've
tried, but it won't work from my home line--it just does a never-ending
handshake, and eventually the PPP client times out. During the beta, I
think Lucent found my case interesting because I happen to have a crappy
line, that really has an uncanny ability to break modems. They did
everything they could to make the SM56 connect on this line, but in the
end they weren't able to get it to happen. However, I have several
other modems that connect without problems from this line, albeit at low
speeds (28.8-31.2). Also, if I force the SM56 to V.34 with an init
string, it works fine on this line. Of course, I don't see Lucent as
the problem here--I think it's a case of Motorola building a crappy
modem that can't handle crappy phone lines.
>
> Then there's the customer who was connecting great at 44K. The
> telco did a "fiber optic upgrade" in his area and now he gets no
> more than 26.4K.
I think fiber would count as an analog-to-digital conversion, and there
can only be one of these between the client modem and your PM3 in order
to attain speeds higher than V.34. Whether this is what's causing this
probably depends on how they connected the fiber in the CO. If there's
another A/D conversion before it hits your PM3, your out of luck for
V.90. I think this would be a good explaination for what has happened,
here, though.
>
> Then, there are the times when:
> User: "All of a sudden, I get disconnected immediately after
> I connect. It used to work fine. I didn't change
> anything on my end, what is your problem?"
> Me: "Did this start when it started raining two days ago?"
> User: "Yes."
> Me: "Wait till your phone lines dry out."
>
> A few days later when it's dry again...
>
> Me: "Are you still having a problem staying connected?"
> User: "No. Guess you were right about the phone lines."
I've got a few users with this same problem. They just know that when
it rains they're going to get bumped a lot. When it rains, some of them
decrease their connect speed (usually to 19.2), and it fixes the
problem. Then, when the lines have dried out, they bump the speed back
up. Others would rather deal with the disconnects than slow their modem
down. The decision is up to them.
>
> With this many telco related problems, how do I know what to
> report to Lucent support, and what to not report. I don't want
> to overburden them with useless support calls.
I'd say if the problem is re-createable on lines that you know to be
clean (like your office), call support. I'd also call them when a
certain modem won't connect on a certain line, but other modems will
connect on that same line.
>
> And with only one PM-3, and it being in production, I don't
> really WANT to be in the beta program.
In the last beta, I only had one PM3, and it was also in production. I
recently bought a second PM3, but nonetheless, I went through the entire
beta with one. One thing I did have was an analog modem pool, however.
If anyone started having modem trouble, I would get traces from the PM3
for Lucent, then have the customer switch their dialup number to the
analog pool. I kept a list of these people, and whenever Lucent
released a new beta to address their particular problem I would ask them
to try the PM3 again. If the problem wasn't fixed, I'd repeat the
process. As far as stability of the code, I never noticed any problems
with the beta. My PM3's never crashed or rebooted or anything like
that. I did have a few people with modem trouble, but they were mostly
the same people who were having trouble with 3.8.2. No doubt about it,
it's not particularly easy to participate in a beta, but if you're
having modem issues it's worth it to get your customers off your back.
Craig
Xpressweb Internet Services
bairdc@xpressweb.com
http://www.xpressweb.com
-
To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
'unsubscribe portmaster-modems' in the body of the message.