Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Thu, 1 Feb 2001 16:47:21 -0700 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Wan interruptions can be confusing. If you have multiple remote sites, each
with a unique IP scheme, what affects one location may not be an issue with
another site.
At a previous job we had 3 remote sites. Each location had a unique IP
scheme. (i.e. 111.100.nn.nn, 111.90.nn.nnn, & 111.80.nnn). Once site was
always having connectivity issues. We kept calling this problems in, and
talked with AT&T until we were blue in the face. AT&T finally escalated our
problem and sent an engineer to the remote site. He did his testing and
said he couldn't find a problem. But miraculously the problem went away
after he placed the circuit back in service. The tech claims he didn't do
anything, or find a problem, but whatever he did fixed the problem.
[log in to unmask] wrote:
> AT&T is Frame provider... I have a firm belief that they just lie to
> me, no matter what the problem... CIR and burst are =. Another,
> interesting point: Not all clients get dropped at the same time??? If
> there were an interuption in WAN, would that not disconnect all clients?
>
> Thanks,
> Jim
>
> In article <[log in to unmask]>,
> Jeff Kell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > Larry Barnes wrote:
> > >
> > > I would be involving your circuit provider at this point. They
> > > maybe having issues with certain circuits.
> >
> > Agreed. Especially if your Committed Information Rate is a whole lot
> > more than your Burst rate. You might also look for BECNs on the
> Cisco.
> > If you're consistently exceeding the CIR you're going to loose a WHOLE
> > LOT of packets if the frame cloud is congested overall.
> >
> > You don't have one of those old, despicable Sprint CIR 0 circuits, do
> > you?
> >
> > Jeff Kell <[log in to unmask]>
> >
> >
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
|
|
|