We feel yore pain ...but maybe the title of your post should be changed to "I Hate Vendors Who Are Too Damn Lazy To Fix a Stupid Flaw That's Probably Induced Ulcers in More Than One Engineer"
'course it loses a little punch then >>> "MADMAN" 12/18/2001 3:10:04 PM >>> Or more generally remote access!!!! Thought I would pass a tid bit of info I garned after beating my head and wasting time needlessly in the hopes someone else doesn't replicate same. Got a call from a customer, an ISP, wondering why his users with V.92 modems were always connecting at V.90. I quickly educated myself on Ciscos support for V.92 and verified the 5300's were up to spec. I found a V.92 modem laying, lying around and called it myself, the sh modem x/x showed V.90. I found on CCO a test number for V.92 calls and called this 5300 in San Jose, same result. I set up a 5300 in our lab with a PRI, same result. Read docs thinkng I was missing something, didn't seem to be, opened case with TAC. Talked to engineer, he didn't know why either. Got a DE and about a day later found out that even when you make a V.92 connection the 5300 will display V.90!!!!!!!! The answer was "you need to try a V.92 feature". The V.92 feature is modem on hold. I calmly suggested that they may want to take two minute and two lines of code and add V.92 as a connection type!! -- David Madland Sr. Network Engineer CCIE# 2016 Qwest Communications Int. Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 612-664-3367 "Emotion should reflect reason not guide it" Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=29570&t=29545 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
