Good Job. Sometimes you have to bend the truth to get around the politics.
I've had a similar issue with TimeWarner Road Runner and my ubr924. They won't support it in docsis mode and the basic bridging config doesn't seem to work with their setup. For now I am using a 2611 that I bought for my lab. tm Tim Medley - CCNP+Voice, CCDP Sr. Network Architect VoIP Group iReadyWorld -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Cebuano Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 1:32 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: COX Cable and Cisco uBR924 owners [7:40208] Hi, all. This is just a short notice for people on this list that are subscribers of Cox Communications and have been denied the use of the Cisco uBR924 or newer models. I have battled the company's politics in the past when i wanted to connect my uBR924 to their network. I even escalated my request to their Tech. Engineering Dept. in San Diego, only to be told that they no longer support any Cisco cable modems in their database. Alas, after a few months of being quarantined by the likes of Doyle, Halabi and the gang, i was able to spare a few hours to configure my uBR for basic bridging operation (config is on CCO) and call up their local tech support and lied that I wanted to register a Toshiba modem. Gave the tech the MAC and Serial number (thank G~d she did not recognize these as Cisco numbers!!), and in two minutes my unit was "provisioned". I hope this message helps one or more list subscribers. Albeit I still believe for most transactions that Honesty is the best policy (hey, I was honest in my quest :-> ) Elmer Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=40235&t=40208 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
