Re: ASCEND brain-dead implementation? Or something else

Damien T. (damient@livewire.comsec.net)
Thu, 3 Apr 1997 21:01:06 -0800 (PST)

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Howard Leadmon: "Re: Pipeline problem is resolved"
Previous message: Philip Thomas: "pipeline 50?"
Maybe in reply to: Karl Denninger : "ASCEND brain-dead implementation? Or something else"

At 05:18 PM 4/3/97 -0600, Karl wrote:
>No I didn't. I posted that to the list Kevin.

Yep, and I saw it:

----------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 20:11:39 -0600
From: Karl Denninger <karl@Mcs.Net>
To: portmaster-users@livingston.com
Subject: Pipeline problem is resolved
Sender: owner-portmaster-users@livingston.com
Reply-To: Karl Denninger <karl@Mcs.Net>

ASCEND told our customer how to fix it.

Apparently the NVRAM got totally scrambled.

Going to 5.0A and clearing the NV resolved the problem; it now leaves both
channels up and alone.

-- 
Karl Denninger (karl@MCS.Net)| MCSNet - The Finest Internet Connectivity
http://www.mcs.net/~karl     | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service
			     | 99 Analog numbers, 77 ISDN, http://www.mcs.net/
Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| NOW Serving 56kbps DIGITAL on our analog lines!
Fax:   [+1 312 803-4929]     | 2 FULL DS-3 Internet links; 400Mbps B/W Internal

Next message: Howard Leadmon: "Re: Pipeline problem is resolved"
Previous message: Philip Thomas: "pipeline 50?"
Maybe in reply to: Karl Denninger : "ASCEND brain-dead implementation? Or something else"