Re: (PM) PM3 vs. PacWest
clemdog@marshallnet.com
Sat, 9 May 1998 09:36:19 -0500
> We recently decided to try the PacWest Co-location service in
> Oakland using our PM3's and their Telco service. We have two
> Pm3's running ComOS 3.8b15 connected to them via 4 CT1
> lines. The encoding is AMI, framing D4, PCM: u-law, signaling
> E&M winkstart. All works fine for 3 modems on each PM, then
> we (our customers) get fast busy. PacWest says the portmasters
> aren't winking back after three connections so the lines
> are busied out, I say fast busy's would point to the telco. In
> any case, they claim it's the equipment, I suspect it's them,
> my customers don't care who's fault it is, they just want it to
> work. Has anyone else seen this? Does anyone have a clue
> or experience with PacWest and Portmasters?
>
Why would you want to be using AMI, D4?? This means either your circuit is
lineside CT1 or your configuration is incorrect. In my experience most AMI, D4
circuits use an FXS signaling. If this is in fact a trunkside circuit you better
check the line specs with PacWest. What kind of switch is this on????
Jon Clemons
-
To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>