Re: (PM) IRX & Cisco

John G. Thompson (jgt10@livingston.com)
Wed, 24 Feb 1999 16:43:21 -0800

At 10:59 AM 02/24/99 +0100, Xavier wrote:
>We have lots of client using small leased line connected to IRX portmasters.
>On the remote side, they use Cisco (25xx, 16xx).
>
>Problem: The lines are very instable!
>
>Ex:
>
>Couldn't send LCP_ECHO_REPLY
>Couldn't send LCP_ECHO_REPLY
>Enabling port S2
>Couldn't send LCP_ECHO_REPLY
>Couldn't send LCP_ECHO_REPLY
>Enabling port S2
>Couldn't send LCP_ECHO_REPLY
>Couldn't send LCP_ECHO_REPLY
>Enabling port S2
>Couldn't send LCP_ECHO_REPLY
>Couldn't send LCP_ECHO_REPLY
>
>
>Any idea? How can I make the link more reliable? Anything to change on the
>Cisco and/or the IRX?

Hard to tell, really.

The above can happen when there is already data backed up on the WAN
connection to the Cisco. Take a look at the ratio of received data to
transmitted data. I suspect you'll find that the transmit count is much
higher than the received. You might also do a show S2 and send that along
as well.

What kind of CSU/DSU are you using? Have you looked to see if it is
reporting any errors or violation on the leased line?

JGT
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
John G. Thompson Technical Support STAFF Engineer aka JOAT(MON)

---==####==---Lucent Technologies Remote Access Business Unit---==####==---
4464 Willow Road ftp://ftp.livingston.com/ Tel: (800) 458-9966
Pleasanton, CA 94588 http://www.livingston.com/ Fax: (925) 737-2110
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
******* The solution to any problem lies in its proper definition. *******
-
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/>