Re: (ASCEND) Stacking Max4048's

["Tim Jung" <tjung@igateway.net>]

Ok I see how that would be useful but for the fact that our POP uses channelized
T1s rather than ISDN. Southwestern Bell doesn't offer ISDN PRI in that part of
the world here in Missouri. We can get it in St. Louis but that is about it. Our
outlying POPs have to use a channelized T1 instead.

Tim Jung
System Admin
Internet Gateway Inc.
tjung@igateway.net

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Connolly <tec@mountain.net>
To: Tim Jung <tjung@igateway.net>
Cc: ascend-users@bungi.com <ascend-users@bungi.com>
Date: Friday, May 08, 1998 4:41 PM
Subject: Re: (ASCEND) Stacking Max4048's


>If a users is allowed to use 2 channels (ie. 128K isdn) and he gets his first
>channel
>logged into your first max, but the second channel is forced to use the second
>max.....
>With stacking enabled the above cenario is transparent to the user.
>With stacking disabled the above example will not allow the second channel to
>be added until it connects in on the first max.



++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe:	send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd:	<http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>

---

• Prev by Date: (ASCEND) Is this a correct strategy to utilise Ascend enterprise SNMP extensions?
• Next by Date: Re: (ASCEND) POTS bonding
• Prev by thread: Re: (ASCEND) Stacking Max4048's
• Next by thread: (ASCEND) Is this a correct strategy to utilise Ascend enterprise SNMP extensions?
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread