Re: (ASCEND) Which version is best for 56k?

["Huelbe Arizon Garcia" <huelbe@zaz.com.br>]

Dear friends,

We use a Max 6000 here... Apologize for the mistake :c)

Huelbe.

----- Original Message -----
From: Daniel J. Vance <techlists@rvi.net>
To: Ascend List <ascend-users@bungi.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 29, 2000 1:52 PM
Subject: Re: (ASCEND) Which version is best for 56k?


It was my understanding that 7.0.X is the last supported branch of software
supported by the max4000s.  Anything above that is only for the max6000.

Sincerely,
Daniel J. Vance
----- Original Message -----
From: Jake Messinger <jake@advamed.com>
To: John Coy <jcoy@anc.net>
Cc: Huelbe Arizon Garcia <huelbe@zaz.com.br>; <ascend-users@bungi.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 29, 2000 5:45 AM
Subject: Re: (ASCEND) Which version is best for 56k?


> On Mon, 28 Feb 2000, John Coy wrote:
>
> > I'm interested in knowing how you're running anything
> > greater than 7.0.26 on a MAX 40XX box?  Ascend stopped
> > supporting the MAX 40XX platform in TAOS version 7.0.X.
>
> ?? They are up in the 8's now.
>
> >
> > Are you sure you're not running 7.0.2X?
> >
> > John
> >
> > At 04:01 PM 2/28/00 -0300, Huelbe Arizon Garcia wrote:
> > >Hello!
> > >
> > >Here we have a Max 4000 running TAOS 7.2.0. My customers are
complaining
> > >that if one connects to this Max, connections are established at 42.000
to
> > >46.666 bps. But, if one connects to
> > >other NAS in other city (which has Cisco and TNT NASes), the speed is
always
> > >better, up to 54.333 bps.
> > >
> > >For your information, these customers generally have HSP or Winmodems,
like
> > >Lucent LT V.90.
> > >
> > >So, I would like to know if I upgrade this Max to TAOS 7.4.0 or 8.0.x
will
> > >cause to V.90 connection get better rates. And, is 8.0.x stable or are
there
> > >any reports of problems?
> > >
> > >Greetings,
> > >
> > >Huelbe.
> > >
> > >P.S.: I apologize for my poor english...
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: Phil Bedard <philb@cyberlynk.net>
> > >To: <ascend-users@bungi.com>
> > >Sent: Monday, February 28, 2000 1:17 PM
> > >Subject: (ASCEND) 7.0.26 must use assigned address somewhere?
> > >
> > >
> > >       Does anyone know if somewhere in 7.0.x they have introduced a
> > >command to make it so the remote end must accept the assigned address?
> > >I upgraded a max4k to 7.0.26 from 6.0.8 and now a couple of users are
> > >getting their old IP addresses, which they have configured in their
> > >equipment.  They were getting the correct radius assigned ips until I
> > >upgraded to 7.0.26.
> > >
> > >Phil Bedard
> > >++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
> > >To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
> > >To get FAQ'd: <http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>
> > >
> > >++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
> > >To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
> > >To get FAQ'd:   <http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>
> >
> > ++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
> > To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
> > To get FAQ'd: <http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>
> >
>
> --
>
~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~
> Jake Messinger, VP. ph:713-772-6690 Lucent Dealer
> AMS, Inc. fx:713-774-3498 Medical Billing
> 8300 Bissonnet  #400 jake@advamed.com,ICQ# 4403734 Internet Services
> Houston, Texas  77074 www.advamed.com/~jake and Hardware
>
> Adjunct Professor University of Houston, CBA jake@uh.edu
>
~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~
>
> INVENTOR OF the _.,-*~''~*-,._ SQUIGGLES (c) 1978
>
> ++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
> To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
> To get FAQ'd: <http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>
>

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

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