deaddawg
join:2006-01-16
Ottawa, ON
|  [H/W] Bug with WIC-1ADSL / HWIC-1ADSL
I have four DSL modules in my 2821 router, 2 WIC-1ADSL and 2 HWIC-1ADSL.
I am having the same problem with 4 aDSL lines on all four modules. The upstream with only sync at 736 kbit/s (should be 800kbit/s), and says it is maxing 100% of the available bandwidth, however downstream syncs at 5056 and says it is using around 50%.
Also, the provider is showing I am on a fast path profile, but the Cisco ADSL module seems to be showing Interleave.
If I use an external DSL modem, i get full 800kbit/s upstream. It just seems to be a problem with the Cisco modules. Please find output below.
Here is the output from the provide side while synced with my Cisco router.
As you can see, the provider side is only showing 76% bandwidth usage on the upstream side.
Has anyone experienced this before? Any idea what could be happening?
Thanks ! |
|
TomS_
debugger it
Premium,MVM
join:2002-07-19
Australia
| said by deaddawg  :Has anyone experienced this before? Probably every single Cisco ADSL router/module user. 
I dont know what it is, but I have heard that Ciscos tend to ignore certain parameters that the DSLAM passes to it, as such it tries to figure it out for itself, and doesnt usually end up getting 100% out of a line.
It can be good or bad. Sometimes it may result in increased stability at the trade off of a little speed, other times it may try and grab too much and reduce reliability. |
|
deaddawg
join:2006-01-16
Ottawa, ON | reply to deaddawg
The thing that bothers me the most is that it is getting Interleave instead of Fast Path. |
|
wellKnown
@cox.net
| reply to TomS_
quote:
Probably every single Cisco ADSL router/module user.
You got that right. It has been a problem with the chips Cisco uses for their aDSL interfaces for many years. Those chip are only 100% compatible with DSLAMs from the same manufacturer. In published interop tests I have read Cisco equipment syncs at a slower rate and shows a higher error rate then other vendor's products. Given that this has been known for awhile I doubt Cisco will ever change vendors or pressure their current vendor to fix the incompatibilities. |
|
NeTwOrKDawg
Networking is a lifestyle
join:2005-04-25
Brantford, ON
1 edit | reply to deaddawg
I have it worse here..upstream capacity is 104%.
|
|
deaddawg
join:2006-01-16
Ottawa, ON | But it is actually syncing on fast path and at 800 kbit upstream ..... I wish I had that! |
|
deaddawg
join:2006-01-16
Ottawa, ON
| reply to deaddawg
So I figured out it is some sort of bug with the remote DSLAM's that Bell uses here. I believe it is the newer Lecent Stinger's.
It identifies as IKNS as the vendor. Apparently it is a hardware problem that they cannot / will not fix. I will have to deal with lower upstream. Some modems can sync at full 800, but lots of issues. |
|
keeska
Premium
join:2007-04-06
Sedona, AZ
| Are you sure the bug is in the DSLAM? Cisco devices have had trouble syncing with Lucet DSLAMs for years due to incompatibilities in the chips Cisco uses. There were some old posts about the problems in the qwest forum since qwest uses Lucent DSLAMs at some locations. Interesting that the old 670 aDSL router Cisco bought instead of built is able to sync at full speed with the same DLSAMs. |
|
deaddawg
join:2006-01-16
Ottawa, ON | well it is a hardware bug with some modems (cisco included)
I will just have to deal with 736 x 4 instead of 800 x 4. I can live.
 |
|
JuanchoCR
@co.cr
| reply to deaddawg
Re: [H/W] Bug with WIC-1ADSL / HWIC-1ADSL
Why don´t you try upgrading the DSL firmware, you are using the embedded one. New firmwares will make the chipset to train at higher speeds and to solve interop issues, I think the latest one for the HWIC card is 4.0.15 and of course you would need a CCO to download it. |
|
deaddawg
join:2006-01-16
Ottawa, ON | I have actually been running the external FW for a while now on the two HWIC cards, no difference.
Init FW: init_AMR-4.0.015.bin
Operation FW: AMR-4.0.015.bin
FW Source: external
FW Version: 4.0.15 |
|
