| [Cable HSI] Missing Mandatory MDD One day, about 3 weeks ago I noticed that my modem was not bonding channels any longer and it had been earlier in that day. I rebooted the modem and it was bonding again, but only 2 channels instead of the 3 it usually has bonded. I also got the following message in the log - Missing Mandatory MDD TLV on primary DS Channel.
The 3 frequencies that used to bond were 111 MHz, 129 MHz and 135 MHz, but now the channel over the 111 MHz frequency is missing. Modem reboots over the past several weeks hasn't changed anything. Signal levels are fine. Others in the area have the same issue, so I know the problem isn't on my end.
So, is there a problem with the CMTS or the node in my area. I'm not having any problem with the service; just trying to be preventative. |
|
| If you have no problems don't worry about it.
--
I speak for myself, not my employer. |
|
| Not worried about it. Like I said, just taking a preventative stance so as to not have any potential future problems. Thought the error message might be a flag to any Mediacom techs reading this that something on Mediacom's side that needs to be checked into. |
|
 MediacomChadMediacom Social Media Relations TeamPremium,VIP
join:2010-01-20
Gulf Breeze, FL
kudos:74 | There were some head end changes that could have caused this. Shouldn't become an issue and you should be good to go. Let me know if you see any problems. |
|
| said by MediacomChad:There were some head end changes that could have caused this.
Okay, so, there must have been something overlooked in the head end configuration to make the log entry - "Missing Mandatory MDD TLV on primary DS Channel" - to start showing up.
Just like the entry - "DHCP RENEW WARNING - Field invalid in response v4 option" - that has been discussed in the past on this forum. |
|
MediacomChadMediacom Social Media Relations TeamPremium,VIP
join:2010-01-20
Gulf Breeze, FL
kudos:74 | Yes these notifications in the modem log can be caused by different things. If you aren't noticing any issues though then I wouldn't worry about them. If these messages are paired with T3 or T4 timeouts then we would definitely need to look into that. |
|
|
|
