In a word, Yes. We've got two TNT's that have been rock-solid for over a year that have rebooted 6 times in two days. Any help at all would be most appreciated.
Thanks in Advance,
Ejay Hire
Has anyone opened a ticket with Lucent about this? My initial feeling is
some traffic pattern, possibly a side affect of the recent instability,
could be causing it. Thanks.
andy
Lucent is aware of the problem and is working on a fix. One of our
networks is O1 and they use massive amounts of TNTs. Excerpt from their
announcement yesterday:
"...an intermittent problem that has been discovered to be affecting a
specific type of network card used by some of the NAS devices that
populate our network. The problem is exacerbated by the blaster worm and
has been replicated by Lucent, our vendor and others. In order to resolve
the issue, we are working with Lucent to test and deploy an emergency
updated version of software to the affected NAS devices."
Jim
> "...an intermittent problem that has been discovered to be affecting a
> specific type of network card used by some of the NAS devices that
> populate our network. The problem is exacerbated by the blaster worm and
> has been replicated by Lucent, our vendor and others. In order to
resolve
> the issue, we are working with Lucent to test and deploy an emergency
> updated version of software to the affected NAS devices."
Has anyone gotten a patch from Lucent yet for the Max TNT's? I need
something, I've got a bunch of these and when a customer on the TNT has the
worm the ping packets coming from his dialup are causing the TNT to crash.
Even a way to filter within the TNT would be useful if anyone has any ideas
on that. I've already placed filters in my cisco routers for the 92 byte
pings but that doesn't stop the ones that originate with the dialup user
from crashing the TNT.
Geo.
Even a way to filter within the TNT would be useful if anyone has any ideas
on that. I've already placed filters in my cisco routers for the 92 byte
I believe you want to to do this in the radius profile for each user.
Similar to port-25 filtering, eh?