Fragmenting packets over Ethernet to improve voice quality

Setup:
1750--Ethernet---Satellite Receiver---128K Sat Link---Sat. Recvr--Ether---1750
Question:
Since the Satellite Link is only 128K there will be a problem of Serialization Delay. Is there a way to fragment packets and Interleave over ethernet ? The same way it is done over Frame Relay or MLPPP.
In this setup how does one lower down "Serialization Delay" ?

rocampo,
With a Satellite link, most the latency will be travel time and not serialization delay. I would expect VoIP quality to be an issue, since the users will have to tolerate long delays and have to wait to make sure the person on the other end has actually finished speaking before starting to speak. VoIP packets are generally small enough that they are already at or near Ethernet minimum packet size of 64 KBytes, so they are not fragmented on Ethernet. However, you may want to look into the QOS / COS capabilities of your LAN switches. But the real issue for you will be the large amount of latency across the satellite link. Be sure to use QOS on the satellite link, to send along VoIP packets on a preferred basis over other less time sensitive traffic. And you may want to see if you can use RTP header compression on the Satellite link to shrink the size of VoIP frames.
Regards,
Rob Bristow
AT&T Solutions
CCIE #3335

Similar Messages

Can you carry L3VPN MPLS packets over Ethernet XConnect?

Hi All,
Can you carry L3VPN MPLS packets over an ethernet port-based xconnect???
Current:
POP_1 >> Physical Circuit << POP_2
Proposed:
POP_1 >> Provider_Router_1 << ethernet port-based xconnect >> Provider_Router_2 << POP_2
We are cancelling our physical circuits between each POP and going with another provider who is going to carry all our traffic between the POPS using ethernet xconnects. We have a few L3VPN MPLS customers and I wasn't 100% sure if their L3VPN data would be carried over the proposed xconnects.
Thanks.
Andy

Thanks guys for your reply...
One thing that I've never fully understood is the MTU setting you need within the Service Provider's core network (and I've read quite a bit about it).
For example we've cut across to the new xconnect circuit last night and I can get a 1500 byte L3VPN MPLS packet through the Service Provider's core from one PE to another PE via the xconnect (see below). I think this is made up of the payload (1492 bytes) + 2 x Tunnel/VC headers (8 bytes) = 1500 bytes total - so the Service Provider's core has MTU of 1500 bytes (correct me if I'm wrong on this).
Now I don't know if this is good or bad??? What should I be looking for? How do I determine what MTU is required through the Service Provider's core???
PE_1#ping vrf NSTEST 172.16.100.17 size 1492 df-bit
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 1492-byte ICMP Echos to 172.16.100.17, timeout is 2 seconds:
Packet sent with the DF bit set
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 24/25/28 ms
PE_1#ping vrf NSTEST 172.16.100.17 size 1493 df-bit
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 1493-byte ICMP Echos to 172.16.100.17, timeout is 2 seconds:
Packet sent with the DF bit set
Thanks.
Andy

Extending Wireless Network and Bridging Over Ethernet

Have a TimeCapsule and Airport Basestation at home. Both are currently connected over wireless using the "Extend Wireless Network" feature.
On each of the devices have several laptops, mac minis etc. connected over Ethernet (since wireless insufficient for our high speed data transfers etc.)... Trouble we are having is the speed/connection between both the TC and the AP, so considering to connect them both over Ethernet to improve.
Question is once they are connected over Ethernet, what happens to the "Extend Wireless Network", how does the TC and AP know to either use the wireless or the Ethernet to connect with each other? Does one take precedence over the other?
We want to keep them both on Ethernet and Wireless bridge ideally, so that at opposite ends the wireless network is extended for our iPhones and iPads and all devices connected on Ethernet benefit the speed boost over Ethernet, but just not sure how it will behave, and not sure how to test this scenario....
So asking here instead
Thanks!

It sounds like you might want to configure your base stations into a "roaming network".

Dynamic bandwidth selection for PPPoE over Ethernet/VLAN

Hello all, hope you are doing great.
I'm planning to deploy PPPoE Server (Cisco Router 7609) for a ISP. This ISP will provide Internet connection for customer over Ethernet.
I have to provide a solution to assign bandwidth to each customer by RADIUS and I find some clues that Dynamic Bandwidth Selection (DBS) should be the answer. Unfortunately, DBS only support PPPoA or PPPoE over ATM.
If you have any experience with equivalent function, please help me. Thank you very much.
Regards,
Hiep Nguyen.

Hiep,
I think I have figured this out. Here is the test config on my PPPoE server:
int lo1
ip address 172.25.25.25 255.255.255.255
ip radius source-interface Loopback1
aaa new-model
radius-server host 172.16.1.55 auth-port 1812 acct-port 1813 key cisco$$$
aaa group server radius RADIUS-ACT
server 172.16.1.55 auth-port 1812 acct-port 1813
aaa authentication login default group RADIUS-ACT local
aaa authorization exec default group RADIUS-ACT local
aaa accounting exec default start-stop group RADIUS-ACT
aaa accounting delay-start
aaa authentication ppp default if-needed group RADIUS-ACT local
aaa authorization network default group RADIUS-ACT local
aaa accounting network default start-stop group RADIUS-ACT
aaa accounting update periodic 5
bba-group pppoe global
virtual-template 1
interface fa0/1
pppoe enable group global
ip address 172.30.0.1 255.255.0.0
no shut
interface Virtual-Template1
mtu 1492
ip unnumbered FastEthernet0/1
peer default ip address pool GLOBALPOOL
ppp authentication chap
ip local pool GLOBALPOOL 172.30.0.2 172.30.127.255
policy-map POLICE-128K
class class-default
    police 128000
policy-map POLICE-512K
class class-default
    police 512000
Here are the attributes on the radius server, for a group the PPPoE customer belonged to:
Service-Type = Framed
Framed-Protocol = PPP
cisco-avpair="ip:sub-policy-In=POLICE-128K"
cisco-avpair+="ip:sub-policy-Out=POLICE-512K"
Here is the show policy-map on the virtual-access interface the client connected on:
sho policy-map int virtual-a 3
Virtual-Access3
Service-policy input: POLICE-128K
    Class-map: class-default (match-any)
      1000 packets, 1402000 bytes
      5 minute offered rate 0 bps, drop rate 0 bps
      Match: any
      police:
          cir 128000 bps, bc 4000 bytes
        conformed 799 packets, 1120198 bytes; actions:
          transmit
        exceeded 201 packets, 281802 bytes; actions:
          drop
        conformed 0 bps, exceed 0 bps
Service-policy output: POLICE-512K
    Class-map: class-default (match-any)
      911 packets, 1137746 bytes
      5 minute offered rate 0 bps, drop rate 0 bps
      Match: any
      police:
          cir 512000 bps, bc 16000 bytes
        conformed 799 packets, 1136178 bytes; actions:
          transmit
        exceeded 0 packets, 0 bytes; actions:
          drop
        conformed 0 bps, exceed 0 bps
I was able to generate enough traffic with ping to meet the exceed action in and have it drop packets.

Streaming iTunes (shared library) video over ethernet...

I'm hoping someone with combined iTunes and networking savvy might be willing to help me out here. Here's the setup,
I have an Intel iMac hooked up to Fantom 1TB drive via USB 2.0 (iTunes library on external). The iTunes library is shared to an iBook G4 over ethernet via a Linksys Wireless B router (but both comps are wired in for max speed). (To be clear, when I say 'shared' I mean that I open iTunes on the iBook with it's own library and select the shared iMac library from within the iTunes GUI). When I go to play videos over the shared library on the iBook they are quite choppy and slow and I'm wondering where the bottleneck is.
I'm using Cat5e cable (1000Mbs+ so far as I can gather), but the router ports are 10/100 as is the ethernet port on the iBook (max 100Mbs). Further, the iBook has only 32MB of VRAM (although I've upgraded the RAM to 1.12GB). The iMac is running Leopard 10.5.5, iBook running Tiger 10.4.11, both machines running iTunes 8.0.1. I'm presuming that the read and transfer rates of the external are not the issue here because there are no problems viewing on the iMac, but I could be wrong.
So is the bottleneck the 10/100 ethernet ports on the router/iBook, the iBook VRAM, or is there something inherent in iTunes library sharing itself that is causing the delays? I also have an Xbox 360 which reads the same shared library via Rivet/Connect360 over the same network and router and videos are fine on the Xbox which makes me think the problem is with the iBook or iTunes.
I ask because I'm considering upgrading the router, and even replacing the iBook, but if it's something to do with iTunes itself, then there's not much point.
Thanks to any and all who can offer advice.

This evening I tried to narrow down the problem further and I think it boils down to the iBook not being able to process the video data fast enough rather than the transfer rate over the network or something inherent in iTunes.
To do this I shared my library folder on the network and copied a file from it to the iBook's HDD, adding it also to iTunes locally on the iBook. The quality is the same whether I view it:
1) Through the iTunes GUI 'SHARED' library over the network
2) By opening it directly (using Quicktime) over the network through the mounted shared folder in finder
3) Viewing it in Quicktime directly from the iBook's internal HDD
4) Viewing it locally in iTunes from the iBook's HDD
Now the question is whether the iBook should be able to view this video smoothly given its hardware, or do I have the logic board VRAM problem that I've been reading about...I guess an issue for another post/topic.
Thanks for trying to help Tom.

Detect device over ethernet

Hi Everyone,
I would like to know how do i detect device connected over ethernet by using labVIEW?
My require is:
I have to develop a code which detect any device connected to ethernet port.(The external device which is connected to ethernet port may be anything)
I would like to get the IP of the device connected to my ethernet port using labVIEW.
It will be really grateful if anyone can help me to resolve this.

A brute force method which is commonly used is to send a ping packet to every IP address in the subnet(s) you are interested in. This is not guaranteed to work since some devices will not reply to ICMP ping packets for security reasons. Another approach which again guaranteed to work and will more likely find fewer devices would be to send a SNMP request for the system description (1.3.6.1.2.1.1.1.0) . If a device supports SNMP they will generally respond to this request.
Many devices, especially network infrastructure devices, will not be easily managed. They will have security enabled to limit access to them. Part of this security will be to limit what types of communications they will accept and who they will talk to. Simply finding an IP address active on a network will not provide you with too much information about the type of device it is and how you may communicate with it. There are lots of network protocols out there and many devices have very specific ones they use. A general purpose network manager that can find and communicate with anything on the network is a daunting task and one that most likely will not be possible to implement. At best you will be able to find a subset of devices. As I mentioned even the most basic ping packet will not guarantee you will find everything.
I'm not trying to rain on your parade but trying to let you know that you are trying to accomplish something that will most likely impossible to actually do. Probably the most effective way, but not very practical, to at least find eveything would be to implement a port scanner that would exhaustively go through every IP address in your desired range and attempt to establish a connection on every TCP port (you could stop once you get a response). If a device is on the network it more than likely will communicate on at least one TCP port. All this would tell you though is that there is a device at that IP address that communicates using port x. However, as I cautioned before this type of activity will very quickly get the attention of the network staff managing the network you do this on.
Mark Yedinak
"Does anyone know where the love of God goes when the waves turn the minutes to hours?"
Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald - Gordon Lightfoot

H323-Voice-Quality explanation

I understand that the h323-voice-quality VSA conveys the calculated ICPIF factor, which is supposed to be a positive integer. However, on many occasions, this VSA contains the value "-1" or "h323-voice-quality=-1"(In fact, it appears in some examples of this very web site). What is the meaning in this case? Clearly, it can't be used but there must be some reasoning behind it that I'd like to know. Same goes for the value "0", which is unrealistic when codecs other than G.711 are being used, and for any ICPIF value over 50.

The value should be in from 0 - 34 not -1.This should be calculated from the icpif for the call. Two caveats with
this value. First is that it relies on rtcp (which for example our ip phones do not support). The second is that the call needs to be longer than 10 second in duration. If neither of these conditions are true, you should expect it not to be set; or as shown as -1.
As a workaround try upgradig the IOS to the latest one.

Itunes over ethernet?

I have a Mac Pro in my upstairs office and it is connected to the home network by an Ethernet hardwire. The router is a Netgear model.
I also have a Windows laptop connected to the network in the family room via WiFi.
Is there a way for me to use the Laptop to control the iTunes library on the Mac Pro and have the audio play through my home theater in the family room? The Home Theater has access to the hardwire Ethernet and I would prefer a solution that uses the hardwire NOT WiFi....
Thanks,
Pete D.

Why are there ethernet ports on both the aiport and the aiport express
So you can plug ethernet devices into them.
In order to do audio over ethernet, you have to convert the audio to packetized data which would then have to be converted back to audio at the far end and fed to an amp.
You would get a customized system installed to play audio/video over CAT5 ethernet.
Or use wifi which should work anywhere in the house unless you have a lot of wiring in the walls, shielding the signals.
You don't simply play regular analog audio thru an ethernet wire though it would be possible. If so, it would not be used for ethernet connection.
Keep in mind that a CAT5 cable in the wall is not ethernet. Ethernet is a communications protocol that typically uses CAT5 cabling between devices (routers and switches).
A bit about AoE-> Audio over Ethernett

Telephone line Extensions over Ethernet via SPA112 ?

I saw a recommendation elsewhere and on this forum suggesting the SPA112 coul be used to extend phone lines (same number) to other rooms over ethernet.
Here is what I want to do:
I have exsiting IP based phone service provided by a company called Talkit (Canada). Talkit provided at Grandstream Handytone 286 ATA and I connected a cordless Nortel analog phone to it. Works ok.
Now I want to put an extension of the same phone number into another room. I purchased two SPA112s to try to do this. I have established ethernet connectivity and I can see and configure both units.
I connetced one unit to the phone line that runs from the Handytone ATA to my analog phone to one SPA112 and a second old analog phone in the second room to the second SPA112.
I made the following config changes:
I upagraded the FW to the latest version on both SPA112 units.
I set
Register to No
Use OB proxy to No
Make calls wo reg to Yes
Ans call w/o reg to Yes.
I was able ot get a dial tone on the second phone but when I dialed out to my cell phone I geta busy signal.
Another issue is that the SPA112 connected to the Handytone ATA seems to stay OFF Hook.
Please advise... or point to a document where I can read about how to set these up.
I am assuming that I do not need to register the spa112s to my service provider proxy bu that rather that two spa112s will simply pass the incoming and outgoing calls thru.
John

John,
Both the Grandstream Handytone and the SPA112 are what are called "ATA" devices. "ATA" stands for Analogue Terminal (or in some literature, Telephone) Adapter. That's to say that an ATA device converts from an IP-based voice connection to an analogue voice connection.
The port that you connect your cordless phone to on the Grandstream ATA is, technically, referred to as an FXS port. An FXS port provides dial tone and battery voltage on an analogue line. The compliment to an FXS port, is an FXO port, which expects to have dial tone and battery voltage provided to it. Both the Handytone and the SPA112 have only FXS ports, so they all provide dial tone and battery, and thus are not compatible to be connected directly together.
You would need a device (such as the previously mentioned SPA3102) which features an FXO port on one end of the ethernet connection, and one of your SPA112 ATA's on the other end of the ethernet connection.
If I'm understanding what it is you're trying to accomplish correctly (and I believe I do), there are a couple suggestions I would make.
First off, you can contact TalkIt, and explain that you wish to configure your own ATA device with their service, in addition to the one they provided you. They would need to provide you the SIP proxy and credential information for your phone accounts with them. You would then need to program that information into the SPA112 that is in the second room. As long as that SPA112 can get internet connectivity, it should be able to register with their call server, and you should be able to make and receive calls at the same number as the Handytone ATA, providing TalkIt will allow multiple registrations to the same account.
Secondly, you can contact TalkIt, and explain that you wish to have them provide you an additional ATA configured with the same users / phone numbers as your current unit. Some providers are less prone to provide you with the information required to configure your own device, but they may be open to you purchasing / renting an additional unit that they provide, and configuring it in such a way that it shares the same number as the original ATA device they provided you with.
Thirdly, you can purchase a SIP Gateway device, such as the SPA3102, which would provide an FXO port which you could connect to the FXS port of the Handytone ATA device, and then configure one of your SPA112's to make an IP connection to the SPA3102, and connect an analogue line to that SPA112.
If you're not overly familliar with IP Telephony, I'd probably recommend getting a second ATA from TalkIt, as it would come preconfigured, and you would only have to plug it in for it to work. If they're willing to provide you with the SIP information, you may be able to configure one of the SPA112's that you already have, and just use that to connect to their service. This would probably be the least expensive option, but would require you to perform the configuration of the additional ATA device yourself. The third option, which most closely resembles your initial request, would not involve TalkIt, however it would involve purchasing the additional SIP Gateway device, as well as perform all of the configuration yourself. I, personally, have not configured a SIP Gateway device before, so I don't know exactly how involved that configuration is. Configuring the SPA112 shouldn't be too bad, but again, I've never configured it in exactly the way you're describing, so I can't say for sure. I've only ever used them to connect to a full IP PBX, or else a Hosted service, similar to the TalkIT provided Handytone unit.
Hope this provides a little direction, and wasn't too confusing.
Randy

Firewall causing playstation 3 fragmented packets blocked!

Just wanted to post this as info to other RV220w users that have a playstation 3. By default a setting is on in the firewall that blocks fragmented packets.. With this setting on even if the ps3 is in the dmz some games wont work and if you test the ps3 connection it will tell you that either your router or service provider doesn't allow fragmented packets. Its under Firewall > Attack Prevention > check box "block fragmented packets".
the error from testing connection on ps3 is
The router in use may not support IP fragments, and the communication features of some games may be restricted.

[email protected] wrote:
> I am using Netware 6.5 sp1a and bm 3.8 sp1a.
>
> I recently deleted some unneeded packet filter exceptions using
> iManager. When my server was restarted over the weekend the firewall is
> not allowing packets in the exception list to pass through.
> I get a message on the logger screen that states:
> "nbm filewall failed to read configuration from ds"
> What is actuall happening is all traffic is blocked as the exceptions do
> not seem to be working.
>
> I have checked ds and all looks healthy.
>
> Any ideas. I have been forced to disable filters on the public interface
> until I can fix the problem.
>
> Thanks,
>
Sorry but this is the wrong forum. You need to go to
novell.support.bordermanager.packet-filtering. This forum is for the
Novell Client Firewall that comes with BM 3.8
Brad

7921-CME Voice Quality Issue

Hello,
I am running into an issue at customer site which is going on for over 30 days.
They have consistent voice quality issue with 7921 phones.Have checked their phone webpage and see that jitter value increases to 500 during issue. Sometimes I see tcpretransmissions too,
They have QoS but that doesnt seem to help.
I have even collected sniffer off wireless but not able to play due to wireless header.
Have worked with TAC but they do not find any thing conclusive.Can anyone pls tell me what else can be done to analyse and fix the issue

Is the issue with unicast RTP or with multicast (i.e. paging)?
What AP platform and version are you using?
1.2(1) for the 7921 was just released.
1.2(1) Software
http://tools.cisco.com/support/downloads/go/Model.x?mdfid=280808676&mdfLevel=Model&treeName=Voice%20and%20Unified%20Communications&modelName=Cisco%20Unified%20Wireless%20IP%20Phone%207921G&treeMdfId=278875240
1.2(1) Release Notes
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cuipph/7921g/firmware/1_2_1/english/release/notes/7921_12.html
Other than that ensure the deployment is inline with the 7921G Deployment Guide.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cuipph/7921g/6_0/english/deployment/guide/7921dply.pdf

Time Capsule slow internet over wireless after 1 day (not so over ethernet)

I have had my time capsule since they first came out, so I guess about 8 months.
I have had this issue since day one, but I have decided this is just too much.
I have a 25Mb connection, and when I first plug in the TC I get the full speed. BUT... I am down to about 500Kb/s after 2 days, about 300 and so on until it stops at about 65K/s, LESS THAN 1 Mb!
If I unplug it for less then 1 sec and plug it back in, the cycle starts all over agin.
HOWEVER!, This is not the case over ethernet. Everything over ethernet will always get the full speed. It does not degrade, so it has nothing to do with my ISP. They are routed through the TM.
I have auto TM turned OFF on all machines, and backups are ONLY done manually. (I only do them once a week over ethernet).
I have tried every setting, every channel.
The speed does not come back if I simply restart it via software. I must unplug it (only for a split second).
It is 11 feet away from me (counting the angle( it is on a shelf)). My signal is great, and there is nothing else around it.
And this is my second one. The last one did this as well.

The same thing is happening to me, exactly. Although my top speed is lower than yours (I'm on FiOS). Unplug it for a second, and you're back to normal. Otherwise, it will slowly and inexorably degrade until you have something worse than dial-up.
This is completely unacceptable, and it's far too typical of the current state of Apple's quality control and support that there is no official acknowledgment of this screamingly obvious and annoying problem, which happens every single time I use my Time Capsule, which is to say every day, and no recommended fix.
Sometimes I feel as if I could really hate this company!

Time Capsule and only 120 kB/sec over ethernet?

Hi Community,
I want to connect a Mac Mini (late 2009) and a Time Capsule (4th gen) over ethernet.
Even if I connect them directly (with a cat 6 cable, 6ft = 2m in length) I have a maximum transfer speed of around 120 kBit/sec ~ this is roughly 1/100 th of which is possible over gigabit ethernet (if hdds would be really fast ;-) .
The time capsule worked for about a year wirelessly and served my MacMini and my MacBook Air... but I have the cables and liked to gain some speed (and not have so much usage on my wifi).
I made a factory reset and put the Time Capsule in a No-Wifi-No-Internet mode with "hard wired" IP -- so it should work like a simple wired NAS.
Working with a switch (Netgear GS) I get the LED info, that the switch senses a gigabit-connection for the Mac Mini and the Time Capsule.
BTW: My internet download speed ist roughly at 600 kBit/sec -- so the Mini could handle more, which means: the Problem lies within the Time Capsule.
Can anyone help me? Is my TimeCapsule defective?

WLAN is deactivated in the Time Capsule and the Mac Mini. My "test-object" is my saved Mountain-Lion-Image with 4,4 GB in size -- forget to mention: The Mini runs on Mountain Lion.
I never tried the ethernet LAN connection before... so I don't know, if it would have worked with Snow-Leo or Lion. But as said before... downloading from the internet I can get 600 kB/s which is limited by my 6MBit DSL line.
Unfortunately I don't have another gBit ethernet Mac to test the Time Capsule. The Air doesn't have a LAN plug-socket.
I tried the three LAN ports and the WAN port of the Time Capsule -- all connect the Mini to the TC, but all give me the same transfer speed... of 120 kB/sec.
Of course, the WLAN connection to the TC is much faster. Before the wires I used the 5 GHz band -- and could make a full system Backup over a night. Cabled I would have to spend around 80 days for that ;-)
BTW: A PING-Test looks quite good...
PING 192.168.2.2 (192.168.2.2): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 192.168.2.2: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=0.194 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.2.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=0.236 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.2.2: icmp_seq=2 ttl=255 time=0.172 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.2.2: icmp_seq=3 ttl=255 time=0.229 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.2.2: icmp_seq=4 ttl=255 time=0.232 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.2.2: icmp_seq=5 ttl=255 time=0.226 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.2.2: icmp_seq=6 ttl=255 time=0.230 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.2.2: icmp_seq=7 ttl=255 time=0.227 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.2.2: icmp_seq=8 ttl=255 time=0.268 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.2.2: icmp_seq=9 ttl=255 time=0.227 ms
^C
--- 192.168.2.2 ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.172/0.224/0.268/0.024 ms

How to print on HP LaserJet 2200 over Ethernet?

Hi,
I did an upgrade to Snow Leopard and would like to print on a HP LaserJet 2200 over Ethernet. OS X and the HP printer drivers are up to date now.
The printer has been cold reset and on the configuration print out there's the IP address 0.0.0.0
Now my question is how to get this printer to work with Snow Leopard over Ethernet? I did not find a tutorial how to assign an IP address to the printer first so I got stuck.
Could you give me a hint where I should start with the configuration first?

OK, now the printer works
I reset the router and checked if DHPC is running.
I reset the printer (hold down the GO button, turn the printer on and continue to hold the GO button for five to ten seconds).
Checked at router that the printer is visible as network device.
At the router I assigned a fixed IP address to the printer.
At OS X System Preferences > Printer I added a new printer with "HP Jetdirect - Socket", the fixed IP address and the correct printer driver "HP LaserJet 2200".
Now the printer has been recognized well by the system (Tray 3, Duplex and printer RAM) and printing works.
THANKS.

Voice quality problems on iPhone 5s with IOS 7.02 on Verizon.I

I have a brand new iPhone 5s with IOS 7.02 on Verizon. Everything works great except when on talk on the phone the normal way. When I do that, people tell me they can hardly hear me. But, when I put them on the speaker phone, they can hear me very well. Also, Voice Memos, and SIri all work just fine. It is only when I talk on the phone the normal way (without the speakerphone on) that the voice quality I am transmitting is very low. Does anyone know how to fix this? Thanks very much.

Apple helped me solve this problem. They gave me a brand new iPhone 5s. The were just great in their support. It appears that my first iPhone 5s had a faulty "audio chip." This is the chip that changes the frequency of your voice as you talk into the microphone; Apple explained that it is one frequency when talking on the phone, and another where using the speakerphone, and another when using Siri, and another when using voice memos, etc. You use the same 2 microphones for all of these applications (one at the bottom of the phone, and one my the camera lens), but the "audio chip" adjusts the freqency based on the applicaiton you are using. So, on my first iPhone 5s, my "audio chip" was defective, so they gave me a new iPhone 5s, and it has been working just fine. I had the most current IOS operating system on the original iPhone 5s with the faulty "audio chip," and on my new iPhone 5s which works great. Hope this helps. The technicians at Apple Customer Care and at the Apple Store are very aware of this problem with potentially defective "audio chips" in some of the iPhone 5s's. Cheers, Clarence from Cleveland.

Fragmenting packets over Ethernet to improve voice quality

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for