Wan Coax Link Down. Wan Coax Link up

About 2 weeks ago I had this problem where the Wan Coax Link would drop and come back up instantly every 15 minutes or so, all day, everyday. I verified this by looking at the router system logging.
1. I got a shipped a new rounter on 7/22. That did not fix the problem.
2. I had a tech come out on 7/24. The ONT got replaced and he took the coax from the tv and plugged it into the router (router coax into TV). That did not fix the problem.
3. Sunday(7/25) another tech came buy. I was not home for this, but he messed around where the splitter was by all our coax connections. It did not seem to fix it.
4. About an hour after he left I unplugged the router and connected it directly to the ONT with a Coax. My connection only dropped once in 2 hours. Ok, so I put the router back in its original spot inside the house. Only got one disconnect in about 6-7 hours. Not sure what's up with that.
5. Internet has been working ok. Link would only drop a couple times a day.
6. Now tonight (8/2 10:00PM PST) I get home and start playing a game and using MSN. I notice I get dc'd. Log back in and get dc'd again a few minutes later. I check the log and the Coax link has been going up and down since 6:21PM PST till Midnight. It was going down every minute till 7:33PM PST. The disconnects slowed down since 7:33 and it goes down every 10-15 minutes like it normally did before 7/25. Has stopped disconnecting for about an hour from midnight to 1AM, but it has started back up again with continuous disconnects every 5-20 minutes.
What could this problem be?
Thanks
Whittier, California

My problem is not as sever as yours but I get unexplained WAN droppage every week or so. There is no apparent correlation to anything occuring in my home or neighborhood. This is a problem since I host business servers in my basement and require good QoS. I am still investigating whether this is a router issue or a Verizon service issue. If the latter, I am unsure why the router does not automatically reacquire its WAN IP.

Similar Messages

WRVS4400N : DHCP not assigning IP addresses if WAN link is down

Hello,
With the latest firmware installed (the one suporting fixed IP based on MAC), I have one problem: the DHCP server is not assigning addresses when the WAN link is down. When it is up, it generally assign IP based on the configuration binding (MAC/IP). But it sometimes fail to do so. Before using the wrvs4400n I had no issues with DHCP wrt54G and other routers.
Any hints ?
Thanks.
V.

Hi there!
Thanks for contacting the business support - other guys got the same problem.
I'm now back on firmware version 1.00.16 and everything works fine.
But the new features were nice to have!

EEM -automatic shut down or switch over of WAN link in OSPF when packet drop increase

Hi,
Need help..
can any one help me how can EEM help for automatic shut down or switch over of WAN link in OSPF when packet drop increase a predefined level.
I have a set up different branches connected together...OSPF is the routing protocol and need to communicate with two branches via hub locations.
need to shut or switch some percent of traffic from primary to back up when packet drop in the link.

I am not sure EEM can do what you want.
Another option could be to use SLA tacking/monitoring. But you will fall back to the new route when you lose some percentage of pings, you can't switch only part of the traffic.
I hope it helps.
PK

Exchange 2013 Split DNS, how to get WAN clients to use public Split DNS IP when inter-office link is DOWN?!

Hello,
I have an Exchange 2013 deployment and a LAN/WAN setup, we have many small remote WAN linked offices that can resolve to the Exchange Server's internal IP.
Outlook clients in remote WAN offices work fine as long as the link is UP since the Split Brain DNS for Exchange will resolve the internal clients to the internal IP of the Exchange server, Outlook connects up without issues.
However, in the event of loosing connection to our remote sites, they will no longer be able to resolve to the internal Exchange IP, but they still have a backup public internet that they can use. So should the inter-office connectivity fail we have it setup
so clients in remote offices can still browse the internet, etc.
However, their Outlook fails to connect because it has a cached DNS record for our Split Brain Exchange DNS setup and tries to resolve it to its internal IP, instead of refreshing the cache and grabbing the public IP of the Exchange server since now they
would be resolving it over the public internet.
Is there anything I can do with my existing configuration to allow the client to pick up the public IP of the Split DNS setup when our inter-office connection is down and the client is no longer able to use the internal IP they have cached for Exchange?
I guess I could lower the TTL on the DNS record to something like 1 minute so it does not cache the DNS record / IP for long? Is this the best approach?

http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/lose.html
I would suggest that the best approach is to either improve the reliability of the WAN link or to configure DNS to always use the Internet path. You might want to work with your network guy, perhaps there's a way to have your gateways automatically
switch to an Internet VPN backup when the WAN link is down or something like that.
Ed Crowley MVP "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems."

Actiontec MI424WR-GEN2 Rev E - No STP for Coax link?

I've been following the instructions to change my Actiontec router into a MOCA bridge (both for the WAN and the LAN), so that a better router can do the actual routing. I follow the instructions on-line (those in these forums and in other places), but it all comes crashing to a halt at the point where I am supposed to enable the STP protocol on the coax side of things. No matter what I do to this router, I cannot get that checkbox to appear anywhere. It's there for Ethernet, Broadband/Ethernet and Wireless Access Point - nothing for coax.
Is this an implied "it's already on and that's non-negotiable" or does it mean that I've got something else going on here?
Running firmware 20.20.8, in case that matters.
Thanks in advance!
j

JBromberger wrote:
I've been following the instructions to change my Actiontec router into a MOCA bridge (both for the WAN and the LAN), so that a better router can do the actual routing. I follow the instructions on-line (those in these forums and in other places), but it all comes crashing to a halt at the point where I am supposed to enable the STP protocol on the coax side of things. No matter what I do to this router, I cannot get that checkbox to appear anywhere. It's there for Ethernet, Broadband/Ethernet and Wireless Access Point - nothing for coax.
Is this an implied "it's already on and that's non-negotiable" or does it mean that I've got something else going on here?
Running firmware 20.20.8, in case that matters.
Thanks in advance!
j
Can you give us a link to the instructions you are trying to follow?
The check box you are looking for should be under network connections
then click network (home office)
then click Bridging
and I see this - It doesn't look like the picture in the manual possibly because my router is connected by ethernet not coax. Is that what you see too?

Windows 7 RC turns off the Fios MI424WR (Rev E) Coax WAN port (and can't turn it back on)

Windows 7 RC (and probably Visa) displays the Fios router as an Icon when you open the Network Icon. If you right-click the Fios router you get a menu which contains "disable". If you select "disable", the Fios router does exactly that and your Internet Connection will be down.
So, the obvious thing to do is "enable" from the same menu, right? Well, in my experience, when you select the "enable", the Fios router turns on the Ethernet WAN port. Which is fine if your router is connected to your ONT via ethernet. Unfortunately, the most common way Verizon connects their router to the ONT is via Coax!
You can easily fix this by logging onto the Fios router and re-enable the Coax WAN port via Main / Network Connections / Broadband Connection (Coax). However, I have not found a way to re-enable the Coax Wan port from within Windows 7.
I don't know if the bug is in the Fios router or in Windows 7 RC, but I bet I'm not the only one that has experienced this problem. The first time it happened, the Verizon tech told me to press the reset button on the router. This fixed the problem, but wipped out all my custom settings.
Has anyone else seen this behavior?
Message Edited by RATickle on 07-06-2009 10:57 AM

*Putting on more pressure*
What this thread is about is, the least of your problems...
#1 If UPnP in on in the router, with an UPnP aware client users can open ports in the router without ever being asked for the user name and password of the router.
And keep in mind: YOU are responsible for the traffic that flows over that router. This is no matter to take lightly. For example if someone is on your network downloading/uploading songs (uTorrent one of many UPnP aware apps). The RIAA goes after your ISP, because it came from their network. Then ISP comes after you, because it came from your network.
Depending on how good this/these people are, good luck finding that person (or people)....
#2 There is a rule of how to forward ports in your router to allow users to connect to you. "Once you've forwarded a Port to ONE IP address, you CAN NOT use it with any other IP address."
But with most routers about UPnP, all you know about UPnP it is either On or Off (You have no idea of what ports are being forwarded to an IP Address).
So, I have to wonder how you will avoid over lapping ports.
#3 At http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/tip/0,289483,sid14_gci863906,00.html
They talk about Improving performance and security by disabling unneeded services, and they point http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/servicecfg.htm
Then at http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/servicecfg.htm they say that UPnP is an unneeded service.
If you are the original poster (OP) and your issue is solved, please remember to click the "Solution?" button so that others can more easily find it. If anyone has been helpful to you, please show your appreciation by clicking the "Kudos" button.

Why internal EIGRP flapping when a WAN link is flapping?

I have router A and B running EIGRP in between. Router B has a WAN connection into the carrier.
Recently the EIGRP neighboring between A and B was flapping. In the mean time the WAN link was flapping too.
Router B was running BGP over the WAN link and redistributing BGP into EIGRP.
Why the WAN link issue caused the EIGRP neighboring up and down?
Thanks
Gary

When we attempted to ping the ISP's router will a full size MTU packet, the packet gets dropped. Any packets greater than 400 bytes gets dropped.

Is a L3 switch able to receive a WAN link? if the WAN circuit presentation is ethernet?

Hi experts,
The question is if a L3 switch is able to receive a WAN link which is Ethernet, at the same way than a router?

Disclaimer
The Author of this posting offers the information contained within this posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose. Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.
Liability Disclaimer
In no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author has been advised of the possibility of such damage.
Posting
To add to what Jody has already posted, L3 switches often lack features commonly found on routers. Often such features are WAN related. Jody mentioned one common WAN feature, NAT, but they might also lack certain hardware resources, such as sufficient capacity to take one or more full Internet route tables.
Even when running across MetroE clouds, often LAN L3 switches are still a bit "weak", for such usage, which is why Cisco has a series of MetroE switches.
The forgoing doesn't mean you cannot use a LAN L3 switch, just you need to be careful matching what the switch can do with your WAN feature needs.

Load balancing over two separate outside routers and two separate WAN Links

Hi everybody,
I have one 2851 setup with two separate ISP links and have it configured for failover with BGP. It works great but doesn't load balance.
Well now I have to new routers (3925's) to replace the single 2851 and I want to configure them to load balance over separate WAN links.
Can someone help figure out the best approach to make this happen? I would really appreciate it.
Thank you,
Thomas Reiling

Disclaimer
The Author of this posting offers the information contained within this posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose. Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.
Liability Disclaimer
In no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author has been advised of the possibility of such damage.
Posting
The "best approach", IMO, would be to use PfR (if your routers support it).

Lap not joining over a wan link

hi
i have 2 wism running on 6509 chassis and i have access points in remote branches. the lap is not joining the wism. here is the situation:
lap can ping the controllers
lap is getting ip address
option 43 is there on the vlan
dns entry for the wlc is there.
however, when i checked the lap boot: it s getting an ip address and gives the command prompt.
the below debugging on the wlc gives nothing:
debug capwap events
debug capwap errors
debug mac addr <mac addr>
the wan link is private wan running ospf on both routers from each end.
I see no point why this lap is not joining
any idea?

Hi,
According to your description, I understand that all attachments in Outlook are opened slowly since updating Outlook 2003 to 2013. Please confirm whether all users encounter this issue. Also check whether the issue continues in cached mode and in OWA.
Based on your post, I suggest we can try to disable the following add-ins to check whether the issue persists:
Acrobat PDFMaker office com addin
symantec endpoint protection outlook addin
If there is any updates, please feel free to let us know.
Thanks,
Winnie Liang
TechNet Community Support

Cisco WAAS deployment over VSAT WAN links

Hi.
I would just like to know if you can implement Cisco WAAS on a WAN running on 128 VSAT llinks and if the performance improvement will be very significant. Significant enough to make me change my mind from upgrading the link?
Thanks

Hi Tod.
Thank you very much for your reply. It was very helpful. I am currently researching into the viability of Cisco WAAS as an optimization tool that will increase bandwidth and reduce costs. I wanted to know if you could help suggest any useful document that could help in my research.
Thank you again.

Eigrp - How to modify Admin distance for redistributing connected links and over WAN

We have a single EIGRP domain 101 across 2 locations (A and B) separated by a WAN link. Each location has a number of L3 switches at the IDF behind the router which has the L3 vlans VL1, VL2 etc. We run eigrp 101 across all the switches and on the routers but we dont advertise any of the L3 vlans on them and we do redistribute static and connected for the static and the vlans to be distributed on eigrp.
Qn
1. How do i reduce the admin distance of the directly connected vlan on IDF on our core switch. ie. Vl1 and Vl2 that are distributed via connected has a admin distance of 170 locally as the other switches sees that as External without having to advertise the networks individually on each switch.
2. Is that possible to increase the admin distance over the WAN link without having to create a 2nd eigrp domain. ie.. Add a admin distance of say 50 over the WAN link and that way devices on both sides do see that there is a 130 distance for the remote side and 90 for local for admin distance.
Why?
I am trying to separate two locations and i don't think we will be able to create an additional domain and i am trying to see alternate methods of achieving this.
Additional info-
The design i mentioned has 2 locations with a WAN connection and i have mixed (90/170) distance based on where the routes are coming(eigrp/connected/static) from eventhough everything is within the same network. We only have 1 Eigrp network 101 and was looking to alter the AD for just connected if at all possible.
Assuming i put in all the routes into the network how can i make site 2 see the site 1 network with a larger admin distance and 1 to 2 with a larger admin distance while not altering the admin distance within the local site.
Underlying reason: We are getting a MPLS link(lower bandwidth) connecting to site 3,4 and 5 at both sites and wanted to clear the internal routing first before i can add them or redistribute them into bgp.

If these two sites are connected via a P2P link and you are exchanging EIGRP routes across it then you need to be aware of what you redistribute into BGP because each site will know about it's own subnets but also the other sites subnets.
If you just redistribute all EIGRP at both sites then it's a lottery as to which MPLS connection the non EIGRP sites use.
So you either need to -
1) when you redistribute EIGRP at each site into BGP use a route map and only allow the local networks for that site
or
2) if you want each of the EIGRP sites to back each other's MPLS connection up you could have them both advertise out all networks ie. their own and the other EIGRP site's networks but modify the BGP attributes of the non local networks so they are least preferred.
You still want to use a route map to ensure only the local and other EIGRP sites network are redistributed because remember you are also receiving BGP routes from the non EIGRP sites and redistributing these into EIGRP at each site and these are exchanged via the P2P link as well.
It realty depends on what you are trying to do.
The actual basic redistribution is very straightforward, see this link -
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/ip/border-gateway-protocol-bgp/113506-failover-eigrp-bgp-00.html
but you need to decide what you are going to do in terms of EIGRP to BGP advertisements as covered above.
I'm not trying to make things complicated for you but because you have a P2P link connecting these sites and you are running EIGRP over it then any routes received via BGP will be redistributed into EIGRP and you need to make sure they are then not redistributed back into BGP on the other site router.
Jon

WAN LINKS

Can anyone tell me what most people are using nowadays to connect there WANS, i.e what encapsulation is most popular ?

hi
it basically depends on the service requirement and also proportional to traffic or the size of the lan which you have in locations.
In my SP environments its mostly the E1 links which gets connected to the CE.
May be the other variant whichs T1 being used in NA and some other geographical locations.
As far as encapsulation is concerned its better to leave as it to default which HDLC untill unless if you are conencting to a non-cisco device wherein you need PPP to be coded in there.
ppp you can have if you want to have a multilink bundle which is logically bundling 2 physical interface and make use of the resultant value of the b/w of those physical interfaces(easy way to have load balancing but difficult to manage or monitor the physical links coz the ip reachability will be only for the multilink interface and not to the physical interface)
if its a small group of organisation and their work basically doesnt require all the 24Hrs connectivity they can very well opt for ISDN too..
Peopl who have enough requirements and who all are very much reduandant concerned they have both flavours like E1 or T1 as their primary and ISDN as their backup.
If you take a SP to SP scenario for uplink interconnectivity purpose they talk in OC-3 ,OC-12 or even OC-48..
regds

Anyone linking PBX E1 across a WAN ?

Want to link a couple of Meridian exchanges across a low bit rate WAN using PRI - QSIG. Want to be able to send signalling channel uncompressed and associated voice timeslots using G.729 codec.
Do i tunnel timeslot 15 or send as transparent ?
Can anyone using this setup share their CFG or an example of this scenario ?
Tks.

I am using T1 PRI with Q.SIG. The other end could be any type of voice port such as E&M, FXS, or T1 PRI.
This is basicly my config. The PBX adds 21 & 41 as an access code and so that I do not overlap dial-peers.
hostname voice-rtr
isdn switch-type primary-qsig
controller T1 1/0
framing esf
linecode b8zs
pri-group timeslots 1-24
interface Loopback0
ip address 10.16.53.241 255.255.255.255
h323-gateway voip interface
h323-gateway voip bind srcaddr 10.16.53.241
interface FastEthernet0/0
ip address 10.16.53.3 255.255.255.240
speed 100
full-duplex
interface Serial1/0:23
no ip address
isdn switch-type primary-qsig
isdn protocol-emulate network
isdn incoming-voice voice
isdn T203 20000
no cdp enable
voice-port 1/0:23
input gain 2
output attenuation 10
description To PBX
dial-peer voice 418000 pots
description 8000-8999
destination-pattern 418...
direct-inward-dial
port 1/0:23
forward-digits 4
dial-peer voice 211000 voip
description 1000-1999
max-conn 20
destination-pattern 211...
progress_ind connect enable 8
session target ipv4:10.16.53.242
codec g711ulaw <<<== change to G729
expect-factor 0

Transport dot1q vlan tagging over wan link

Hi,
I would like to transport 802.1Q vlan tagging over a wan link, is it possible ?
I heard about l2tp V3...
Best regards

Hi,
You would have to use a technology such as Ethernet over MPLS (EoMPLS) or VPLS. This technology is referred to as Layer 2 VPNs. You can get more info on this at the following locations:
EoMPLS (part of the Cisco Any Transport over ATM suite):
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps6646/products_ios_protocol_option_home.html
VPLS:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps6648/products_ios_protocol_option_home.html
Hope that helps - pls rate the post if it does.
Regards,
Paresh

Wan Coax Link Down. Wan Coax Link up

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for