Wireshark-users: Re: [Wireshark-users] Using Wireshark for a DSL "link no surf" problem--SOLUTION
Date Index · Thread Index · Other Months · All Mailing Lists
Date Prev · Date Next · Thread Prev · Thread Next
From: Kok-Yong Tan <ktan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 15:55:03 -0400
As I expected, MegaPutz was at fault: They'd changed my VPI/VCI circuit numbers out from under me, from 0/35 (the default) to 0/40 at the DSLAM. This was proven when the technician showed up today with a brand new ZyXEL P660R-F1 ATU-R (a.k.a. CPE or DSL modem) which allowed changes via its webpage instead of some special piece of software only available to OEMs. When he plugged it in, the ZyXEL P660R-F1 also wouldn't connect with the default VPI/VCI of 0/35. But then he checked the configuration with a software tool only available to MegaPutz technicians and noticed that the idiots at the CO were sending data down 0/40 instead. Once he reconfigured the P660R-F1 for a VPI/VCI of 0/40, my link-no-surf issue instantly disappeared and my connection was back up again. Instantly. No delay. Like there was no problem whatsoever. Total time spent? 15 minutes. That included the introductory conversational pleasantries.
And the worst of it? MegaPutz now wants to charge me multiple $$$ for a "truck roll" plus the cost of the new modem despite having caused the issue in the first place ("we need to charge any time we send a technician out even if it's our fault and your modem is just old instead of plain broken"). Even when all they'd had to do was to revert the circuit to 0/35 instead of the 0/40 they had set it to (the VPI/VCI numbers are virtual circuit numbers). A 2-minute job. Maybe 5-minutes if they stopped to scratch their butts. If they knew what they were doing, that was (they'd told me they escalated this trouble ticket to Tier 2, NOC Operations and then the duty Network Engineer but everybody just came back with "it's a broken CPE"). Something they should've noticed when I sent them screenshots of the old Broadxent Briteport's setup screens which prominently displayed the VPI/VCI as 0/35 and not 0/40 that they had set the DSLAM card to. And the only "upside" from my being down for 11 days while out at Sharkfest? A measly $33 credit for the problem they caused in the first place. Since they bought out Speakeasy (which I was an original customer of and whose Tier 1 techs were the equivalent of everybody else's Tier 3 techs), MegaPath's constant cost cutting truly shows in the quality of their staff (their field technicians are different because they're subcontractors so there are good ones and bad ones). 

#MegaPathSucks

On 6/18/14 17:25, Jamie O. Montgomery wrote:

True. With the two types of DSLAMs we have we either associate the
static IP with the port or the mac address of the CPE. The IP wouldn't
work anywhere else.

Jamie Montgomery | Comporium
Network Facilities Engineering | Engineering Associate II
www.comporium.com
jamie.montgomery@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

The information contained in this e-mail message and any attachments
thereto are confidential, privileged, or otherwise protected from
disclosure, and are intended for the use of the individual or entity
named above. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message and
any attachments by anyone other than the intended recipient, or an
employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended
recipient, is prohibited. If you have received this communication in
error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone or e-mail and
destroy the original message, attachments, and all copies.

On Jun 18, 2014 2:17 PM, Aaron Wasserott <aaron.wasserott@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Some ISPs will still use PPP even though you have static assignments.
This gives them an easy way to lock accounts for non-payment in their
RADIUS server, instead of having to shut down the PVC or DSLAM interface.

*From:*wireshark-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:wireshark-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Jamie O.
Montgomery
*Sent:* Wednesday, June 18, 2014 11:59 AM
*To:* Community support list for Wireshark
*Subject:* Re: [Wireshark-users] Using Wireshark for a DSL "link no
surf" problem

PPPoE is used for authentication. If you have a static IP, they know who
has it and you don't need authentication. PPPoE would be the termination
point for the address, but since it will reside on your firewall, the
modem needs to bridge the dsl network to the Ethernet network on the
public side if the firewall

They give you a /24 because they'd be burning up more IPv4 addresses
giving you a smaller subnet. Other static IP customers use addresses in
that subnet along with you.

*Jamie Montgomery | Comporium*

Network Facilities Engineering | Engineering Associate II

www.comporium.com <http://www.comporium.com/>

jamie.montgomery@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:jamie.montgomery@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>



/The information contained in this e-mail message and any attachments
thereto are confidential, privileged, or otherwise protected from
disclosure, and are intended for the use of the individual or entity
named above. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message and
any attachments by anyone other than the intended recipient, or an
employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended
recipient, is prohibited. If you have received this communication in
error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone or e-mail and
destroy the original message, attachments, and all copies./


On Jun 18, 2014, at 1:34 PM, "Kok-Yong Tan" <ktan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:ktan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

    No, the DSL modem is bridging, not routing.  I've been assigned two
    static IPs (although they've given me a /24 net mask!!!) and my
    firewall is assigned one of them.  The firewall is connected
    directly to the DSL modem by Cat6 patch cable.  The other IP is
    unused (I use it for testing VPN configurations).

    I'm not sure but since the Broadxent Briteport is a PPPoE modem, I
    assume PPPoE.  But the tech says that's not correct (WTF?).  And he
    can't explain what they use.  Sigh.

    --

    Reality Artisans, Inc.

    #   Network Wrangling and Delousing
    P.O. Box 565, Gracie Station

    #   Apple Certified Consultant
    New York, NY 10028-0019

    #   Apple Consultants Network member
    <http://www.realityartisans.com <http://www.realityartisans.com/>>

    #   Apple Developer Connection member

    Cell: (646) 327-2918

    #   Ofc: (212) 369-4876

    On Jun 17, 2014, at 22:13 , Pedro Tumusok <pedro.tumusok@xxxxxxxxx
    <mailto:pedro.tumusok@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:



    Well if the tech can see stuff, its not what I thought might be the
    problem, which was PVC settings.

    But does your modem get an IP address, ie is it setup as a router or
    does your computer get the ip address?

    Are you using PPPoA/PPPoE etc?

    On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 5:52 AM, Frank Bulk <frnkblk@xxxxxxxxx
    <mailto:frnkblk@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

    Some Comtrend modems can do a port mirror of the WAN (DSL) side.

    Frank


    -----Original Message-----
    From: wireshark-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
    <mailto:wireshark-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
    [mailto:wireshark-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
    <mailto:wireshark-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>] On Behalf Of
    Kok-Yong Tan
    Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 4:53 PM
    To: Community support list for Wireshark
    Subject: Re: [Wireshark-users] Using Wireshark for a DSL "link no surf"
    problem


     > On Jun 17, 2014, at 14:28, Jaap Keuter <jaap.keuter@xxxxxxxxx
    <mailto:jaap.keuter@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
     >
     >> On 06/17/2014 08:42 PM, Kok-Yong Tan wrote:
     >> Is it possible to use Wireshark to troubleshoot a DSL "link no surf"
    problem?  The ISP insists it's a CPE issue but the problem only started
    after their Tier 1 tech monkeyed with the DSLAM and/or the CPE
    (remotely) in
    some manner.  I find it suspicious that the problem was intermittent
    packet
    loss until they tinkered, whereupon the problem became a "link no surf"
    issue (i.e., there's Layer 2 connectivity but zero Layer 3 traffic
    passing).
     >
     > Depends on what you can trace in the CPE, as in, how close to the DSL
    interface.
     > Otherwise you'll need capture hardware on the DSL....
     >
     > Good luck,
     > Jaap
     >

    I can get up to the DSL modem itself.  In hindsight, I'm thinking
    this isn't
    going to be of much use and the only way to debug this is with capture
    hardware on the DSL side as you suggested.  Drat.
    --
    Sent from my iPad2 with greater chance of typographical, grammatical and
    other disasters.  Your indulgence is even more humbly requested.

    ___________________________________________________________________________
    Sent via:    Wireshark-users mailing list
    <wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
    Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users
    Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-users
                  mailto:wireshark-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
    <mailto:wireshark-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>?subject=unsubscribe



    --
    Best regards / Mvh
    Jan Pedro Tumusok

    ___________________________________________________________________________
    Sent via:    Wireshark-users mailing list
    <wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
    Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users
    Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-users
    mailto:wireshark-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe

    ___________________________________________________________________________
    Sent via:    Wireshark-users mailing list
    <wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
    Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users
    Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-users
    mailto:wireshark-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe



___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-users mailing list <wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-users
              mailto:wireshark-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature