I remember seeing something about scramble being preferred when Covad said
"no don't do that" on a DS3 to them.
I found something over at the 3Com site that states: "It is a
technique used to avoid certain transmission equipment behaviors (for
example, erroneous alarm conditions) that are caused by sensitivity to
certain bit patterns in the ATM payload. You must match this setting at
the two ends of the DS3 trunk."
Haven't found anything more detailed than that though. I wonder why this
specifically applies to ATM? I wish I could find the earlier reference,
as it went into more detail regarding the "why"...
Charles
| Charles Sprickman | Internet Channel
| INCH System Administration Team | (212)243-5200
| spork@inch.com | access@inch.com
On Tue, 18 Jul 2000, George Robbins wrote:
> Well, the b3zs linecoding should keep you out of erroneous error territory.
>
> There are some older t3 CSU's that don't even support payload scrambling,
> beyond that it seems some providers default to doing it one way and some
> the other...
>
> The DOS thing has to do with scrambler prediction on services over SONET
> links that don't use a zero-handling linecoding at the line level. (or
> something like that 8-)
>
> George
>
>
> > Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 16:37:38 -0700
> > To: <cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net>
> > From: Ramin K <kashani@enteract.com>
> > Subject: Scramble or not to scramble
> >
> > I've got a provider who said they usually don't do scramble on DS3's.
> > I was under the impression that turning on scramble was a good thing
> > in most cases.
> >
> > Now of course I can't remember why I came to this conclusion. The only
> > reference I found was it keeps your DSU from reporting erroneous errors.
> >
> > For some reason I thought it made some DoS attack against the interfaces
> > harder. Am I just on crack?
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:12:14 EDT