Operating in the 3.65 band. I checked 5 UE's and all them have 20+ days of Uptime, and Connection time of 6 Days. I did a EPC reboot 6 days ago.
I have seen where after a reboot of the eNB I have to reboot the EPC. We have two EPC's and it will say EPC2 is UP, but refuses to use it until I reboot EPC1. Monitor /show the tlsyslog file on the EPC. It will show what is going on with a UE. (You may need to unable logging..) I look for past issues, then use the "monitor" command to keep an eye on it. BreezeWay2020> file show /mnt/flashfs/log/tlsyslog Are you seeing anything like this? 29326:2016-02-23,04:23:17.813355:NOTICE:0:06.05.03700:MME:1059:MME: Recv UE_Ctxt RelReq from eNodeB 011000100 with IP 172.16.70.2 with cause 26 for UE(52) - trigger Detach What you need to look for is if there is a "cause ?? for UE(??) - trigger Detach"'. I was getting lots of Cause 6 "Channel Unacceptable". The MCS level had dropped down to 0 or 1 and the UE disconnects and reconnects 1 - 2 minutes later. This was caused by two issues. 1. Split mode 2x2 where the two sectors could see each other. 2. The UE had a bad board and would think the BIT error rate was too high. We had a couple of those in a batch. Replacing the UE would fix it 100% of the time. Matt Carpenter Amarillo Wireless On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 11:52 AM, Ian Fraser <[email protected]> wrote: > > I also meant to say that I am not having sticky UE issues with the EPC > like Bryce notes. I did find that I needed to reboot the eNB after a > Spectrum scan to get the UE's to reconnected but they were not showing in > the EPC at that time. > > -- > Ian Fraser > goZoom.ca Inc. > 195 Libby's Rd. McNab-Braeside > K7S0E1 > 877(613) 622 0093 ext 21 > > > On 05/09/2016 12:47 PM, Ian Fraser wrote: > > > What Band are you operating in Matthew ? I'm 3.65 and I'm still having a > lot of issues with disconnecting UE's. > > eNB 0606 .0413 > > EPC 060600729 > > UE's are .105 except for one 8000 that is on HN_02_02_01_00_41 I've been > having this issue since .089. The 8000 is not doing any better than the > 7000's > > All of my UE's have reconnected at least once in the past 24 hours. > Ticket has been open for a month. > > I just set them all back to Full band since have them locked to the eNB > Freq didn't help. > > -- > Ian Fraser > goZoom.ca Inc. > 195 Libby's Rd. McNab-Braeside > K7S0E1 > 877(613) 622 0093 ext 21 > > > On 05/09/2016 12:22 PM, Matthew Carpenter wrote: > > Hi Bryce, > > We have 4 eNB's and 90 UE's and not seeing any of those kinds of issues. > EPC is on 0606.00729 > eNB's on 0606.04013 > UE's are on a mix of 01.01.02.082, 01.01.02.089, 01.01.02.089.002 and 1 UE > on 01.01.02.105 > > First make sure you are putting tickets in to Telrad, they are very fast > at responding and always figures out what is going on (except my MTU issue > and we are working on that). > > Next is interference, as you know that can cause all kinds of issues. I > was self interfering for a while and had issues (9 Months ago). > > I have found that if the eNB loses the S1 for a little bit, it sometimes > will not connect back to the EPC and the eNB will hold on to the UE's. I > have a second eNB for them to shift over to and that does not always > happen. I have a ticket in about it and Telrad knows about it. > > I suggest you take a UE back to an older version of firmware and see if > its cleans it up. The one UE on 01.01.02.105 has not been having issues > that I know of, but I will roll it out to my employees and do some testing > to see. > > Thanks, > > Matt Carpenter > Amarillo Wireless > > > > On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 10:23 PM, Bryce Duchcherer <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> We are still having huge issues after the upgrade! >> Once we rolled out the new 105 software on the CPE's we are having issues >> with them staying connected. >> The connection drops, but show active in the EPC. When booted they do not >> come back. They sometimes come back after a power cycle of the CPE. It >> usually doesn't last long though before the connection drops again. >> >> Not to mention all the speed issues. >> >> We invested in LTE technology to improve service for our customers, but >> we have done the opposite. We are even having customers ask to be put back >> on their old equipment. >> >> Anyone else seeing issues like this? >> >> Bryce Duchcherer >> NETAGO >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On >> Behalf Of Nick Dewar >> Sent: Monday, August 8, 2016 9:04 >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [Telrad] Telrad Digest, Vol 22, Issue 23 >> >> Hi All, >> >> I am glad to see there was lots of activity on the forums last week, was >> on vacation and apologize for the late response. I will try to address a >> few of the points discussed >> >> - major CINR/ RSRP delta on the CPE7K is addressed in a new release. >> This release is about to be GA. The same release also introduces increased >> MTU support, PCI locking and a disconnect issue. If you have one off >> cases experiencing any of those issues please engage with support so we can >> track and assist. The non-official release can be downloaded from the link >> below >> https://www.dropbox.com/s/mrlomfmherxhg8t/FW-Telrad_ODU_01. >> 01.02.105.ipk?dl=0 >> >> - anytime you migrate from WiMAX to LTE it is absolutely critical that a >> detailed RF plan is completed. Especially when there are multiple WiMAX >> vendors deployed with limited sync capabilities. WiMAX RSSI is measured of >> a preamble which is boosted above all the data sub carriers. In LTE the >> RSRP is the avg measured power of the ref symbols which is not boosted >> above the data like the preamble in WiMAX. Some may have noticed that in >> WiMAX a 10dB CINR is hardly functional but in LTE a 10dB CINR will push a >> significant amount of data. This is because the ref signal measurement is >> equal of that of the data resource elements in LTE >> >> >> Steve Cole - we want to get you squared away and can have boots on the >> ground next week. The EPC issue you are experiencing is related to a DHCP >> relay bug we identified in the logs from your system and a new version is >> already in regression testing. Switching to proxy mode could server as >> work around in the meantime >> >> Regards >> Nick >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On >> Behalf Of [email protected] >> Sent: August 7, 2016 1:00 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Telrad Digest, Vol 22, Issue 23 >> >> Send Telrad mailing list submissions to >> [email protected] >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> [email protected] >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> [email protected] >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than >> "Re: Contents of Telrad digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. Re: Wimax to LTE (Steve Cole) >> 2. Re: Wimax to LTE (Matthew Carpenter) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2016 19:16:25 -0400 >> From: Steve Cole <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [Telrad] Wimax to LTE >> To: [email protected] >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed >> >> On 8/4/2016 8:46 AM, Skywerx Support wrote: >> > I have enb's with over 80 clients offering mixed packages of 3, 5, 10, >> 15, and 20 Mbps services. No complaints here. You obviously have >> something messed up. >> Eh, no. 10Mhz is the biggest channel we can run and we did some >> downtilt. When we can go higher channel widths (we are our own worst >> interference with WiMax), and pull out the barrier channels, it will be >> better. But that won't fix the EPC, it won't fix the RF power, and it >> won't fix the reconnect issue. >> >> The rest we have plenty of capacity. The bottleneck at present is >> Telrad, no questions about it. >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2016 10:29:38 -0500 >> From: Matthew Carpenter <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [Telrad] Wimax to LTE >> To: Telrad List <[email protected]> >> Message-ID: >> <[email protected] >> ail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> We are using the EPC in a central/datacenter configuration. The eNB's >> are fed by fiber or by licensed link. >> Sure we have an issue once in a while, Telrad support jumps on it and >> gets it fixed quickly. >> >> 82 UE's over 4 eNB's and running good. I am in 2x4(receive) mode >> currently. >> >> What going on with RF power? >> >> Not seeing the reconnect issues that you guys have been talking about. Is >> the UE just going to sleep? >> >> MattCarpenter >> >> >> On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Steve Cole <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > On 8/4/2016 8:46 AM, Skywerx Support wrote: >> > > I have enb's with over 80 clients offering mixed packages of 3, 5, >> > > 10, >> > 15, and 20 Mbps services. No complaints here. You obviously have >> > something messed up. >> > Eh, no. 10Mhz is the biggest channel we can run and we did some >> > downtilt. When we can go higher channel widths (we are our own worst >> > interference with WiMax), and pull out the barrier channels, it will >> > be better. But that won't fix the EPC, it won't fix the RF power, and >> > it won't fix the reconnect issue. >> > >> > The rest we have plenty of capacity. The bottleneck at present is >> > Telrad, no questions about it. >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Telrad mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> *Matthew Carpenter* >> *806-316-5071 office* >> *806-236-9558 cell* >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/private/telrad/attachments/ >> 20160807/457b5c11/attachment-0001.html >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Telrad mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad >> >> >> End of Telrad Digest, Vol 22, Issue 23 >> ************************************** >> >> >> >> ************************************************************ >> ************************ >> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by >> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer >> viruses. >> ************************************************************ >> ************************ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ************************************************************ >> ************************ >> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by >> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer >> viruses. >> ************************************************************ >> ************************ >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Telrad mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Telrad mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad >> > > > > -- > *Matthew Carpenter* > *806-316-5071 <806-316-5071> office* > *806-236-9558 <806-236-9558> cell* > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Telrad mailing > [email protected]http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Telrad mailing > [email protected]http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad > > > > _______________________________________________ > Telrad mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad > > -- *Matthew Carpenter* *806-316-5071 office* *806-236-9558 cell*
_______________________________________________ Telrad mailing list [email protected] http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad
