X.25 clearing circuit after receiving Call Connected packet with facilities

[Paul Curren]

We've just migrated one of our systems from HPUX-10.20 to HPUX-11.00 and have encountered a problem with SVCs being cleared as soon as a Call Connected packet is received.

Here is the relevant bit of nettl trace:

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvLAN/X.25 NETWORKINGvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv@#%
Timestamp : Fri Apr 12 BST 2002 09:44:40.205477
Process ID : 21923 Subsystem : SX25L3
User ID ( UID ) : 102 Trace Kind : PDU OUT TRACE
Device ID : -1 Path ID : -1
Connection ID : 0
Location : 00123
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tx L3 bd: 0 p: 1 at Fri Apr 12 BST 2002 09:44:40.205472 Call request lci 1054
Called Address : 26800631000139
Calling Address : 408746500009
Facility Length = 26 bytes
0: 00 0f cb 0a 12 37 40 87 46 50 00 09 ff 00 c9 0a .....7@.FP......
16: 12 37 26 80 06 31 00 01 39 00 -- -- -- -- -- -- .7&..1..9.......
Calling Address Extension:
37 40 87 46 50 00 09 ff 00 (X.213/ISO 8342 Add 2)
Called Address Extension:
372680063100013900 (X.213/ISO 8342 Add 2)


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^LAN/X.25 NETWORKING^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^@#%
Timestamp : Fri Apr 12 BST 2002 09:44:40.240126
Process ID : [ICS] Subsystem : SX25L3
User ID ( UID ) : -1 Trace Kind : PDU IN TRACE
Device ID : -1 Path ID : -1
Connection ID : 0
Location : 00123
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rx L3 bd: 0 p: 1 at Fri Apr 12 BST 2002 09:44:40.240123 Call connected lci 1054
Called Address : 26800631000139
Calling Address : 408746500009
Facility Length = 26 bytes
0: 00 0f c9 0a 12 37 00 40 87 46 50 00 09 00 cb 0a .....7.@.FP.....
16: 12 37 40 87 46 50 00 09 ff 00 -- -- -- -- -- -- .7@.FP..........
Called Address Extension:
370040874650000900 (X.213/ISO 8342 Add 2)
Calling Address Extension:
37 40 87 46 50 00 09 ff 00 (X.213/ISO 8342 Add 2)
---- Detection of a facility code not allowed ----


vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvLAN/X.25 NETWORKINGvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv@#%
Timestamp : Fri Apr 12 BST 2002 09:44:40.240355
Process ID : [ICS] Subsystem : SX25L3
User ID ( UID ) : -1 Trace Kind : PDU OUT TRACE
Device ID : -1 Path ID : -1
Connection ID : 0
Location : 00123
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tx L3 bd: 0 p: 1 at Fri Apr 12 BST 2002 09:44:40.240354 Clear request lci 1054
Clearing Cause : [ 0 ]
Diagnostic : [65]


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^LAN/X.25 NETWORKING^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^@#%
Timestamp : Fri Apr 12 BST 2002 09:44:40.247532
Process ID : [ICS] Subsystem : SX25L3
User ID ( UID ) : -1 Trace Kind : PDU IN TRACE
Device ID : -1 Path ID : -1
Connection ID : 0
Location : 00123
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rx L3 bd: 0 p: 1 at Fri Apr 12 BST 2002 09:44:40.247529 Clear Confirmation lci 1054

This used to work under HPUX-10.20!

[Johan Gjestvang]

Hi, this is a commond problem
when doing upgrade. You have
to 1) save your config files.
(make a copy of your /etc/x25
directory)
Then start SAM, and "walk through" all parameters for your X.25 configuration.
Click for every item.
It has to be done because the
config file need to be re-hashed.
If you allready have done it,
check all values agains the
config file you may have saved or against your description. If you did't save the file and the description has gone, call your X.25 vendor for this information. I know by the "hard way" that it so easy to change some vitale parameters when you walk through the config. Espesaial if you are useing terminal based SAM. So be careful and check afterwards.
The errormessage (cause 0 diag 65) say it is missmatch betewene the parameters you send and what your subscription can accept.
It can be missmatch in numbers of VC's or missmatch in fast select and many other
parameters.

Happy configuration !

Br, Johan

[Paul Curren]

Thanks for the info, but we are using the ACC product, hence it doesn't seem to get included in SAM.

Also, I copied our working x.25 config files from the HPUX-10.20 system onto the HPUX-11.00 system to make sure I had the correct config - no help there either. Tweaking various params in the config doesn't seem to make any difference.

We are not using fast select, or flow control negotiation.

It seems as though the SVC is being set up correctly all along the chain, until the Call Connected packet arrives back at the HPUX system. Then the SVC gets cleared with a diagnostic implying that a facility is not allowed.

You can see the facilities in the Call Connected packet in the nettl trace - nothing illegal looking there so far as I can see, but still the x.25 subsystem clears the connection.

I know that the x.25 is configured correctly because I can set up a call with another remote system that doesn't use Extended Addressing facilities.

[Paul Curren]

An update. Have now been informed by HP that this is now a 'feature' of HPUX-11.00.

According to the X.25 standards, it is illegal to include the Calling Address Extension in the Call Connected packet.

Hence, HP's new X.25 s/w for HPUX-11.00 clears the circuit.

The X.25 s/w in HPUX-10.20 was a bit more laid back about this sort of thing.

Now I need to find out why the Cisco router is adding this facility, but that's a question for another group!