I have a Cisco EHWIC-4G-LTE-V cellular card card in my Cisco 1941W router. I'm working with a Cisco tech and there is an issue with the card that we feel is on Verizon's end. We're going to call Verizon together to discuss this with them, and I'd like to not fumble through the phone menu for 20 minutes with this guy, given he costs $150/hr. Does anyone know the proper phone number and menu options to press to get ahold of someone who would actually have a clue about these cards and be able to chat with myself and my Cisco tech? Thank you.
No. There is no shortcut to speaking with a person when you call in. Contact the normal 1800 922 0204 support number and work through the options that are presented to you. If necessary try calling ahead once and write down your menu options so that when you have cisco on the phone you can quickly get to where you need to go.
If its not an account problem then perhaps we can help you. What kind of a problem are you noticing with your VZW device?
The device handles traffic fine when there is 2-4 devices on the LAN side. Once that number grows to 10 or so, instead of everything slowing down and politely sharing the available bandwidth, the interface repeatedly bounces between online/offline states.
The limits are:
15 simultaneous connections with 4G LTE (Mifi 6620L)
10 simultaneous connections with 4G LTE
10 simultaneous connections with 3G (Mifi 6620L)
5 simultaneous connections with 3G
Not much is known about how this is enforced, but it seems logical that you’ve encountered enforcement.
Thanks 7e18n1. Given NAT/routing is happening here, how would Verizon even know if I had two dozen devices on the LAN side? I'm not expecting everything to work fast, just work at all They sell this card to slip into Cisco routers so I'd expect it to just be bound by available bandwidth; maybe those limits are just for portable/consumer devices, or do you think they're for everything?
I believe 7es reference is primarily for Jetpacks which have physical hardware limitations to how many simultaneous connections they can handle. The VZW home routers should have higher limitations. Since your scenario offloads the LAN duties to the cisco router I would expect Cisco to more accurately quote you on how many LAN connections are possible. VZW card in your scenario I would think only has to worry about one connection, to the VZW towers and back.
Depending on what is going on with those LAN connections the WAN connection may be getting overburdened and maxed out to the point where it constantly has to renegotiate causing disconnections and reconnections.
Some info to help you with your conversation with VZW would be to gather the local wireless statistics in your area. You could do this from the card if there is software to access that information. Otherwise a similar VZW device like a smartphone or jetpack could reveal the same diagnostics too. VZW would most likely ask you to move around to different locations and site survey the area. It would be interesting to know if the same problem happens in other locations or configurations too.
> Given NAT/routing is happening here, how would Verizon even know if I had two dozen devices on the LAN side?
What is on the LAN side isn’t the issue. The focus is on the number of simultaneous connections to the Verizon Wireless network. How? Find your IP address range in the list and read the comments. Follow the link for carrier-grade NAT and read the first paragraph. Follow the link for middlebox and read the first sentence. Tracing websites reveals the middlebox units. Alter you connection by enabling and disabling popular VPN client types like PP2P & L2TP and OpenVPN using a VPN router and standalone VPN Clients on a computer. Note how the route changes through the middlebox units placing you on specific subnets for specific VPN types and whether it’s a VPN router or standalone client. This isn’t merely a router or managed switch in control. This is high order programming logic from a computer with an operating system running a program specially written to determine what the user is trying to do and then routing to a subnet for that specific purpose.
I can’t see NAT/routing fooling a middlebox, especially since enforcement of simultaneous connections seems like a trivial matter.
> They sell this card to slip into Cisco routers so I'd expect it to just be bound by available bandwidth; maybe those limits are just for portable/consumer devices, or do you think they're for everything?
You are indeed bound by the available bandwidth; it is the transition to more than 10 simultaneous connections that appears to be biting you. With the possible exception of a static IP address, I think those restrictions are in place on everything that uses the Verizon Wireless Network.