# HL7802.4.6.9 AT+CGDCONT=? fails

**URL:** <https://forum.sierrawireless.com/t/hl7802-4-6-9-at-cgdcont-fails/26126>\
**Category:** HL78\
**Created:** [February 1, 2022, 5:27pm UTC](https://forum.sierrawireless.com/t/hl7802-4-6-9-at-cgdcont-fails/26126 "2022-02-01T17:27:48Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 3

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![johnofleek](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex025/user_avatar/forum.sierrawireless.com/johnofleek/32/4726_2.png) [@johnofleek](https://forum.sierrawireless.com/u/johnofleek)\
**Post date:** [February 8, 2022, 9:53am UTC](https://forum.sierrawireless.com/t/hl7802-4-6-9-at-cgdcont-fails/26126/3 "2022-02-08T09:53:07Z")

</div>

Hi Jerdung

It would take me a long time to create an AT command validation test rig 🙂 I was kind of hoping that sort of testing would be carried out by SW.

For interest the only reason I was trying at+cgdcont=? is that I didn’t understand why context 3 was erroring. Having at+cgdcont=? would have been useful as it turns out that there is a whole [story](https://forum.sierrawireless.com/t/hl7802-4-6-9-usb-at-port-cgdcont-only-contexts-1-2-seem-to-be-accepted/26127/4) behind the two contexts.

Some other random =? commands to the modem - note the at+wppp=? response

```auto
at+kusbpcomp=?
+CME ERROR: 4

at+ccid=?
+CCID: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
OK

at=?
+CME ERROR: 4

at+cgreg=?
+CGREG: (0,1,2,4)
OK

at+WPPP=?
+WPPP: (0-2),(1-2)

OK

```

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.sierrawireless.com/t/hl7802-4-6-9-at-cgdcont-fails/26126)._