dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
290635
share rss forum feed


Fireguyy

join:2006-10-01
reply to Sdofi

Re: Actiontec MI424WR FIOS N Router REV. I

said by Sdofi :

Being a former TWC customer I kind of expect that retail stores do exchanges for things other than STBs. I had the pleasure of returning their cable modems more than once.

But TWC definitely treated cable modems as monthly rentals like their STBs.
Verizon would be providing less competitive customer service if it did not allow their customers to exchange their routers - we pay them a small fortune every month.

But you don't pay a monthly charge for your router, so how would this be less competitive?


sdofi

@verizon.net

In my past dealings with TWC they pretty much exchanged your cable modem no questioned asked. All you had to do was walk into their retail store with the cable modem and they will swap it for you. The same with STBs and remotes.

Both TWC and VZ charge a monthly fee (bundled or unbundled) for the TV service and a seperate rental fee for the STB.

Similarly both TWC and VZ charge a monthly fee for the Internet service with no seperate fee for the equipment.

It seems, from what has been posted so far, that VZ doesn't allow exchanges of the FiOS router at their retail stores.

So if the only difference between these two companies is that one allows Internet equipment exchanges and the other company does not then one company is providing less customer service and is therefore being less competitive.



Fireguyy

join:2006-10-01

said by sdofi :

So if the only difference between these two companies is that one allows Internet equipment exchanges and the other company does not then one company is providing less customer service and is therefore being less competitive.

If there is a problem with your router, Verizon will gladly send you out another with 1 or next day delivery. If there is no problem with it, and your service is working just as good as it was when you agreed to the TOS, why should the company just willing exchange it for you?

It cost's the company a great deal of money to take in a router, screen, clean, and place it back into circulation just so that you can have a new one. This is why you can purchase a new router if it's a requirement for you to have the newest version immediately.

I'm not sure how TWC handles their returned equipment, maybe they just toss it back into the pile to hand out to the next customer that comes along so that they don't take on any cost.


SRF26

join:2000-04-03
Jamaica, NY

Hi. I just became a FiOS Triple Play subscriber and per the information from the router interface/set up, I have the following router:

Actiontec MI424WR-GEN2
Firmware: 20.19.8
Hardware Version: F

I currently have the WiFi radio disabled because I am using a D-Link Extreme N router for my wireless services. I did notice something when going through the Actiontec set up. Under the Wireless Settings, the Wireless Mode indicates "Compatibility Mode (802.11b/g/n)." Does this mean the router can support 802.11n devices? I thought Verizon didn't have any "N" capable routers.

TIA...JL



More Fiber
Premium,MVM
join:2005-09-26
West Chester, PA
kudos:31

The rev. F is draft 802.11n only.



foolmeonce

@optonline.net
reply to MrKal_El

said by MrKal_El:

said by foolmeonce :

I received this router (I) last night with my upgrade to the triple play. Shipped firmware 40.19.22

I am in upper Westchester County, NY.

Is there a user guide available for this router? Could not find anything via Google.

So you are saying this was the standard Router given to you w/out the 150Mb plan?

That is correct! My triple play includes the 15/5 internet.


sdofi

@verizon.net
reply to Fireguyy

While TWC may not ask you exactly why you brought equipment back to their retail store for an exchange they know that most customers either have a real serious problem with the equipment or they want some sort of feature upgrade.

There is no dispute that there is significant cost involved in screening and refurbishing returns. Why do companies take this on? Maybe to generate customer satisfaction. Who ultimately pays for this? The customer does in the form of monthly bills.

I don't think that any company just hands back out returned equipment without any sort of testing. Doing so would cause more problems. At least some minimal QA is done. Sometimes the equipment is returned to the supplier or manufacturer for refurbishing.

Fortunately for me I have gotten back only working new (looking?) equipment (new box, manual, CD, cables, matching serial number and mac address stickers on box & equipment) for the ones I have returned.

I was a TWC customer for a long time and these returns were spaced out and far between.



SRF26

join:2000-04-03
Jamaica, NY
reply to More Fiber

said by More Fiber:

The rev. F is draft 802.11n only.

Thanks for the info.

Happy New Year....JL


Jackarino
YacCity
Premium
join:2006-12-28
Allendale, NJ
kudos:1
reply to rev I

My Rev.F just died at one of my homes. Ordered one through Tech support, and they assured me it would be a rev I. I heard that song before. let's see what I get.


degeester

join:2002-03-08
La Quinta, CA

Unfortunately for you Fiosman it's router lottery. I played that game, they sent 3 replacements (overnight, very quick) but they were Rev. E's. The technician had Rev 1 on the truck so again I got lucky.



Zero

join:2009-07-01
Collegeville, PA
reply to More Fiber


802.11n single stream data rates
said by More Fiber:

The rev. F is draft 802.11n only.

Saying that it's draft doesn't accurate explain why it's limited to only 65 mbps. A 802.11n router can be draft and get up to 270 or 300 mbps too.

As you can see from the table above, the real reason the Rev F is limited to 65 mbps is because it only has a single stream radio and is limited to only use a 20 MHz channel. This is why it still only has a single antenna.

The wikipedia page on 802.11n has the full chart where you can see the Rev G and Rev I have 2 spatial streams but are still limited to the same 20 MHz channel of bandwidth resulting in 130 mbps. With 2 streams a second antenna was added to the design.

The GI of 800ns is standard in 802.11 - 400ns is optionally used by vendors for increased data rates.

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/802.11n#Data_rates

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guard_inte···Interval

claibourne

join:2011-07-04
Garland, TX
reply to rev I

Has anyone checked the size of the NAT table in the Rev I?

If you have a Rev I, much appreciated if you'll do this (assuming the interface is the same as the other FiOS routers), and post a followup with the result:

1) Go to "Local Administration" under "Advanced Settings"
2) Enable telnet
3) telnet to the router, login with "admin" and the router's password
4) At the router prompt, enter "firewall dump -ps"
5) Maximum number of connections will be the second or so line of the output; you may have to scroll back to see it.

Thanks!



KCrimson
Premium
join:2001-02-25
Brooklyn, NY
kudos:1

2 edits
reply to birdy

said by birdy :

That 2nd antenna isn't just sitting there to look pretty. The rev I is most likely a dual band N router. The big question is whether its single or dual radio. If single, then only one frequency available (2.4 or 5GHz). If dual radio then 2 SSID's available with one being 2.4GHz channel and other being 5GHz channel.

I don't think your explanation between dual and single radio is technically accurate. I have a Netgear WNDR3300, which is of the single radio variety. It offers separate and simultaneous SSID's on each frequency (2.5 and 5 Ghz), but limits N to EITHER of the two..
ie - You can run B/G on 2.4 Ghz with SSID "Network_X", while also running N on 5 Ghz with SSID "Network_Y", but you can't run N on both of those networks simultaneously - its either/or only in the case of Wireless N. Depending upon the devices you're connecting (capable of 5 Ghz?) and the network topology (most importantly distance and interference), many including myself would be just fine with single radio technology. I get 40 mhz (wide) 5Ghz 270 mbps connections while also supporting my older B/G devices on 2.4 Ghz.

Edit - What's also nice about using a single radio dual band N (which tend to be the cheaper of the dual band N's) - is that when combined with the Rev F Actiontec router, you can also get slightly quicker 2.4 Ghz connections through the Actiontec's own draft-N ability (on its own SSID - with a connection rate of ~65 mbps. Now you're running 3 separate wireless networks, with the only limitation being the speed of the wireless N channel on the 2.4 Ghz band.


birdy

@verizon.net
reply to claibourne

This is the first line reported after using the command,
firewall dump -ps

Active Connections 72/0, quota 30000/-1.

So NAT table is 30,000?



Jackarino
YacCity
Premium
join:2006-12-28
Allendale, NJ
kudos:1
reply to rev I

Thats the same as the Rev F


claibourne

join:2011-07-04
Garland, TX
reply to birdy

Thanks, birdy. As Fiosman said, same as the F (and the E as well).



More Fiber
Premium,MVM
join:2005-09-26
West Chester, PA
kudos:31

said by claibourne:

Thanks, birdy. As Fiosman said, same as the F (and the E as well).

The rev. E was reported as 13,000.
--
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary and those who don't.

claibourne

join:2011-07-04
Garland, TX

Not sure that's correct; perhaps it changed with a later firmware rev? To verify the "firewall dump -ps" output, I ran the same test smallnetbuilder uses on an E and an F; got close to 32k on both.

»www.smallnetbuilder.com/lanwan/l···vision-3


dagwag77
Premium
join:2011-09-05
NY, USA
reply to birdy

Got the same on my rev G with firmware 30.18.5. I still haven't taken my I out of the plastic...



Smith6612
Premium,MVM
join:2008-02-01
North Tonawanda, NY
kudos:24
Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
·Frontier Communi..
reply to More Fiber

Stupid question, but did anyone ever figure out why the NAT Table is as limited as it is on the Verizon firmware? I almost have a feeling it's nothing more than the amount of available RAM. I'm running an ActionTec MI424WR Rev. D with DD-WRT loaded onto it. The NAT Table is set to 32768 by default, and can be boosted up to 65535 entries due to the amount of free RAM that is available and you can configure expiry times for the entries.


claibourne

join:2011-07-04
Garland, TX

I've often wondered that myself. The E and F have the same amount of RAM as the Westell, but it supports about 160k. Not sure why the later rev Actiontecs are limited to a significantly smaller number.


claibourne

join:2011-07-04
Garland, TX
reply to dagwag77

said by dagwag77:

Got the same on my rev G with firmware 30.18.5. I still haven't taken my I out of the plastic...

Wouldn't want to sell me one or the other at a fair price, would you?

dagwag77
Premium
join:2011-09-05
NY, USA

said by claibourne:

Wouldn't want to sell me one or the other at a fair price, would you?

Not at the moment, sorry... I'm having some really weird issues with my static ips so the tech swapped my rev G for me and left me an I to play with when (not if) I break the G... (The actiontecs aren't able to assign out the additional statics, the assigned computers don't get internet connectivity, but the IPs work fine if hooked up directly).

claibourne

join:2011-07-04
Garland, TX

Thanks, no worries. I have an installer coming out Wed morning to add a coax outlet and an STB and will see what he has on the truck. Here in N TX they've still been deploying Westells on new installs, at least up until fairly recently. I'm interested to see what he says they're deploying now.


shawnc221

join:2011-12-31
Chino, CA
reply to rev I

just got installed for 35/35 yesterday with a rev I. Wired speeds are great at about 45/45. On wifi however, I'm only getting about 20/20 even after running the optimizer and being right next to the router. Not that it's big deal as 20 is plenty fast already, but I was just wondering if anyone had any ideas on why its being slowed down on wifi?



birdy

@verizon.net
reply to dagwag77

@dagwag77

So even the rev G reports a 30K NAT table size (listed as 200k on here)?



MrKal_El

join:2003-01-19
Franklin Square, NY
reply to shawnc221

said by shawnc221:

just got installed for 35/35 yesterday with a rev I. Wired speeds are great at about 45/45. On wifi however, I'm only getting about 20/20 even after running the optimizer and being right next to the router. Not that it's big deal as 20 is plenty fast already, but I was just wondering if anyone had any ideas on why its being slowed down on wifi?

Are you running straight N?
--
Twitter: MrKal_El

dagwag77
Premium
join:2011-09-05
NY, USA
reply to birdy

said by birdy :

@dagwag77

So even the rev G reports a 30K NAT table size (listed as 200k on here)?



More Fiber
Premium,MVM
join:2005-09-26
West Chester, PA
kudos:31

The 200K in the FAQ was based on a test by a user.
Here is one post that claimed 300K in the rev. G.
»FIOS TV Central website access with Non AT Router?

The same user had previously posted that it supported 100K entries.
--
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary and those who don't.


claibourne

join:2011-07-04
Garland, TX

said by More Fiber:

The 200K in the FAQ was based on a test by a user.
Here is one post that claimed 300K in the rev. G.
»FIOS TV Central website access with Non AT Router?

The same user had previously posted that it supported 100K entries.

Hmmmm.... I haven't looked through the thread yet to see how he tested this; but now I'm wondering if the "firewall dump -ps" output might be bogus on anything newer than rev F. As I mentioned earlier, I verified it on and E and F with the smallnetbuilder test I referenced, and the results were roughly equivalent.

I'd gladly test but I don't have a G or an I. If the installer happens to have a rev I on the truck when he adds my new coax drop and STB Wednesday morning, I'll give it a shot.

In the meantime, if any of you enterprising G or I owners want to run the test....

Happy New Year!