dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2703
share rss forum feed

KoRnGtL15
Premium
join:2007-01-04
Grants Pass, OR
kudos:1

[Speed Issues] New firmware available for Ubee U10C035

How new? I do not know and tried to get the answer. Over the past 2-3 weeks. I was having trouble with pages loading slow. Often enough where I finally decided to complain in the direct forums. Right away they seen my modem had older firmware. They pushed a new version to me # 3.10.1311 and everything is fine once again. For some reason it was never pushed to me or its so new. It has not been pushed yet to all. Like I said. I was not able to get a direct answer on the firmware date. So, if you are having slow speed issues. Ask about this new firmware. They will push it to you.

Boot Code Version : 6.1.1f
Software Version : 3.10.1311
Hardware Version : 1.38.0


cork1958
Cork
Premium
join:2000-02-26
If they're not pushing it to all, their must've been some issue similar to the SB6121 fiasco they pulled off earlier this year!

At least that wouldn't surprise one bit, knowing Charter!
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/

kruser
Premium
join:2002-06-01
Eastern MO
That firmware version was pushed to my Ubee of the same model about two or three months ago.
I was not having any issues nor did the firmware cause any.


cork1958
Cork
Premium
join:2000-02-26
Were you one of the ones effected by the firmware on those SB6120's?

If not, that just means KoRnGtL15 is a marked person because I know they were effected!
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/

kruser
Premium
join:2002-06-01
Eastern MO
My 6120 did take that firmware that caused all the issues for many but I was also unaffected by that one as well.
I switched to the Ubee shortly after though as I like the Ubee's stats pages better.

My 6120 had issues before the FW fiasco where it would not lock to a 64 QAM channel on the upstream side. It would only lock to a 16QAM and that only gave me about half of my Ultra plans upload speed. The guys in direct fixed that for me so now either modem will run fine.


cork1958
Cork
Premium
join:2000-02-26
Was mainly just being sarcastic/humorous towards KoRnGtL15 because I do remember that person being VERY involved in that topic about the 6120's!! Especially since you said you got the newer firmware 2-3 months earlier.
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/

KoRnGtL15
Premium
join:2007-01-04
Grants Pass, OR
kudos:1
Oh yes how I remember the 6120 fiasco. They bricked mine with that new firmware. Any ways. Getting back to the new firmware for the Ubee. Wow 2-3 months old?!?!? Not happy about getting it so late. :/ Think you are right about being marked cork. Haha!

kruser
Premium
join:2002-06-01
Eastern MO
Maybe they roll out for a few customers and see if they get any reported problems and then let it fly for all at a later date.


88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
reply to cork1958
said by cork1958:

If they're not pushing it to all, their must've been some issue similar to the SB6121 fiasco they pulled off earlier this year!

it was the SB6120 not the SB6121.


tscotty
Premium
join:2005-07-04
Saint Charles, MO
reply to KoRnGtL15
I have the same firmware on my Ubee modem and haven't noticed any issues.

whoaru99

join:2003-12-17

2 edits
reply to kruser
said by kruser:

Maybe they roll out for a few customers and see if they get any reported problems and then let it fly for all at a later date.

The problem with that, which is probably why we got burnt on 6120, is that it's not just your modem involved. Meaning, a small sample doesn't necessarily make a good test for release. You have to make sure the test includes all variables or you run into problems with the unknowns when you get larger exposure as in a full release. It's the system it's connected to as well and those aren't necessarily all running the same hardware nor firmware versions. This was the case for the 120 incident.

If you got the dreaded 6120 firmware update but the CMTS for your location was of the proper type/version there was no problem for you. But, if your CMTS wasn't supporting channel bonding, guess what? The CMTS would no longer communicate with the modem after that firmware update. So, technically, the modem never was bricked per se, Charter's system (in some areas) just wouldn't talk to it (yeah, same net effect but technically different). If you have one of those modems and connect it now in an area with channel bonding, I'll bet you $1 it works just fine (after provisioning, of course).


cork1958
Cork
Premium
join:2000-02-26
My CMTS WAS supporting channel bonding at the time of that mess and guess what, it screwed up my totally brand new, as in 1 day old, SB6120!

Soon as I changed to the Zoom 5341, that same day, also with channel bonding, guess what. It worked!!

I know there was an issue with some CMTS, but I'm sure all of them supported channel bonding, even at that time.

said by kruser:

Maybe they roll out for a few customers and see if they get any reported problems and then let it fly for all at a later date.

Only Charter could be so brain dead as to do that!
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/

whoaru99

join:2003-12-17
No, they didn't all support channel bonding at that time. I know absolutely for sure channel bonding wasn't active around these parts when mine was affected by that fateful update. Point being when it came that time to enable channel bonding and the firmware and or hardware updates to do it from CMTS perspective then your 6120 would be working again.

If you still have it you should give it a try. Bet a $1 it works now.


cork1958
Cork
Premium
join:2000-02-26
I had JUST bought the 6120 THAT day, when they pushed that messed up firmware.

Played with it for a day or two before realizing it was Charters fault, thanks to this forum, so returned it for my current Zoom 5341 modem.

I'd be willing to bet it would not work correctly today, also!

Do you still have your 6120 KoRnGtL15?
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/


cork1958
Cork
Premium
join:2000-02-26
reply to whoaru99
Edit:
Oops! Sorry, double post!!
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/


mmainprize

join:2001-12-06
Houghton Lake, MI
Reviews:
·Charter
reply to whoaru99
said by whoaru99:

No, they didn't all support channel bonding at that time. I know absolutely for sure channel bonding wasn't active around these parts when mine was affected by that fateful update. Point being when it came that time to enable channel bonding and the firmware and or hardware updates to do it from CMTS perspective then your 6120 would be working again.

If you still have it you should give it a try. Bet a $1 it works now.

I can verify also that in my area Channel bonding was not enabled yet. I had got the e-mail that i needed to get the new D3 modem and i was not happy when i upgrade to the SB6120 and found it was not any better then what i had because Channel bonding was not turned on. I had my new modem installed for about 3 months before the flash day when it stopped working. I had to wait about another 5 months before Channel bonding went live.

There have been reports here that the modems still work once the CMTS were updated.

KoRnGtL15
Premium
join:2007-01-04
Grants Pass, OR
kudos:1
reply to cork1958
Nope. I traded someone on here locally for the Ubee U10C035 a long time ago.


cork1958
Cork
Premium
join:2000-02-26
Wasn't channel bonding turned on when your 6120 got messed up though?
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/

KoRnGtL15
Premium
join:2007-01-04
Grants Pass, OR
kudos:1
I cant remember for sure. I think bonding was enabled before the update.

whoaru99

join:2003-12-17

4 edits
reply to cork1958
said by cork1958:

I'd be willing to bet it would not work correctly today, also!

You will lose that bet.

On a secondary note, I didn't mean to imply that channel bonding, per se, was the fix for the 6120 issue but likely channel bonding was coincidental to the CMTS updates that allowed the modem to work again. Since we can't see CMTS details channel bonding is a workable check point.

Point being, the modem never was broken, per se, it was CMTS issues for Charter and others. As I said before though, for the average Joe on the street the end result was the same and blaming and replacing the modem was the easy "fix". That's how I ended up with the Ubee, that was Charter's fix for me. I know the 6120 works because I didn't throw it way nor sell it, and connected it some months back just to see if I should toss it out. Still has the same firmware that was blamed for the problem and it worked.


cork1958
Cork
Premium
join:2000-02-26
Yes,
It was the "easy fix" especially if you wanted to use the internet, or just wanted to hand over your money to Charter!

I know what you're getting at about channel bonding not being what cured it all, but I was just stating that from that thread back then, which was QUITE a long thread, I'd also be willing to bet that most (at least over 50%) of the people who were effected, already had channel bonding in their areas.

Doesn't matter to this topic and doesn't matter to probably anyone else anymore, so end of discussion. We both know where we're at.
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/

whoaru99

join:2003-12-17
Just to be clear, I didn't have to hand over anything to Charter for a replacement modem once I got to the proper level of tech/customer support. I owned a 6120, now I own a Ubee.

haggelz

join:2010-07-04
Glendale, CA
reply to KoRnGtL15
Good call, just got mine upgraded. Don't really see any difference though. Maybe more reliable in the long run.

U10C035> Sb612x