dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
836
share rss forum feed


teksavvyuser

@teksavvy.com

[Cable] SBG6580 Problems

I have been using a Motorola SBG6580 modem now for about 4 months on the Teksavvy network via Rogers Cable.

The modem disconnects from the network every few hours or so at random. I have found the following related discussion about it:

»forums.comcast.com/t5/Basic-Inte···U1515401

The firmware in the modem is 3.1.0.0 and there's no way to get the newer firmware. The DOCSIS 3 spec is designed to disallow flashing the firmware except over the wire from the ISP.

Like everyone else I got it at TigerDirect. And it's not difficult to get Teksavvy to provision it (see other posts on this topic). It's a great device. Great speed. The integrated wifi works great. But the disconnects are such a pain that I'm thinking of replacing it with an on-list Motorola model. It's a shame, though.

The only mitigation I have found is that when you detect that your internet connection has died, you login to the device via »192.168.0.1/. That seems to force it to renegatiate the connection with the ISP. This is just voodoo on my part; I'm not sure if that is what is happening but it seems to work.

Any comments or suggestions on ameliorating this problem would be appreciated. Thanks.


AOD
Premium
join:2008-01-24
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:1
The modem isn't on the list of supported modems. You might be SOL on this one. Teksavvy doesn't flash or provision the modems Rogers does. I'm pretty sure they will not upgrade the firmware on it either.


TwiztedZero
Nine Zero Burp Nine Six
Premium
join:2011-03-31
Toronto, ON
kudos:5
^ What AOD See Profile said above. Its not a widely supported modem and not on the approved list.

Its times like these when you take matters into your own hands and assume the risks involved.

There are tons of other modems we could possibly be using, the SB6141 is one such that comes to mind; particularly since it uses practically the same firmware the approved SB6120 & SB6121's do.

Newer models that aren't supported at this time; likely won't be anytime in the near future unless people start to pony up the required cash some $8k+ or so to get units approved, and theres no guarantee they'll pass. (And no one has shown any interest in raising that ammount even with a group effort to get one or two newer modems approved).

Then theres the matter of firmware updates that the big red machine doesn't want to push at all, even to currently supported approved TPIA modems; that is, unless they absolutely have to.

... up/down, the creek, sans paddle and all that entails.

And just in case you're wondering about the even newer impending Docsis 3.1 modems - fuggitaboutit unless theres some incredible paradigm shift and suddenly POI's get the newer hybrid D3.1 linecards that support those are somehow magically installed one day and a brand new batch of approved modems supporting their higher QAM frequencies and multiple channel bonding beyond what we currently enjoy become available. (and thats not even taking into consideration the upcomming aggreated POI system).
---
Anyhoo, if theres a lot of you out there with that particular firmware issue, there might be an enterprising individual that could possibly flash them to a stable firmware model, but I don't think I'd want to try that route just now. Firmware that might work on HFC networks down in the states don't always translate into workable up here in Ontario or anywheres else in Canada for that matter. Why take the risk.
---
So, I guess you should maybe save some pennies nickles, and maybe buy a currently supported modem through TSI or another vendor that might have some like maybe ElectronicsGuru, or some other handy dandy resource.

--
----|- From the mind located in the shadows of infinity -|----
Nine.Zero.Burp.Nine.Six
Twitter = Twizted Zero
Chat = irc.teksavvy.ca


Teddy Boom
k kudos Received
Premium
join:2007-01-29
Toronto, ON
kudos:21
reply to teksavvyuser
I've upgraded this unit for a customer. Changing to 6.5.x.x seems to help, but no guarantees.

(edit: and thanks for the plug TwistedZero )

--
electronicsguru.ca

arthurwinslo

join:2012-11-30
Toronto, ON
reply to teksavvyuser
Goto »192.168.100.1 and click on logs. Paste the log file here so that more experienced users can diagnose it. Please be sure to censor out all HFC MAC ID's from the logfile for your own personal security.

There are lots of sbg6580's on the network running the old 3.1.0.0 that do not have any flapping issues but that isn't to say that updating the firmware wouldn't help either.


Teddy Boom
k kudos Received
Premium
join:2007-01-29
Toronto, ON
kudos:21
said by arthurwinslo:

There are lots of sbg6580's on the network running the old 3.1.0.0 that do not have any flapping issues but that isn't to say that updating the firmware wouldn't help either.

Thanks arthurwinslo. I have to say, the unit I upgraded had a much older version than 3.1.0.0. I can't recall the exact number, but it was around 1.5.x.x.
(I wish I could read cable modem logs better.. I still find them very confusing )
--
electronicsguru.ca

technocar2

join:2009-05-29
Brampton, ON
kudos:2
reply to teksavvyuser
I find it amusing how rogers doesn't even enforce the approved modem requirement. I'm pretty sure rogers can fine teksavvy through the CRTC for having non approved modems because lets be clear, rogers knows exactly what modems are being used at any given time, wouldn't take much for them to find all the non approved modems and file them with the CRTC. I guess rogers is doing a favor to the TPIAs on this one.


elitefx

join:2011-02-14
London, ON
kudos:2
said by technocar2:

....rogers knows exactly what modems are being used at any given time, wouldn't take much for them to find all the non approved modems and file them with the CRTC.

Actually they can't. You give a Cisco DPC3008/DPC3010 standalone MAC/serial to Rogers and their system registers it as a DPC3825. Rogers don't know and don't care about the difference.


Teddy Boom
k kudos Received
Premium
join:2007-01-29
Toronto, ON
kudos:21

1 recommendation

reply to technocar2
said by technocar2:

I'm pretty sure rogers can fine teksavvy through the CRTC for having non approved modems

Find it in the tariff, then I'll believe you. I haven't noticed anything like that yet, but that doesn't mean it isn't there.

said by technocar2:

lets be clear, rogers knows exactly what modems are being used at any given time,

Rogers can find out exactly which modems are being used, if they look. They don't look.

I don't recommend non-approved modems, but let's not go all FUD about it. There are good enough reasons to stick to the approved list without exaggerating things.
--
electronicsguru.ca


elitefx

join:2011-02-14
London, ON
kudos:2

1 edit
said by Teddy Boom:

There are good enough reasons to stick to the approved list without exaggerating things.

Agreed BUT Tek may have decent modems but Rogers approved modems (gateways) are crap unless they're bridged. Why pay $200 for a half assed gateway when you can buy a rock solid standalone, that's not subjected to Rogers moronic firmware flashes, for $69 on sale.

The SMART money gets CREATIVE and gets a D3 standalone activated.

InvalidError

join:2008-02-03
kudos:5
reply to elitefx
said by elitefx:

Actually they can't. You give a Cisco DPC3008/DPC3010 standalone MAC/serial to Rogers and their system registers it as a DPC3825. Rogers don't know and don't care about the difference.

The first digits on MAC addresses are manufacturer-specific to avoid collisions between different manufacturers so they can definitely tell that model does not match manufacturer if they bothered to look. They can also request the model info directly from the modem itself during the ranging and BPI+ authentication processes.

So it seems to clearly be because Rogers does not care. And why should they? If wholesale ISPs fail to do their own checks, the ISPs and their clients are the ones who are going be stuck with the bill when techs come to investigate DC problems and find out the modem does not match what is on records (aside from the MAC#) and is not on the approved list.


elitefx

join:2011-02-14
London, ON
kudos:2
said by InvalidError:

So it seems to clearly be because Rogers does not care. And why should they? If wholesale ISPs fail to do their own checks, the ISPs and their clients are the ones who are going be stuck with the bill when techs come to investigate DC problems and find out the modem does not match what is on records (aside from the MAC#) and is not on the approved list.

Absolutely right BUT we're getting into fear mongering territory. Name brand quality D3 modems come from the factory with firmware Docsis 3 and IPV6 ready. ISPs only want to flash the firmware to allow them access to your private property modem. Modems are tested and readied for use at the factory. If the modem works when it's activated then the odds are it will work for a loooong time otherwise RMA it like any other PC part.

Bad Rogers issued firmware= F#CKED up modems.

Keep Rogers out and keep your modem safe.

technocar2

join:2009-05-29
Brampton, ON
kudos:2
reply to elitefx
said by elitefx:

said by technocar2:

....rogers knows exactly what modems are being used at any given time, wouldn't take much for them to find all the non approved modems and file them with the CRTC.

Actually they can't. You give a Cisco DPC3008/DPC3010 standalone MAC/serial to Rogers and their system registers it as a DPC3825. Rogers don't know and don't care about the difference.

That's their billing systems, but their CMTS knows exactly what modem its talking to. Rogers can easily check.

Also it doesn't have to be in the tariff for rogers to file complains against the TPIAs. If Teksavvy or any other TPIA didn't get the SBG6580 approved then rogers has more then enough evidence from their CMTS to create problems for Teksavvy, its just that they don't.


nitzguy
Premium
join:2002-07-11
Sudbury, ON
reply to technocar2
said by technocar2:

I find it amusing how rogers doesn't even enforce the approved modem requirement. I'm pretty sure rogers can fine teksavvy through the CRTC for having non approved modems because lets be clear, rogers knows exactly what modems are being used at any given time, wouldn't take much for them to find all the non approved modems and file them with the CRTC. I guess rogers is doing a favor to the TPIAs on this one.

They would only enforce it if a rogue modem caused some problems with the network. I know its hard to believe, but some models of modems for whatever reason just didn't want to play nice..granted for me this was back in the DOCSIS 1.x days and I don't know if that's been fixed ,but that's where this was born out of since TPIA has been around since about 2002...but nobody really took advantage of it until recently.

If a modem was causing a segment to go down or some nutsiness at the UBR level, then Rogers would look at it. Otherwise as others have said they really don't care.

In regards to the modems, yes, they retrieve all of the manufacturer AND model #'s from all of the modems fairly easily I'm sure. Any non-approved modem would show up as such. I'm no talking at a billing level, I'm talking at the actual UBR equipment itself.

Here's the thing, the OP might be actually having a signal related issue. Firmware updates aren't the end all to be all to solve all of users issues...no offense to anyone out there who makes revenue from doing such a thing.

A $100 piece of consumer hardware doesn't have the preciseness of the $5k testers that "typically" Cable techs have access to when there are signal related issues.

There could be issues as to why it only happens a few times a day...it could be that the signal is very marginal. The OP did not post any of that information either....

And again, its Rogers' network, built from the ground up. Its the rules for playing in their sandbox so to speak, if ISPs don't want to play by the rules, then they don't get access to the sandbox...as simple as that.

InvalidError

join:2008-02-03
kudos:5
reply to elitefx
said by elitefx:

Name brand quality D3 modems come from the factory with firmware Docsis 3 and IPV6 ready.

There are millions of possible permutations of CMTS firmware and modem models/firmware versions. As with anything else that has this many possibilities, even certification still cannot guarantee that every combination will work flawlessly. Videotron retired the SB6180 because it turned out to be more unusually troublesome with their equipment.

Unlike PC components which have a point-to-point PCIe/USB/SATA link to the chipset, DOCSIS modems have to play nice with all the 100+ other DOCSIS devices on the same node and hardware/firmware/config at the remote (CMTS) end can change without notice.

arthurwinslo

join:2012-11-30
Toronto, ON
reply to Teddy Boom
You're welcome Teddy. If anything, drop me a line in PM if there's anything you would like me to have a look at for you.