dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
5341
Arx160le
join:2013-02-12

Arx160le

Member

Rogers has a new gateway coming up! - CGN3

I was recently looking at the wifi certificates for several routers and gateways on the wifi alliance's certification site, and I stumbled upon a device named CGN3-ROG. This device is dated to have received it's certificate on June 6 of 2013, and having the -ROG suffix means its a rogers device, just as with the CGN2-ROG. The certificate is linked below, along with a link to the CGN3 and it's specifications.

»certifications.wi-fi.org ··· WFA20016

»www.hitron-americas.com/ ··· ts/cgn3/

The CGN3 is an upgraded version of the CGN2, providing even faster speeds, and a 5ghz wifi 3 stream wifi band, along with a 3 stream 2.4 ghz wifi band.

The fact that it has just recently showed up on the site means that it must be currently in testing by Rogers, since the device itself isn't exactly "new".

Along with the 5ghz band though, it also seems to missing key features that the CGN2 has, namely WMM power save, and many of the option capabilities that allow devices to perform better over wireless N.

Hopefully it's better than the mess that the CGN2 was!
Arx160le

1 edit

Arx160le

Member

I was also able to find another link pertaining to the CGN3-ROG and release notes about something, not too sure what it means though: »ftp://222.92.145.140/CGN3/CGN3 ··· 2-13.doc

Edit: I noticed that cisco connect was mentioned in these release notes, so this is definitely Rogers!

elitefx
join:2011-02-14
London, ON

1 recommendation

elitefx

Member

Yes and once Rogers pushes one of their infamous firmware updates into it the thing will be just another piece of Rogers overpriced problem riddled hardware .
Arx160le
join:2013-02-12

Arx160le

Member

It also looks like it'll be stupidly overpriced, looking at the specifications of it. It may not be for the lower tiers, looking at the fact that it supports 24 channels bonded over its downstream interface.
Hooter
join:2009-08-17
Scarborough, ON

Hooter to Arx160le

Member

to Arx160le
Another new gateway from Rogers - about as exciting as watching paint dry, considering the success (or lack of) from all of their previous models!
useless2764
join:2008-10-11
Barrie, ON

useless2764 to Arx160le

Member

to Arx160le
24/8 modem well then

GM85
Click, Click
join:2002-07-02
Canada

2 edits

GM85 to Arx160le

Member

to Arx160le
What I don't understand is why can't Rogers also push out a standalone DOCSIS 3 MODEM for those who want to use their own router.

Along with the CGN series, Hitron also has the CDA series. It's identical in hardware-specs to the CGN, but is only the modem.

EDIT: I'm currently using the CGN2 as a bridged modem, but I feel like the device wasn't intended for this purpose.
JAC70
join:2008-10-20
canada

JAC70

Member

said by GM85:

What I don't understand is why can't Rogers also push out a standalone DOCSIS 3 MODEM for those who want to use their own router.

If I had to guess, I'd say they don't want to troubleshoot IPv6 issues on 3rd party routers. Or they want to move to a pay-per-address model.
yyzlhr
join:2012-09-03
Scarborough, ON

yyzlhr to Arx160le

Member

to Arx160le
If I were to guess, I think they might be using this for IPTV. I don't see any other use for a 24x8 DOCSIS 3.0 modem unless they want to play downstream wars with Bell in their limited FTTH areas.

Dones
join:2008-02-14
Toronto, ON

Dones to Arx160le

Member

to Arx160le
Sooooo 1Gbps downstream!?!?!?!?!?!?

HiVolt
Premium Member
join:2000-12-28
Toronto, ON

HiVolt to yyzlhr

Premium Member

to yyzlhr
said by yyzlhr:

If I were to guess, I think they might be using this for IPTV. I don't see any other use for a 24x8 DOCSIS 3.0 modem unless they want to play downstream wars with Bell in their limited FTTH areas.

Heh, what's the point of IPTV? Rogers digital cable is already somewhat IPTV, if you ever went into the boxes info screens you see they have IP addresses for the TV side as well.
yyzlhr
join:2012-09-03
Scarborough, ON

yyzlhr

Member

said by HiVolt:

said by yyzlhr:

If I were to guess, I think they might be using this for IPTV. I don't see any other use for a 24x8 DOCSIS 3.0 modem unless they want to play downstream wars with Bell in their limited FTTH areas.

Heh, what's the point of IPTV? Rogers digital cable is already somewhat IPTV, if you ever went into the boxes info screens you see they have IP addresses for the TV side as well.

The IP address is only to pull up the On Demand library and to run searches, and for SDV sessions. Rogers has stated publicly that they intend to transition towards IP transmission. Also IPTV is a much more efficient use of bandwidth on the cable plan and most cable providers have stated they intend on moving towards an all IP network at some point.
34764170 (banned)
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

34764170 (banned) to Dones

Member

to Dones
said by Dones:

Sooooo 1Gbps downstream!?!?!?!?!?!?

Not even close.
34764170

1 edit

34764170 (banned) to HiVolt

Member

to HiVolt
said by HiVolt:

Heh, what's the point of IPTV? Rogers digital cable is already somewhat IPTV, if you ever went into the boxes info screens you see they have IP addresses for the TV side as well.

You do know Rogers will be migrating to IPTV? It affords them greater flexibility for provisioning, greater efficiency for utilization of their network and additional features with their TV platform. Having an STB with an IP connection to provide over the top services with Internet integration is not the same thing as having the broadcast TV network being fed via IPTV.
34764170

34764170 (banned) to yyzlhr

Member

to yyzlhr
said by yyzlhr:

unless they want to play downstream wars with Bell in their limited FTTH areas.

They could try playing that game but IMO Rogers would lose.
34764170

34764170 (banned) to GM85

Member

to GM85
said by GM85:

What I don't understand is why can't Rogers also push out a standalone DOCSIS 3 MODEM for those who want to use their own router.

Because there is no purpose to having to stock more CPE when the existing gear does both.
said by GM85:

EDIT: I'm currently using the CGN2 as a bridged modem, but I feel like the device wasn't intended for this purpose.

You can feel that all you want, but that's what the device was intended to do.
34764170

34764170 (banned) to JAC70

Member

to JAC70
said by JAC70:

If I had to guess, I'd say they don't want to troubleshoot IPv6 issues on 3rd party routers. Or they want to move to a pay-per-address model.

None of this makes any sense. They would have to deal with that with ATPIA providers anyway as well as even their own retail service. The last part especially makes no sense.
JAC70
join:2008-10-20
canada

JAC70

Member

said by 34764170:

None of this makes any sense. They would have to deal with that with ATPIA providers anyway as well as even their own retail service. The last part especially makes no sense.

a) How are 3rd-party routers used by ATPIA customers Rogers' problem?
b) One of the main goals of IPv6 is assigning an IP to each connected device to eliminate NAT. Do you really think Rogers will balk at charging their users for each IP assigned?
yyzlhr
join:2012-09-03
Scarborough, ON

1 edit

yyzlhr

Member

said by JAC70:

said by 34764170:

None of this makes any sense. They would have to deal with that with ATPIA providers anyway as well as even their own retail service. The last part especially makes no sense.

a) How are 3rd-party routers used by ATPIA customers Rogers' problem?
b) One of the main goals of IPv6 is assigning an IP to each connected device to eliminate NAT. Do you really think Rogers will balk at charging their users for each IP assigned?

I highly doubt Rogers or any MSO would get away with forcing a pay per address model on a residential internet service. Especially when we are moving into a world where one individual often owns several internet connected device.

As brad has pointed out, there's no point in adding complexity to the current product line when the money has already been spent, by stocking DOCSIS 3.0 gateways and standalone routers. The gateway can be configured to do both without issue.

Also as a former sales rep, there is an overwhelming demand from consumers for an all in one solution that the provider will support. Many customers don't even know what the term 'router' means and will not sign up if their service provider will not assist them in connecting multiple devices. MSOs are also not able to troubleshoot the myriad of 3rd party routers available on the market. Having an all in one solution allows the MSO to remotely configure and troubleshoot the device for the customer.

Although, I agree this is not the route Rogers and other MSOs should have chosen given the poor quality of the router side of all in one gateways. I think a better solution would be to provide a standalone DOCSIS 3.0 modem and then charge less tech savvy customers an additional rental fee to obtain a good standalone router that's been preloaded with some custom firmware that allows Rogers to remotely configure the device.

Unfortunately, it would not make sense to change things now with all the money they've already invested in the existing inventory of gateway equipment.
34764170 (banned)
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

34764170 (banned) to JAC70

Member

to JAC70
said by JAC70:

a) How are 3rd-party routers used by ATPIA customers Rogers' problem?
b) One of the main goals of IPv6 is assigning an IP to each connected device to eliminate NAT. Do you really think Rogers will balk at charging their users for each IP assigned?

a) It's same basic mechanisms for how the equipment is configured whether its Rogers retail customers or ATPIA customers on Rogers network... DHCPv6/DHCPv6-PD. Just as if Rogers had some sort of implementation issues with their DHCP (v4) infrastructure that caused compatibility issues.

b) Rogers will be like any other MSO and provide at least a /64 at the absolute minimum via DHCPv6-PD; although more likely to provide a /56 if requested.

TypeS
join:2012-12-17
London, ON

TypeS to HiVolt

Member

to HiVolt
said by yyzlhr:

I don't see any other use for a 24x8 DOCSIS 3.0 modem unless they want to play downstream wars with Bell in their limited FTTH areas.

Most areas with Bell FTTH deployment will most likely also have Rogers FTTH deployment as well, so Rogers doesn't need to compete with Bell's FTTH when they have their own.
said by HiVolt:

Heh, what's the point of IPTV? Rogers digital cable is already somewhat IPTV, if you ever went into the boxes info screens you see they have IP addresses for the TV side as well.

Rogers is still delivering TV channels to your STB(s) with QAMs. With IPTV, it'll be like Bell Fibe TV. You have an internet connection from Rogers and the TV channels are delivered to you via that internet connection instead of QAMs.
34764170 (banned)
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

34764170 (banned)

Member

said by TypeS:

Most areas with Bell FTTH deployment will most likely also have Rogers FTTH deployment as well, so Rogers doesn't need to compete with Bell's FTTH when they have their own.

Not likely to be so anytime soon... but Rogers will have to be a lot more serious about rolling out FTTH.
said by TypeS:

Rogers is still delivering TV channels to your STB(s) with QAMs. With IPTV, it'll be like Bell Fibe TV. You have an internet connection from Rogers and the TV channels are delivered to you via that internet connection instead of QAMs.

Well, its a logically separate IP network across the same last mile connection, but none the less the idea being its an all IP environment for video / voice / Internet and any other over the top services (.e.g. home security). MSOs will be migrating video to IPTV. telcos will be migrating from POTS to VoIP at some point.