dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
26899

kibosh
join:2010-12-16
Whitby, ON

kibosh to mozerd

Member

to mozerd

[Modem/Router] Re: :: Hitron CGN3 v4.2.4.3 ::

I use OOMA with the CGN3 in gateway. I placed the OOMA in the DMZ but i am finding I get a bit of an echo at times which I never had before when i had my cisco bridged and using my asus router. It seems that the CGN3 is attacking the OOMA traffic anyway. I am looking forward to bridging the CGN3 . . . I assume it will help.
LYuan
join:2014-01-24
Canada

LYuan to SimplePanda

Member

to SimplePanda

Is it possible your MAC is whitelisted somewhere courtesy of your discussions with CAT?

Possibly, but the last few conversations that I have had was not with CAT, and they seemed to be aware of the update, and seemed to be convinced that it was a wide rollout. However, the fact that nobody else has received it yet suggests otherwise.

kibosh
join:2010-12-16
Whitby, ON

kibosh

Member

Although a couple different people on the rogers forum indicated that they called and were told it was rolling out now until March 7.
technocar2
join:2009-05-29
Brampton, ON

technocar2 to SimplePanda

Member

to SimplePanda
said by SimplePanda:

May be tougher than that - the CGN3 is a 24/8 device (vs. the 8x4 of CGN2/6141). People have gotten away with provisioning their off-network modems using equivalent on-network devices (your 6141 = CGN2, 6121's have gotten on masquerading as D3GN's, etc).

There isn't a 24x8 device from Motorola (and never will be at this point it seems).

Once again, all of this gets better if Rogers stops dicking about and sells us standalone devices.

When you provision a third party purchased modem you can basically tell them anything, you can say its CGN3 even when it does not have the same specs because those reps will not verify anything. But once its in the system then the CMTS takes over and it does not care about what modem you have. It will give the CFG for your tier and that's it. If your modem is good enough it will get the full speeds, if not then it won't get the full speed. And like I said, SB6141 can easily achieve 300mbps down and 20 mbps in its current 8X3 configuring on the rogers network (but ideally you wouldn't want that but its 100% possible). For me, I wouldn't want that plus it will be an unnecessary hassle to try to get it re-provisioned and I don't have the nerve to deal with that process again (it can easily take 10+ calls to rogers).

And yes the there is no Motorola modem equivalent to CGN3 yet and hence I haven't made the jump to the new ultimate. I would rather have a 100% stable modem than the CGN3 or any other combo modem rogers may come out with.

But this new CGN3 firmware looks promising if it does turn out to be stable, only time will tell.
wayner92
join:2006-01-17
Toronto, ON

wayner92 to mozerd

Member

to mozerd
said by mozerd:

I'd be interested to find out IF you're using VoIP with the Hitron CGN3

I have had Vonage VOIP for many years. I never had problems until I was using the CGN3 in gateway mode. The other party can't hear me when making or receiving phone calls (or vice versa), I can't remember which. The web UI was so unstable I never really had too much time to play around opening up ports, or putting it in the DMZ, before I went back to bridge mode where I don't have issues.
technocar2
join:2009-05-29
Brampton, ON

technocar2 to LYuan

Member

to LYuan
LYuan can you do a complete saturation test of your line with multiple connections? Just download all four ubuntu torrents at the same time and see if anything changes »www.ubuntu.com/download/ ··· ownloads
wayner92
join:2006-01-17
Toronto, ON

wayner92 to LYuan

Member

to LYuan
said by LYuan:

Yep, still running it! I haven't had a single problem to be honest, so in this case, no news is definitely good news! Hopefully everyone gets it tonight as it's getting pretty boring here as the only guy with properly working internet!

I am guessing (and hoping) that I haven't been upgraded since my modem (in bridge mode) died 30 minutes before you posted this.

kibosh
join:2010-12-16
Whitby, ON

kibosh

Member

Haha . . . I would assume so since LYuan is the only person so far on this forum that has received it.

mozerd
Light Will Pierce The Darkness
MVM
join:2004-04-23
Nepean, ON

mozerd to GI Suck

MVM

to GI Suck
said by GI Suck:

What application are you using? I've been using Lync 2013 without any issues on my network.

i'm not using the HITRON CGN3 .... I am trying to find out if Rogers is causing issues with VoIP application in GATEWAY or BRIDGE mode on the CGN3 ... I suspect bridge mode is left alone but gateway mode is designed to fail ... Only a suspicion at this time.

SimplePanda
BSD
Premium Member
join:2003-09-22
Montreal, QC

SimplePanda

Premium Member

said by mozerd:

said by GI Suck:

What application are you using? I've been using Lync 2013 without any issues on my network.

i'm not using the HITRON CGN3 .... I am trying to find out if Rogers is causing issues with VoIP application in GATEWAY or BRIDGE mode on the CGN3 ... I suspect bridge mode is left alone but gateway mode is designed to fail ... Only a suspicion at this time.

You're suggesting it's breaking intentionally?

mozerd
Light Will Pierce The Darkness
MVM
join:2004-04-23
Nepean, ON

mozerd

MVM

Yes, I am suggesting that.
technocar2
join:2009-05-29
Brampton, ON

technocar2

Member

said by mozerd:

Yes, I am suggesting that.

Its possible because rogers has a competing service but its highly unlikely. As evil as rogers is I don't think they will go this low.

SimplePanda
BSD
Premium Member
join:2003-09-22
Montreal, QC

SimplePanda to LYuan

Premium Member

to LYuan
My guess would be more that it's broken by omission.

The CGN3 is basically a broken-as-shipped device. Bridge mode doesn't work. Highly latent LAN ports. Port forwarding barely works if at all. Interface slow. Etc, etc.

They clearly didn't test it properly (and amusingly call it the "Advanced" gateway for some reason) and we're all stuck with it right now (at least if you want 250/20 or want to buy a future proof device).

SIP via a NAT and the associated hole punching / UPnP requirements is non-trivial as far as getting everything to work properly sometimes. You need to ensure appropriately configured re-sub timeouts, etc to make sure the gateway honours the port configurations, etc. Even on "decent" routers this sometimes needs a bit of tuning.

Given that VoIP seems to work with all the other gateway devices I'd guess that this is less an issue of intentionally shipping the CGN3 broken as far as VoIP goes and more an issue of shipping a device that's just plain broken due to poor testing.

At least, that'd be my guess.

Sadly, what I'm saying is I'd believe Rogers isn't so much malicious as just incompetent.

Sigh.
LYuan
join:2014-01-24
Canada

LYuan to technocar2

Member

to technocar2
said by technocar2:

LYuan can you do a complete saturation test of your line with multiple connections? Just download all four ubuntu torrents at the same time and see if anything changes »www.ubuntu.com/download/ ··· ownloads

Just did a quick run-through of the torrent download - Download speeds are fine. Speed is consistent, though I do have QoS enabled on my end. Everything works great.

Obviously when I saturate the upstream by either hosting video streams or uploads, the latency increases expectedly.

mozerd
Light Will Pierce The Darkness
MVM
join:2004-04-23
Nepean, ON

mozerd

MVM

said by LYuan:

Just did a quick run-through of the torrent download - Download speeds are fine. Speed is consistent, though I do have QoS enabled on my end. Everything works great.

Are you in Bridge Mode or Gateway Mode when you state that QoS is enabled?

SimplePanda
BSD
Premium Member
join:2003-09-22
Montreal, QC

SimplePanda

Premium Member

said by mozerd:

said by LYuan:

Just did a quick run-through of the torrent download - Download speeds are fine. Speed is consistent, though I do have QoS enabled on my end. Everything works great.

Are you in Bridge Mode or Gateway Mode when you state that QoS is enabled?

He's in bridge and running QoS on his own router.
LYuan
join:2014-01-24
Canada

LYuan to mozerd

Member

to mozerd
said by mozerd:

Are you in Bridge Mode or Gateway Mode when you state that QoS is enabled?

Yep, SimplePanda is correct. I'm running bridge mode - QoS on the WAN side of my Netgear Nighthawk running DD-WRT.

kibosh
join:2010-12-16
Whitby, ON

kibosh to LYuan

Member

to LYuan
i finally got it too!!

mozerd
Light Will Pierce The Darkness
MVM
join:2004-04-23
Nepean, ON

mozerd to LYuan

MVM

to LYuan
Apparently HITRON does make a standalone cable modem CDA-32372.

Hitron Debuts 1-Gig Cable Modems

In North America and other regions that use 6 MHz channels, Hitron's products would provide a maximum theoretical downstream bandwidth of 960 Mbps down and 240 Mbps up. The CDA-32372 is a standalone cable modem, while the CDE-32372 is a gateway with dual-band 3x3 Wi-Fi.

Perhaps if enough people made noise Rogers would listen and add the CDA-32372 to the mix of supported cable modems.

GI Suck
I Got Mail Yay
join:2004-01-14
Oshawa, ON

GI Suck to mozerd

Member

to mozerd
said by mozerd:

said by GI Suck:

What application are you using? I've been using Lync 2013 without any issues on my network.

i'm not using the HITRON CGN3 .... I am trying to find out if Rogers is causing issues with VoIP application in GATEWAY or BRIDGE mode on the CGN3 ... I suspect bridge mode is left alone but gateway mode is designed to fail ... Only a suspicion at this time.

Both Lync and Skype work on the CGN3 while in gateway mode without issues. I'm still waiting for the firmware release to go into bridge mode.

SimplePanda
BSD
Premium Member
join:2003-09-22
Montreal, QC

SimplePanda to mozerd

Premium Member

to mozerd
said by mozerd:

Apparently HITRON does make a standalone cable modem CDA-32372.

Hitron Debuts 1-Gig Cable Modems

In North America and other regions that use 6 MHz channels, Hitron's products would provide a maximum theoretical downstream bandwidth of 960 Mbps down and 240 Mbps up. The CDA-32372 is a standalone cable modem, while the CDE-32372 is a gateway with dual-band 3x3 Wi-Fi.

Perhaps if enough people made noise Rogers would listen and add the CDA-32372 to the mix of supported cable modems.

You'd have to make a lot more noise. Quite a few of us have been calling / messaging / petitioning a while. Rogers doesn't seem interested.
LYuan
join:2014-01-24
Canada

LYuan

Member

I honestly don't think Rogers will ever go back to modems. It's too easy to support a single device. It relieves Rogers of the overhead that is involved in training inexperienced help desk support folk, Documentation is much easier; everything is just much simpler with one unified device.

In many ways, I don't mind this *IF* the device is a good device and works like it is supposed to. However, for some reason with Rogers, that is rarely the case for new hardware.

L.

mozerd
Light Will Pierce The Darkness
MVM
join:2004-04-23
Nepean, ON

1 recommendation

mozerd

MVM

said by LYuan:

Documentation is much easier; everything is just much simpler with one unified device.

I could NOT disagree more ..... integrated devices are FAR more complex to support without exception. Integrated Network Gear have far more disruptive issues:And no matter how good the glowing reports and reviews are for these products, they all continue to have far too many disruptive issues. The HITRON Gateway is a very good case in point.
wayner92
join:2006-01-17
Toronto, ON

wayner92

Member

The funny thing is that the Hitron Gateway is worse when it operates as just a modem vs. as a gateway. But we don't know if we would have this issue with the standalone modem.

I agree with the basic premise that integrated gear will have more issues but if I was Rogers I would be favouring providing gateways as they make it easier when dealing with 90%+ of the customer base, although I would give customers the option of a modem.
LYuan
join:2014-01-24
Canada

4 edits

LYuan to mozerd

Member

to mozerd
said by mozerd:

integrated devices are FAR more complex to support without exception

I disagree; not in your actual statement, as integrated devices are by definition more complex - you are correct, but in the context you are using to frame your argument. You are looking at the single device, and not the service as a whole. Yes, there is an exception. The exception is in a situation when an integrated device is being used as an all-in-one gateway solution, the way Rogers - if they had a choice - would have all their customers set up. That 'exception' happens to account for over 99% of all Rogers Hi-Speed installations.

You're looking at it from a power user's perspective. I'm explaining it from a business' perspective. You simply cannot deny that it makes more sense to have one product to support rather than 'Product A' or 'Product B + consumer's choice of Router C'. From a support perspective, that would be an absolute nightmare. How many calls do you think Rogers got way back in the day, where a non-technical customer is calling about their Internet being down, blaming Rogers when it ends up being a router configuration on the customer's side? You can't even blame the customer because the kid next door set it up for him, but he's away on summer holiday and in the interest of saving a few bucks, the made-in-China router was found on craigslist and bought off some sketchy dude who delivered it in an El Camino, and conveniently because of router's Asian heritage, the user interface is completely convoluted and illegible unless you have a masters in ESL. As a support rep, what am I supposed to do?

Rogers is eliminating that variable, and from a support perspective it makes complete sense; it's just the execution of it in the form or working hardware that leave much to be desired.

I'm not disagreeing that life wouldn't be better for you, me, and everyone on this forum if Rogers allowed modems. Voicing that here in this forum is preaching to the choir in every sense of the expression. We would love it. However, we; power users (people who think they know what's going on) and people who actually know what's going on (even fewer) represent a mere sliver of Rogers' customers as a whole when it comes to technical aptitude.

Rogers is catering to the 99%, and that's EXACTLY what they should be doing as a business. One of the original times that I called to complain about my CGN3 in bridge mode, the support rep responded with "Sir, why are you using bridge mode? We usually only recommend bridge mode for businesses and web servers".

Seriously. Businesses and web servers.

This is the kind of support staff that Rogers wants to hire. These are the only type of people that Rogers can afford to hire and train in their business model. On the staff's desktop is a big red button labelled "FIX" that will remotely reboot the gateway device and 9/10 times, it solves the problem. For the other one time; escalate it.

Would it be nice to have a choice of device? HELLS YES!!! However, like many have said here; you can scream until you're blue in the face and it wouldn't matter, because we are the 1% (actually 1% is way optimistic), and if we all got fed up and decided to leave, Rogers wouldn't even bat an eyelash, because we'd most likely be replaced by people who don't know what 'bridge mode' is; the type of customer that Rogers would prefer anyway. They don't need to cater to us because we barely figure into their bottom line; and unfortunately for you and me, that's just business. From Rogers' point of view, WE are the exception, and that is why we don't have modems any more.

elitefx
join:2011-02-14
London, ON

1 edit

elitefx to LYuan

Member

to LYuan
said by LYuan:

I honestly don't think Rogers will ever go back to modems. It's too easy to support a single device. It relieves Rogers of the overhead that is involved in training inexperienced help desk support folk, Documentation is much easier; everything is just much simpler with one unified device.

Sadly, It's got absolutely nothing to do with modem vs gateway tech support. Has anyone ever talked to a Rogers CSR? Stupid as a post. They'd need a script to tie their own shoe laces IF they could find their own feet. Ask a Rogers Reject any question and you'll get 50 different answers ALL of them WRONG.

All Rogers cares about is CASH. A modem costs $100 retail and a Gateway goes for $199-$249. Rogers mantra is 'giving us more cash is our solution to your problems'. If there was a $500 unit Rogers would claim that was the recommended hardware to use. It's a racket. Always has been.

Upgrade,upsell,upgrade. Always the same tune. Always more problems. And Rogers still wants more money.

AND it doesn't matter what hardware you rent/buy. ONE Rogers firmware flash and it's dead in the water anyway.

SimplePanda
BSD
Premium Member
join:2003-09-22
Montreal, QC

SimplePanda to LYuan

Premium Member

to LYuan
Ok. Emboldened by everyone receiving the newer "fixed" firmware I just traded my rental CGN2 in for a purchased CGN3 (always intended to buy once bridging worked anyways).

In my area (High Park) i'm getting 16x3, channel bonding.

Hardware version is 1A. Software shipped is 4.1.4.5. I assume I'll get an upgrade sooner or later.

Using TomatoUSB on my router (Asus N66u). Set the "route modem IP" to 192.168.100.1.

Accessing »192.168.100.1 works perfectly and I can see all current modem stats, including channel count, system version, etc.

Now just patiently waiting for 4.2.4.3.

So far I'm getting 250Mbps or so with boosting. This is on a 150/10 plan. The modem interface itself doesn't seem laggy or slow in any way contrary to all reports. Maybe I have this newer "variant" that some have supposed now exists?

Also, people who have had these slow down on them - how long have I got? 8-24 hours as I understand it?
LYuan
join:2014-01-24
Canada

1 edit

LYuan to elitefx

Member

to elitefx
said by elitefx:

said by LYuan:

I honestly don't think Rogers will ever go back to modems. It's too easy to support a single device. It relieves Rogers of the overhead that is involved in training inexperienced help desk support folk, Documentation is much easier; everything is just much simpler with one unified device.

Sadly, It's got absolutely nothing to do with modem vs gateway tech support. Has anyone ever talked to a Rogers CSR? Stupid as a post. They'd need a script to tie their own shoe laces IF they could find their own feet. Ask a Rogers Reject any question and you'll get 50 different answers ALL of them WRONG.

All Rogers cares about is CASH. A modem costs $100 retail and a Gateway goes for $199-$249. Rogers mantra is 'giving us more cash is our solution to your problems'. If there was a $500 unit Rogers would claim that was the only one you could use. It's a racket. Always has been.

Upgrade,upsell,upgrade. Always the same tune. Always more problems. And Rogers still wants more money.

While I'm not denying that Rogers' cares about money - As they should, being a business an all...

Your angstful tone and the fact that you pose your theory as the ONLY reason is completely unfounded, inaccurate, and at best merely speculation. When you buy a gateway device for $200, Rogers does not make $200 off you. They make a cut, but most of it goes to the rest of the participants of the supply/retail chain. They couldn't care less about your one-time purchase. They would rather you rent for the rest of your life.

Over the course of 20 years, I've used 4 different modems at my house. If I bought each of those modems let's say at $200 bucks a pop ($800). That barely constitutes as a drop in the pool when compared to the amount of money that I have given them over the years for the service.
LYuan

LYuan to SimplePanda

Member

to SimplePanda
said by SimplePanda:

So far I'm getting 250Mbps or so with boosting. This is on a 150/10 plan.

What's preventing you from going over to the new Ultimate tier?

SimplePanda
BSD
Premium Member
join:2003-09-22
Montreal, QC

SimplePanda to LYuan

Premium Member

to LYuan
said by LYuan:

said by elitefx:

said by LYuan:

I honestly don't think Rogers will ever go back to modems. It's too easy to support a single device. It relieves Rogers of the overhead that is involved in training inexperienced help desk support folk, Documentation is much easier; everything is just much simpler with one unified device.

Sadly, It's got absolutely nothing to do with modem vs gateway tech support. Has anyone ever talked to a Rogers CSR? Stupid as a post. They'd need a script to tie their own shoe laces IF they could find their own feet. Ask a Rogers Reject any question and you'll get 50 different answers ALL of them WRONG.

All Rogers cares about is CASH. A modem costs $100 retail and a Gateway goes for $199-$249. Rogers mantra is 'giving us more cash is our solution to your problems'. If there was a $500 unit Rogers would claim that was the only one you could use. It's a racket. Always has been.

Upgrade,upsell,upgrade. Always the same tune. Always more problems. And Rogers still wants more money.

While I'm not denying that Rogers' cares about money - As they should, being a business an all...

Your angstful tone and the fact that you pose your theory as the ONLY reason is completely unfounded, inaccurate, and at best merely speculation. When you buy a gateway device for $200, Rogers does not make $200 off you. They make a cut, but most of it goes to the rest of the participants of the supply/retail chain. They couldn't care less about your one-time purchase. They would rather you rent for the rest of your life.

Over the course of 20 years, I've used 4 different modems at my house. If I bought each of those modems let's say at $200 bucks a pop ($800). That barely constitutes as a drop in the when compared to the amount of money that I have given them over the years for the service.

This. I think I've bought 2 modems from Rogers in 20 years of cable modem service (going back to the Wave/LANCity days). A Motorola 5100 and now a CGN3.

On the other hand, consider the service fees in those 20 years of service.

I was a TekSavvy customer for 2 years. If Rogers would have just kept their network running properly and sold me a decent standalone modem 2 years ago I probably never would have left them.

The hardware and it's price tags are DROPS in the bucket compared the service fees and they only way they'll keep getting fees from me is if:

a) I can use my own router and configure it the way I want.
b) The service works as I expect it to.

Right now they're just -BARELY- meeting the criteria for a).