1 edit | DSL Modem Recommendation Since Qwest has recently upgraded to a higher speed, and me being stuck at 640kbps (max) and a 2 hour timed disconnect, I have decided that I need to upgrade my modem to take advantage of these new services.
I am currently using a Intel Pro/DSL 2100 modem which I have been told uses CAP and does not support the new Qwest services.
What modem should I get? Qwest is offering the Actiontec GT201 (I think it's GT201) going for $59.99. I do not feel like spending that much money for a modem and would much rather get something cheaper either from Fry's Electronics or from ebay.
What modem should I look into?
My friend recently handed me a broken Arescom NetDSL 800 series modem, is there a way I can fix this? run a diagnostic or something?
Thanks.
//EDIT: PS, I would like to share this connection over a network. |
|
|
|
| Its actually called the GT 701g. YOu can rent it for $3 a month which is a much better option because of you purchase it and it has a problem, qwest will not send you a new one, because you own it. One the rental, they own it and they will ship you a new one. I learned this the hard way.
Your gonnna spend around that same price range for another modem and its somewhat tough to find a modem that will do DMT/ PPPoA which is the protoocol uses for their new higher speed service.
As far a fixen a broken/dead Arescom, I wouldn't have a clue, it depends whats wrong with it. |
|
 adsldudePremium,Ex-Mod 2003-9
join:2000-11-10
Colorado
kudos:1 | reply to Spetsnazgg
Take your pick: »US West/Qwest DSL »What end-user devices work with Qwest ADSL? |
|
| But is there a specific modem that is better than the rest? And are they all networkable?
@IceWindius: Thanks, I'll look into the renting option. |
|
adsldudePremium,Ex-Mod 2003-9
join:2000-11-10
Colorado
kudos:1 | said by Spetsnazgg:
But is there a specific modem that is better than the rest?
Depends on your requirements. They're all DMT PPPoA capable at a minimum. Some have features like hubs, switches, NAT, packet filters, stateful firewalls, content filters, DHCP servers, wireless AP, etc. What do you want?
said by Spetsnazgg:
And are they all networkable?
The ones that are marked "ethernet" are easier to network. The ones marked "USB" would take more effort to network. |
|
| reply to Spetsnazgg
i have been working with the actiontec gt701-wg for about a week now and i am VERY unhappy with it and their tech support.
although the device functions it does so just barely and will NOT work with my VPN!
first, the delivered cd software would not run on my win98 system. since it would not run i do not know if it has alternative configuration methods from using http to the device as outlined below.
second, none of the data entry boxes for ip addresses on the http configuration screens accept class a or b addresses (such as 10.1 or 172.16.1). these LEGAL addresses have worked since the invention of ip. forcing us to write ALL addresses in class c style is not only absurd but noncompliant with the RFCs.
third, the http configuration screen for "advanced- port forwarding" does NOT allow user-entered protocols by name nor number. this prevents me from configuring access for nortel's VPN client i am required to use for access to my employer. furthermore, one cannot change the internal config files (that drive iptables for the firewall and nat functions) one would require in order to "work around" the brain-dead actiontec interface. the file system is "read only".
fourth, complaining to qwest has been futile. their head-in-the-sand response is "we don't do modems nor vpn"! they simply say that this has to be done by actiontec. how is still in question.
fifth, actiontec refuses to accept complaints in this area. their response is "you have to pay us to make that feature work but we won't guarentee it will work with VPNs". what kind of crap is this? i have already paid for a device that is expected to be "fit for this purpose (merchantilability)". besides, this is a VERY common requirement today and should actually be easy to do. i think the device has the basic capabilities since it is linux based. however, actiontec chose not to make the needed interfaces available even though it would be easy.
sixth, dumping the iptables config for any of the default configs shows that actiontec has mistakes in it. you can telnet to the device and run "iptables -L" and "iptables -t nat -L" and see for yourself.
seventh, the nortel VPN client has limited and simple protocol and port requirements that should be easy for any respectable dsl device. [i have those requirements for those interested.]
eighth, setting the actiontec firewall off, basic or low is risky business and counter to all network security tenants. since i have not gotten this VPN operational at any firewall setting level i can't say it is pertinent to my issues. clearly one should run this at the highest possible firewall security level (i suggest NOT to use this modem).
ninth, simply put- don't use the actiontec. the device is crap and so is the company's support. i'm researching for a better, more professional device and company. i will be complaining to qwest's top management with all of this so they will have no room for excuses and sending back this actiontec ASAP. maybe this is why people desire the cisco?
painter |
|
| So are you suggesting I get the cisco? 
Which one? |
|
 LavaJoePremium
join:2004-02-01
Denver, CO | said by Spetsnazgg:
So are you suggesting I get the cisco?
Which one?
My recommendation is the Cisco 678. You can get them on Ebay. Solid hardware! |
|
ktig
join:2004-03-24
Longmont, CO | I agree. My cisco 678 has been solid now for about 2 months. Best $75 I've spent in a long time. The actiontecs, 1524 and 701 only lasted hours before have to be reset. |
|
| So far my 701g has been going weeks without a reset. |
|
 rogunitUhhh, Sir?Premium
join:1999-09-18
Phoenix, AZ | reply to Spetsnazgg
I've said it before...
I love my Cisco 678! |
|
| reply to Spetsnazgg
I found a place that says they're selling the Cisco 678's pretty cheap, but they list them as G.lite software version 2.4.1. Am I safe in assuming that these would be flashable to DMT? |
|
| reply to Spetsnazgg
Qwest website has program to re-flash Cisco 678.
»www.qwest.com/dsl/customerservic···dmt.html |
|
Reviews:
 ·Future Nine Corp..
| reply to Spetsnazgg
The Cisco 678 was a nice modem for its time, but now it's dated, discontinued, lacking in modern features, and lately overpriced. If I was buying a modem, I wouldn't spend $75 on a Cisco (can you even get them for that price anymore?). There are better modems out there now. |
|
LavaJoePremium
join:2004-02-01
Denver, CO | said by bigjoesmith:
The Cisco 678 was a nice modem for its time, but now it's dated, discontinued, lacking in modern features, and lately overpriced. If I was buying a modem, I wouldn't spend $75 on a Cisco (can you even get them for that price anymore?). There are better modems out there now.
It may be dated, but it still works very well, and it trains at full speed (1536/1024). I'd spend $100 for a 678 before I spent $60 for an ActionTec, given all of the flakeyness I've heard about. For me, reliability is of utmost importance. With the 678, configure it, hook it up, and forget it. I do have a static IP block, so I don't need any "features" in the modem - I just need it to connect and remain connected. I have a LinkSys WRT54G behind it that does wireless and NAT/firewall (also very stable).
Can you recommend other modems that have the same stability and are less dated? I wouldn't mind knowing of options. |
|
Reviews:
·Future Nine Corp..
1 edit | The Actiontec would not be on my short list. Too flakey in my experience and the UI is horrible.
Stablility is a requirement. So are the standard feature sets. Beyond that, the most useful feature for most people would probably be support for UPnP. If you're going to use a NAT router on your DSL connection (and most Qwest.net users are), then UPnP support promises to help people out of the NAT-port mess (which most people don't have the knowledge or inclination to deal with). For those who want to eliminate NAT on the router, support for DHCP spoofing or PPTP relay would be a nice feature.
I'd look at the Thomson modems, i.e. the 530 or the 510v4. Or the Efficient Networks models (5600, etc.) or even the Zoom X5. |
|
| reply to Spetsnazgg
Does the Cisco support dynamic IP?
Are there features that the Cisco doesn't support that the Intel Pro/DSL 2100 (internal) modem supports?
Would I be able to hook it up to a hub and have it work with my network? Or do I need a router?
Thanks |
|
Reviews:
·Future Nine Corp..
| Does the Cisco support dynamic IP?
In what manner? As a DHCP client or a DHCP server? It works as both. All modern DSL modems do (typically as a DHCP client on the WAN interface and a DHCP server on the LAN interface).
Are there features that the Cisco doesn't support that the Intel Pro/DSL 2100 (internal) modem supports?
Yes, basically the 2100 has the ability to bring the public IP to your inside equipment (and consequently the ability to access the Internet without a NAT router in the way). With the 2100 the public IP is assigned to the computer hosting the 2100. With the Cisco, the public IP is consumed by the Cisco itself and all access to the Internet will be through the Cisco's NAT router. Some applications do now work well across a NAT router.
Would I be able to hook it up to a hub and have it work with my network? Or do I need a router?
The Cisco 678 functions as a router. You can hook it to a hub and have multi-computer access to your Internet connection. All modern DSL modems provide this capability: it's part of the standard feature set.
If you are willing to spend what it takes to get a Cisco these days, I would encourage you to check out one of the currently produced modems that support useful features beyond what was available in the Cisco's time. |
|
Reviews:
·Future Nine Corp..
| If you insist on getting the 678, you might want to check out getting the 677 instead. They are same modem with the exception that the 678 will do both CAP and DMT. The 677 is DMT only. Since the new Qwest 1.5 service is DMT, the 677 will function just like the 678. And they go for less on ebay. |
|
LavaJoePremium
join:2004-02-01
Denver, CO | said by bigjoesmith:
If you insist on getting the 678, you might want to check out getting the 677 instead. They are same modem with the exception that the 678 will do both CAP and DMT. The 677 is DMT only. Since the new Qwest 1.5 service is DMT, the 677 will function just like the 678. And they go for less on ebay.
I have seen a few posts that say that the 677 will not achieve full 1024 upload speed, whereas the 678 will. Just another point to consider. |
|
