how-to block ads
|
|
Uniqs:
4721 |
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Take your NETGEAR FVS318V3 and chuck it Well... I've had it with the NETGEAR FVS 318V3 Router.
All in all, it seems to have a lot of really nice functionality, but IMO, it's just not ready for prime time.
Here's a list of the problems I experienced with mine.
• unable to keep a connection longer than 72 hrs before it wants to "re-obtain the leased Line". What's this mean? on the short side, it would renew a lease on the line every 1 hr and on the long side, it would get a lease on the line every 72 hrs. Nevertheless, when the router decided to re-lease the line, my connections would drop. I talked with Netgear support and I got, "we have heard this issue reported before..." but from the tone in the note, it sounded like they weren't sure if or when they might resolve this. So, if you go away and play road warior, and want to get into your machine a week later, you might not be able to do so. Alternatively, if you are online doing sumptin, and the router drops you, then you need do gobs of stuff to get back online.
• The WAN side of the router seems to be really, really slow. It doesn't seem to matter much what one does. I have a 6-8Mbps dl connection, and the best I could do with it was about 1.8-2.3 Mbps.... so it's really slow...
• The logging function allows for "E-mailing" the logs, but it apparently doesn't conform to numerous ISP' SMTP email protocols... so that only leaves you with the having to use a syslogd program somewhere to capture and collect the loging information. While this is all good, from what I've seen, it's the consumption of needed cycles becomes prohibitive to run.
• The router would from time to time, die. I would know when the leased line time would expire, and yet under some conditions, the little box would seem to roll over and put it's pads in the air... yelling, "I'm Done... Put a Fork in me!! "
• The documentation is woefully inadaqutate.
• Trying to talk to anyone inside Netgear is simply an impossibility. So, there's no sense to waste your time on the phone. They may behave differently with customers that have support contracts, but us home / soho users would do as well using a couple of emptied out dog food cans and some string.
Someday, if they ever get thier act together, this might be a neat little product. Personally, I just don't have the time to wait, nor can I afford the little boxes desire to roll over at least once every 72 hrs and put it's pads in the air .... not my idea of good reliability.
Now, before anyone flames me, I put up the latest firm ware code, and after explaining all the things I was experiencing to the technical folks at Netgear and trying to work with them, it boils out to the simple aspect I just ran out of time waiting, hoping and praying the firmware gods would bestoe upon me a firmware fix that would address all the issues such that it behaved like a well behaved network device would.
Anyway, I did send a note back to Netgear saying I wasn't going to be needing any more of thier fixes / patches that didn't solve the issues; and I'd not likely be recommending thier products to anyone I know, and the technical team was free to share my note with Peter Lo, CEO of Netgear... but I doubt serriously he'll ever see it or know about the issues.
Anyway, I solved my all my Netgear headaches after taking 2 asprin, re-setting the device back to factory specifications, putting the device and all it's parts back into the box and returning the device for a full refund from where it was purchased.
When the merchant asked why it was being returned, I shared with him the e-mails I got from Netgear and the merchant's response was, "Oh.... I see!!! "...
Anyway boys and girls, I hope you have better experiences with your netgear devices than I have. | |
 AnavSarcastic Llama? Naw, Just AcerbicPremium
join:2001-07-16
Dartmouth, NS
kudos:3 | Sorry to hear about your circumstances, send me a PM or email and will help sort out a possible solution.  | | |
|
NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:4 Reviews:
 ·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to NETGEAR HEADACHES
said by NETGEAR HEADACHES :
Well... I've had it with the NETGEAR FVS 318V3 Router.
• The logging function allows for "E-mailing" the logs, but it apparently doesn't conform to numerous ISP' SMTP email protocols... so that only leaves you with the having to use a syslogd program somewhere to capture and collect the loging information. While this is all good, from what I've seen, it's the consumption of needed cycles becomes prohibitive to run.
Anyway boys and girls, I hope you have better experiences with your netgear devices than I have.
I have had trouble only with Linksys products; a BEFSR11 and a WRT54G, or whatever the WAP model number was. My Netgear FR114P is running just fine, and I don't see the problem with the e-mail feature:
From - Wed Sep 07 18:25:25 2005
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <***@netscape.net>
Received: from rly-nc03.mx.aol.com (rly-nc03.mail.aol.com [172.18.151.200])
by air-nc04.mail.aol.com (v107.10) with ESMTP id MAILINNC41-8222431f3c941b8;
Wed, 07 Sep 2005 15:16:36 -0400
Received: from ylpvm53.prodigy.net (ylpvm53-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.57.84])
by rly-nc03.mx.aol.com (v107.10) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINNC32-674431f3c8162;
Wed, 07 Sep 2005 15:16:17 -0400
Received: from etscape.net (adsl-64-174-90-97.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net [64.174.90.97])
(authenticated bits=0)
by ylpvm53.prodigy.net (8.12.10 auth mps linux/8.12.10) with SMTP id j87JFu80023603
for <***@netscape.net>; Wed, 7 Sep 2005 15:15:57 -0400
Message-Id: <200509071915.j87JFu80023603@ylpvm53.prodigy.net>
Date: 07 Sep 2005 12:16:17 -0700
From: ***@netscape.net
To: ***@netscape.net
Subject: Chihiro 's wan port IP is changed to 64.174.90.97
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-AOL-IP: 172.18.151.200
X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version)
[2000-01-01 00:00:05] Chihiro 's WAN IP is changed to: 64.174.90.97
--
Norman
~A deam, dream, no dream
~Voices of the night go across the forest
~A dream, dream, no dream
~Good night my good child | |
| I'm not encouraged to read this as I have 3 318v3's to go in to small offices and using them to VPN back to a 538.
That's the plan anyway.
As for the question of SMTP 'protocols', I would hazard a guess that he's trying to use an unregistered hostname and when the recipient system tries to do a reverse lookup to confirm the hostname/address it's failing. A lot of places are doing this now to try to reduce the influx of spam and it places the onus on the sender to make sure the hostnamename and address they are sending from is verifiable via DNS lookup.
Just my 2 cents worth.
Regards,
Brad. | |
| reply to NormanS
NormanS,
Yes, I'm fully aware of RFC 2821 and it's specification. Perhaps it's as you suggested, not having a return path being provided for the email function which some ISP's migh require.
I guess my complete fustration comes from the attitude and response from Netgear that "They may or may not" choose to fix these issues.... which was the final straw for me.
Anyway, it's all a moot point now.. I'm abusing a Linksys BEFSX41...... not that it's perfect mind you... but it's at least not rolled over...
Thanks for everyone's offer to help.
NETGEAR HEADACHES | |
| reply to NETGEAR HEADACHES
NoemanS,
I think NH meant that the e-mail notification did not allow input of user id and password as many ISP's smtp server requires. I have the same problem with a WGR614v2 and the Netgear support basically told me "tough luck" the feature is not supported. | |
NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:4 Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| 
Netgear FR114P E-Mail configuration. |
said by sskl1998 :
NoemanS,
I think NH meant that the e-mail notification did not allow input of user id and password as many ISP's smtp server requires. I have the same problem with a WGR614v2 and the Netgear support basically told me "tough luck" the feature is not supported.
I suppose. I never looked at the other Netgear documentation. I know a D-Link DI-704UP like that; but there is an SBC SMTP message submission server which only requires that the submission client be on the SBC network; authentication by IP address.
--
Norman
~A deam, dream, no dream
~Voices of the night go across the forest
~A dream, dream, no dream
~Good night my good child | |
OLDg30
join:2002-02-22
Ocala, FL | Interesting... I used one to support vpn's from it's site to a Cisco Pix and a Watchguard X15 without a problem at all. Had them config'd in 30 minutes and it rocks from there. | |
|
