pivonka571
join:2005-02-03
La Crosse, KS
| reply to Doctor Olds
Re: Questions about reconnecting to ELN DSL service
All hail, Dr. Olds!
That's the information I needed to figure out how to get my connection. It's not fast, and there are questions left unresolved, but it's working and holding.
I could not access the new Xyxel Prestige 645M UHP modem because I used PPPOE to access the internet over the former Westell Wirespeed modem, which did not support IP addressing by the NIC on the local machine. Since TCP/IP was not required, and I had no router or LAN here, the NIC was not bound to the TSP/IP protocol and could not access the Zyxel modem.
With LAN NIC binding to TCP/IP (but TCP/IP for LAN NIC not bound to any local "Client" or "Service") the NIC acquires an IP address, acts as a DHCP Server, and acts as a Default Gateway. It is difficult to visualize how this improves security on the local machine. :-( But it does give access to the modem ROM interface, where I found that the modem was in its default UHP mode setting.
UHP mode was not useable without having both the LAN setup for TCP/IP and entering the user name and password in the modem setup.
The failing DSL connections to the internet had been made by the local machine PPPOE software; that fact led to conflicts with the modem mode in place, and that caused the rapid failure of internet connectivity - though not a disconnect of the connection itself.
Two corrective options were available:
1) The modem could be left in UHP mode, the NIC could be left with TCP/IP enabled, and the user name and password entered so that the modem could establish and maintain connection to the PPPOE server. The old software PPPOE connections would be disused or uninstalled.
2) The UHP mode could be disabled, so the modem acted in bridge mode, and the local machine could use software PPPOE to establish and authenticate connections. Optionally, the TCP/IP software binding to the local machine NIC could be removed or left in place. (And thanks for reminding me I did not need WINS enabled, either.)
I chose the second option, with TCP/IP binding not in place for the NIC. The connection persists and tests out at:
dslreports.com speed test result on 2006-05-20 21:36:15 EST:
735 / 102
Your download speed : 735 kbps or 91.9 KB/sec.
That is 58.6% worse than an average user on covad.net
Your upload speed : 102 kbps or 12.8 KB/sec.
That is 73.9% worse than an average user on covad.net When I return from my travel I will need to run comparable tests on the UHP mode option, to see if the modem's mode has any impact on the connection speed. 7 to 10 it does not, in this location, which has some telephone line issues. (COVAD has set the line to "stability mode" due to line issues, and needs an Earthlink work order to address them.)
I chose to continue use of software PPPOE because it has worked well for the past 6 years, and because I did not want to bind TCP/IP to my NIC in the absence of a hardware firewall between it and the outside world.
I think the best long term solution may be to purchase a combination DSL modem, router, and hardware firewall, with wireless capability, and substitute it for the Zyxel. Then the software PPPOE on the local machine becomes truly redundant, and can be uninstalled.
Finally, I am 90% convinced that both Earthlink and Covad are mistaken in believing that there is no inherent incompatibity between the Westell Wirespeed modem and their provisioning of DSL to Earthlink customers.
This modem was working fine when the UUnet provisioning was terminated. And the current settings on the computer, supporting a stable Zyxel mediated connection, are identical to those which supported the Westell Wirespeed, so far as I can determine.
There is plenty of room for incompatibilities between the way the Westell modem passes software PPPOE originated UDP discovery requests to the provisioning servers, and the way the Zyxel does so. And the provisioning servers may react to differences by refusing to recognize and discarding "malformed" UDP discovery requests. Such incompatibilities apparently result in the server not recognizing or or not processing the Westell mediated requests.
If someone can find me a Westell Wirespeed modem (the plain, no model number, non IP addressable version) user whose modem survived the Earthlink initiated change in provisioning from UUnet to COVAD, I might change my bet on this.
Until then, I think both companies are in denial, and are spending their own and their customers' time and energy barking up the wrong problem solving tree. The first response should be to replace the Wirespeed modem.
Thanks again. I really, really appreciate the information, and the effort you made to give me a hand with this. |
