Topic 'Re: Home Hub 3000' in forum 'Bell Canada' - dslreports.com

Re: Home Hub 3000

Fri, 26 Jan 2018 09:35:21 EDT

Altheran5 posted : Well, I got 300/100, and can consistently get 340/120 with devices wired on my network on the HH3000. Since my install, I removed the SFP module and completely got rid of any Bell device, bt anyhow, HH3000 did do his job ... Looks live a LAN / devices issue.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Thu, 25 Jan 2018 17:50:43 EDT

specialkone posted : This is incredible. I have the exact same issue as akbarba. I had the fibe 50 plan with the HH2000. The modem is in the living room with the TV. My gaming desktop is in the first bedroom/office only 20 feet away. So it’s wifi connected. No issue with the fibe 50 plan and the HH2000. Speed to device (computer) was always 55-60 MBPS plus and even better when connected to only 5G as the signal in my area is stronger on 5G.

All the issues came when I switched to the fibe 100 MBPS plan. This plan doesn’t have the 250GB download limit which burned me with penalties a couple of times plus I figured my speed would be twice as fast.

What a disaster. The tech guy (who tried very hard) was at my place for 6 hours on Tuesday. With the HH2000 the speed to modem was 70-85 MBPS with a max of 88. He tried a new HH2000 and had the head office boys reset multiple configurations with the same result. He then plugged in a HH3000 and speed to modem was consistently at 100 MBPS+. He was happy, didn’t know what the speed issue was with the HH2000 but left me with the HH3000. I said can we check speed to device? He said speed to modem was his responsibility, figured I wouldn’t have problems and left.

That’s where all my troubles started. With the fibe 100 plan and the HH3000 the speed to device is 29 MBPS, yet on the fibe 50 plan and HH2000 the speed to device was almost always 60 MBPS. Tried 5G only with the HH3000 and the results were worse.

Spent the day yesterday on the phone with Bell trying to resolve this. It was admitted to me that the HH2000 will do a max of 92 MBPS so the 80-88 MBPS results the tech was getting were good. Yet how can Bell sell a 100 MBPS plan with a modem that won’t do 100? And as I’m gathering from this forum, the issue I’m having with the HH3000 is the wifi signal, especially 5G, is much worse than the HH2000 which is why I now have slower speeds to device than I had with the HH2000.

Any advice? Wish I could try ethernet but the modem is in the living room with the TV and the gaming desktop is in the bedroom/office 20 feet away. What to do with Bell?

Re: Home Hub 3000

Wed, 20 Dec 2017 11:02:52 EDT

akbarba posted : Thanks for your suggestion! I will look around.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Wed, 20 Dec 2017 10:58:54 EDT

H0W1K2 posted : I will say get rt ac68u, since it support dd-wrt.

Try shopping around as well, however since i have used rtac68u, it served me well.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Wed, 20 Dec 2017 10:56:48 EDT

akbarba posted : Bell supports only 100mbps max in my neighborhood currently so I'm on it. I don't need much coverage as it's a townhome and also 4-5 lan ports are sufficient for me.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Wed, 20 Dec 2017 10:53:13 EDT

H0W1K2 posted : What speed tier you plan to get?

I have gigabit found out netgear orbi doesn't have horse power to deliver full gigabit with pppoe passthrough. So I rejected it, if you not getting gigabit and want extra coverage it is good option.

I personally use asus rtac86u, so far really good for performance but no dd-wrt support, if you need router with 8 lan ports rtac88u is good but again expensive and it doesn't support dd-wrt.

Last one which still support dd-wrt is rt-ac68u. It is still very popular though and not expensive.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Wed, 20 Dec 2017 10:39:34 EDT

akbarba posted : Thanks, if I want to use HH3000 as bridge and use my own router, what would you suggest? I would like to get something that is best value for money, preferably one which supports DD-WRT.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Wed, 20 Dec 2017 10:25:49 EDT

H0W1K2 posted : Actually both speed and shorter range on 5 ghz, in general homehub 3000 is not good device.

I just use my own router with it and happy camper.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Wed, 20 Dec 2017 10:20:37 EDT

akbarba posted : Are you advising to stay away from HH3000 only because of shorter wifi range or does it affect the speed too? Bell upgraded my HH2000 to HH3000 when I switched from Fibe 50 to Fibe 100, ever since I can get only 40mbps max on my devices using speedtest.net while the speed test on the modem portal gives 100 mbps. The speed is worse on Google speed test, only going upto 16 mbps. When I was on Fibe 50, I used to get 50mbps consistent in all of my devices using speedtest.net.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Sat, 16 Dec 2017 20:03:45 EDT

H0W1K2 posted : HH2000 keep it, 3000 wifi is not good at 5 ghz.

All bell router can use pppoe passthrough which is similar to bridge mode on cable and yes you can use your ow router in pppoe passthrough mode.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Sat, 16 Dec 2017 19:50:59 EDT

anon posted : Is it worth getting the HH3000 for wifi signal strength improvement over the HH2000? Currently have the 2000 and spotty in my home.

If not, is the 2000 bridgeable to use my own router?

Re: Home Hub 3000 - Disabling TV Wifi

Mon, 11 Dec 2017 14:38:18 EDT

anon posted : Hi Anonfe818. Just wondering what your solution ended up being. I have a new HH3000 but have wired my home so that I do not need wifi. My TV, even cell phones (when in the house) are connected with Ethernet. Now I find out that I cannot disable the wifi TV signal from the 3000. Someone suggested to me that since my TV is hard wired and my VAP is not even plugged in the 3000 won't send out wifi signals. They say it's the VAP that originates the communication to the modem and the modem doesn't "proactively" seek devices. I'm skeptical. I too have a problem with being too close to wifi and I have young kids. I'd welcome any comments. From Collingwood, ON.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Thu, 30 Nov 2017 17:14:06 EDT

Altheran5 posted :

said by Anonfe818 :

My problem is that I want to shut off all radios because I feel the RF affecting my body when I stand near router. I know there are some people here able to figure it out.Anyhow I like my own 802.11AC Linksys router, even though its not "wave2"

Wrap it in alluminium foil and ground it XD

Re: Home Hub 3000

Sat, 25 Nov 2017 14:16:38 EDT

H0W1K2 posted : I have hh3000 and my advice stay away from it. It is completely useless with wifi. Especially with 5GHZ band since it only allows 36, 40, 44 and 48 channels. All of them are lower powered channels and thus shorter range.

Stay with HH2000 and be happy. HH3000 garbage is not worth it.

Re: Home Hub 3000 vs Home Hub 2000 - do I personally really need a HH3000?

Fri, 24 Nov 2017 19:35:43 EDT

student13 posted : The home hub3000 is a 802.11ac wave 2 router with 12 antennae(s) and 3 wifi radio 2x5Ghz and 1x2.4 . It is a very powerful very fast fast router with 2 big drawbacks

1. The third wifi radio is for tv only and you cannot shut it off (However I did shut the first two and for security sake make bell pvr run over Ethernet and put copper plate on the cupboard door to reflect down signal of third secret tv wifi that I cannot shut off )

2. Security is shitty on the hh3000 many examples but with my Linksys AC router
Running dd-wrt I can run password protected
Smb or FTP ( for fast home network file transfer) and I can block printers and restrict
Shady devices . And the security is better for blocking intruders . With hh3000 all I get is an open samba share for anyone to see !

Re: Home Hub 3000 vs Home Hub 2000 - do I personally really need a HH3000?

Wed, 11 Oct 2017 18:29:25 EDT

AmirDaTSME posted : horrible wifi I get with hub 3000 I use get wifi single in my backyard now I don't what a joke even in my house it seems I only get one bar now on wifi what ever you do stay on hub 2000 \

also radio frequencies on hub 3000 is locked u cant put it higher then channel 48 manually ??

Re: Home Hub 3000 vs Home Hub 2000 - do I personally really need a HH3000?

Tue, 10 Oct 2017 08:50:11 EDT

johnnycanuck posted :

said by qzcgd:

New modem by Bell

- Allows for ALL TV receivers to be wireless including the main PVR unit
- Allows for speeds above 1 Gbps
- Better WiFi signal
- Battery included which allows for up to 4 hours of internet access in case of power outage (!!!)
- Battery will be free for first few months, but is optional and will eventually be $50
- Display on the unit with useful messages
- New interface

Should launch soon

I'm trying to decide (for my personal situation only and ignoring future requirements I might have) whether to stay with my current HH2000 or upgrade to a HH3000.

My "needs" are obviously based on my current situation

1. I have a copper wire - pair bonded service … for Internet (Fibe 25) + TV (Fibe Better) + Home phone
• for various reasons I can't get "Fiber to the Home" … so a built in ONT on the HH3000 is irrelevant to me
2. I have no devices with Wireless AC adapters
• so AC support is also irrelevant to me
3. I don't need speeds above 1 Gbps
• so this feature is irrelevant to me as well
• I want to upgrade my speed to Fibe 50 and Bell tells me I can do it on my current HH2000

So at this point I don't think an HH3000 would be of any real benefit to me.

However, the one point in the initial high level summary description that opens this thread says " Better WiFi signal ".

Can someone expand a bit on this benefit? At this point, it's the only thing that I'm wondering about as a possible benefit to me … but it depends on how it's a "Better WiFi signal" than what the HH2000 already provides.

Are there other "basic" benefits I don't appreciate ... understanding that I not a sophisticated / heavy duty user of the internet and tv.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Sun, 30 Jul 2017 23:34:25 EDT

singerie3 posted : network address translation.

since you seems like a lazy person, here's the wiki page that I googled for you : »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ne ··· nslation

Re: Home Hub 3000

Sun, 30 Jul 2017 22:23:38 EDT

student13 posted : What is a "double NAT" . What is a NAT anyways ?

Re: Home Hub 3000

Wed, 28 Jun 2017 20:58:37 EDT

H0W1K2 posted : Nope. Using DMZ doesn't help in this case. However DMZ may help on this case. It is available in HH 3000

Re: Home Hub 3000

Wed, 28 Jun 2017 18:34:41 EDT

spartan002 posted :

said by secotton:

You can do that, but you're creating a double NAT. It'll work usually fairly well and most won't even have an issue, but you may see some strange issues.

does putting the router in dmz prevent that when using the set-up listed above your post??

Re: Home Hub 3000

Sun, 25 Jun 2017 21:32:43 EDT

secotton posted : You can do that, but you're creating a double NAT. It'll work usually fairly well and most won't even have an issue, but you may see some strange issues.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Sun, 25 Jun 2017 20:27:23 EDT

student13 posted : The way I do it is the following, I take an ethernet cable, put it into ethernet 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 of the HH 3000, and the other end of the ethernet into the "internet" or "WAN" port of my linksys router, and let the linksys router and the home hub resolve their respective ip adresses by themselves, usually this involved auto DHCP, , I find it easy to do.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Wed, 21 Jun 2017 10:02:58 EDT

rcy5 posted : I tried option 4 last night and it worked. Keep in mind I have the hh2000. On Saturday they are installing the hh3000 unless I cancel, which h I'm debating doing.

So last night I logged into the hh2000, signed out of the 'internet' side (by using a fake b1 #) and left the TV side logged in. I then used PPPoE on the dlink to connect using my b1 and password and it connected and I was happily surfing.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Wed, 21 Jun 2017 06:26:58 EDT

secotton posted : Go with Option 2 or 3. Usually it's best practice to avoid Option #1 (dual NAT). It should work, but there may be some funky issues (I had them myself for a while). Option 4 wont work - you need to stay logged in to both Internet / TV on the HH2000 / 3000.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Wed, 21 Jun 2017 00:52:01 EDT

rcy5 posted : Hi. I'm just looking for some clarification on adding my own router in a system with a HH2K or a HH3K. I have 4 different scenarios, and I'm not sure what's best. I currently have the HH2K and the HH3K is being installed on Saturday (but I can cancel if the HH2K is the better option???). I'm relatively new at this, so I might have some of the terminology wrong.

1. I stay logged IN to the HH. I add my new router (a D-Link DIR 890L - log in IP is 192.168.0.1) as a 'router' and set ito use Dynamic IP (DHCP). With this, the Bell router will assign an IP address to the D-Link (192.168.2.X) and everything subsequently connected to the D-Link will have an IP address from the D-Link - 192.168.0.X

2. I stay logged IN to the HH. I add the D-Link as an access point. It will get an IP address from the HH (192.168.2.X) and everything subsequently connected to the D-Link will have an IP address from the HH (192.168.2.X). To connect to the D-Link after making it an access point, I need it's IP address on the HH (so, for example, 192.168.2.222, if that's the IP address that the HH assigned to it, instead of the default 192.168.0.1).

3. I stay logged IN to the HH. I use PPPoE to also connect the D-Link, using my b1 user name and password. I now have two PPPoE connections going, both with different outside IP addresses.

4. Same as 3, but I log OUT of the HH (internet, but stay logged in to TV). I use PPPoE to connect the D-Link using b1 and password. I now have one PPPoE connection.

Is there one way that's better than the other? Pros / cons to the different ways?

Thanks.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Thu, 08 Jun 2017 08:28:04 EDT

secotton posted : You can't shut off the wireless dedicated for the TV on the HH3000. Only solution would be to replace the HH3000 with something else.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Thu, 08 Jun 2017 08:19:04 EDT

anon posted : Hello @Dallas1, I don't think you understand.

On teh Bell Home Hub 3000,

Radio #1 = 2.4GHz wifi user controlled , can be shut off.
Radio #2 = 5 GHz wifi user controlled. can be shut off.
Radio #3= 5 GHz wifi NOT user controlled (cant be shut off, only reserved for wireless TV ) -- there is not coax cable like in the old Fast 2864.

My problem is that I want to shut off all radios because I feel the RF affecting my body when I stand near router. I know there are some people here able to figure it out.Anyhow I like my own 802.11AC Linksys router, even though its not "wave2"

Re: Home Hub 3000

Wed, 07 Jun 2017 16:27:20 EDT

mr weather posted : You can't disable the wireless for Fibe TV.

And no, your televisions don't have to be wireless; all the new boxes support ethernet. Indeed, Bell recommends that the 4K PVR be hardwired.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Wed, 07 Jun 2017 12:38:27 EDT

dallas1 posted : Lol
Log into the modem and disabled the Wi-Fi

Re: Home Hub 3000

Wed, 07 Jun 2017 11:54:15 EDT

anon posted : Hi I recently got a Home Hub 3000 in the Montreal area. ( They gave me FIBE 50 Mbps - to "compete" with Videtron).

1. What they don't tell you --- is that all your televisions have to be wireless.-- This means WPS has to active over one of the ( two )5GHZ wifi radios, meaning security risk, and no way to shut off the wifi that is used for televsion. Does anyone here know how to shut off the 5ghz radio ( the one that is used for FIBE wireless TV , not ) .

On another note, is if Bell "FIBE" does not add the last "R" in my neighborhood meaning Gigabit Internet, then I am moving over to Videotron or Telus.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Sun, 30 Apr 2017 11:31:29 EDT

SimplePanda posted :

said by Anon5252b :

11ac can easily handle this with any half decent setup. AFAIK the HH3k is using a wave 2 AP too. 2.4 GHz is congested. Don't use it for anything important. That's why they're using ac.

It doesn't matter what 802.11 protocol they're using - RF interference is RF interference.

At my home, the 5.8ghz high band using 11ac from an HH3000 is limited to about 20Mbps with a lot of latency jitter and consistent packet loss. This is line of sight, never mind putting walls in the way, and it's all due to interference and congestion issues. Basically all high band channels have become useless.

This makes wireless TV highly problematic, especially since you can't change the TV band on an HH3000. The HH3000 also has no DFS support, so that's not an option either.

11ac wave 2 (and I'm not sure the HH3000 is a wave 2 device) just isn't getting around the 25+ other networks in the 5.8g high band that I can see with a network scanner. Too much contention in a dense area for this spectrum to be reliable.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Fri, 28 Apr 2017 23:58:44 EDT

anon posted :

said by SimplePanda:

I know Bell is all about wireless TV and the default install for the primary DVR is wireless these days but I just don't trust even 5.8ghz to deliver UDP datagrams reliably enough for TV streams. Especially in Toronto where there are really no uncontested channels anymore.

11ac can easily handle this with any half decent setup. AFAIK the HH3k is using a wave 2 AP too. 2.4 GHz is congested. Don't use it for anything important. That's why they're using ac.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Thu, 27 Apr 2017 12:51:59 EDT

ainyul posted : have less disconnects with the VAP3400, albeit still a pain having your movie lose signal and you cannot continue your movie; as for the HH3000 the service tech was not able to install; have to get CS back and have them go over previous notes once again...

Re: Home Hub 3000

Thu, 27 Apr 2017 09:09:31 EDT

malachii posted : Hi guys. Glad to have found this forum. Recently switch from Rogers in TO to 1gig Bell. Get full speed with the HH3000. Tried switching to my OpenWRT router (TPLink C7), but speeds dropped from 950 to 150 (no HW support I guess) with DMZ. I have TV and Phone also. Trouble is I can't seem to disable DHCP on the HH3000. I customized my OpenWRT DHCP to broadcast a Wins server because I can't get my macs to properly see my Syno NAS otherwise. Now my NAS doesn't regularly appear in my PC lists. I prefer to use my own DHCP to customize the Wins broadcast, and control who goes through the VPN gateway. Thanks!

Re: Home Hub 3000

Fri, 21 Apr 2017 00:01:51 EDT

ainyul posted : have a tech tomorrow to change from vap 2500 to 3400; am going to accept the previously offerred upgrade to hh3000, any downsides? any suggestions appreciated!

Re: Home Hub 3000

Mon, 17 Apr 2017 15:31:37 EDT

dandu3 posted : Yeah you could, but it's an added expense

Re: Home Hub 3000

Mon, 17 Apr 2017 01:07:36 EDT

SimplePanda posted :

said by dandu3:

I'd rather have it wireless, that way you have an extra Ethernet port for something else

Or you can just use a switch.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Sun, 16 Apr 2017 19:49:41 EDT

dandu3 posted : I'd rather have it wireless, that way you have an extra Ethernet port for something else

Re: Home Hub 3000

Sat, 15 Apr 2017 16:23:17 EDT

SimplePanda posted :

said by oblender:

I had wireless installed in my place when I upgraded to fibre. Installer place vap as transmitter closer to my tvs and hard wired it to hh3000 via coax. He said it's better for tv reception. This might be a possibility.

The installer at my house seemed happy to use wireless to connect a DVR that was literally on the same rack as the HH3000 and could have been connected using a standard patch cable.

Seems Bell installers are 100% under direction to install TV in wireless mode regardless of how little sense that can make sometimes.

One DSLR user (I can't remember who it was) claims that support told him that using Ethernet isn't even supported any more.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Sat, 15 Apr 2017 11:38:47 EDT

oblender posted : I had wireless installed in my place when I upgraded to fibre. Installer place vap as transmitter closer to my tvs and hard wired it to hh3000 via coax. He said it's better for tv reception. This might be a possibility.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Fri, 14 Apr 2017 18:16:07 EDT

H0W1K2 posted : You can also use powerline adapter to deliver over wire, if running Ethernet directly is not feasible.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Thu, 13 Apr 2017 13:59:39 EDT

SimplePanda posted : Alternatively (and probably the best option from a reliability perspective anyways) is to just run Ethernet to your distant receivers.

I know Bell is all about wireless TV and the default install for the primary DVR is wireless these days but I just don't trust even 5.8ghz to deliver UDP datagrams reliably enough for TV streams. Especially in Toronto where there are really no uncontested channels anymore.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Thu, 13 Apr 2017 08:15:46 EDT

Rigor_M posted : the WAP (wireless for TV) is in the HH3000 so, probably the best course of action would be to move the HH3000 closer to the middle of the house.

You can achieve this by Asking Bell to do it because its not were you wanted it or moving it your self.

If choosing the later, then, if you have enough fiber coming in the house to move it, that would be the best way.

If not enough fiber line is available then, a fiber to CAT5e/6 would be you best option. put the converter where to modem is now and run a cat5e/6 cable to where you want it. connect the new cable to the red port marked WAN. Remember that if you have network cables going into the LAN ports, you will need to extend/move them to the new area.

Good luck :)

Re: Home Hub 3000

Wed, 12 Apr 2017 20:28:42 EDT

anon posted : Now, please excuse my ignorance/idiocy and general technical inaptitude. I just had the HH3000 installed but the signal in the furthest point of my house is very poor (both Tv and wifi). Is there a way to rectify this? If so, I would really appreciate the help of this clearly talented group of tech wizards. I have the 1gb line in and three tvs attached. Thanks in advance

Re: Home Hub 3000

Tue, 04 Apr 2017 10:53:11 EDT

SimplePanda posted :

said by DPyro:

I see a lot of people in this thread using their own hardware. I currently have the HH2000 1Gbps/4K TV. What benefit would I gain from using my own equipment?

Overall reliability and security.

Bell devices have a noted history of having security issues or abnormal security behaviour.

Plus, Bell basically has full access to your router and home network when you use their provided router and you're just assuming (hoping) that they'll never decide (or be compelled) to make use of that access.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Tue, 04 Apr 2017 10:02:55 EDT

DPyro posted : I see a lot of people in this thread using their own hardware. I currently have the HH2000 1Gbps/4K TV. What benefit would I gain from using my own equipment?

Re: Home Hub 3000

Mon, 03 Apr 2017 23:14:37 EDT

Fibetech2020 posted : Your going from FTTN to FTTH so the technology is very different. You need the HH3000 as they have the ONT and UPS built in. Your connection hub would work fine for FTTH if you already had FTTH setup previously with the older ONT and UPS that are separate devices. Based on your speed above though currently yiu are not FTTH as your upload is only 10 instead of 25.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Mon, 03 Apr 2017 22:36:37 EDT

yds posted : So just arranged for an upgrade of my service from my old Fibe 25/10 (with FibeTV) to Fibe 50/50 (may ultimately go up to the 150/50). Supposedly I have to get the new HomeHub 3000 to replace my Sagemcom 2864. In preparation for the installer coming next Sat, I thought I'd switch all my STB over from Coax connections to Ethernet connections, since the HH3000 doesn't have coax. When I did so, I found that wireless connections on my network started having issues. Connections would drop (my printer, laptop, couple of RPi's) and have trouble reestablishing. I rebooted my Sagemcom, and all the STB's, but still had same issues. Just switched them all back to coax connection, and so far wireless clients seem stable again. Is this a known issue with the Sagemcom 2864?? Will I have the same problems with the HH3000? If so, that may be a show-stopper for the new setup.

Re: Home Hub 3000

Sat, 01 Apr 2017 18:22:42 EDT

ombre posted : i did some modification
i use my hp switch with the sfp directly in it. i can now have multiple pppoe session with my b1 over 2 routers