In the config I am working with I have a UHP DSL Modem (Earthlink
supplied) connected to a 11b/g wireless router.
Repeatedly (and often) the modem enters this 'diagnostic' phase where
is blocks internet access and displays Earthlink's "Fix and/or Retry"
page.
- The modem is currently in DHCP/NAT/PPPoE Mode, I'd like to disable
this and have the Router do the PPPoE dialing.
- The modem is supplying DHCP to the Router. Seems it would be better
to hard code some static IPs in there between the Modem and the
Router, right?
- re: the Subject Line, I have another, extra, DSL modem at hand and I
am thinking to swap it out to divide and conquer the 'problem'. Any
problem(s) with swapping DSL modems like lego blocks?
>In the config I am working with I have a UHP DSL Modem (Earthlink
>supplied) connected to a 11b/g wireless router.
>
>Repeatedly (and often) the modem enters this 'diagnostic' phase where
>is blocks internet access and displays Earthlink's "Fix and/or Retry"
>page.
>
>- The modem is currently in DHCP/NAT/PPPoE Mode, I'd like to disable
>this and have the Router do the PPPoE dialing.
>
>- The modem is supplying DHCP to the Router. Seems it would be better
>to hard code some static IPs in there between the Modem and the
>Router, right?
I don't think you can do that. The IP addresses supplied by Earthlink
arrive via PPPoE (not DHCP). You have to have a PPPoE client running
somewhere. You currently have it running inside the UHP DSL modem.
You can setup the UHP modem for bridge mode with instructions at:
<http://www.dslreports.com/faq/earthlink/100_UHP_DSL_Modems>
(See first item on disabling router mode). You then setup PPPoE in
the router. You can also setup the PPPoE dialer in the computer, but
that's a wasted effort if you have a router.
>- re: the Subject Line, I have another, extra, DSL modem at hand and I
>am thinking to swap it out to divide and conquer the 'problem'. Any
>problem(s) with swapping DSL modems like lego blocks?
Yep. However, if Earthlink is doing MAC address authentication, you
may have a problem. When you juggle modems back and forth, be sure to
power cycle the attached router, as the MAC address table on the WAN
port needs to be updated. Also, if you don't get an IP address from
Earthlink in the router, try turning the modem off for about 15
minutes to reset the config in the DSLAM.
On Jul 22, 8:25*am, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 18:33:39 -0700 (PDT), TBerk
>
> <bayareab...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >In the config I am working with I have a UHP DSL Modem (Earthlink
> >supplied) connected to a 11b/g wireless router.
>
> >Repeatedly (and often) the modem enters this 'diagnostic' phase where
> >is blocks internet access and displays Earthlink's "Fix and/or Retry"
> >page.
>
> >- The modem is currently in DHCP/NAT/PPPoE Mode, I'd like to disable
> >this and have the Router do the PPPoE dialing.
>
> >- The modem is supplying DHCP to the Router. Seems it would be better
> >to hard code some static IPs in there between the Modem and the
> >Router, right?
>
> I don't think you can do that. *The IP addresses supplied by Earthlink
> arrive via PPPoE (not DHCP).
Well, I _am_ running the PPPoE via the router now. I just let the IP
numbers etween the router and modem take care of themselves.
>*You have to have a PPPoE client running
> somewhere.
Yeah. Thx Jeff, so far with the modem in 'I'm only a modem' mode all
seem well, no swapping to report as of yet.
>Well, I _am_ running the PPPoE via the router now. I just let the IP
>numbers etween the router and modem take care of themselves.
If you're doing double NAT, you may have problems with any programs or
services that require port forwarding in the router. It will go
through the router when properly configured, but not the NAT DSL
modem, which probably doesn't have port forwarding or redirection.
>>*You have to have a PPPoE client running
>> somewhere.
>
>Yeah. Thx Jeff, so far with the modem in 'I'm only a modem' mode all
>seem well, no swapping to report as of yet.
On Jul 24, 4:01*pm, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
Snip>
> >Yeah. Thx Jeff, so far with the modem in 'I'm only a modem' mode all
> >seem well, no swapping to report as of yet.
>
> It's called "bridge mode" in most modems.
>
> --
> # Jeff Liebermann
Yeah, sorry, I've been less than precise with actual details. I
changed the modem to bridge mode and the router to PPPoE to do the
connecting, etc.
I'm just posting quickley tonight, more details in another thread.
On Jul 21, 6:33*pm, TBerk <bayareab...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In the config I am working with I have a UHP DSL Modem (Earthlink
> supplied) connected to a 11b/g wireless router.
>
> Repeatedly (and often) the modem enters this 'diagnostic' phase where
> is blocks internet access and displays Earthlink's "Fix and/or Retry"
> page.
>
> - The modem is currently in DHCP/NAT/PPPoE Mode, I'd like to disable
> this and have the Router do the PPPoE dialing.
>
> - The modem is supplying DHCP to the Router. Seems it would be better
> to hard code some static IPs in there between the Modem and the
> Router, right?
>
> - re: the Subject Line, I have another, extra, DSL modem at hand and I
> am thinking to swap it out to divide and conquer the 'problem'. Any
> problem(s) with swapping DSL modems like lego blocks?
>
> TBerk
This may or may not be applicable, but I installed a rwifi outer on a
Verizon DSL and discovered that the DSL modem was a one port router.
To get things working, all I had to do was change the default address
on the wifi router I was installing. That router had a mac clone
feature, but I didn't need to use it.
On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 17:32:12 -0700 (PDT), miso@sushi.com wrote:
>This may or may not be applicable, but I installed a rwifi outer on a
>Verizon DSL and discovered that the DSL modem was a one port router.
>To get things working, all I had to do was change the default address
>on the wifi router I was installing. That router had a mac clone
>feature, but I didn't need to use it.
There are some like that. The original 2-wire DSL
modem/router/wireless router only had room for one ethernet port. Same
with ActionTec GT701. Not every router has room for 4 ethernet ports.
However, the functions are unchanged. They can do NAT to 254 IP
addresses. If you need more ethernet ports, just add an ethernet
switch with 5/8/16/24 ports.
On Jul 27, 6:45*pm, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 17:32:12 -0700 (PDT), m...@sushi.com wrote:
> >This may or may not be applicable, but I installed a rwifi outer on a
> >Verizon DSL and discovered that the DSL modem was a one port router.
> >To get things working, all I had to do was change the default address
> >on the wifi router I was installing. That router had a mac clone
> >feature, but I didn't need to use it.
>
> There are some like that. *The original 2-wire DSL
> modem/router/wireless router only had room for one ethernet port. Same
> with ActionTec GT701. *Not every router has room for 4 ethernet ports.
> However, the functions are unchanged. *They can do NAT to 254 IP
> addresses. *If you need more ethernet ports, just add an ethernet
> switch with 5/8/16/24 ports.
>
> --
> Jeff Liebermann * * je...@cruzio.com
> 150 Felker St #D * *http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
> Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com
> Skype: JeffLiebermann * * AE6KS * *831-336-2558
What I was hoping this thread was going to cover is quality of DSL
modems. Pretty much you use what the ISP "gives" you, but certainly
some DSL modems work better than others in terms of bit error rate,
etc The Prestige modem I got with Covad would hang once in a while. I
complained to Speakeasy, which sent me a "free" modem from Creative.
No hang conditions, but the power on reset internal to the modem is
crap cubed. Get a power glitch and it can't restart. I have a few more
months before my contract expires, that is, I can't dump Speakeasy
unless I want a bill for that piece of crap they sent me.
It's an analog world, dammit! Quality is not a feature checklist.
On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 20:14:45 -0700 (PDT), miso@sushi.com wrote:
>What I was hoping this thread was going to cover is quality of DSL
>modems.
Ummm... this is a wireless newsgroup. We don't do no stinkin wires.
You'll probably do better in a DSL harware newsgroups.
Reviews of some DSL modems (in UK).
<http://www.thinkbroadband.com/reviews.html>
The real difference between the various modems is in the DSL chipsets.
<http://www.chipweb.de/dsl/index.php?menu=1&level=9>
Sure, there are problems with flaky router sections, lack of fail safe
timers, and lousy firmware, but those come and go as firmware gets
updated. However, if you're after connection reliability, stability,
uptime, and speed, it's the chipset that makes it happen.
Incidentally, I have not seen a DSL modem that hasn't hung at some
point. The causes are usually power glitches. A UPS does not seem to
help. I even have two that are running on battery power. They both
hang. I have some on mountain top sites, where the power and RF
environment certainly doesn't help.
My ill considered opinion is that the Ti chipset is the best of bunch.
Westel uses Ti. Speedstream uses Alcatel, which tends to hang, but
otherwise works ok. 2-wire uses STMicroelectronics Ascot DSL chipset,
whcih seems to work quite well. I mostly like it because of the nifty
diagnostics. I don't get many hangs with 2-wire routers, but I'm
starting to see some failures, especially the wall warts.
>It's an analog world, dammit! Quality is not a feature checklist.
Maybe. However if you're in marketing, it's a digital world. There's
only one digital parameter of interest:
1 = customer buys the product
0 = customer does not buy the product.
There are no states in between.
On Jul 27, 10:22*pm, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 20:14:45 -0700 (PDT), m...@sushi.com wrote:
> >What I was hoping this thread was going to cover is quality of DSL
> >modems.
>
> Ummm... this is a wireless newsgroup. *We don't do no stinkin wires.
> You'll probably do better in a DSL harware newsgroups.
>
> Reviews of some DSL modems (in UK).
> <http://www.thinkbroadband.com/reviews.html>
>
> The real difference between the various modems is in the DSL chipsets.
> <http://www.chipweb.de/dsl/index.php?menu=1&level=9>
> Sure, there are problems with flaky router sections, lack of fail safe
> timers, and lousy firmware, but those come and go as firmware gets
> updated. *However, if you're after connection reliability, stability,
> uptime, and speed, it's the chipset that makes it happen.
>
> Incidentally, I have not seen a DSL modem that hasn't hung at some
> point. *The causes are usually power glitches. *A UPS does not seem to
> help. *I even have two that are running on battery power. *They both
> hang. *I have some on mountain top sites, where the power and RF
> environment certainly doesn't help.
>
> My ill considered opinion is that the Ti chipset is the best of bunch.
> Westel uses Ti. *Speedstream uses Alcatel, which tends to hang, but
> otherwise works ok. *2-wire uses STMicroelectronics Ascot DSL chipset,
> whcih seems to work quite well. *I mostly like it because of the nifty
> diagnostics. *I don't get many hangs with 2-wire routers, but I'm
> starting to see some failures, especially the wall warts.
>
> >It's an analog world, dammit! Quality is not a feature checklist.
>
> Maybe. *However if you're in marketing, it's a digital world. *There's
> only one digital parameter of interest:
> * 1 = customer buys the product
> * 0 = customer does not buy the product.
> There are no states in between.
>
> --
> Jeff Liebermann * * je...@cruzio.com
> 150 Felker St #D * *http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
> Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com
> Skype: JeffLiebermann * * AE6KS * *831-336-2558
Asa you probably know, the wall-wart is farmed out to China. It is the
one piece that could get a company in serious trouble since it
connects to the AC line. Best to let some other vendor deal with the
wrongful death lawsuit. Oh wait, sue a Chinese company. That won't
happen.
The broadband review site didn't really have want I want. I'd like to
see bit error testing at different SNR. Yes, I ask for too much.
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
<snip>
>
> My ill considered opinion is that the Ti chipset is the best of bunch.
> Westel uses Ti. Speedstream uses Alcatel, which tends to hang, but
> otherwise works ok.
I wonder what's in the Efficient (Speedstream) 5861; I use one in a rather
hot place and it has never hung over several years of operation. I can't
look inside it while the net is up ;-)
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 10:19:36 -0500, msg <msg@_cybertheque.org_> wrote:
>Jeff Liebermann wrote:
><snip>
>>
>> My ill considered opinion is that the Ti chipset is the best of bunch.
>> Westel uses Ti. Speedstream uses Alcatel, which tends to hang, but
>> otherwise works ok.
>I wonder what's in the Efficient (Speedstream) 5861; I use one in a rather
>hot place and it has never hung over several years of operation. I can't
>look inside it while the net is up ;-)
>
>Michael
No guts, no gain. Anyone can't disassemble a device when the power is
off. It takes a real hacker to do that while it's running.
Do you have the FCC ID number? If so, look it up on the FCC ID web
pile. There will be photos of the insides, which might include the
chip numbers. Probably Alcatel something.
Incidentally, don't assume that just because it hasn't required a kick
start that it's uptime is equivalent. Some routers have automatic
reboot features. Others have watchdog timers that reboot if hung.
Check the logs to be sure.
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 10:19:36 -0500, msg <msg@_cybertheque.org_> wrote:
>
>
>>Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>><snip>
>>
>>>My ill considered opinion is that the Ti chipset is the best of bunch.
>>>Westel uses Ti. Speedstream uses Alcatel, which tends to hang, but
>>>otherwise works ok.
>
>
>>I wonder what's in the Efficient (Speedstream) 5861; I use one in a rather
>>hot place and it has never hung over several years of operation. I can't
>>look inside it while the net is up ;-)
>>
>>Michael
>
>
> No guts, no gain. Anyone can't disassemble a device when the power is
> off. It takes a real hacker to do that while it's running.
Indeed. It is mounted on a bulkhead 15 feet up so that adds to the
challenge (extra points allotted?).
>
> Do you have the FCC ID number? If so, look it up on the FCC ID web
> pile. There will be photos of the insides, which might include the
> chip numbers. Probably Alcatel something.
Too bad the FCC site has been purging material older than 10 years;
products which had a long life cycle (the 5861 evidently well into
the new millennium) are gone since the original filing is now too
old.
>
> Incidentally, don't assume that just because it hasn't required a kick
> start that it's uptime is equivalent. Some routers have automatic
> reboot features. Others have watchdog timers that reboot if hung.
> Check the logs to be sure.
No doubt it has a watchdog, however the logs confirm no spontaneous
reboots (only after known power failures since it isn't on an UPS).
Just seems well engineered.
msg wrote:
> Too bad the FCC site has been purging material older than 10 years;
Too bad the FCC isn't purging political appointees with no radio
communications experience, much less anything the FCC is mandated
to regulate. At one time long long ago, most of the staff had
a radio amateur ticket.
On Jul 28, 8:31*am, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 10:19:36 -0500, msg <msg@_cybertheque.org_> wrote:
> >Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> ><snip>
>
> >> My ill considered opinion is that the Ti chipset is the best of bunch.
> >> Westel uses Ti. *Speedstream uses Alcatel, which tends to hang, but
> >> otherwise works ok.
> >I wonder what's in the Efficient (Speedstream) 5861; I use one in a rather
> >hot place and it has never hung over several years of operation. I can't
> >look inside it while the net is up ;-)
>
> >Michael
>
> No guts, no gain. *Anyone can't disassemble a device when the power is
> off. *It takes a real hacker to do that while it's running.
>
> Do you have the FCC ID number? *If so, look it up on the FCC ID web
> pile. *There will be photos of the insides, which might include the
> chip numbers. *Probably Alcatel something.
>
> Incidentally, don't assume that just because it hasn't required a kick
> start that it's uptime is equivalent. *Some routers have automatic
> reboot features. *Others have watchdog timers that reboot if hung.
> Check the logs to be sure.
>
> --
> Jeff Liebermann * * je...@cruzio.com
> 150 Felker St #D * *http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
> Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com
> Skype: JeffLiebermann * * AE6KS * *831-336-2558
Funny thing is my most dependable DSL setup was from Direct TV, the
old Telegy (Telogy?) out of Cupertino. Unfortunately, the modem
didn't work with other ISPs. Also unfortunate that DiectTV decided to
can the company after buying it.
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 11:05:40 -0500, msg <msg@_cybertheque.org_> wrote:
>Indeed. It is mounted on a bulkhead 15 feet up so that adds to the
>challenge (extra points allotted?).
Yep. You get extra credit for doing that. By coincidence, I'm doing
a DSL and network wiring job and install this afternoon. The MPOE is
located 4 meters off the ground, directly over a small swamp. No easy
place to plant the ladder. I tried to convince AT&T to move it to
ground level, but they wanted too much money to fix their own mistake.
>Too bad the FCC site has been purging material older than 10 years;
>products which had a long life cycle (the 5861 evidently well into
>the new millennium) are gone since the original filing is now too
>old.
Argh. I didn't realize they were doing that. However, I doubt that
the 5861 is that old. I got DSL when it first arrived in this area in
mid 1999. At the time, the hot ticket was the Alcatel 1000 DSL modem,
a true piece of junk. The integrated DSL/router conglomerations came
several years later.
>No doubt it has a watchdog, however the logs confirm no spontaneous
>reboots (only after known power failures since it isn't on an UPS).
>Just seems well engineered.
Sound good enough for me. Will it do 6Mbits/sec thruput?
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 10:34:30 -0700 (PDT), miso@sushi.com wrote:
>Funny thing is my most dependable DSL setup was from Direct TV, the
>old Telegy (Telogy?) out of Cupertino. Unfortunately, the modem
>didn't work with other ISPs. Also unfortunate that DiectTV decided to
>can the company after buying it.
Telocity. It should have worked with AT&T. We had a few of those
around here. They used SBC line, but ran their own authentication
servers. The problem was probably the wrong VPI/VCI (ATM virtual
circuit numbers) which need to change to the usual 0/35 for AT&T.
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
<snip>
Regarding the Speedstream/Efficient Networks/Siemens 5861:
> Sound good enough for me. Will it do 6Mbits/sec thruput?
Oddly, the mfg. datasheet and techref and user manuals are
notably silent on the WAN hardware specifics, but a little
research found third-party descriptions that confirm support
for full rate G.DMT (G.992.1), G.Lite (G.992.2), G.HS(G.994.1),
mgmt(G.997.1) and ANSI T!.413 Issue 2.
The mfg.'s techref manuals describe the CPU, RAM, FPGA encrypt.
acceleration and other features.
On Jul 27, 10:22*pm, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 20:14:45 -0700 (PDT), m...@sushi.com wrote:
> >What I was hoping this thread was going to cover is quality of DSL
> >modems.
>
> Ummm... this is a wireless newsgroup. *We don't do no stinkin wires.
> You'll probably do better in a DSL harware newsgroups.
>
Yeah. (I'm the OP) I was also hoping for DSL modem lists of have and
have nots, quality wise.
And yeah, I understand about posting in a wireless NG, but I get my
networking from a wire, before it goes wireless.
> Reviews of some DSL modems (in UK).
> <http://www.thinkbroadband.com/reviews.html>
>
> The real difference between the various modems is in the DSL chipsets.
> <http://www.chipweb.de/dsl/index.php?menu=1&level=9>
> Sure, there are problems with flaky router sections, lack of fail safe
> timers, and lousy firmware, but those come and go as firmware gets
> updated. *However, if you're after connection reliability, stability,
> uptime, and speed, it's the chipset that makes it happen.
>
> Incidentally, I have not seen a DSL modem that hasn't hung at some
> point.
<snip>
Well, my follow up so far is that by removing the duty from the DSL
modem to provide both connectivity and DHCP to the router (I believe
it's in BRIDGE mode now) I have avoided the 'Earthlink is going to run
diags now..." bullshhhhh it got to doing every night.
So, I never got around to changing out the other DSL modem after all.
msg wrote:
> Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> <snip>
> Regarding the Speedstream/Efficient Networks/Siemens 5861:
>
>> Sound good enough for me. Will it do 6Mbits/sec thruput?
>
> Oddly, the mfg. datasheet and techref and user manuals are
> notably silent on the WAN hardware specifics, but a little
> research found third-party descriptions that confirm support
> for full rate G.DMT (G.992.1), G.Lite (G.992.2), G.HS(G.994.1),
> mgmt(G.997.1) and ANSI T!.413 Issue 2.
>
> The mfg.'s techref manuals describe the CPU, RAM, FPGA encrypt.
> acceleration and other features.
>
> A compressed description lacking proper formatting is here:
> http://209.85.141.104/search?q=cache...lnk&cd=1&gl=us
>
>
> Michael
Up to 8 Mbps downstream
Up to 1 Mbps upstream http://www.cybermind-usa.net/files/ENI5861QS.pdf
Since they issue a warning about replacing a battery how often do you
have to replace it?
I am surprised the on-board psu hasn't caused any overheating problems
by now.
> msg wrote:
>
>> Too bad the FCC site has been purging material older than 10 years;
>
>
> Too bad the FCC isn't purging political appointees with no radio
> communications experience, much less anything the FCC is mandated
> to regulate. At one time long long ago, most of the staff had
> a radio amateur ticket.
And once upon a time the phrase "in the public interest" was
actually respected by the FCC and once upon a time the ARRL and
FCC both supported maintaining high standards of practice in the
radio art and good conduct of licensees.
It saddens me also that the general public hasn't revolted over
the imposition of DTV transition (which is just a spectrum grab
scheme); evidently the twenty percent or so that rely on OTA TV
are an inconsequential minority. Say goodbye to portable OTA TV,
reliable TV while in motion and useful emergency services TV.
On Jul 28, 12:08*pm, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 10:34:30 -0700 (PDT), m...@sushi.com wrote:
> >Funny thing is my most dependable DSL setup was from Direct TV, the
> >old Telegy (Telogy?) *out of Cupertino. Unfortunately, the modem
> >didn't work with other ISPs. Also unfortunate that DiectTV decided to
> >can the company after buying it.
>
> Telocity. *It should have worked with AT&T. *We had a few of those
> around here. *They used SBC line, but ran their own authentication
> servers. *The problem was probably the wrong VPI/VCI (ATM virtual
> circuit numbers) which need to change to the usual 0/35 for AT&T.
>
> --
> Jeff Liebermann * * je...@cruzio.com
> 150 Felker St #D * *http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
> Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com
> Skype: JeffLiebermann * * AE6KS * *831-336-2558
Not that I know what the VPI/VCI is, but how do I change it? Somewhere
in the path, I have covad as a provider, with Speakeasy essentially
reselling the bandwidth, if that makes a difference.
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 20:45:07 -0700 (PDT), miso@sushi.com wrote:
>Not that I know what the VPI/VCI is, but how do I change it? Somewhere
>in the path, I have covad as a provider, with Speakeasy essentially
>reselling the bandwidth, if that makes a difference.
Try Google for VPI VCI. 247,000 hits
I assume you still have your Telocity DSL modem/router. The config
page is 10.0.0.1 or 10.0.0.5 or something similar. There should be a
DSL configuration page, which includes the VPI/VCI settings. Note
that the default config for the Telocity (DirectvDSL) device is a
static IP on the WAN side. Don't assume that the default config will
work.
On Jul 30, 5:36*pm, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 20:45:07 -0700 (PDT), m...@sushi.com wrote:
> >Not that I know what the VPI/VCI is, but how do I change it? Somewhere
> >in the path, I have covad as a provider, with Speakeasy essentially
> >reselling the bandwidth, if that makes a difference.
>
> Try Google for VPI VCI. *247,000 hits
>
> I assume you still have your Telocity DSL modem/router. * The config
> page is 10.0.0.1 or 10.0.0.5 or something similar. *There should be a
> DSL configuration page, which includes the VPI/VCI settings. *Note
> that the default config for the Telocity (DirectvDSL) device is a
> static IP on the WAN side. *Don't assume that the default config will
> work.
>
> --
> Jeff Liebermann * * je...@cruzio.com
> 150 Felker St #D * *http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
> Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com
> Skype: JeffLiebermann * * AE6KS * *831-336-2558
Well yeah, I did the google first, saw the number of hits, and
freaked.
Mine is just a modem, not a modem router. I don't have it at hand for
obvious reasons. It is the model that had both ethernet and usb.
On Jul 27, 10:22*pm, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 20:14:45 -0700 (PDT), m...@sushi.com wrote:
> >What I was hoping this thread was going to cover is quality of DSL
> >modems.
>
> Ummm... this is a wireless newsgroup. *We don't do no stinkin wires.
> You'll probably do better in a DSL harware newsgroups.
>
> Reviews of some DSL modems (in UK).
> <http://www.thinkbroadband.com/reviews.html>
>
> The real difference between the various modems is in the DSL chipsets.
> <http://www.chipweb.de/dsl/index.php?menu=1&level=9>
> Sure, there are problems with flaky router sections, lack of fail safe
> timers, and lousy firmware, but those come and go as firmware gets
> updated. *However, if you're after connection reliability, stability,
> uptime, and speed, it's the chipset that makes it happen.
>
> Incidentally, I have not seen a DSL modem that hasn't hung at some
> point. *The causes are usually power glitches. *A UPS does not seem to
> help. *I even have two that are running on battery power. *They both
> hang. *I have some on mountain top sites, where the power and RF
> environment certainly doesn't help.
>
> My ill considered opinion is that the Ti chipset is the best of bunch.
> Westel uses Ti. *Speedstream uses Alcatel, which tends to hang, but
> otherwise works ok. *2-wire uses STMicroelectronics Ascot DSL chipset,
> whcih seems to work quite well. *I mostly like it because of the nifty
> diagnostics. *I don't get many hangs with 2-wire routers, but I'm
> starting to see some failures, especially the wall warts.
>
> >It's an analog world, dammit! Quality is not a feature checklist.
>
> Maybe. *However if you're in marketing, it's a digital world. *There's
> only one digital parameter of interest:
> * 1 = customer buys the product
> * 0 = customer does not buy the product.
> There are no states in between.
>
> --
> Jeff Liebermann * * je...@cruzio.com
> 150 Felker St #D * *http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
> Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com
> Skype: JeffLiebermann * * AE6KS * *831-336-2558
Just a FYI. Fry's has the Diamond dsl602e on sale. $44 in the store,
plus there is a $15 rebate. The good or bad news is it uses the TI
chipset, AR7 to be specific. I say bad because some claim there is a
bug in the TI chipset, as shown here:
<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/22/zen_ar7_infineon_bt_fault/>
<http://www.solwiseforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=8647>
DSL - A modem is a modem is a modem, right? 
Linear Mode
