|
Home > Archive > Voice Over IP in UK > January 2007 > Are there better ADSL modem routers out there?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Are there better ADSL modem routers out there?
|
|
| Bypass 2007-01-06, 7:11 pm |
| I'm only a few yards from the BT exchange. I'm with MAAF on their 8Mb
Max account and I'm getting a download speed in the region of 5Mb.
What's the likelihood of increasing my download speed by a) upgrading my
router's firmware and/or b) by getting a 'better' modem/router? If
that's an option, who are the market leaders?
The service is quite solid at the moment, but I use VoIP for my calls
(voip.co.uk) and occasionally I get drop-outs.
| |
| Gordon Henderson 2007-01-06, 7:11 pm |
| In article <B5OdnW-Grr6rGQPYnZ2dnUVZ8qqlnZ2d@brightview.com>,
Bypass <user@example.net> wrote:
>I'm only a few yards from the BT exchange. I'm with MAAF on their 8Mb
>Max account and I'm getting a download speed in the region of 5Mb.
What does your modem actually sync at? If it's syncing at 8Mb and you're
only getting 5Mb then it's either a BT virtual-path capacity problem in
your exchange (remember you're 50:1 anyway) or theres issues insude your
ISP. Upgrading your modem won't help any of these, so start by looking
at your ADSL hardware and seeing what it's giving.
Gordon
| |
| Al Dykes 2007-01-06, 7:11 pm |
| In article <B5OdnW-Grr6rGQPYnZ2dnUVZ8qqlnZ2d@brightview.com>,
Bypass <user@example.net> wrote:
>I'm only a few yards from the BT exchange. I'm with MAAF on their 8Mb
>Max account and I'm getting a download speed in the region of 5Mb.
>
>What's the likelihood of increasing my download speed by a) upgrading my
>router's firmware and/or b) by getting a 'better' modem/router? If
>that's an option, who are the market leaders?
>
>The service is quite solid at the moment, but I use VoIP for my calls
>(voip.co.uk) and occasionally I get drop-outs.
For your VOIP problem, I'd look at your uplink speed. Others may be
able to comment on features that apply to QoS for voice. I'd
like to hear if any exist.
I'm of the opinion that 8Mb/sec is a walk in the park for any modern,
properly functioning modem/router combo. It's not that fast.
You can use XP's pathping command to show ping times and dropped
packet counts between your PC and any host service on the net you have
problems with. An occassional dropped packet isn't bad, but most of
the time there should be none.
The echo times should be examined as a source of problems for VOIP,
but the solution is probably upstream and you have to address it via
your ISP.
--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m
Harrison for Congress in NY 13CD www.harrison06.com
Don't blame me. I voted for Gore. A Proud signature since 2001
| |
| Bypass 2007-01-06, 7:11 pm |
| Gordon Henderson wrote:
> In article <B5OdnW-Grr6rGQPYnZ2dnUVZ8qqlnZ2d@brightview.com>,
> Bypass <user@example.net> wrote:
>
> What does your modem actually sync at? If it's syncing at 8Mb and you're
> only getting 5Mb then it's either a BT virtual-path capacity problem in
> your exchange (remember you're 50:1 anyway) or theres issues insude your
> ISP. Upgrading your modem won't help any of these, so start by looking
> at your ADSL hardware and seeing what it's giving.
>
Modem Status
Link Status Connected
Us Rate (Kbps) 448
Ds Rate (Kbps) 8128
US Margin 25
DS Margin 13
Modulation MMODE
LOS Errors 0
DS Line Attenuation 15
US Line Attenuation 14
Path Mode Interleaved
Gordon, I take it that this is exactly what you mean?
| |
|
| Bypass wrote:
> I'm only a few yards from the BT exchange. I'm with MAAF on their 8Mb
> Max account and I'm getting a download speed in the region of 5Mb.
Where are you getting this download speed from?
What is the signal strength, SNR, downlink and uplink speed shown as?
| |
| Eeyore 2007-01-06, 7:11 pm |
|
Bypass wrote:
> Gordon Henderson wrote:
>
> Modem Status
>
> Link Status Connected
> Us Rate (Kbps) 448
> Ds Rate (Kbps) 8128
> US Margin 25
> DS Margin 13
> Modulation MMODE
> LOS Errors 0
> DS Line Attenuation 15
> US Line Attenuation 14
> Path Mode Interleaved
>
> Gordon, I take it that this is exactly what you mean?
Now go here....
http://speedtester.bt.com/
Be patient, it's crap and run the test until it gives you some data rates and
your *profile*.
If your profile's 7150kbps and it likely is - any speed issues aren't the ADSL
connection at all.
In any case 'only' 5M is very good.
Graham
| |
| Guy Dawson 2007-01-06, 7:11 pm |
| Bypass wrote:
> Gordon Henderson wrote:
>
>
> Modem Status
>
> Link Status Connected
> Us Rate (Kbps) 448
> Ds Rate (Kbps) 8128
8128Kbps is the maximum line speed. You've got a very fast ADSL
connection and a different router won't increase this speed.
> US Margin 25
> DS Margin 13
> Modulation MMODE
> LOS Errors 0
> DS Line Attenuation 15
> US Line Attenuation 14
> Path Mode Interleaved
The Margin figures (aka signal to noise ratio) are good as are your
line attenuation figures.
Am I right in thinking your download speed of 5Mbps is from a download
test tool?
Given the high quality of your basic ADSL connection (8Mbps) the cause
of your lower download speed (5Mbps) is to be found further up the
network. Given that you're getting VoIP dropouts I suspect congestion
further up the network.
Unfortunately there's little you can do sort of changing to a service
with a better than 50:1 contention ratio.
>
> Gordon, I take it that this is exactly what you mean?
--
Guy
-- --------------------------------------------------------------------
Guy Dawson I.T. Manager Crossflight Ltd
gnues@crossflight.co.uk
| |
| The Invisible Man 2007-01-06, 7:11 pm |
| Eeyore wrote:
>
> Bypass wrote:
>
>
> Now go here....
> http://speedtester.bt.com/
>
> Be patient, it's crap and run the test until it gives you some data rates and
> your *profile*.
>
> If your profile's 7150kbps and it likely is - any speed issues aren't the ADSL
> connection at all.
>
> In any case 'only' 5M is very good.
>
> Graham
>
I live only 70m from the local exchange and get the same 448 and 8128.
My modem router is currently on the end of about 50 feet of very poor
looking extension wire. I usually get 4 - 5 megs but occasionally 6.5
I suspect local contention is the problem. Alternatively Newnet could be
a bit overwhelmed. They have just greatly increased their prices for
heavy users to protect their network.
| |
|
|
"Ted B" <teddyb2005@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1168017578.24852.0@proxy00.news.clara.net...
> Bypass wrote:
>
>
> Where are you getting this download speed from?
>
> What is the signal strength, SNR, downlink and uplink speed shown as?
Not necessarily in answer to this question, but it may help and can be
applied in any ADSL configuration.
The use of good quality filters and better still "active" rather than
passive
filters can improve the quality of connection dramatically.
For best results do not use a filter.
If you need to use a filter, place the filter where the line enters the
premises,
"Y" off at this point and use one leg for all telephony and the other line
for all data.
You'll only need one filter in this scenario and therefore reduce losses.
| |
| Al Dykes 2007-01-06, 7:11 pm |
| In article <sDxnh.53378$n36.35588@newsfe7-gui.ntli.net>,
Nick <not.known@here.com.uk> wrote:
>
>"Ted B" <teddyb2005@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1168017578.24852.0@proxy00.news.clara.net...
>
>Not necessarily in answer to this question, but it may help and can be
>applied in any ADSL configuration.
>The use of good quality filters and better still "active" rather than
>passive
>filters can improve the quality of connection dramatically.
>For best results do not use a filter.
>If you need to use a filter, place the filter where the line enters the
>premises,
>"Y" off at this point and use one leg for all telephony and the other line
>for all data.
>You'll only need one filter in this scenario and therefore reduce losses.
>
>
Try removing all phone devices other than your modem and run speed
tests. If you see a speed improvement, put the phones back one at a
time, test, and see if one of the phones is a problem.
--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m
Harrison for Congress in NY 13CD www.harrison06.com
Don't blame me. I voted for Gore. A Proud signature since 2001
| |
|
| In article <459E8DB9.B8A52372@hotmail.com>,
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com thought we might be interested in
the following...
> Now go here....
> http://speedtester.bt.com/
>
> Be patient
How patient? 5 minutes, 10 minutes?
--
My reply address is invalid
Please post replies to the group...
| |
| NoNeedToKnow 2007-01-06, 7:11 pm |
| On 05 Jan 2007, "Nick" <not.known@here.com.uk> wrote:
>For best results do not use a filter.
Hmmmm... exactly what I tried today (three routers, two filters, and
a few spare cables) when visiting friends whose ADSL stopped working
on 28/12. tech support (on an 0845, not sure where) guy was rather
negative when I mentioned I had tried three routers, with and without
using filters (I had at least one cable with RJ11 to BT plug) and was
of the opinion there should always be a filter... My guess is that
ISPs drum it into all staff to stress this to customers.
| |
| Eeyore 2007-01-06, 7:11 pm |
|
Tx2 wrote:
> rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com thought we might be interested in
> the following...
>
>
> How patient? 5 minutes, 10 minutes?
After that long try again in an hour. I know, it's rubbish. If you persevere
though it will eventually give you your bras ? profile. I don't know of any
other way to find out that info.
Graham
| |
|
|
"NoNeedToKnow" <me@privacy.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:b8ntp2lqbdb4rf6069ei5tokdfaarqodcg@
complete-pc-services.info...
> On 05 Jan 2007, "Nick" <not.known@here.com.uk> wrote:
>
>
> Hmmmm... exactly what I tried today (three routers, two filters, and
> a few spare cables) when visiting friends whose ADSL stopped working
> on 28/12. tech support (on an 0845, not sure where) guy was rather
> negative when I mentioned I had tried three routers, with and without
> using filters (I had at least one cable with RJ11 to BT plug) and was
> of the opinion there should always be a filter... My guess is that
> ISPs drum it into all staff to stress this to customers.
The "filter" removes the high frequency audio tones that carry the data
and thus allows normal telephone usage to run simultaneously without
the tones being heard.
If the connection to the ADSL line does not have the need for a normal
telephone, or the ADSL tones do not interfere (hearing loss) with the
use of the telephone, or is only used a fax line, then the filter serves
no purpose.
"Tech Support" types are usually following scripts and have little or
no technical knowledge.
| |
|
| Nick wrote:
> If the connection to the ADSL line does not have the need for a normal
> telephone, or the ADSL tones do not interfere (hearing loss) with the
> use of the telephone, or is only used a fax line, then the filter serves
> no purpose.
I beg to differ. If you don't filter a fax machine, ADSL won't work
reliably.
| |
| Gordon Henderson 2007-01-06, 7:12 pm |
| In article < d46dnZugLvzEFwPYnZ2dnUVZ8svinZ2d@brightv
iew.com>,
Bypass <user@example.net> wrote:
>Gordon Henderson wrote:
>
>Modem Status
>
>Link Status Connected
>Us Rate (Kbps) 448
>Ds Rate (Kbps) 8128
>US Margin 25
>DS Margin 13
>Modulation MMODE
>LOS Errors 0
>DS Line Attenuation 15
>US Line Attenuation 14
>Path Mode Interleaved
>
>Gordon, I take it that this is exactly what you mean?
Indeed. your modem has connected to your exchange at the max. rate
possible, so any slowdown in data transfers is happening elsewhere and
I think others have posted info about finding this out. You might want
to see if your own ISP has a local speed-test faciltiy, or has facilities
to let you know what your actual max rate is (knows as your BRAS profile)
which will never be more than 7150Kbps (IIRC).
(so all this up to 8Mb is bullshit anyway)
Gordon
| |
|
| Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net Z+6ehhtjfQbGWjcpZJ4jmwSY90dvlV1cSH6uiV/DvYAlQhEh5k
User-Agent: MicroPlanet-Gravity/2.70.2067
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com uk.telecom.broadband:235594 uk.telecom.voip:23323
In article <459EE3C1.7FEF47FC@hotmail.com>,
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com thought we might be interested in
the following...
> After that long try again in an hour. I know, it's rubbish. If you persevere
> though it will eventually give you your bras ? profile. I don't know of any
> other way to find out that info.
oh, is that all if gives you, along with your speed? My ISP gives you
that info (and then some) via my account pages anyway.
--
My reply address is invalid
Please post replies to the group...
| |
| JohnDW 2007-01-06, 7:12 pm |
| Nick, in article <BnJnh.54240$HV6.36550@newsfe1-gui.ntli.net>,
says...
>
>The "filter" removes the high frequency audio tones that carry the data
>and thus allows normal telephone usage to run simultaneously without
>the tones being heard.
>If the connection to the ADSL line does not have the need for a normal
>telephone, ... then the filter serves no purpose.
Agreed, up to here (actually, almost no purpose, there is one,
see * below)
>or the ADSL tones do not interfere (hearing loss) with the
>use of the telephone, or is only used a fax line, then the filter serves
>no purpose.
But don't forget the filter serves the purposes of stopping
the DSL part of the signal from entering the telephone set and
so seeing a mismatched load. The expected load for the radio
frequency DSL signal is the single filter in *one* DSL modem.
Without a filter, and with telephone-type devices connected,
you will be dividing the DSL's signal strength between
multiple destinations thereby reducing the power available to
the DSL modem. The telephone-type device or the user may not
care about the DSL signal, but the modem will probably object
to the reduced signal level.
Similarly, connecting more than one DSL modem will result in
the DSL signal power being divided between each receiver load
on the downstream part. This happens if you connect multiple
routers, each with its own DSL modem, to the phone line even
if you don't have any filters and telephone devices. The
upstream part will also have multiple transmitters, probably
interfering with each other. It may work, depending on the
signal power levels, etc. but isn't recommended. Hence, the
call centre is correct in their general diagnosis - fit only
one modem/router (or USB modem, if you must...)
The filters also work in the reverse direction. They reduce
any high frequency interference generated by the telephone set
from getting onto the lines. This is, typically, switch hook
noise from normal handsets and RF noise from some cordless
handsets, thermostats and whatever else you have in the home.
The first of these is a direct switching of the line current,
so contains many harmonics that will interfere with the DSL
part of the signal.
* The ADSL line can pick up radio frequency and impulse
interference which can cause problems for the DSL part of the
signal. Hence, it is practically always better to get the
combined input converted into separate digital (Ethernet or
WiFi) and the voice signals as soon as possible. Hence the
recommendations to fit a single, preferably active, faceplate
filter to the master socket and installing a router directly
to the filter's DSL output. At least, this way you won't be
sending the DSL RF signal around your multiple socket house
wiring alongside the unbalanced ring signal on "pin 3"
>"Tech Support" types are usually following scripts and have little or
>no technical knowledge.
Which, in this case, doesn't seen too bad, given they aren't
able to quickly assess the technical expertise of the caller
or get involved in long discussions of why it is a generally a
bad idea to diverge from the accepted practice...
--
JohnW.
Replace nospam with the first 3 letters of the current month
to mail me.
| |
|
| Nick wrote:
> "Ted B" <teddyb2005@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1168017578.24852.0@proxy00.news.clara.net...
>
> Not necessarily in answer to this question, but it may help and can be
> applied in any ADSL configuration.
> The use of good quality filters and better still "active" rather than
> passive
> filters can improve the quality of connection dramatically.
Don't undertand this, all the filters I've looked at are passive there are
no active components.
| |
| JohnDW 2007-01-06, 7:12 pm |
| jasee, in article <50a2n7F1f1612U1@mid.individual.net>,
says...
>Nick wrote:
>
>Don't undertand this, all the filters I've looked at are passive there are
>no active components.
>
See http://www.adslnation.com/support/filters.php
Needless to say, they say their design comes out best in their
tests... I've used one of their XTE 2005s on my installation,
and I've gone from a sync speed of 7392Kbps, using a Solwise
filter to 8128Kbps on a line that is supposed to be capable of
from 5 to 8Mbps, (>3Km) according to
http://dslzoneuk.net/checker.php?
--
JohnW.
Replace nospam with the first 3 letters of the current month
to mail me.
| |
| SteveB 2007-01-07, 7:11 am |
|
"JohnDW" <jwnospam@earlsway.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.2009a5f7221bcb23989784@news.aaisp.net.uk...
> Nick, in article <BnJnh.54240$HV6.36550@newsfe1-gui.ntli.net>,
> says...
>
> Agreed, up to here (actually, almost no purpose, there is one,
> see * below)
>
>
> But don't forget the filter serves the purposes of stopping
> the DSL part of the signal from entering the telephone set and
> so seeing a mismatched load. The expected load for the radio
> frequency DSL signal is the single filter in *one* DSL modem.
> Without a filter, and with telephone-type devices connected,
> you will be dividing the DSL's signal strength between
> multiple destinations thereby reducing the power available to
> the DSL modem. The telephone-type device or the user may not
> care about the DSL signal, but the modem will probably object
> to the reduced signal level.
>
> Similarly, connecting more than one DSL modem will result in
> the DSL signal power being divided between each receiver load
> on the downstream part. This happens if you connect multiple
> routers, each with its own DSL modem, to the phone line even
> if you don't have any filters and telephone devices. The
> upstream part will also have multiple transmitters, probably
> interfering with each other. It may work, depending on the
> signal power levels, etc. but isn't recommended. Hence, the
> call centre is correct in their general diagnosis - fit only
> one modem/router (or USB modem, if you must...)
>
> The filters also work in the reverse direction. They reduce
> any high frequency interference generated by the telephone set
> from getting onto the lines. This is, typically, switch hook
> noise from normal handsets and RF noise from some cordless
> handsets, thermostats and whatever else you have in the home.
> The first of these is a direct switching of the line current,
> so contains many harmonics that will interfere with the DSL
> part of the signal.
>
> * The ADSL line can pick up radio frequency and impulse
> interference which can cause problems for the DSL part of the
> signal. Hence, it is practically always better to get the
> combined input converted into separate digital (Ethernet or
> WiFi) and the voice signals as soon as possible. Hence the
> recommendations to fit a single, preferably active, faceplate
> filter to the master socket and installing a router directly
> to the filter's DSL output. At least, this way you won't be
> sending the DSL RF signal around your multiple socket house
> wiring alongside the unbalanced ring signal on "pin 3"
>
>
> Which, in this case, doesn't seen too bad, given they aren't
> able to quickly assess the technical expertise of the caller
> or get involved in long discussions of why it is a generally a
> bad idea to diverge from the accepted practice...
>
> --
> JohnW.
> Replace nospam with the first 3 letters of the current month
> to mail me.
Blimey, someone who knows what they're talking about. He's right you know.
| |
| NoNeedToKnow 2007-01-07, 7:11 pm |
| On 5 Jan 2007, gordon@lion.drogon.net (Gordon Henderson) wrote:
>What does your modem actually sync at? If it's syncing at 8Mb and you're
>only getting 5Mb then it's either a BT virtual-path capacity problem in
>your exchange (remember you're 50:1 anyway) or theres issues insude your
>ISP. Upgrading your modem won't help any of these, so start by looking
>at your ADSL hardware and seeing what it's giving.
I beg to differ, on the basis of trying a number of routers here, then
coming across the Zyxel 1-port model that NDO was handing out in August
and finding that while the others had been giving sync speeds of 8128,
throughput was significantly lower, while the Zyxel not only gave me
better throughput, but to all intents seemed to stay connected (the
other, older, non-ADSL 2/2+ units showed 8128/448 but from time to
time would lose sync and took up to a minute to re-connect - they
tended to drop the connection a few times a day).
--
www.netdimes.org - mapping the internet.
Join team UK-24x7 (position 183) Let's beat "United States" :->
| |
| NoNeedToKnow 2007-01-07, 7:11 pm |
| On 6 Jan 2007, JohnDW <jwnospam@earlsway.co.uk> wrote:
>But don't forget the filter serves the purposes of stopping
>the DSL part of the signal from entering the telephone set and
>so seeing a mismatched load. The expected load for the radio
>frequency DSL signal is the single filter in *one* DSL modem.
>Without a filter, and with telephone-type devices connected, ...
In this case, as explained to the ISP tech support chap, the ADSL router
was connected at the master socket with nothing else on the line.
There's no extension wiring to consider, so I was a little surprised at
the response (in a negative tone) about my having tried anything 'with
no filter' (it happened that both cables I had with me, from earlier
ADSL modem/routers, had BT plugs on).
To me the filter was merely being used as an adaptor from BT to RJ11
in this case, and a potential source of a fault (which was why I took
more than one to my friends' home) - turned out to be a BT fault (I
wanted to be sure it wasn't just the router causing their problem).
>Which, in this case, doesn't seen too bad, given they aren't
>able to quickly assess the technical expertise of the caller
>or get involved in long discussions of why it is a generally a
>bad idea to diverge from the accepted practice...
However, I did explain that everything else was unplugged and only
the router was connected to the test socket, so I suspect that it
was a 'scripting error' :-)
--
E-petition the PM to: hold a public referendum on the introduction
of the National Identity Register and associated Identity Cards.
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/IDreferendum/
| |
| JohnDW 2007-01-08, 7:11 am |
| NoNeedToKnow, in article
< tuh2q25vohpik6110e60it1m4g81d7bqko@compl
ete-pc-
services.info>, says...
>In this case, as explained to the ISP tech support chap, the ADSL router
>was connected at the master socket with nothing else on the line.
>
>There's no extension wiring to consider, so I was a little surprised at
>the response (in a negative tone) about my having tried anything 'with
>no filter' (it happened that both cables I had with me, from earlier
>ADSL modem/routers, had BT plugs on).
>
>To me the filter was merely being used as an adaptor from BT to RJ11
>in this case, and a potential source of a fault (which was why I took
>more than one to my friends' home) - turned out to be a BT fault (I
>wanted to be sure it wasn't just the router causing their problem).
You were correct, tech support was wrong. The filter in this
case (ADSL only), would be functioning only as a socket
converter. The modem/router has its own inbuilt filter that
blocks the low frequency telephone signals. If you plug a
modem/router into the master's test socket with a suitable
socket converter, then there is no need for any other filters.
The general case does require a filter to keep the DSL signal
off any internal wiring, so I suspect that is where the tech
support guy was coming from. However, you had gone one stage
further and already removed all the internal wiring by using
the test socket in the master, so he was incorrect is saying
you needed a filter. Be warned, though, that there were two
standards for wiring BT to RJ11 cables acquired from old voice
band modems. One will not work, so using a filter as a socket
converter isn't necessarily a bad idea...
>However, I did explain that everything else was unplugged and only
>the router was connected to the test socket, so I suspect that it
>was a 'scripting error' :-)
You have a good point. I always use this approach of using
the master's test socket when I have a problem. I even have a
*known good* BT to RJ11 adapter plug in my tool bag to
facilitate this for DSL problems, along with carrying a known
good ZyXEL 660R. (http://tinyurl.com/gmhtb)
--
JohnW.
Replace nospam with the first 3 letters of the current month
to mail me.
| |
| hairydog@despammed.com 2007-01-09, 7:11 pm |
| On Fri, 05 Jan 2007 17:28:27 +0000, Bypass <user@example.net> wrote:
>Modem Status
>
>Link Status Connected
>Us Rate (Kbps) 448
>Ds Rate (Kbps) 8128
>US Margin 25
>DS Margin 13
>Modulation MMODE
>LOS Errors 0
>DS Line Attenuation 15
>US Line Attenuation 14
>Path Mode Interleaved
>
All that is on the excellent side of good, though I can't see why you
are on interleaved. It ought to be in Fast mode with SNR and
Attenuation figures like that.
If you aren't seeing the full speed, it's not your modem/router to
blame: it's doing as well as is possible.
| |
| Phil Thompson 2007-01-09, 7:11 pm |
| On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 19:35:10 +0000, hairydog@despammed.com wrote:
>All that is on the excellent side of good, though I can't see why you
>are on interleaved. It ought to be in Fast mode with SNR and
>Attenuation figures like that.
several ISPs opt-in to interleaving by default - AOL, Demon, BT (?) -
it reduces support requirements as the number of people who want it
turning off is way smaller than the number who would experience
instability without it.
Phil
| |
| Andy Furniss 2007-01-11, 7:11 pm |
| JohnDW wrote:
, along with carrying a known
> good ZyXEL 660R. (http://tinyurl.com/gmhtb)
Recently got one of these - I Like the TI AR7 chipset, it will sync and
hold a meg faster than either of my last century chipset modems.
In some ways I would consider it too good to test someone elses line -
ie, it may well be OK with that but unstable with another router.
Don't think much of the propriotory ZyOS, though. It only does 1024
conntracks and reboots after exceeding it. Also has a habit of offering
a password reconfigure screen to anyone who happens be using a browser
while it is (re)establising a ppp.
Would be nice to get OpenWRT on it.
Andy.
|
|
|
|
|