Then what is our best course of action?
I am leaning towards #2 since I like the speeds when it is working and I don't want to get into arguments about my data cap whether it should be 1TB (which comes with Ultimate 250) or 250GB (which comes with Ultimate 150). I also go for a minimu of 23 hours (so far) untilt he problems reappear.
I sure wish they would tell the tech support CSRs about this problem.
I wonder if the issue is partially due to saturating the number of connections that the device can handle as the device is not dropping connections. This would explain why "old" connections continue to work but you can't make new connections.
For example, my Vonage adapter continues to work through the "Outages" as does my X-windows connection to my Virtual Private Server in the Netherlands.
I went #2 based on the location of my cable modem (in my roof) -
The problem is always therel; I think it's just made worse by certain types of use, or number of packets, or something. The latency issue is there right from a fresh reboot of the modem, it just gets worse over time. Slow death.
The only downside with going #2 is that you can no longer call tech support to pester them about your modem anymore....
But is the problem still there in bridged mode? I haven't bothered switching back to Gateway mode and I get sub 1ms pings for my LAN PCs.
The problem is always there - You can't see it in bridge mode because you can't ping the CGN3 in bridge mode. Pinging between network devices is always fine.
So my system died just before midnight after 28 hrs of uptime. So I switched to Gateway mode for the first time as I immediately had put it in bridge mode before.
As LYuan noted the ping times to the Gateway are slow - I would say that they average 6ms or so. Speed are awesome at 327/21 - faster than what I usually get in bridged mode.
We will see how long this lasts.
I had to switch the gateway's IP over to 192.168.1.1 as I have lots of static IPs in the 192.168.1.X range - although I guess I could have just changed the subnet.
*Posted on DSL Reports and Rogers Forums*
I just got off the phone with Rahim from the customer advocacy team at Rogers, who was very patient and most technical out of anyone that I have talked to so far in the chain. I think I'm getting somewhere, or maybe that's the genius of Rogers; make you *THINK* you're getting somewhere 😉 I don't think I can push for the office of the President as I don't have the CGN3 anymore, but I explained to him what was going on from the beginning. We discussed the following.
1) My personal experience in this field
2) My initial symptoms in bridge mode
3) Latency pinging to the LAN interface in gateway mode; compared to CGN2 and Cisco
4) Emphasized that the problem is not the Rogers network or the modem's signals, as they have been great in my area.
5) I did not expect Rogers to be able to do something immediately, as if what I think is going on is true, the fix would have to come from Hitron's side. I just need Rogers to acclimate to the fact that this is actually a widespread issue, and like cepnot4me said, award it a "known issue" status. That's all I want.
Rahim did notice that I do use a lot of upload, and that may be causing the latency. I explained to him, that any latency caused by flooding the upstream channels would manifest on the WAN side of the gateway and would not effect the LAN/gigabit interface.
He agreed that pinging the LAN interface in a gigabit network should not result in these high pings, and anything above 1ms is not ideal. Based on these facts and the fact that he did believe that I knew what I was talking about, he agreed to have engineers look into this, and he would also be doing some research on this.
Rahim himself has not personally heard of any problems with these devices, which I find a bit worrying, but I referenced both DSL Reports and the Rogers Community forums as places to look. He has agreed to take this on.
We hung up, and he called back a few minutes later, and told me that I had a truck coming on Thursday, which was true. I asked him if it was still needed, and he said no, and that he was on top of it. He also said that if he needed any more instruction during his testing as to process, he would reach out to me. All in all, I feel productive, and I am thankful that I got to speak to Rahim, who seems eager to take this on.
If you're reading this, thanks a bunch Rahim!
Hogwash posted this last September, but his points bear repeating.
It takes four wireless access points to cover my house. They are already set up and I really don't need or want wireless capability built into my cable modem. (And, no matter what the commercial says, one wireless router simply isn't going do my whole house!)
It shouldn't be a big reach for Rogers to offer modems. The fact that they deliberately aren't offering modems is a craven, self-serving decision that attempts to maximize their monthly device rental income. It's a short sighted strategy.
Hitron makes a 24x8 DOCSIS 3.0 modem, the CDA-32372.
Given the symptoms described in this thread, it's likely that this modem would work OK. (Well, I wouldn't bet a lot on it, but odds are it would be OK.)
However, I have a question.
Hitron bills this as a "modem" only, but the App Diagram they give in the link below shows several LAN devices connected to the modem with only a "switch" in between. I always thought that you needed a full gateway/router with NAT, DHCP, etc. to hang multiple devices onto a LAN.
So either this "modem" is actually a gateway/router, or the diagram is in error. If this modem actually acts as a full gateway/NAT router, then it could very well suffer from the same problems as the CGN3 since a lot of the internal code will be in common.
Rogers. Please give us a plain high speed (24x8) cable modem! Maybe even one that works for more than a day at a time?