Standalone Docsis 3 Modem Implementation

Need Help?

That's what we're here for! The goal of the Rogers Community is to help you find answers on everything Rogers. Can't find what you're looking for? Just ask!
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Reply
Hogwash
I'm a Senior Contributor
Posts: 219

Standalone Docsis 3 Modem Implementation

In the past couple years Rogers has taken to using Docsis 3

gateways for use with Rogers HighSpeed Internet. A gateway

contains a modem and wireless router combination. Rogers

rents/sells these gateways for use on their Docsis 3 level

internet tiers.

 

Sadly, the wireless router component, in these gateways, has

historically presented various problematic performance

related issues. Rogers solution was to release newer gateway

versions with enhanced wireless capabilities.

 

As experienced users will verify, wireless routers are not a "one size fits all"

component in today's demanding home network. Rogers enhanced

wireless gateways are not a viable solution for a lot of

users. Presently, a user's only option has been to place the gateway in

"bridge mode" (disable the router component) and connect the

modem portion to their own higher performance personal

wireless router.

 

Problem: Rogers gateways cost in the neighborhood of $249 +

tax. Disabling half of it cripples our investment.

 

Solution:  Introduce standalone Docsis 3 modems for use on

the Rogers HighSpeed network. These could be sold/rented

alongside the gateway models now available. A "standalone

modem" is simply a modem with no wireless component

included. Just like the good ole Docsis 2 modems of

yesterday.

 

ALL gateway manufacturing vendors offer standalone modems in

the same model series as their gateways. These vendor

manufactured standalone modems also use the same firmware,

as the modem portion, in their bigger brother gateways

enabling Rogers to push any required bios updates effortlessly .

 

Renting/selling standalone modems alongside gateways, by

Rogers, would greatly enhance the customer's ability to

customize their home network hardware requirements while respecting

Rogers need to maintain a stable secure Rogers HighSpeed

Docsis 3 network.

 

There is also a great cost saving benefit to the consumer as

standalone modems retail for less than half gateway retail

prices.

 

All in all, a great idea for Rogers to implement, and a

positive step forward for Rogers and their Docsis 3 network

hungry customers.

Yea I know, this post is total "Hogwash"
Frazzled
I'm a Reliable Contributor
Posts: 147

Re: Standalone Docsis 3 Modem Implementation

I am behind you 100% Hogwash. I have never understood why Rogers insists on the gateways when they suffer from frequent issues as you have suggested. The two most common are dropped connections and poor range, therefore necessitating the bridge mode in order to use your own 3rd party router. A stand alone D3 modem is just what the doctor ordered!

 

When Rogers advertises that their modems "deliver consistent speeds and signal strength throughout the home" and the gateways do not provide this, Rogers is not living up to their promises. The average customer expects that the all-in-one device will work and that they will get decent wireless signals throughout their homes. When the device fails to live up to promises, many customers simply do not know what to do. Why provide an all-in-one device when only half of it works properly?

 

I would go even further and recommend the Motorola 6180. It gets rave reviews. The Motorola D2 Surfboard modems were rock solid. I never saw anything like the number of complaints that Rogers now gets with their D3 gateways! Perhaps some day, they will actually listen to their customers!

 

http://moto.arrisi.com/Video-Solutions/US-EN/Products-and-Services/Voice-and-Data-Consumer-Premise-E...

 

 

nbikeman
I'm Here A Lot
Posts: 5

Re: Standalone Docsis 3 Modem Implementation

I also fully agree with Hogwash. Many users already have their non-gateway wireless networks setup and working. Why would anyone want to invest in another wireless device? Also, Rogers disables the extra features (e.g. USB ports ) on their Gateway modems. I want a non-gateway reliable D3 Motorola modem.
TeDD13
I'm a Trusted Contributor
Posts: 352

Re: Standalone Docsis 3 Modem Implementation

Fully support the need for standalone modem. Although Motorola 6180 is an excellent choice it is limited for 8x4 channels, when Rogers now provides up to 16 downstream channels on Ultimate. As Rogers is HITRON's major customer it shouldn't be hard for Rogers to provide HITRON standalone modems, like HITRON CDA-30360 or HITRON CDA-32372 .

 

Although Hitron's latest gateways, CGN3 seems to have excellent wireless component, some major router functions are disabled by Rogers' custom firmware, including USB ports, port forwarding.

 

I have been using CGN3 for the past 3 weeks and I am very pleased with wireless, but inability to forward ports might make me to switch back to Cisco DPC3825...

 

Rogers is the first HITRON's customer to buy CGN3s for its customers and seems like Rogers will introduce CGN4 sometimes next year. It would be essentially the same gateway but with AC-compatible wireless on 5 GHz band.

Gdkitty
Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 14,340

Re: Standalone Docsis 3 Modem Implementation

As I have said before, I agree that a stand alone should be made available.

But I would have to at least partially agree with Tedd.
If Rogers is going to actually move and provide us one, should be something that at least partially future proofs for expansion, using something that is a 24x8.

It's surprised me that Motorola only has 8x4 devices, since they seems to be the modem of choice across many ISPs, you think they would try to be a leader in this.


Hogwash
I'm a Senior Contributor
Posts: 219

Re: Standalone Docsis 3 Modem Implementation


@Gdkitty wrote:

If Rogers is going to actually move and provide us one, should be something that at least partially future proofs for expansion, using something that is a 24x8.

It's surprised me that Motorola only has 8x4 devices, since they seems to be the modem of choice across many ISPs, you think they would try to be a leader in this.

Best reason I can think of is it just isn't necessary for the foreseeable future. An 8x4 Docsis 3 modem is capable of handling in EXCESS of 300mbps downstream and 120mbps on the return channels.

 

Rogers broadband tiers don't even currently come close to offering these speeds. Rogers would need to invest millions in their infrastructure to enable network capacity to handle 300mbps downstream speeds 24/7 by the majority of their customers simultaneously.

 

Upstream/return channel bandwidth availability is even MORE LIMITED. This is the reason why broadband tier speeds are ASYMMETRIC.

 

The introduction of Docsis 3.1 protocols in the coming years, by it's very nature, will free up a lot of network capacity to accommodate vastly faster speeds.

 

IMHO All in all, Although I agree 24x8 Docsis 3 modems are ideal, the technical reality is that Rogers network just hasn't reached the point where foreseeable FUTURE network capacity limits will make their CURRENT purchase/use REALISTICALLY worthwhile.

 

It's like buying a Lamborghini when a bicycle will do. 

Yea I know, this post is total "Hogwash"
Gdkitty
Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 14,340

Re: Standalone Docsis 3 Modem Implementation

With only back end Infrastructure changes (no cabling changes) with the 24x8 they can offer almost 1g download (yes less up)... To me a smarter infrastructure investment than the cost of FTTH.

Just trying to think of people who like to buy their equipment. Last thing I want is someone to buy one say if they came available (an 8x4) and then a year later they announce big speed changes, but oh you need a 24x8 for it. People forced to pay AGAIN. 😞

IF we ever get ANY OF THESE, needs to be well tested first. (We all know how testing goes with Rogers :p)
TSI (on Rogers lines) allow provisioning of the 6180, but recently were bricked with a back end change somehow, until a firmware patch was pushed out to them


agent86
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 10

Re: Standalone Docsis 3 Modem Implementation

Im using the new Hitron but also have disabled the gateway and would buy the CDA-32372 in a heartbeat if I could find one.  My Motorola 6121 worked awesome but this one would be nice to have even if it was only for a year or 2.    So hope they read this and see many users want this standalone modem and they would not lose any money by offering it.  If they dont then ppl will get it anyways when available from other places and then they will lose money.  I have always used my own modem and only have the gateway until I can find the standalone modem.

CPmike
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 13

Re: Standalone Docsis 3 Modem Implementation

OK here is the real reason for dropped connections and crappy performance of this modem and why Rogers does not want to use another modem!

 

Rogers is hijacking your page requests to route through their DNS gateway.

 

If you look in the mso user you will see DNS proxy gateway. Even using your own DNS does not stop the routing through the Rogers gateway. This modem does not allow it to be changed. Why?

 

I can only guess, but this makes it possible for them to inject their own ads, traffic shape, prevent the use of media which you are not paying them for plus track everything you do.

 

I would swear and call Rogers a name but that would break the TOU so I will refrain.

Gdkitty
Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 14,340

Re: Standalone Docsis 3 Modem Implementation

Rogers doesnt inject their own adds.. but they do use it to ocassionaly push injections, yes.

They usually come up, when there is a major infrastructure change (when they change the package speeds, etc.)  This is also how they inject the USAGE warnings.

(the right/wrong of this... thats another story).

 

Regardless of it going through a DNS proxy.. ANY information, they could traffic shape, block, throttle, with the rest of the networking equipement that our connection goes through.

 

What information are you looking at to think there is a proxy, other than the DNS servers entered?
This is my information on my gateway:

GATEWAY
 DHCP Gateway IP Address:  192.168.0.1
 Subnet Mask:  255.255.255.0

 DNS Proxy IP Address:  192.168.0.1
 Primary LAN DNS:  64.71.255.204
 Secondary LAN DNS:  64.71.255.198

Listed at the bottom two, are the two rogers DNS servers. Are these not changable on the modem you have?  (i have the SMC and they are).
The PROXY that they list here.. is the IP address of your LOCAL gateway itself.  meaning, that you could put into a LOCAL device's gateway settings, the IP of the gateway modem, and it will proxy the addresses that it has stored in here.

IF you are entering your own DNS server info on the device itself, then it would never go to that proxy and forward to the rogers ones.