CODA-4582 - Open Issues for Investigation

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
I'm an Advisor
Posts: 928

Re: CODA-4582 - Open Issues for Investigation


@JohnBeaudin wrote:

@VivienM

 

Yes I am in North-East NB


And that means that, as RogersDave said to you earlier, distance/physics is going against you.

 

Unless things have changed (and the absence of reverse DNS on Rogers' routers makes it hard to tell), the Rogers IP network is very very Toronto-centric. To reach, say, NYC, your packets could easily end up doing NB -> Toronto -> Chicago -> NYC. (or NB -> Toronto -> Ashburn -> NYC... or even NB -> Toronto -> NYC) That's going to add a lot of latency compared to another provider that might do NB -> Montreal -> NYC.

 

Plus, you're in NE NB - it wouldn't surprise me if the fiber to your headend ran from Moncton, so if your traffic is going down to Moncton before heading north-west to Toronto, that's another little bit of latency added there.

 

Note, too, that looking at layer 3 stuff in traceroutes is a good start but is not really enough here because traceroutes won't show you the physical routing of the underlying fiber.

 

I don't know if there are any fiber routes directly from NB into the eastern U.S.; if there are, and another provider used those, then again, latency would be further reduced...

 

I'm a Reliable Contributor
Posts: 617

Re: CODA-4582 - Open Issues for Investigation

I am already running tests with Dave about the route and we're working on somehting to improve the route.

I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 154

Re: CODA-4582 - Open Issues for Investigation

... If @RogersDave doesn't get employee of the year, Rogers should be disbanded.

I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 31

Re: CODA-4582 - Open Issues for Investigation

I just want to thank @RogersDave for his ongoing support of these new modems and the gigabit service in general.

 

Also, I have a question.  I'm thinking about running my Coda modem in bridge mode.  I know for certain that my router is affected by the bug in the previous firmware where bridge mode wouldn't work.  It actually bricked my old modem when I tried it.  I noticed that this issue has been resolved since the .23 firmware.  Do you guys think it's safe for me to put my modem into bridge mode now?  Are there any advantages?  Right now all I have done is disabled wifi on the Coda modem and I basically daisy chained my D-link router.  What do you guys think?  I really don't want to brick another modem.  Plus I hear that Rogers is having issues swapping modems right now.

I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 207

Re: CODA-4582 - Open Issues for Investigation

Run it in bridge mode. Unless you went out of your way to configure that router as a switch with no routing and dhcp serving. your double natting and that will cause issues and speed loss.

 

On the flip side. What dlink router do you have? as it might be too slow to handle being the gateway and achieving proper speeds over the coda. It's important to verify that you have HARDWARE NAT capabilities on any router you use if you are on the 250u package or up. 


@SickBeast wrote:

@I just want to thank @RogersDave for his ongoing support of these new modems and the gigabit service in general.

 

Also, I have a question.  I'm thinking about running my Coda modem in bridge mode.  I know for certain that my router is affected by the bug in the previous firmware where bridge mode wouldn't work.  It actually bricked my old modem when I tried it.  I noticed that this issue has been resolved since the .23 firmware.  Do you guys think it's safe for me to put my modem into bridge mode now?  Are there any advantages?  Right now all I have done is disabled wifi on the Coda modem and I basically daisy chained my D-link router.  What do you guys think?  I really don't want to brick another modem.  Plus I hear that Rogers is having issues swapping modems right now.


 

I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 31

Re: CODA-4582 - Open Issues for Investigation


@Jeffj wrote:

Run it in bridge mode. Unless you went out of your way to configure that router as a switch with no routing and dhcp serving. your double natting and that will cause issues and speed loss.

 

On the flip side. What dlink router do you have? as it might be too slow to handle being the gateway and achieving proper speeds over the coda. It's important to verify that you have HARDWARE NAT capabilities on any router you use if you are on the 250u package or up. 


@SickBeast wrote:

@I just want to thank @RogersDave for his ongoing support of these new modems and the gigabit service in general.

 

Also, I have a question.  I'm thinking about running my Coda modem in bridge mode.  I know for certain that my router is affected by the bug in the previous firmware where bridge mode wouldn't work.  It actually bricked my old modem when I tried it.  I noticed that this issue has been resolved since the .23 firmware.  Do you guys think it's safe for me to put my modem into bridge mode now?  Are there any advantages?  Right now all I have done is disabled wifi on the Coda modem and I basically daisy chained my D-link router.  What do you guys think?  I really don't want to brick another modem.  Plus I hear that Rogers is having issues swapping modems right now.


 


Thanks!  You were right!  My speeds are better now.  Plus I didn't brick my modem.  I really appreciate your help and advice.

 

My router is a D-link 868L.  It has been tested to achieve 900+mbps in terms of WAN to LAN routing performance.  And this has proven to be true in my testing.

Highlighted
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 75

Re: CODA-4582 - Open Issues for Investigation


@Jeffj wrote:

@RogersDave wrote:

@gp-se wrote:

@RogersDave got .24 a few hours ago, network is SLOW, so I checked my DOCSIS Logs: 


@gp-se, I just ran a remote test on your modem and can clearly see signs of interference at 591 MHz and possibly at 597 MHz.

 

For the geeks out there, this is really close to a quarter wavelength of WiFi channel 1 (2401-2423 MHz).

 

My best recommendation is to swap this modem whenever you have a chance.

 

Dave


Just to explain to the non geek a little further and to geek out a bit my self lol

 

Cable operates between 100MHz to 1000MHZ  area. so much ofthat range is with in a quarter to half wave legnth of the 2.4ghz spectrum.  The fact that most consumer routers sue quarter wave, quarter wave di pole or half wave antennas due to the form factor they need to achieve. this probably has a signifigant factor in the interference as well. 

 

Also the antenna placement on these access points is not optimal, again due totheformfactor they have to achieve so they actually generate some noise in the spectrum them selves, but typically this doesnt matter because it can still cover the average household so no one notices or cares untill something like interfering with your CM happens. 

 

Back a few yeats ago, i did an experiment and shielded a TPlink WR-1040D antennas from them selves so they dont cross talk, and essentially doubled the range of the unit, but it changed it from a omni directional unit to a directional due to the shielding. I was also able to reduce the transmit power by almost 60% and still gain better range and thus reducing noise signifigantly. 

 

Wireless is a cruel mistress sometimes. 


So in the case where the modem is experiencing interference, is it experiencing the interference from it's own radio antennas?  And if we are using it in bridge mode with our own routers, does separation from the modem and router make much of a difference if the waves are omnidirectional?  Is there a minimal distance we should have them separated by?  Thanks.

I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 207

Re: CODA-4582 - Open Issues for Investigation


@Hwaiting wrote:

@Jeffj wrote:

@RogersDave wrote:

@gp-se wrote:

@RogersDave got .24 a few hours ago, network is SLOW, so I checked my DOCSIS Logs: 


@gp-se, I just ran a remote test on your modem and can clearly see signs of interference at 591 MHz and possibly at 597 MHz.

 

For the geeks out there, this is really close to a quarter wavelength of WiFi channel 1 (2401-2423 MHz).

 

My best recommendation is to swap this modem whenever you have a chance.

 

Dave


Just to explain to the non geek a little further and to geek out a bit my self lol

 

Cable operates between 100MHz to 1000MHZ  area. so much ofthat range is with in a quarter to half wave legnth of the 2.4ghz spectrum.  The fact that most consumer routers sue quarter wave, quarter wave di pole or half wave antennas due to the form factor they need to achieve. this probably has a signifigant factor in the interference as well. 

 

Also the antenna placement on these access points is not optimal, again due totheformfactor they have to achieve so they actually generate some noise in the spectrum them selves, but typically this doesnt matter because it can still cover the average household so no one notices or cares untill something like interfering with your CM happens. 

 

Back a few yeats ago, i did an experiment and shielded a TPlink WR-1040D antennas from them selves so they dont cross talk, and essentially doubled the range of the unit, but it changed it from a omni directional unit to a directional due to the shielding. I was also able to reduce the transmit power by almost 60% and still gain better range and thus reducing noise signifigantly. 

 

Wireless is a cruel mistress sometimes. 


So in the case where the modem is experiencing interference, is it experiencing the interference from it's own radio antennas?  And if we are using it in bridge mode with our own routers, does separation from the modem and router make much of a difference if the waves are omnidirectional?  Is there a minimal distance we should have them separated by?  Thanks.


As long at the modem is the black dot with the proper shielding distance *shouldnt* matter and it shouldnt interfear with its self. Otherwise Rogers recommended having your wireless 2.4 turnedo ff on the Coda if its not a black dot and have your router 6 feet minimum away. 

I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 42

Re: CODA-4582 - Open Issues for Investigation

What's strange is that the color of my download indicator on the coda has changed color to light purple. However, the ofdm/ofdma overview shows both channels disabled. I performed a hard reset as was recommended but the channels are still disabled.

Could this be another bug?
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 84

Re: CODA-4582 - Open Issues for Investigation


@Jeffj wrote:

@Hwaiting wrote:

@Jeffj wrote:

@RogersDave wrote:

@gp-se wrote:

@RogersDave got .24 a few hours ago, network is SLOW, so I checked my DOCSIS Logs: 


@gp-se, I just ran a remote test on your modem and can clearly see signs of interference at 591 MHz and possibly at 597 MHz.

 

For the geeks out there, this is really close to a quarter wavelength of WiFi channel 1 (2401-2423 MHz).

 

My best recommendation is to swap this modem whenever you have a chance.

 

Dave


Just to explain to the non geek a little further and to geek out a bit my self lol

 

Cable operates between 100MHz to 1000MHZ  area. so much ofthat range is with in a quarter to half wave legnth of the 2.4ghz spectrum.  The fact that most consumer routers sue quarter wave, quarter wave di pole or half wave antennas due to the form factor they need to achieve. this probably has a signifigant factor in the interference as well. 

 

Also the antenna placement on these access points is not optimal, again due totheformfactor they have to achieve so they actually generate some noise in the spectrum them selves, but typically this doesnt matter because it can still cover the average household so no one notices or cares untill something like interfering with your CM happens. 

 

Back a few yeats ago, i did an experiment and shielded a TPlink WR-1040D antennas from them selves so they dont cross talk, and essentially doubled the range of the unit, but it changed it from a omni directional unit to a directional due to the shielding. I was also able to reduce the transmit power by almost 60% and still gain better range and thus reducing noise signifigantly. 

 

Wireless is a cruel mistress sometimes. 


So in the case where the modem is experiencing interference, is it experiencing the interference from it's own radio antennas?  And if we are using it in bridge mode with our own routers, does separation from the modem and router make much of a difference if the waves are omnidirectional?  Is there a minimal distance we should have them separated by?  Thanks.


As long at the modem is the black dot with the proper shielding distance *shouldnt* matter and it shouldnt interfear with its self. Otherwise Rogers recommended having your wireless 2.4 turnedo ff on the Coda if its not a black dot and have your router 6 feet minimum away. 


Just my 2cts of ignorance...isn't the interference only when you are running Coda in Gateway and also attach a router, when both units are broadcasting WiFi frequencies.....I cannot see how the Coda in Bridge mode can be affected by the WiFi frequencies of a router to slow it down. I am not a DataCom guru and would like to understand. Cheers...