01-05-2017 11:03 AM - edited 05-02-2017 07:09 AM
*** This post was last edited May 2, 2017 ***
Good morning Community,
As I mentioned in a post two days ago, we have received the next firmware 2.0.10.20 from Hitron. We are currently running initial testing on this version and will push it out to participants in the firmware trial program as soon as it passes initial testing.
However, while running these tests, we discovered abnormal behavior with ICMP and are awaiting feedback from Hitron today to asses how this will be addressed. As soon as I this is confirmed, I’ll update the change log with the correct version information and start pushing it out.
In parallel, we are still working on the following high priority items. In some cases below, I requested affected customers to reach out to me via private message. If you do so, please include your modem MAC address in the subject line (even if we exchange messages daily) as there are a lot of you reaching out to me daily 🙂
UDP Packet Loss
The investigation for what has been reported as UDP packet loss is still ongoing. We have deployed a probe at one fellow forum member on both a CODA-4582 and a CGNM-3552 to collect additional data. We are actively working with Hitron and Intel on the results observed.
Based on what we know so far, in most instances UDP packet loss is coupled with higher uplink usage in the area. Although the impact is noticeable in specific logs (League of Legends), the root cause for the perceivable impact (while playing) is likely related to bufferbloat (see next issue).
Bufferbloat
When comparing the performance of a CODA-4582 to a CGNM-3552 in the same network conditions, the CODA-4582 consistently reports higher bufferbloat when tested on DSLReports.
Update April 12: The solution for this problem will come in two folds. It will require a change in software which will possibly be included in 2.0.10.27 but more likely in 2.0.10.28 and a change in network configuration.
The network configuration change is not compatible with the current firmware so this change will only come after a vast majority of the modems are running the new code. We are however looking at a way to make the change only for specific modems to support testing in the community.
Update April 22: This problem seems resolved in firmware 2.0.10.27
5 GHz WiFi Low range for channels 36 to 48
Lower WiFi channels on the modem have a much smaller range. This is due in part to the limit imposed by Industry Canada to maximum transmit power.
Furthermore, the current automatic channel selection (auto mode) tends to select the lower channels when in similar load conditions.
Workaround: manually select higher channels (149-153-157-161)
Update April 22: The channel selection algorithm has been improved in firmware 2.0.10.27
Loss of OFDM Channel Lock
Under some RF conditions, the modem fails to lock properly on the OFDM channel. This typically result in variable performance.
Update April 12: This problem is resolved in 2.0.10.26T2
List of connected device does not get fully populated
This is a known issue that has been tracked since firmware 2.0.10.13. We are making improvements at every firmware but it is not a perfect system.
The situation is worst after a reboot or firmware upgrade as the list gets reset and must be repopulated as devices renew their DHCP lease.
NAT Loopback not working for wired clients
When setting up port forwarding to an internal server, it is possible for a client on WiFi to reach the server using the external IP/port. If the client is on a wired interface, it doesn't work.
Update April 12: This problem is resolved in 2.0.10.26T2 (not confirmed)
LAN Counters not working
Some customers reported that LAN counters (especially in bridge mode) are reporting inaccurate values.
This problem has been reported to Hitron for investigation.
Unexpected modem reboot
Some customers reported their modem reboots unexpectedly. We have also seen this behavior in our lab.
Update April 12: This problem is resolved in 2.0.10.26T2
Missing SC-QAM Channels
After a reboot, some modems are missing SC-QAM channels. A fix has been implemented in 2.0.10.26T2 to address this behavior but it has not corrected all scenarios.
Investigation continues with Hitron.
WiFi Survey
The WiFi Survey functionality in firmware 2.0.10.26T2 (and possibly before) reports incorrect SSID names.
Guest Network
When connecting to the Guest Network, an error message is displayed "only allow DHCP client to use this wireless". This has been reported in firmware 2.0.10.26T2.
Update April 22: This issue has been resolved in firmware 2.0.10.27
Update May 2: It seems this issue is not fully resolved and still experienced by some users
Future Planned Improvements
The following are items that we are working on in parallel of the above.
Dave
*Edited Labels*
04-30-2017 10:56 PM
These are the readings I get without the attenuator, which looks to actually be -8. I just called Rogers and they are saying that their bottom spec for SnR is 25. They do have a technician coming out, but I am afraid they won't be able to fix this since they don't seem to be all too eager to even try to find the problem.
Downstream Overview
Port ID | Frequency (MHz) | Modulation | Signal strength (dBmV) | Channel ID | Signal noise ratio (dB) |
1 | 657000000 | 256QAM | 9.000 | 17 | 34.346 |
2 | 561000000 | 256QAM | 6.700 | 2 | 13.327 |
3 | 567000000 | 256QAM | 6.000 | 3 | 13.619 |
4 | 573000000 | 256QAM | 5.800 | 4 | 14.849 |
5 | 579000000 | 256QAM | 5.900 | 5 | 15.249 |
6 | 585000000 | 256QAM | 6.400 | 6 | 16.346 |
7 | 591000000 | 256QAM | 7.000 | 7 | 16.693 |
8 | 597000000 | 256QAM | 6.700 | 8 | 17.370 |
9 | 603000000 | 256QAM | 7.300 | 9 | 18.893 |
10 | 609000000 | 256QAM | 7.800 | 10 | 18.616 |
11 | 615000000 | 256QAM | 8.000 | 11 | 34.926 |
12 | 621000000 | 256QAM | 8.600 | 12 | 34.926 |
13 | 633000000 | 256QAM | 8.900 | 13 | 34.484 |
14 | 639000000 | 256QAM | 9.200 | 14 | 34.346 |
15 | 645000000 | 256QAM | 9.200 | 15 | 34.484 |
16 | 651000000 | 256QAM | 9.000 | 16 | 34.484 |
17 | 555000000 | 256QAM | 7.100 | 1 | 19.869 |
18 | 663000000 | 256QAM | 9.300 | 18 | 34.926 |
19 | 669000000 | 256QAM | 9.500 | 19 | 34.926 |
20 | 675000000 | 256QAM | 9.300 | 20 | 34.484 |
21 | 681000000 | 256QAM | 9.100 | 21 | 34.346 |
22 | 687000000 | 256QAM | 8.900 | 22 | 33.957 |
23 | 693000000 | 256QAM | 8.600 | 23 | 33.957 |
24 | 699000000 | 256QAM | 8.600 | 24 | 33.834 |
25 | 705000000 | 256QAM | 8.200 | 25 | 33.487 |
26 | 711000000 | 256QAM | 7.800 | 26 | 33.377 |
27 | 717000000 | 256QAM | 7.600 | 27 | 33.063 |
28 | 723000000 | 256QAM | 6.600 | 28 | 32.676 |
29 | 825000000 | 256QAM | 3.000 | 29 | 29.807 |
30 | 831000000 | 256QAM | 3.700 | 30 | 29.759 |
31 | 837000000 | 256QAM | 4.400 | 31 | 29.620 |
32 | 843000000 | 256QAM | 4.900 | 32 | 29.620 |
Receiver | FFT type | Subcarr 0 Frequency(MHz) | PLC locked | NCP locked | MDC1 locked | PLC power(dBmv) |
0 | NA | NA | NO | NO | NO | NA |
1 | 4K | 290600000 | YES | YES | YES | 6.900002 |
Port ID | Frequency (MHz) | Modulation | Signal strength (dBmV) | Channel ID | Bandwidth |
1 | 30596000 | ATDMA - 64QAM | 29.500 | 1 | 6400000 |
2 | 38595824 | ATDMA - 64QAM | 40.750 | 3 | 3200000 |
3 | 23700000 | ATDMA - 64QAM | 29.000 | 2 | 6400000 |
04-30-2017 11:11 PM - edited 04-30-2017 11:13 PM
@lupinglade if you have time, call back in and ask the CSR to check the DOCSIS 3.0 signal to noise ratios for your neighbours. That will determine if this is a single line issue (yours) or if its a wider area problem, in which case there should be a different tech assigned, or possibly a maintenance crew. With the signal attenuator taken out, it pretty evident that you have noise issues that require sorting out. The question is, are you the only one on your local tap with this issue? With several channels running in the 15 dB range for signal to noise, there should be no hesitation in sending a tech to determine what the problem is. The main concern should be to assign the right level of technician to address the issue.
04-30-2017 11:27 PM
@Datalink Talked to Rogers again -- they are saying its in spec and see no reason to run any tests on the neighbourhood. As I expected. Rogers seems to only care if you have no Internet at all, ie. <25 SnR etc. 😞
05-01-2017 10:03 AM
@lupinglade well your levels are more than 10x lower than acceptable -- clearly that should be enough for them to fix the problem. Your SNR levels are absolutely terrible, you clearly need a line replaced.
05-01-2017 10:40 AM
Good morning Community,
Just a quick note that due to a fat finger problem this morning (100% my fault), I deleted all my private messages.
If you sent me something and you are still expecting an answer, reach out to me again.
Sorry for that.
Dave
05-01-2017 10:55 AM
@RogersDave wrote:Good morning Community,
Just a quick note that due to a fat finger problem this morning (100% my fault), I deleted all my private messages.
If you sent me something and you are still expecting an answer, reach out to me again.
Sorry for that.
Dave
You need an assistant, for the usual, but also for some one to blame.
05-01-2017 11:03 AM
@Telek so you think rogers sticking an attenuator on the line isnt an acceptable fix? I guess it just masks the symptoms?
05-01-2017 11:08 AM
@lupinglade correct. It's strange, but depending on how the noise is created, since SNR is a ratio between signal and noise, if the attenuator filters out noise more than signal, you can get a higher SNR after.
But your levels without the attenuator are terrible, so it requires a real fix.
05-01-2017 01:36 PM - edited 05-01-2017 01:38 PM
@lupinglade,
I would email the office of the president and tell them the problems you have had. They will escalate the issue and send a Sr. Tech out there to resolve the problem. I have had similar issues in my area with signal and this approach got the resolution I wanted. An added bonus is that they can even give you a goodwill credit on your account for your time and trouble. The address is:
ombudsman@rci.rogers.com
Some background to the process:
05-01-2017 01:42 PM
05-01-2017 03:39 PM - last edited on 05-01-2017 03:49 PM by RogersMoin
The issue is firmware setting. DDNS is incorrectly configured for default@freedns.afraid.net. The provider admin said "Its appending a not valid string after the '?' by the looks of things,", after watching log for login attempt.
I currently have the CODA-4582 Rev 1A modem with 2.0.10.26T2 firmware.
05-01-2017 08:06 PM
@RogersDave Any way I can beta test 2.0.10.27 or later? I am experiencing significant (2-5% constant) upstream UDP packet loss in online gaming.
05-01-2017 11:18 PM
I'm getting this error when trying to have guest use guest network:
When is firmware going to be fixed. It just started a few weeks ago.
Guest Network
When connecting to the Guest Network, an error message is displayed "only allow DHCP client to use this wireless". This has been reported in firmware 2.0.10.26T2.
Update April 22: This issue has been resolved in firmware 2.0.10.27
05-02-2017 12:53 PM - last edited on 05-02-2017 03:27 PM by RogersMoin
Only Allow DHCP Client to Use this Wireless
Internet works fine when connecting to wifi at home. When a guest comes and wants to connect to the guest wifi connection that's when I get the problem.
The "networkname-guest" is selected in the list of wifi spots. User is prompted to fill in the password on the Hitron page and click "access internet". This is where the button to connect dissapears once pressed and then the message "only allow DHCP client to use this wireless" the message in french is poorly translated but reads as followed "seulement client dhcp permet d'utiliser ce fil". Technicians over the phone didn't know what the issue is and told me to swap it out at the Rogers store which is what I did.
The problem persists.
Any idea how to fix this?
*** Added Labels ***
05-02-2017 03:04 PM
Seeing a few cases of newly setup Coda modems where the 5G network, looking at the settings is secure but can be connected to as if it was open, no password required. Factory reset resolves the issue.
Brian
05-02-2017 03:31 PM
@otrocky that problem should be resolved in the latest firmware (currently available to beta participants only).
05-03-2017 01:05 PM - last edited on 05-03-2017 01:14 PM by RogersMoin
Guest wifi in a home is an important feaure and was promised as available and easy to setup and modify when I purchased my Rogers bundle.
I got no usb setup stick but was able to go online & find the cusadmin login info and that allows detailed Hitron modem setup variables includind guest wifi with separate pswd and # devices...
I got up & working fine for a while ...but now I get no guest access and a msg:
"Only allows DHCP client to use this wireless". ? (I changed nothing to get this ?)
..Why ? and how do I change to get guest wifi to work again ?
05-03-2017 03:25 PM
@Frustration71 read the last few posts in this thread for the answer 🙂
05-03-2017 05:49 PM - last edited on 05-04-2017 02:20 PM by RogersShaun
Hello RogersDave.
I've stambled over an issue with IP address reserved for one specific MAC address.
My environment is as follows:
Hardware Version | 1A |
Software Version | 2.0.10.26T2 |
Hardware Version 1A
Software version 2.0.10.26T2
CODA-4582 is the only DHCP server operating 2.4 and 4 channels 5 GHz wifi with the same SSID.
There is an additional router with wifi and DHCP disabled and used as a switch only.
Dynamic IP range set from x.x.x.21 to x.x.x.200
There are several devices with reserved IP addresses from x.x.x.3 to x.x.x.20 (with some free addresses available)
I am trying to assign x.x.x.15 to an iPad Air 2 by reservation to it's MAC address with no luck.
Incidentally, there is an iPad Pro on the network that picks up a reserved by MAC IP address x.x.x.12 without a problem.
iPad Air originally had x.x.x.26 address
Over multiple attempts it got xxx.27 , xxx.28 , xxx.29 and xxx.30 assigned
My last tested procedure was: reset iPad Air network configuration
Turn it off
Set IP lease in CODA to 30 minutes and add reservation for iPad's MAC address (tried both adding manually and by clicking Add button and editing to x.x.x.15 and saving).
Should have powered CODA off for clean test, but admittedly did not under pressure from family
Waited for 40 minutes
Turned iPad back on and set up wifi access
iPad got the same x.x.x.30 IP address as before this sequence!
Am I doing something wrong, or is ir a genuine bug?
05-03-2017 08:56 PM - last edited on 05-04-2017 02:20 PM by RogersShaun
@igorella1 I believe there is a bug in the current firmware that only allows a certain amount of mac address reservations. perhaps you hit the limit.
05-04-2017 10:43 AM - last edited on 05-04-2017 02:21 PM by RogersShaun
@gp-se wrote:
@igorella1 I believe there is a bug in the current firmware that only allows a certain amount of mac address reservations. perhaps you hit the limit.
@gp-se Thank you, you are right. The limit according to my experiments is 10 MAC addresses. Quite reasonable for a residential modem/router. My list had some old reservations for devices I no longer have. I guess fiddling with DD-WRT and Tomato firmware spoiled me. Deleted an old streamer and bingo. Good to know.
@RogersDave Any plans to increase the MAC reservations limit?