05-31-2016 08:42 AM - last edited on 03-14-2018 04:23 PM by RogersRoland
Hello Community,
We are currently offering our users an exclusive opportunity to participate in an upcoming trial of the new firmware for our Rocket Wi-Fi Modem (CGN3ACR, CGN3AMR and CGN3ACSMR) and Rocket Gigabit Wi-Fi Modem (CGN3552 and CODA-4582). For details of this program, please see this thread.
This thread will be used for feedback regarding the firmware. We've invited @RogersSergio, @RogersSyd & @RogersBob from our Networking team to participate in this thread. Your feedback is very valuable and will be used to enhance the firmware before it is released publicly.
Thank you for your continued feedback and support.
11-17-2016 10:24 PM
11-17-2016 10:27 PM
I have the CGN3ACSMR
11-17-2016 10:30 PM
11-17-2016 10:33 PM - edited 11-17-2016 10:48 PM
Bridge mode and on previous firmware about 20-21mb/s
Also just tested and relised have high ping 200-500ms when max out download
11-17-2016 10:51 PM
11-17-2016 11:20 PM
speedtest.net also tried just uploading a file to google drive
11-17-2016 11:28 PM
11-18-2016 11:04 AM
If you are testing your latency when uploading or downloading, especially at maximum capacity, it is normal that your ping time will sky rocket.
When you perform a ping, a packet is sent to a server and a response comes back. If you are maxing out the upload, the ping packet sent (ECHO REQUEST) will be delayed as it has to be transmitted amongst all other packets from your file upload.
The same thing will happen if you test latency during a file download that maxes out your connection. The ping response from the server (ECHO RESPONSE) will have to be queued and transmitted amongst all other packets from the file download.
Regarding the limited upload speed at 15-16 Mbps, it is something we are aware of on firmware 4.5.8.27. It doesn’t affect everybody and it seems to be a clear cut. Some people are affected and some others are not. If you prefer to return to firmware 4.5.8.22 which doesn’t have this limitation but also doesn’t not have any of the latency improvement, sent me a private message and I’ll take care of it.
Dave
11-18-2016 11:53 AM
yes i understaned that but it shoud manage that better. Anyone have Bell FTTN and can test what happens when you max out the upload.
11-18-2016 02:02 PM
@RogersDave could you put me on .27? I would much rather have improved latency than download speed. I am currently running the CGNM-3552 with Ignite 60.
11-18-2016 02:39 PM
11-18-2016 03:50 PM
@pvincent wrote:@RogersDave could you put me on .27? I would much rather have improved latency than download speed. I am currently running the CGNM-3552 with Ignite 60.
I just started the upgrade on your modem. It will reboot in a few minutes on the new version.
@noziel wrote:
Dave
I believe I brought this up on other posts and yet to get a response. Seems those that are affected are on hardware 1A. While those not affected are on 2A. Not sure how my theory plays out but can this be confirmed. Also this is not just those on gateway but bridge mode.
Food for thought!
Hardware type 1A is by far the most common. All the cases that were reported to me of limited upload speed were on hardware 1A but I also have lots of working cases on that same hardware revision.
Dave
11-18-2016 03:59 PM - edited 11-18-2016 03:59 PM
11-18-2016 04:45 PM
Thanks Dave. .27 is loaded. here are my speed test results
http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/5809473380
I am on ignite 70u
Mythen
11-18-2016 05:32 PM
Ping 90 ms Outch.
Past few days ping is up the roof for me as well, tried to play CSGO an online FPS and I was pinging 78-80 on Chicago servers while usually it's playable at 50.. had to stop playing..
I don't want to put any pressure but you guys have no idea how much having a good ping will be huge for me, the feeling...
11-18-2016 05:41 PM
here on the island of Newfoundland. It really all depends on where the server is. Twitch servers for example the best ping is in newyork believe it or not.
Also doing a Rogers speed test I get 23ms ping.
Mythen
11-19-2016 06:48 AM
As a feature request, please enable the use of the same SSID on both radio bands. This feature should be available to all future firmware releases. Please include my modem to be upgraded once this feature needs to be tested on any new firmware releases..
11-19-2016 09:21 AM
@blues_clues wrote:As a feature request, please enable the use of the same SSID on both radio bands. This feature should be available to all future firmware releases. Please include my modem to be upgraded once this feature needs to be tested on any new firmware releases..
@blues_clues, I will verify with our product management team to see if there is background information as to why this is currently not allowed. Once I get feedback, I will either add this enhancement to the list in the 2nd post or reply here with an appropriate reason.
If you don't hear from me in 2 weeks, keep me honest and send me a private message as a reminder.
Dave
11-19-2016 10:01 AM
I believe at one time this was actually allowed on the CGN3s. Maybe the CGN3 will still allow this?? In any event, I'm not entirely eager to see this happen. This subject has come up in the past, in terms of its use. That is simply because a single SSID for both networks has produced nothing but confusion on the part of the user when it comes to using wifi networks or trying to troubleshoot those networks. Windows pc's do not indicate which network you're connected to when there are two networks with the same SSID, and I don't believe that the vast majority of Windows laptops are able to successfully roam between either one without operator intervention. Please correct me if I'm wrong on that one. Routers that employ roaming either have receive power levels that the user can set in order to force the end device to roam back and forth, or, that function is simply black boxed as most people don't get the whole idea or can't get the settings correct, so, the choice is to enable or disable it.
Personal opinion, this is one of those ideas that sounds really good, but, from past history on the forum, its more trouble than its worth.
11-19-2016 10:14 AM
11-19-2016 10:26 AM
@mozerd wrote:
I absolutely agree with @Datalink
a single SSID for both networks is a VERY BAD idea. Keep them separate ... BETTER still put the Gateway in BRIDGE mode and use a good quality Router that will perform MUCH better for every function and capability under its control.
Not so. All routers should have this as an option. If it does not work how the user expects, they can choose to make them separate. My personal experience with various makes of Enterprise and SOHO Wireless routers have not been an issue with this configuration. I would blame the chipset on the client and the drivers rather than the wireless router having this capability. I have deployed an enterprise wireless and numerous home environments for over 60K users without an single isse.