FEEDBACK - Rogers Rocket Wi-Fi Modem Firmware Trial

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 Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 20

Re: FEEDBACK - Rogers Rocket Wi-Fi Modem Firmware Trial

Hi Guys,

 

When looking at the channels in the modem's DOCSIS WAN page, what should I look for to identify problems? what is considered Spec for a Signal Strenght? is it the same spec for bot downstream and upstream?

 

This is mine, I noticed 3.1 is not used at all but for 3.0, does it look ok?

 

Downstream Overview
Port IDFrequency (MHz)ModulationSignal strength (dBmV)Channel IDSignal noise ratio (dB)
1657000000256QAM5.2004140.946
2363000000256QAM7.9001043.377
3369000000256QAM7.8001143.377
4375000000256QAM7.8001243.377
5381000000256QAM7.8001343.377
6387000000256QAM7.7001443.377
7393000000256QAM7.7001540.946
8399000000256QAM8.0001643.377
9405000000256QAM7.8001743.377
10411000000256QAM7.7001844.626
11417000000256QAM7.7001943.377
12423000000256QAM7.5002043.377
13429000000256QAM7.4002143.377
14435000000256QAM7.6002244.626
15441000000256QAM7.3002340.946
16447000000256QAM7.2002443.377
17555000000256QAM5.3002540.946
18561000000256QAM5.6002640.946
19567000000256QAM5.1002740.946
20573000000256QAM4.9002840.946
21603000000256QAM5.1003340.946
22609000000256QAM4.7003440.946
23615000000256QAM4.6003540.366
24621000000256QAM5.1003640.946
25663000000256QAM5.1004240.946
26669000000256QAM4.8004340.946
27675000000256QAM5.0004440.946
28357000000256QAM8.300943.377
29633000000256QAM4.7003740.946
30639000000256QAM4.8003840.946
31645000000256QAM5.1003940.366
32651000000256QAM5.0004040.946
OFDM Downstream Overview
ReceiverFFT typeSubcarr 0 Frequency(MHz)PLC lockedNCP lockedMDC1 lockedPLC power(dBmv)
0NANANONONONA
1NANANONONONA
Upstream Overview
Port IDFrequency (MHz)ModulationSignal strength (dBmV)Channel IDBandwidth
138596000ATDMA - 64QAM     40.75033200000
230596000ATDMA - 64QAM38.25016400000
323700000ATDMA - 64QAM37.75026400000
OFDM/OFDMA Overview
Channel IndexStatelin Digital AttDigital AttBW (sc's*fft)Report PowerReport Power1_6FFT Size
0DISABLED0.50000.00000.0000-inf-1.00004K
1DISABLED0.50000.00000.0000-inf-1.00004K

 

Thanks!

I'm a Reliable Contributor
Posts: 607

Re: FEEDBACK - Rogers Rocket Wi-Fi Modem Firmware Trial

@NorthGraves

 

50-70ms in online gaming for NA-EAST is the norm.

 

I play many games and it's always between that range on US EAST servers.

 

US EAST is 50-70ms

US WEST is 95-105ms

 

Dota2, CSGO,Overwatch,Starcraft,Wow,COD,battlefield name them all tested all between the 50-70ms. 

 

I am curently on CODA with .19 firmware, it's running well no issues, but no improvements over the CGN3ACMR in term of online gaming yet.

Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 6,056

Re: FEEDBACK - Rogers Rocket Wi-Fi Modem Firmware Trial

@JohnyR what was your previous modem and firmware version on that modem?



Highlighted
Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 6,056

Re: FEEDBACK - Rogers Rocket Wi-Fi Modem Firmware Trial

@Lumute your downstream signal levels are high, but within spec.  The signal to noise is ok.  The upstream signal levels are fine.  The only thing that a tech would do is install an attenuator to drop the downstream levels.  That would also push up the upstream levels.  if you're not having any problems I would leave it alone for now.  Over the next few years, without any changes, those levels will drop on their own as the external cable and connectors age. 



I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 43

Re: FEEDBACK - Rogers Rocket Wi-Fi Modem Firmware Trial

@Datalink It was the CGNM-3552, I think on .22? Can't really remember anymore, sorry!

Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 6,056

Re: FEEDBACK - Rogers Rocket Wi-Fi Modem Firmware Trial

If that's an ICMP ping to the CMTS it would have been 4.5.8.27 on the modem.  V4.6.8.22 and earlier would have resulted in a much worse plot.  What that plot really shows is that V4.5.8.27 on probably both CGN3ACSMR and CGNM-3552 is better than the current version of CODA-4582, ergo, my question, does the CODA-4582 use the hardware accelerator. From your plot, I would say that the answer is no.  If it does, then I would say that we have yet another problem to solve.



I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 32

Re: FEEDBACK - Rogers Rocket Wi-Fi Modem Firmware Trial

@RogersDave

 

My area has had terrible upload speeds for months, even right now (~1pm) I'm getting ~3Mbps up. 

 

I'm on the D3.1 modem but maintainence siad there are "no problems" in my area. I've had 5 modems (3 unique types)  All equipment is connected by Cat5e etc. New rg6 has been ran too, though no change. 

 

rogers server

 

img.PNG

 

If you need more info feel free to PM me!

I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 43

Re: FEEDBACK - Rogers Rocket Wi-Fi Modem Firmware Trial

@DatalinkActually the plot I embedded was all CODA. The switch from green to purple (no pl to some pl) is what I was concenered about since I didn't change the modem or anything of that sort.

 

The difference between latency on the 3552 vs the CODA is night and day: the CODA is waaaaay more stable.

I've Been Here Awhile
Posts: 2

Re: FEEDBACK - Rogers Rocket Wi-Fi Modem Firmware Trial

I am really thinking of returning this modem. Is there an ETA when your test phase will be over? How would you release a product to customer with such a performance?

Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 928

Re: FEEDBACK - Rogers Rocket Wi-Fi Modem Firmware Trial


@mosalem2003 wrote:

I am really thinking of returning this modem. Is there an ETA when your test phase will be over? How would you release a product to customer with such a performance?


Quite bluntly, because... the old modems had their own set of issues.

 

That's often the trade off faced in this business: the question isn't whether the new modem (or whatever) is perfect; the question is whether it's better than the status quo.

 

What seems to have happened here is that Rogers wanted to do something about the Puma 6 disease on the CGN3 family; this modem passed all internal testing and behaved better than the CGN3s, so... released it was. And then various reports of problems came in... (but that being said, my bridged one on the 250 plan seems to work just fine)