From what I can gather, I believe the issue lies with the Intel Puma chipset (which impact this model and others including the Ignite) and the only way to resolve this would be that:
- Rogers would present this issue to Hitron and push for a speedy fix.
- Hitron would have to contact the application engineers at Intel to get the latest SDK drivers
- Reproduce this issue in their lab (which can be very easy to do)
- Intel would have to modify the drivers to fix this and update their SDK
- Hitron would retest and confirm the fix
- Roll this fix into a new firmware update
Being a retired application engineer and have worked with Intel and other companies, this process takes several months and is not an overnight fix. I am unsure if this is only a 2.4 Ghz issue or if this replicating also impacts 5 Ghz bands. If it is only 2.4 Ghz this is not as bad as most people will tend to adopt 5 Ghz (especially with wave 2 devices coming out).
Step one would be for Rogers to PUSH this as a priority issue and then Hitron can escalate this with Intel. If Rogers just gives us lip service but not escalate this matter, it won't go anywhere. I think there is enough info here for Rogers to move this upwards if they choose to (and I hope they do).
FYI, calling Rogers support to tell them about this I believe is pointless as most first line techs have no clue what they are doing and will ask to reboot the modem and do all sorts of rigmarole which will have 0 impact on this issue.
@Alex4161 Thanks for your strong insights and forwarding your knowledge and experiences - networking and routers was never my area of expertise when I ran IT departments, I hired out for that, and my experience proceeded the use of wifi, except in a very limited pilot testing with very strong industry professionals working with us (it was a hospital enviroment, so due to regulations and the need for high security, it was not something, I or my department would play around with).
Not the same world as a managed switch, ethernet cabling, or even coax with hubs, back on 10mbs and lower, with the worries of collisions.
Reading yours and others posts about their experiences with tech support, I am not expecting much, if this is truly at the engineering level, which I tend to agree with you on this one based upon my limited knowledge and research, it is unlikely that any lower level tech will understand it and yes, I hate going through the reboot, reset, etc, etc, like as if I haven't already done all that. But that is their check list and they can't escalate until they have documentation that they have done that.
And as for Rogers escalating this as a priority, I do hope so since they have been dabling in firmware upgrades and even beta testing some of them with permission of users recently on the users request, I would hope that all the players involved in these upgrades and whatever they are trying to achieve are prepared and listening for issues - this is what I would expect when patches are put out, but this is also not the world I worked in.
And ac 5 protocols were only approved in Dec 2013 on ac, and on n it has been here since 2009 with the protocol for wider channels on 5 at this point and not yet on 2.4. So the suggestion of widening the 2.4 band is feasable and in development, but there is no approved protocol for it yet. Wave 2 came out in 2014, 2015, but I don't own anything on that level - I am disabled on fixed income, my wife is now unemployed (getting hit doubly financially at the moment), I have always been one of those who pushes my technology to the end and beyond its life span (example, I will put new network card in computers and most of my usage is on computers, not phones. I got this all from Wikapedia, but amazingly, when it comes to the reporting of the standards from Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) LAN/MAN Standards Committee (IEEE 802), they just pull it off their site and report it, and even have included sections that have to be update, but do take it with a grain of salt, as we all should do with Wikapedia.
The next expected change in 2.4/5 is expected in 2019 on the ax standardd. It is looking at 4x the speed of 802.11ac - Maybe I will hold off as long as I can on upgrading networking and devices until that standard comes, and even then, I will give it time to settle - kind of like not upgrading a Windows OS until it is in production for over a year (excluding Windows 10, where they made us do it quicker if we wanted it free).
Ahh the joys of technology - some days, I would like to have my dial up, a basic landline, and a simple cell phone, and my palm pilot and just plain old over the air tv or very limited speciality channels, limited to around 100 channels, and the basic uhf, vhf was fine for me. How we get hooked into buying into the belief that we have to have the newest, best, and often, it forces the industry to move too fast and creates problems for themselves, suppliers of services and users. And who is going to be the first to lose an Iphone 7 wireless ear bud, or dongle.
I am out of here, have to spend time on life instead of computer problems. It has been a long week, so I will just watch TV instead, and slow speeds are ok for now. Will just stay on my 5g devices out of the deadspots.
@BS and @Alex4161, it appears that the extra or hidden network is a wifi beacon for an additional network that is currently active. Its just the beacon from what understand, but it will be taken care of in due time, but for now, it is here to stay. Unfortunately I can't tell you anything more as I don't have any other details. Why it went active with a recent update, I have no idea 😞
@Alex4161 That was a worry that I had too about possible hacking, in your research, is there any ways to get around it, or do I grab my old 2.4 Cisco router and turn off gateway and wireless, or will it still be there?
In my quick search, it appears that the greatest risk around the beacon is with WEP, which has now been removed, as well as allowing only AES. But I haven't researched it at length, and don't fully understand the whole picture without a full research, which I really don't have time for, so for now, I just cross my fingers. There is certainly no shortage of information on the topic and beacon, but it seems to be related to learning the hidden wireless SID which can be pulled from the beacon. The other odd thing I read, to me, is that all networks are transmitting a beacon, so wouldn't that mean we now have an added network running, for some unknown reason and that obviously there would be a beacon. So unless there is a good reason for that added network (much like you can have a guest, 5G and 2G network running simultaneously, we now seem to have a hidden SSID network broadcasting from our routers, for who knows what reason, or was it just an accident, but wouldn't the people who tested the networks being broadcasted on their equipment before rollout have noticed it?)
Just me wondering, as I learn about this new topic to me - in the last year, I have learned so much more about our technology as a result of strange things in Rogers services. Not really something I wanted to learn, I am retired and have so many much better things to do.
Just wondering. Yes, I hope your information you just posted will put up some strong red flags to whoever the team that implemented this version change that they need to either rollback (easiest solution, but not always), or fix it fast.
I have just received the new Hitron router from Rogers and same thing. An unsecured wifi signal is emanating from it. Exchanged for a new one and the same thing again.
My signal even has a name: HITRON-SSID-2G but I get no hits when I Google that.
It concerns me that I have a totally unsecured network in our neighbourhood emanating from my router which anyone can just hop onto and surf with. I've set up as much security as I can through the router settings but nothing that remotely relates to this.
I will just have to monitor to see if anyone uses the signal.
Rogers really need to sort this out - how many unsecured wifi networks are out there because of this glitch in the Hitron router?
Are you able to actually connect to it and get internet?
I beleive, that its a guest network. And while unsecured (like most guest ones are, like hotels, mcdonalds, etc.
It should require a password, etc via webpage before actually allowing one through.
You can contact @communityhelps and i think they can help set up for the turning off of it.
for some reason the guest network is not available to be enabled from the user end..
only via the older SETUP usb keys, which dont really exist anymore i think (havent seen one in ages)
Truthfully, i agree that this should be OFF by default.
As well, IF you have your own 3rd party router already (say from previously) and you want to continue to use that, you can put the rogers unit into bridge mode, making it a modem only (and removing then all rogers settings/networks from the picture)
As far as I can tell, at least with my router (which has been flaking out lately), you cannot connect to the "ghost network". Yes, it looks like a beacon, but if it is indeed the beacon for the guest network, then here's the best workaround to be safe.
1) Enable the guest network. This now puts its security BACK in your hands.
2) Secure it with a strong, secure key (generate random string, say 25 symbols long).
This way, even if it is the beacon for that network, nobody would be able to access it anyway.
No, definitely not the Guest Network which is switched OFF (by default).
Someone suggested it actually might be someone in my house with their Hot Spot switched on on a phone/device, so I'm going to check that first and fingers crossed that is all it is. If not, it's back to square one.