1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION
Accepted Solutions
That won't work. The XB7 and XB8 modems connect to the Nokia ONT thru the modem's port 4. It is the only port on the modem that supports a 2.5 Gb/s sync rate with the ONT. And, port 4 is the only port that is a dual Wide Area Network / Local Area Network (WAN/LAN) port. Since the modem isn't connecting thru the cable port, it requires port 4 to be used as the WAN port, connecting to the Nokia ONT's multi-gig port. So, that occupies the modem's 2.5 Gb/s port, leaving the remaining gigabit LAN ports (1 to 3) for use as ethernet ports. That also limits the throughput thru ports 1 to 3 to 1 Gb/s maximum for each port.
Connecting a multi-gig switch to port 4, ahead of the modem should only result in two WAN IP addresses being available, assuming that @Vanana isn't using Ignite TV. If Ignite TV is in use, its possible that only one WAN IP address is available. So, it wouldn't matter how many other devices were connected to the switch, only one device might end up with an external WAN IP address, allowing that device to be used to access the internet. The real problem with the switch idea is that the switch would result in any devices connected to the switch being exposed to the internet, having to rely on their own firewall to protect the device. So, you wouldn't have a modem or router firewall protecting the connected devices. That is not a good idea.
The solution here is a router with multi-gig ports for both the WAN port and the LAN port, possibly followed by a multi-gig switch, to connect to other devices where 2.5 Gb/s or higher might be used.
And then, there is the issue of supporting the Ignite TV set top boxes, if in fact @Vanana is using Ignite TV. Thats not a problem, but, Rogers doesn't support router connected configurations. Rogers only supports their configurations which limits the ethernet throughput to 1 Gb/s thru the modem.
More to follow ......
Use a 2.5 gigabit multi port switch connected to port 4 then connect your cat5/6 to the new switch.
Then all pc connected to the switch has the potential of getting 1.5 gig.
Then all pc connected to the switch has the potential of getting 1.5 gig.
That won't work. The XB7 and XB8 modems connect to the Nokia ONT thru the modem's port 4. It is the only port on the modem that supports a 2.5 Gb/s sync rate with the ONT. And, port 4 is the only port that is a dual Wide Area Network / Local Area Network (WAN/LAN) port. Since the modem isn't connecting thru the cable port, it requires port 4 to be used as the WAN port, connecting to the Nokia ONT's multi-gig port. So, that occupies the modem's 2.5 Gb/s port, leaving the remaining gigabit LAN ports (1 to 3) for use as ethernet ports. That also limits the throughput thru ports 1 to 3 to 1 Gb/s maximum for each port.
Connecting a multi-gig switch to port 4, ahead of the modem should only result in two WAN IP addresses being available, assuming that @Vanana isn't using Ignite TV. If Ignite TV is in use, its possible that only one WAN IP address is available. So, it wouldn't matter how many other devices were connected to the switch, only one device might end up with an external WAN IP address, allowing that device to be used to access the internet. The real problem with the switch idea is that the switch would result in any devices connected to the switch being exposed to the internet, having to rely on their own firewall to protect the device. So, you wouldn't have a modem or router firewall protecting the connected devices. That is not a good idea.
The solution here is a router with multi-gig ports for both the WAN port and the LAN port, possibly followed by a multi-gig switch, to connect to other devices where 2.5 Gb/s or higher might be used.
And then, there is the issue of supporting the Ignite TV set top boxes, if in fact @Vanana is using Ignite TV. Thats not a problem, but, Rogers doesn't support router connected configurations. Rogers only supports their configurations which limits the ethernet throughput to 1 Gb/s thru the modem.
More to follow ......
Hi @Vanana, if at any time I or anyone else posts something that you don't understand, please get back to us, asking to explain the parts that you don't understand. As one of my university professors said a long time ago, "If you have a question about something, there's a very good chance that someone else has the very same question". We all have to start somewhere, so don't be shy about asking questions. Ask away, as many times as you need to, in order to fully understand how all of this works .....
The outside box will be a fibre cable box, with some length of fibre cable rolled inside the box. Its also the most likely place where the underground fibre cabling connects to a lighter fibre drop cable that is run into the house. From there, the fibre drop cable runs off to connect to the ONT.
Ok, so you only have two ethernet ports in the house. At the various wallplates around the house, are they equipped with cable ports and telephone ports, and if there are telephone ports on the wall plates, are you, or do you have any intentions of using them for landline telephone purposes? The reason that I ask is that telephone cabling is often installed using Cat-5e cabling, which is the same cabling that is often used for house ethernet purposes. That telephone cabling can be repurposed to support ethernet cabling around the house, if that is something that you might be interested in one day.
$500, yup, that might just do the job. Just depends on multi-gig router prices these days.
@Datalink Great point. I do not understand the part related to the availability of the WAN IP addresses or their count, for starters.
Thank you, your description of the fiber box and the fiber cabling running into the house and connecting to the ONT matches ground reality.
There are no cable, telephone, or any other ports in the house. Just two of ethernet CAT6 ports:
I see. I do not believe I have telephone cabling in this house but I'll check with the builder tomorrow.
Which multi-gig router options are available out there, any recommendations?
@Vanana is the house fully finished, as in the walls all have drywall up and fully painted? If the house wasn't fully finished, it might be possible to install additional Cat-5e or preferably Cat 6 cable runs to support the house ethernet network.
From your description, its a simple matter of using that cable run to the second floor to connect the Nokia ONT to a multi-gigabit router. If you had a second cable run back down to the basement, you would use that to connect the router to an unmanaged gigabit or multi-gigabit switch and then connect the second cable run that runs up to the main floor.
If it turned out that you had telephone cabling installed in all of the rooms, but perhaps not completed with the necessary cable ends, it would be possible to install ethernet cable connectors instead of telephone cable connectors on all of the cables and, at the end of the day, end up with an ethernet equipped home.
If you look at all of the rooms with cable connectors, its possible that behind the wallplates there might be a Cat-5e cable ends that would support ethernet operation. The other end would be located in the basement, usually in a white nylon structured wiring enclosure that sits between the wall 2 x 4s. That structured wiring enclosure is where all of the house communications cabling starts, with cable runs that head upstairs to all of the rooms. The Cat-5e cable runs are usually blue in colour. The RG-6 cables for internet modems / cable tv / satellite tv are usually white and / or black. Its very common to see pairs of RG6 cables running to each location. So, a brief look at that structured wiring enclosure would tell you in an instant what cables are installed and how their connected, if at all.
Its very common for builders to run the cables but only install one connector on one cable in the bundle, possibly a cable connector for the modem or cable tv. All the other cables would be tucked in behind the wallplate waiting for the homeowner to discover and put to use.
The WAN address mentioned above is the Wide Area Network address that is assigned by each ISP to devices on their network There are two address schemes in effect today: Internet Protocol Version 4 (IPv4) , which has been around for a very long time, and the newer Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6).
For a modem or router, the ISP will assign a singular Wide Area Network IPv4 address when that device connects to the ISP network. What the world sees is that particular WAN address.
The modem or router, then assigns a Local Area Network address to all devices connected to in on the internal LAN side of the modem or router. The modem or router keeps track of all of these addresses and uses Network Address Translation to translate the incoming data from the external internet (WAN) to the internal LAN device.
A typical IPv4 address looks like this, which in this case is the primary Rogers IPv4 Domain Network Service address: 64.71.255.204
A typical IPv6 address might look like this, which in this case is the primary Rogers IPv6 Domain Network Service address: 2607:f798:18:10:0:640:7125:5204
When you type an address into a web browser bar, such as www.google.com, the web browser goes out to those services and basically says, alright, whats the numerical address for www.google.com? The Domain Network Service provides the answer and the web browser then uses that numerical address to navigate to the correct landing page for the address that you requested.
Alright, back to WAN addresses. With an IPv4 addressing scheme, the world only sees one address at your end. Whatever device you have running behind the modem or router is hidden from the outside world.
With IPv6 that isn't the same case. The ISP provides the modem or router with the first half of the IPv6 address called the prefix. The device on the network then provides the second half, the suffix. The end result is the much longer IPV6 type address that you see above. That is all done automatically by the modem, router and devices on your local network. That address is device specific, which can allow tracking of devices based on the unique IPv6 address. To get around that, pc's running windows utilize rotating random IPV6 addresses, so that pc's can't be tracked. Its possible to speed up the address rotation rate to further confuse any tracking activities by outside parties. The same probably goes for Apple Mac's, iphones and possibly android phones. Not sure about the address change rate for all of these.
In any event, the Wide Area Network address, as assigned by the ISP is unique for IPV4 addresses assigned to modems and routers. They do change, but that change on Rogers network is very slow. The IPv6 addresses assigned thru a combination of a Rogers supplied prefix and device supplied suffix are device specific, but, those real device identities can be obscured thru the use of using random rotating addresses.
Hopefully that explains the Wide Area Network address. If you were to bring up a command prompt on your pc, and type in: ipconfig/all
as you scroll down, you would see a preferred IPv6 address that starts with 2607, which is Rogers network and further down you would see a shorter IPv4 address, which would be something like 10.0.0.250?? The last digits could be something less than 250. That 10.0.0.xxx number is provided by the modem to the pc. Its the Local Area Network number that is provided out of the pool of numbers available to the modem. So, in terms of data flow, anything outbound from the pc goes from the 10.0.0.xxx Local Area address to the modem and appears outbound from a Rogers address, possibly something like 174.x.x.x, or another number range which doesn't come to mind. It all depends on whether or not the modem is running in its native Gateway mode, which in your case it will be, or if its running in Bridge mode, acting as a modem only without any router features. Any data inbound, in terms of IPv4, will be bound for the Wide Area Network 174.x.x.x or other address, translated to its proper Local Area address and sent to the pc. In terms of IPv6 addressing, there is no translation. Its pc to the external address, and from the external address to the pc. So, in theory its faster. How much faster, I think that's debatable.
For now, don't have any recommendations, at least not yet. I'll have to take a look around to see whats available. What you're looking for is a router that has a 2.5 Gb/s or faster WAN port to connect to the external world, and a 2.5 Gb/s or faster LAN port to connect to devices on the Local Area Network. With just a singular pc running 2.5 Gb/s that's pretty simple. The question is whether or not you might want to entertain running faster data rates over the house ethernet cabling, if in fact you have more than one additional cable run available in the house?
The Deco XE75 pro only has one 2.5 Gb/s port and two 1 Gb/s ports. Here's the specs page:
https://www.tp-link.com/ca/home-networking/deco/deco-xe75-pro/#specifications
So, this is the problem, to see 2.5 Gb/s to and thru the router to your pc, both WAN (external) and at least one LAN (internal) port need to support 2.5 Gb/s. The XE75 ports are auto-sensing, so they should determine which port in connected to a modem and which port is connected to an internal device, but only one port supports 2.5 Gb/s.
You're correct concerning the router placement. If you didn't need good wifi performance upstairs, then you could park a router in the basement, connected to the ONT, and then connect each cable run that heads upstairs to the router. With a router that has two 2.5 Gb/s ports, one WAN port and one LAN port, then you would end up with 2.5 Gb/s at your pc. But with the router in the basement, and that counts for any router or modem, your upstairs wifi performance will suffer unless you use some type of mesh network, preferably an ethernet connected mesh network. That's part of the cable and equipment conundrum, getting good wired and wireless performance out of your system while dealing with the directions of the cable runs, location of the ONT, potential location of the router and the idiosyncrasies of the devices, which device has ports of the right capability and how do you connect them to gain the highest data rate out of the whole system.
Ok, so, lets go from scratch here. When I was looking around for the Nokia ONT specs I came across the following info for the two Nokia ONTs that Rogers uses. Here's a snippet of the specs:
1. NOKIA XS-010X-Q ONT: has a single ethernet port.
Available data rates: 100 M / 1 G / 2.5 G / 5 G / 10 G Base-T interface with RJ-45 connector
Ethernet port auto-negotiation or manual configuration with
Medium Dependent Interface /
Medium Dependent Interface Crossover (MDI/ MDIX)
2. NOKIA XS-020X-A ONT: has two ethernet ports
Available data rates port 1: 1 x 1/2.5GE
Available data rates port 2: 1 x 10 GE
So, looking at the back of the ONT will tell you which one you have, the NOKIA XS-010X-Q ONT which has a single ethernet port or the NOKIA XS-020X-A ONT which has two ethernet ports. The first ONT has a multi-gig ethernet port which would allow you to run up to 10 Gb/s. The second ONT supports data rates up to 2.5 Gb/s via port #1 or 10 Gb/s via port #2. Connecting to the 10 Gb/s port of either ONT would allow you to run higher data rates if Rogers ever supported higher data rates in your area someday.
As indicated previously, the ONT connects to the XB7 and XB8 modems thru port 4, which is a multi-gig port that supports data rates up to 2.5 Gb/s. That port is also a Wide Area Network port with a firewall, or, Local Area Network port when the modem is connected via RG-6 cable, which is a typical installation. In this case, with a fibre connected ONT in the system, the two components are designed to connect thru the modem’s port 4, utilizing the firewall that protects the modem via port 4. The end result is that any other ethernet traffic on the Local Area Network ports,1 to 3, is limited to 1 Gb/s, effectively 940 Mb/s when you take ethernet overhead into account. Its unfortunate that Comcast didn’t see fit to put two 2.5 Gb/s ethernet ports on the modem, which would have made the modem very useful for fibre connected configurations, such as the one that you currently have.
As we’re already discussing, to go beyond 1 Gb/s, you would need to replace the modem with a router that has multi-gigabit ethernet ports for both the Wide Area Network (WAN) port (external port) and Local Area Network (LAN) port (internal port). You can simply disconnect the modem and replace it with a capable router. For a singular device such as your pc, you can simply connect to the routers 2.5 Gb/s LAN port. In order to run higher data rates for any other device on your network, you would need to connect the router 2.5 Gb/s LAN port to a multi-gig unmanaged switch. From there, you would connect the other devices to that switch.
Most routers on the market these days are limited to 1 Gb/s, as are most unmanaged LAN switches. The market is at a point where multi-gig routers and switches are readily available. They are more expensive than gigabit routers and switches, but that has always been the case, and, those costs are decreasing as the mutli-gig port and port controller costs come down.
I had a look at the following online article from Dong Knows Tech, which is fairly recent, just to see what’s around these days for routers with dual 2.5 Gb/s ethernet ports, which would enable you to run 2.5 Gb/s to the router, and thru the router to your pc.
https://dongknows.com/multi-gigabit-wi-fi-6-routers-to-bring-home-today/
I won’t attest to the “Dong Knows Tech” idea, but, the article serves as a list of possible candidates. From that list comes the following that might be of interest, maybe now, and maybe later:
TP-Link Archer BE800 – this appears to be one of the first future multi-gig routers around today, with 4 x 2.5 Gb/s ports and 2 x 10 Gb/s ports. Unfortunately, its not available in Canada from what I can see and the U.S. price is $600. Add about 35 % exchange rate and that comes up to $780. Interesting router, but way over budget.
Next is the TP-Link Archer AX3E300:
https://www.tp-link.com/ca/home-networking/wifi-router/archer-axe300/#overview
Interesting router, two 10 Gb/s ports, one 2.5 Gb/s port and its Wifi 6e capable which is the latest wifi standard for high speed wifi running in the 6 Ghz band. Amazon.ca price: $773.42. Ok, so much for that.
Next up, the Asus GT-AXE16000:
https://rog.asus.com/ca-en/networking/rog-rapture-gt-axe16000-model/
It also has 1 x 2.5 Gigabit WAN Port and 2 x 10 Gigabit WAN/LAN Ports plus its Wifi 6e capable. But, its also $800. So much for that one as well.
Next is the Asus RT-AX88U Pro:
https://www.asus.com/ca-en/networking-iot-servers/wifi-routers/asus-gaming-routers/rt-ax88u-pro/
It has one 2.5 Gb/s WAN port and one 2.5 LAN port, so this meets the requirements as well as the usual 1 Gb/s ports. Its only Wifi 6 which is the usual Wifi specs on most routers these days.
Bestbuy.ca cost is $299.99. Its on sale, $100 off until the 6th.
Next up is the Asus GT-AX6000:
https://rog.asus.com/ca-en/networking/rog-rapture-gt-ax6000-model/
This has one 2.5 Gb/s WAN/LAN port and one 2.5 Gb/s LAN port plus 4 gigabit ports. Its only Wifi 6 capable, which is the usual Wifi specs on most routers these days.
It’s 349.99 at Bestbuy.ca, on sale, $80 off.
So, the list for routers with two 2.5 Gb/s ports as a minimum appears to be small. At least in terms of keeping below the $500 budget cut-off. Looks like the Asus RT-AX88U Pro and the Asus GT-AX6000 would fit within the budget. There may be other routers made my other manufacturers that might fit within your budget, but, for a quick look, this is all that I saw. The defining point seems to be the addition of 10 Gb/s ports and possibly Wifi 6e. Food for thought, keep in mind that the ONT has 10 Gb/s capability. That is shown in the specs at the very beginning of the post. Connected to a router that has two 10 Gb/s ports, one for the WAN (external) side and one for the Lan (internal) side, that would give you an upgrade path to higher data rates if an when Rogers ever offered that in your area. That would also require an upgraded Network Interface Card for your pc, but, with the ONT and router connected and synced at 10 Gb/s, there would be no action required on your part other than to order the higher speeds. So, although some of the Gucci routers are beyond budget at this point, keep their capability in mind when you’re looking at your future internet plans.
I had a brief look at some of the Mesh network systems, and like their singular counterparts, when you start adding 2.5 and 10 Gb/s ports, they become very expensive. It becomes a question of how much money do you want to spend?
In terms of “what would I do?”, I wouldn’t have any issues running either Asus router. I’ve used Asus routers for a long time now, so I’m familiar with the user interface and what needs to be done to run them without any issue. My thoughts are, what’s available now that meets the budget and can be installed without a huge hassle? Keeping this to a single router, and possibly an unmanaged ethernet switch is probably the way to do this.
The Republic of Gamer (ROG) Rapture GT-AX6000 is a gaming router, or, at least that’s the way that its marketed. Its currently $349.99 at Bestbuy.ca, on sale, $80 off until the 6th of July.
The Asus RT-AX88U Pro is almost the same router, Bestbuy.ca cost is $299.99. Its on sale, $100 off until the 6th of July.
Both routers have the same processor and amount of memory. The difference is that the GT-AX6000 has one 2.5 port that can serve as a WAN port, or a LAN port. The other 2.5 Gb/s port is shown as a LAN port. The RT-AX88U Pro has two 2.5 Gb/s ports. One is designated as a WAN port, and the other one is designated as a LAN port. So, they are fixed, in terms of what their respective roles are.
The GT-AX6000 has one USB 3.2 Gen 1 and USB 2.0 port. The RT-AX88U Pro has one USB 3.2 Gen 1 port.
Other than that, the two routers are essentially the same, albeit with a different external look.
Both routers can be loaded with Merlin’s Asuswrt, which is a third party firmware built on the original Asus firmware. I’ve used Merlin’s Asuswrt for some time now and I would have no hesitation loading either of these routers with Merlin’s firmware after buying either router. There is a dedicated group of users who use Merlin’s firmware, so, any questions can normally be answered by that group or by Merlin himself. Merlin’s forum is located here:
https://www.snbforums.com/forums/asuswrt-merlin.42/
The Asus forum on the Small Netbuilders site is located here:
https://www.snbforums.com/forums/asus-wireless.37/
Fwiw, Merlin has added his own enhancements to the original Asus firmware and he is usually ahead of the game in terms of updating various open source subcomponents which is included in the Asus baseline firmware. The development cycle runs from the original firmware release by Asus, followed by an update by Merlin, which includes an Alpha, Beta and then Release version. By the time that the Merlin Release version hits the street, its normally well wrung out, in terms of any bugs.
Ok, so, that’s my quick look at buying a router with two 2.5 Gb/s ports. As I indicated, there may be more. If you run a google search for “wifi router with two 2.5 Gb/s ports”, you may come across others. You then have to look very carefully to determine if in fact the routers that are displayed actually have two 2.5 Gb/s ports, one for the WAN side and one for the LAN side. Its possible that you might come across combination ports that can be used on the WAN side or LAN side. And, the next question is, does it fit within your budget?
Ok, so, moving onto the cabling situation. It would be of great interest on your part, if you can determine what cabling is installed in the home, but, possibly not finished with the necessary connectors. If you look at the structured wiring Cabinet in the basement, where all of the communications cabling for the house starts, you should see blue Cat-5e ethernet cables, which can be used for telephones or for house ethernet. You indicated that there are only two ethernet ports in the house, so, there should be two blue Cat-5e ethernet cables in that cabinet that have RJ-45 connectors on them which can be used to connect to the ONT. If you see more blue Cat-5e cables in the cabinet, I suspect that they might not have connectors on them. That will tell you that most likely, each room upstairs has a cable run that can be used for telephone or ethernet purposes. If you count the number of blue cables that are present, that should tell you how many rooms might have the other end of the cables sitting behind a wallplate. If you determine that there are twice as many cables as there are rooms, that would tell you that in all probability, each room has two Cat-5e cable runs from that cabinet.
If you take for example, the 2nd floor room for the office, there might be a second blue Cat-5e cable sitting behind the wallplate. Only way to find out is to take the wallplate off of the wall to see what cables are hiding behind the wallplate. Same goes for the main floor wallplate that contains the ethernet port.
If you find a second Cat-5e cable behind the wallplate, that would allow you to finish those cables so that you have a second cable run between the basement cabinet and the wallplate in question. That second cable run would allow you to park the router at either location, on the main floor or on the second floor, connected to the ONT via the primary cable. From there, the second cable would be used to connect the router to an unmanaged gigabit or multi-gigabit switch sitting at the basement cabinet. That switch would then connect to the cable run to the other room.
So, there are two versions of this that could occur.
- The router is located on the 2nd floor, connected to the ONT via one of the cable runs. The other cable run goes back down to the cabinet to a gigabit switch. The question at this point is what is connected to the main floor ethernet port. If it’s a device that only has gigabit capability, then you would use an unmanaged gigabit switch. The question here is “how is the wifi coverage for the rest of the house if the router is sitting on the second floor?”
- The router is located on the main floor, connected to the ONT via one of the cable runs. The other cable run goes back down to the cabinet to a unmanaged multi-gigabit switch. With the pc upstairs, and its 2.5 Gb/s port, your intention is to run 2.5 Gb/s to the pc. So, you would need an unmanaged multi-gigabit switch, which is more expensive than an unmanaged gigabit switch.
Here are some examples of an unmanaged gigabit switch:
And here are some examples of a unmanaged 2.5 Gb/s switch:
So, as you can see, there is a definite price difference, but, fwiw, that difference used to be much higher. The prices of multi-gig equipment is dropping, not as fast as I’d like to see, but they are dropping.
The upside of installing the router on the main floor is that it will probably provide better wifi coverage over the whole house. That is something that you could experiment with, to determine which location provides better wifi coverage, on the main floor or on the 2nd floor. After you determine that, you can decide which type of switch you need, an unmanaged gigabit switch, or an unmanaged 2.5 Gb/s switch, depending on where the router is located.
The term unmanaged gigabit switch means that the switch is plug and play. You don’t have to do anything to it to manage it, other than connecting one ethernet cable to a router or modem, as a source, and then connecting the other switch ports to cabling or devices that you want to provide ethernet / internet capability.
There are managed switches that allow uses to control network configurations and bandwidth to specific devices if desired. For the sake of this discussion, these don’t come into the picture here.
Ok, that should do it for now. The questions at hand are which router to buy, and what cabling is installed in the home but possibly not finished. If you find that there are additional Cat-5e ethernet cables in the home, you could call in a structured wiring tech company to install the necessary connectors, or, you can do it yourself. Its not hard, just a matter of paying attention to detail and having the necessary tools on hand. I’ve done this myself and walked others thru it, so I know it can be done by people who aren’t familiar with ethernet cabling.
You can thank Comcast for that problem. That is also a problem for all ISPs that are currently captive to Comcast's decisions, and the modems that it provides to its own customers. Every other ISP that licences Comcasts systems are along for the ride, most likely with no ability to influence the direction that the ride happens to take. Comcast announced 10 Gb/s symmetrical service in June. Looking at the installation requirements if appears that its fibre all the way to the router, with the router requiring a 10G 850 nm multimode fiber (MMF), small form-factor pluggable (SFP) transceiver. So the question is, out of all of the routers with SFP ports, which ones are able to run MMF SFPs. Is this yet another Comcast decision that will actually prevent customers from running 10 Gb/s without spending a huge amount of money for a suitable router? Running 10 Gb/s beyond the router would be up to the customer as to how its done. Fibre experts, please chime in here regarding a Single Mode SFP versus a Multi-mode SFP. Can you use both in any SFP application? Does the router port care about which one is in use?
https://www.xfinity.com/support/articles/requirements-to-run-xfinity-internet-speeds-over-1-gbps
Comcast has also been testing a 10 Gb/s modem since early last year, but, I haven't seen any details about the output ports. Comcast is still showing the XB8 as their top modem model at the moment.
Contrary to your opinion, there are ways around the issue of running 2.5 Gb/s to a router. See the above post.
The cable that connects to the Nokia Optical Network Terminal is a fibre optic cable, not an RG6 coax cable that is used in the vast majority of home and business installations. So, you can't connect the fibre cable to a router, but, you can connect the ONT's ethernet output directly to a multi-gig router's WAN port instead of the modem's 2.5 Gb/s WAN/LAN port (port 4). Or, in other words, bypass the modem altogether. Getting 2.5 Gb/s or higher out of the router's LAN ports is possible if you happen have a router with multi-gig LAN ports, and, there are some around.
In the case of a coax cable installation, with an XB7 or XB8, you can connect port 4 of those modems to a router which has a multi-gig WAN port, at least up to 2.5 Gb/s at the present time. That will allow the modem and router to sync at 2.5 Gb/s. Once again, you can get 2.5 Gb/s out to connected devices if the LAN ports of the router are multi-gig ports, or, you run the multi-gig output of the router to an unmanaged multi-gig switch and connect any devices you want to that switch.
Its a matter of money for the customers, having to work around Comcasts decision to provide a single multi-gig port on the modems. It will be interesting to see what comes next. If its yet another modem with a single port that supports multi-gig data rates, I'd consider that to be a major failure on Comcasts part or a deliberate move to throttle customer data rates, forcing customers to spend an amount of money to work around another one of Comcasts decisions..
@CCL3 wrote:
The most appropriate way for Rogers to solve this is to provide a modem/gateway with a 2.5Gbps WAN and LAN respectively. If I wanted to run the modem in bridge mode, there is no way to feed the 2.5Gps WAN on any third-party router. Or simply you should feed the coaxial cable to the modem instead of the Nokia ONT thing. The customer for sure can spend more money for the setup but Rogers should provide solutions to avoid this common issue.
The XB7 and XB8 gateways were meant to support a multi-Gig DOCSIS Internet service. Any change to their current design would drive the hardware costs up significantly.
Bell keeps their hardware costs down by integrating the ONT into their HomeHub and GigaHub modems. Their customers would LOVE to have what you have: an external ONT with a 10 GigE port, where they can supply their own secure, high-performance network gear and stick their Ignite Gateway into a closet.
How about this? I will HAPPILY trade you my Ignite 1.5 Gigabit DOCSIS Internet service for your FTTH serrvice! You can plug your computer into the 2.5 Gigabit Ethernet port and get about 1.,9 Gbps of throughput on your speed tests; I can then plug by own gear directly into the ONT.
@senordd what are you testing with, a desktop or laptop. And ... looking at the 930 Mb/s, I would guess that the test device has a gigabit port on it, assuming that this test was done via ethernet? The best you can do with a gigabit ethernet port is about 930/940 Mb/s.
What modem do you have, the Gen 1, 2 or3 modem? Here is Rogers current modem lineup:
Internet Self-Install - Help and Support - Rogers
Just to note, in order to run data rates over 1 Gb/s, you need a gen 2 or 3 modem and you need to connect either modem via its lower right side port #4 (2.5 Gb/s WAN/LAN) port to a device that supports 2.5 Gb/s via its WAN port. The modem and test device will sync at 2.5 Gb/s, allowing you to run the 1.5 Gb/s data rate.
Note that the above info is for a cable connected modem.
If you happen to have Fibre to the Home (FTTH), then the fibre cable connects to a Nokia Optical Network Terminal (ONT) which then connects to the Gen 3 modem via port 4. That is required as the modem's port 4 functions as a WAN port, with a firewall, or a LAN port when the modem is cable connected In this case it operates as a firewalled WAN port, leaving the remaining three gigabit ports as the only ethernet ports available. To run higher data rates beyond the modem, you would need to replace the modem with a router that has a multi-gig WAN port and a multi-gig LAN port if you wanted to run 1.5 Gb/s or higher to a device on your local network. There is information in the above posts regarding routers with multi-gig WAN and LAN ports.
Note that Rogers doesn't support this configuration, so, if you went down this path, you would need to keep the modem on hand so that you could put it back into service if you needed any troubleshooting from Rogers tech support.
@Datalink wrote:
You can thank Comcast for that problem. That is also a problem for all ISPs that are currently captive to Comcast's decisions, and the modems that it provides to its own customers. Every other ISP that licences Comcasts systems are along for the ride, most likely with no ability to influence the direction that the ride happens to take.
Comcast designed their hardware to work together fairly seamlessly. The Cable companies like their gateways because they are simple, less-technical customers cannot get themselves into trouble, and they support (Ignite) TV, Home Phone, Wi-Fi Pods, Home Security, and a whole suite of other Connected Home offerings.
There is no technical reason why Rogers could not allow customers to use cable modems that Rogers has already certified for TPIA customers who access their network, offer a Home Phone service that uses Grandstream ATAs, and just generally get out of the way of customers who have more advanced technical requirements that Rogers never had the ability to support. The challenge would be where to draw the line of what they will and will not support, even though this is not a problem for TPIA providers, who operate on very slim margins, albeit with a much smaller customer base.
Comcast designed the XB6, XB7 and XB8 gateways to be used with DOCSIS. Their (Gigabit) EPON customers get the Arris X5001. As far as I know, they do not (yet) have a great gateway solution for multi-gig FTTH or 10G offerings.
Comcast announced 10 Gb/s symmetrical service in June. Looking at the installation requirements if appears that its fibre all the way to the router, with the router requiring a 10G 850 nm multimode fiber (MMF), small form-factor pluggable (SFP) transceiver. So the question is, out of all of the routers with SFP ports, which ones are able to run MMF SFPs. Is this yet another Comcast decision that will actually prevent customers from running 10 Gb/s without spending a huge amount of money for a suitable router?
Comcast has been marketing their "Xfinity 10G network" for a while now. For most customers, this will be DOCSIS 4.0, which can theoretically offer 10 Gigabit/s download and 6 Gigabit upload speeds, which will allow them to offer symmetric speeds up to a point.
As for their symmetric 10Gbps FTTH service, it looks like those customers will be getting a 10 Gigabit Ethernet connection. Comcast basically provides them with a fibre jack as their demarc and customers provide their own equipment to connect to it.
To be honest, I think that this is actually a very sensible approach. Anyone who needs THAT much bandwidth is not someone who will be using an Xfinity Gateway for connectivity.
As for hardware, we're talking about $25 for the 850 nm 10GBASE-SR transceiver and less than $20 for a short OM3 MM patch cable. If you have existing equipment with a fixed 10GBASE-T interface, you purchase a 10 Gig media converter.
Running 10 Gb/s beyond the router would be up to the customer as to how its done. Fibre experts, please chime in here regarding a Single Mode SFP versus a Multi-mode SFP. Can you use both in any SFP application? Does the router port care about which one is in use?
https://www.xfinity.com/support/articles/requirements-to-run-xfinity-internet-speeds-over-1-gbps
With optical links, you need to ensure that the transceivers are matched at both ends and that you are using the correct patch cables and compatible fibre along the entire light path.
As a general rule, you must not mix single mode and multimode fibre, and different interface types require compatible fibre. The optical properties of SM and MM fibre are very different.
Comcast has also been testing a 10 Gb/s modem since early last year, but, I haven't seen any details about the output ports. Comcast is still showing the XB8 as their top modem model at the moment.
Comcast has been working with Broadcom to develop a DOCSIS4 cable modem. So far, there is no public info on their next-gen gateway. However, if they based it on the BCM4916 and related chipsets, we'll probably be stuck with a single 10GigE LAN/WAN interface + 3 Gigabit Ethernet ports.
Rogers Ignite Internet 8 Gigabit customers face even bigger challenges making use of all the bandwidth that is available to them. However, with that service, Rogers provides them with a 10 Gigabit Ethernet LAN switch. The LAN switch is connected to the ONT and and the Ignite Gateway and any devices requiring high-speed connectivity are also connected to the switch. (See their FAQ for more info.)
Presumably, Ignite 1.5 and 2.5 Gigabit customers could use a similar approach. Amazon sells LAN switches with eight 2.5 GigE ports and one 10 Gig SFP port for about $150.
This alone is not a great solution because any computers or devices connected to the switch would be "unfirewalled" and directly exposed to the public Internet, and they would not be able to access any devices that are connected through the Ignite Gateway.
However, if you choose to use your own router/firewall and network gear, this would allow you to bypass the Ignite Gateway (since you do not have a Bridge Mode option) yet also leave the Gateway online if you need it to support services such as Home Phone.
@danno100 wrote: You need an ethernet adapter that will go over 1G. The 1.5G is a scam...most people's equipment can't support it.
It's not a scam because Rogers does provide 1.5G to the Gateway. It's not Rogers fault if people don't do their research before switching and if they don't have the appropriate equipment.
-
11400 views
-
12 Likes
-
-
