Rogers Hitron CGN3 - NEW FIRMWARE - 4.2.4.3

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: 86

Re: Rogers Hitron CGN3 - NEW FIRMWARE - 4.2.4.3

I had noticed that IPV6 had gone very quiet in general.  I do see that Rogers just doesn't mention  6RD although it still works for those of us who use it.

 

I hope they get with the program before they break the internet with Carrier Grade Nat which they probably think is a cheap solution to running out of addresses.

Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 928

Re: Rogers Hitron CGN3 - NEW FIRMWARE - 4.2.4.3


@timlocke wrote:

I had noticed that IPV6 had gone very quiet in general.  I do see that Rogers just doesn't mention  6RD although it still works for those of us who use it.

 

I hope they get with the program before they break the internet with Carrier Grade Nat which they probably think is a cheap solution to running out of addresses.


Honestly, I think carrier-grade NAT is what's going to happen.

 

IPv6 is an exercise in naive idealism. Instead of cooking up a quick-and-dirty-hack that could be deployed in a week 20 years ago, the creators of IPv6 put together this monstrosity that, 20 years later, is barely deployed anywhere. And meanwhile, devices like, say TVs, bluray players, even watches, that had no network connectivity 20 years ago now have IPv4 stacks, which makes a v6-only world ever harder to accomplish.

 

IPv6 has a fundamental problem, namely that no one can go IPv6-only until EVERYONE ELSE is IPv6-enabled. Until everyone else is IPv6-enabled and at least some people are IPv6-only, then you can reach everyone else fine by other means, so why would you bother deploying IPv6 absent some government mandate (as has usually been the case for other cold-turkey technological changes, e.g. NTSC -> ATSC)?

 

(That being said, I would love native IPv6 from Rogers or any other large ISP, but... that looks less and less likely every day. Sooner or later, they'll carrier-grade the cheapest tier, then the tier above that, and so on...)



I've Been Around
Posts: 1

Re: Rogers Hitron CGN3 - NEW FIRMWARE - 4.2.4.3

Good Afternoon Everyone.

 

Firstly, thank-you for the opportunity to post questions and learn more about technical issues with Rogers equipment, etc.

 

We are in the process of upgrading to a larger Rogers Internet Package (ie: more Gigs) that requires us to change our current (old) modem to the Hitron CGN3.

 

Reading through multiple  posts here on this forum, it was clearly apparent that the new modem (Hitron CGN3) had many connection and stability issues when Rogers first released it.

 

My question is: Has the most recent version of Firmware resolved the previous connection and stability issues first experienced with the CGN3 Modem?? And if so, what is the most updated version of Firmware required for proper function of the Hitron CGN3??

 

I would appreciate any assistance and recommendations as I'm fearful to make this upgrade based on the history of issues with the CGN3 Modem!!!

 

Thanks!

 

Fireguy (Rob)

Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 13,875

Re: Rogers Hitron CGN3 - NEW FIRMWARE - 4.2.4.3

The latest version of the firmware, is 4.2.4.3.
When you first recieve the unit.. it MAY NOT be on this firmware already.  It can take up to 5 days for it to be pushed out automatically (no, can not call in to get it pushed earlier).
Durring this time, you could run into some of the older instability issues.

Under the older versions of the firmware... weither you were using it in gateway mode or bridged with another router... people experienced things where the unit needed to be rebooted daily.. not always getting the right throughputs when bridged, etc.
These are no longer present in the latest firmware.

 

There is however one major bug in the latest firmware still.

The CGN3 has issues DIRECTLY linking with 10/100 devices.   Connecting a 10/100 device, theoretically, should be able to get up to 100mbps transfer speeds.... there is a linking issue.. where it almost links it at 1/2 duplex... and users experience 30-60mbps speeds.
There are no issues connecting gigabit devices.

If you plan on using the gateway in gateway mode, and have any 10/100 devices that were to connect to it.. the best thing is to put a gigabit switch inbetween.  As the switch is doing the initial link to the CGN3, the 10/100's into the switch should get their full speeds.

Alternatively, many people will put the unit into BRIGED mode, effectively turning it into a modem only.  Then connect a 3rd party router into it, which then does all their routing, wireless, etc.
One just needs to make sure, to get a router, which has gigabit WAN and LAN ports.. or you will run into the same 10/100 linking issues.



Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 6,049

Re: Rogers Hitron CGN3 - NEW FIRMWARE - 4.2.4.3

There are a couple of other issues:

 

1.  Multi-cast support for wireless printers does not appear to work.  You can connect a printer via one of the CGN3 ports and access it through wireless connections apparently.  If anyone is reading through this and has actually been able to make wireless printing work using the CGN3, please chime in......

 

2.  The front LED which indicates the connection data rate of the CGN3, either 100 or 10000 Mb/s always indicates 100 Mb/s (another firmware bug).  Use the port LEDs at the back of the CGN3 to determine the actual port to port connection rate with other devices.

 

3.  There are latency issues with the CGN3, most likely only detectable if you're a gamer. 

 

4.  If you bridge the CGN3 you can apparently obtain two IP addresses with it, which might be useful in some configurations Smiley Happy

 

5.  If you presently use a surge protector of any type on the RG6 cable leading to your modem, or on the ethernet cables leaving the modem, don't use it with the CGN3.  It will most likely cut your throughput rate, leaving you to wonder why you're not seeing the download / upload rates that you expect.  That came up again today.

 

Rumour has it, and I do mean rumour, there will be a firmware update prior to the end of the year.  Hopefully this will fix the current bugs.

 

Despite the existing issues with the CGN3, the question that really comes up sometimes is whether or not you are ready for data rates above 100 Mb/s. There are numerous devices which only contain 10/100 Mb/s ports or which run at lower wireless rates. What we typically see in those cases are questions of why isn’t the download rate where it should be? If you are intending to go to the 150, 250 or 350 Mb/s service, you should review the specs of your devices and determine in advance what their max data rates are. That way, you would know what to expect instead of being surprised when the data rates don’t move up with the increased service level. You might even be surprised to learn that your current devices won’t support higher data rates, making the move up a moot point.

 

 

 



I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 152

Re: Rogers Hitron CGN3 - NEW FIRMWARE - 4.2.4.3

I haven't been on here for awhile, but #4 caught my attention....You'd probably need 2 routers for that, ya? You'd be able to set up a proper DMZ from your house!

Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 6,049

Re: Rogers Hitron CGN3 - NEW FIRMWARE - 4.2.4.3

Yep, that's an interesting twist to say the least.  Welcome back.  Any news on the firmware update front?



Highlighted
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 152

Re: Rogers Hitron CGN3 - NEW FIRMWARE - 4.2.4.3

Nothing yet - I really want them to address the latency issue though, but there's really no way for them to actually experience it unless they game like you said.

 

I'm going to guess that a new modem is going to end up coming out before they address this issue, as there's no way that anyone from rogers is going to consider this a show-stopper (unlike the bridge issue). To that extent, I do agree; it's not a complete show stopper, just annoying for online gamers. 

 

L.

Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 13,875

Re: Rogers Hitron CGN3 - NEW FIRMWARE - 4.2.4.3


@LYuan wrote:

I haven't been on here for awhile, but #4 caught my attention....You'd probably need 2 routers for that, ya? You'd be able to set up a proper DMZ from your house!


Not really.
The modem iteself, just assigns two IP addresses and does and some minimal routing.

WAY back in the day (and we are talking like.. the sub 2mbps rogers high speed days), you used to be able to do this as well.. the assignment of weither you were 'authorized' was to have your PC name as a specific RGXXXXXXX sort of thing.
But you used to be able to do a -1 or -a (i forget which) then -b, running through a switch.. and BOTH would be assigned.
Now.. it was usually a HUB back then.. so collisions EVERYWHERE.. but it would give two addresses. (and was too slow to really share Smiley Tongue)

 

If you wanted two full networks, etc.. you could do two routers..
But the 2nd etc.. you could just do straight to a PC or other device.

 

Now, i have heard of a number confirming that they did get a 2nd IP assigned that way.. none that have KEPT it in that config.

 

I know with rogers, you used to be able to PAY to get two assigned addresses..

Over time, if you were to do that.. i am not sure if rogers would step in and stop you from getting the 2nd or force you to pay, etc.



Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 928

Re: Rogers Hitron CGN3 - NEW FIRMWARE - 4.2.4.3


@Gdkitty wrote:

@LYuan wrote:

I haven't been on here for awhile, but #4 caught my attention....You'd probably need 2 routers for that, ya? You'd be able to set up a proper DMZ from your house!


Not really.
The modem iteself, just assigns two IP addresses and does and some minimal routing.

WAY back in the day (and we are talking like.. the sub 2mbps rogers high speed days), you used to be able to do this as well.. the assignment of weither you were 'authorized' was to have your PC name as a specific RGXXXXXXX sort of thing.
But you used to be able to do a -1 or -a (i forget which) then -b, running through a switch.. and BOTH would be assigned.
Now.. it was usually a HUB back then.. so collisions EVERYWHERE.. but it would give two addresses. (and was too slow to really share Smiley Tongue)

 

If you wanted two full networks, etc.. you could do two routers..
But the 2nd etc.. you could just do straight to a PC or other device.

 

Now, i have heard of a number confirming that they did get a 2nd IP assigned that way.. none that have KEPT it in that config.

 

I know with rogers, you used to be able to PAY to get two assigned addresses..

Over time, if you were to do that.. i am not sure if rogers would step in and stop you from getting the 2nd or force you to pay, etc.


Oh man, this brings back old memories...

 

@Basically, @home ran a very unorthodox DHCP setup whereby you were assigned an IP based on your computer hostname. So, for example, at my parents' house back in the day, I was cr781114-a, I believe. Then you could pay for a second IP, and that would be cr781114-b.

 

(And yes, I did this. Ran a 3Com 10BaseT hub plugged into a Rogers LanCity, later Terayon, modem thank you very much.)

 

This was in an era before consumer-grade NAT 'routers' existed. If you wanted to do NAT (which was brand new - before, you would have been running SOCKS proxies), you set up an x86 box running Linux/FreeBSD, a Windows box running Wingate (ewww, giant security nightmare) or some of the newer NAT software, and then MS launched their own Internet Connection Sharing in... Win98 SE, I believe. (It's been so long.)

 

And with this setup, if you replaced your computer with another one, just give it the cr781114-a name, and boom.

 

@when @home went bust in the fall of 2001, Rogers replaced @home's DHCP with a more traditional DHCP setup that's based on MAC addresses. And that leaves you with a very big problem - if you limit DHCP to one MAC behind a given modem, then what happens if someone gets a new device? They either have to clone the MAC (which is why most consumer routers have MAC cloning options) or call up tech support and have the old device's MAC unregistered.

 

So, I think the Rogers DHCP setup has always allowed more than one MAC per modem ever since then to prevent that problem.

 

(And I wonder what happened to charging for extra IPs. I know my parents continued to be billed for that second IP years after I had put all their machines behind a NAT router...)