- last edited on by
RogersMaude
Announced 13-December-2016 by @RogersDave http://communityforums.rogers.com/t5/forums/forumtopicpage/board-id/Getting_connected/message-id/379...
Credit to @Hybrid_Noodle
Hitron website: http://www.hitron-americas.com/product/coda-4582/
Datasheet: http://www.hitron-americas.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/CODA-4582-Datasheet.pdf
60W Power Supply built into unit
Pictures of Hardware Version 1A:
***Added Labels***
The more intelligent selection, if it was available, would be an 802.11n/ac category. Unfortunately, that doesn't exist as an option. 802.11a was ratified in 1999 and only support 54 Mb/s. So, although its still an option, it should probably be phased out.
Just to note, the upper 5 Ghz channels, 149 to 161 are allowed to run at a 1 watt output. The lower channels 36 to 48 are restricted to 50 or 200 milli-watts depending on when the device was approved by Industry Canada. 200 mw is the latest approved maximum. The inbetween channels are Dynamic Frequency Selection (DFS) which appear to range between 200 mw and 1 watt, subject to Industry Canada RSS-247 limitations to reduce the output power or antenna output where required.
@chemical1 just to note, Rogers has been having problems with its provisioning system over the last couple of months. Maybe this was one of those problems. Plan was activated but the modem wasn't provisioned properly. That never crossed my mind as usually the customers who have this issue can't use their modem at all, so, this might be a slight variation of the problem. Hopefully its resolved at this point.
Yes, but we're talking milli-watts here. A CODA-4582U can run double the power as you move from the lower channels, 36 to 46, up to channels 149 to 161. I'd have to dig into the Emission Designations to understand the exact transmission types. I suspect the chart below shows both beacon and broadcast transmission power levels. In the case of the 5 Ghz for example, the additional power in the upper frequency range, running up to about 180 to 200 mw is probably much less than the standby power for some of your household devices.
Power output for the CODA-4582U as shown on Industry Canada's site;
If my math is correct, that additional 180 mw amounts to .013kWh/month which wouldn't be noticeable on your power bill.
One interesting point is that the power output doesn't come anywhere near the maximum 1 watt allowable limit at the upper 5 Ghz channels. That might be due to antenna output limits which are also stipulated by Industry Canada.
@Datalink wrote:
One interesting point is that the power output doesn't come anywhere near the maximum 1 watt allowable limit at the upper 5 Ghz channels. That might be due to antenna output limits which are also stipulated by Industry Canada.
The 1 W output is EIRP (effective isotropic radiated power). 400 mW would be equal to roughly 26 dBm. With a 4 dBi antenna, the total effective output would be 30 dBm (1W).
@Datalink wrote:Yes, but we're talking milli-watts here. A CODA-4582U can run double the power as you move from the lower channels, 36 to 46, up to channels 149 to 161. I'd have to dig into the Emission Designations to understand the exact transmission types. I suspect the chart below shows both beacon and broadcast transmission power levels. In the case of the 5 Ghz for example, the additional power in the upper frequency range, running up to about 180 to 200 mw is probably much less than the standby power for some of your household devices.
Power output for the CODA-4582U as shown on Industry Canada's site;
If my math is correct, that additional 180 mw amounts to .013kWh/month which wouldn't be noticeable on your power bill.
One interesting point is that the power output doesn't come anywhere near the maximum 1 watt allowable limit at the upper 5 Ghz channels. That might be due to antenna output limits which are also stipulated by Industry Canada.
Thanks. Good to know my hydro bill won't be affected much.
I doubt that it will move the last right hand digit of the monthly power consumption figure.
@Hucklebury wrote:looking at the chart....Channel 151-159 has the highest max output. would this be better channels to use for better signal strength?
The entire upper channel band (149 to 161) is what result in the best range. Although 151-159 have higher transmission power, the antenna is less effective so the net result is still 30 dBm (1W) across 149-161.
@wongnog, under the BASIC .... DNS settings, change the DNS Obtain from Auto to Manual. That will change the layout of the page and show the IPV4 and IPV6 manual DNS entry windows. I have .31 running as well, in Gateway mode, and only have the IPV4 DNS addresses entered. The IPV6 entries are empty. I can't remember if I actually filled those when I had IPV6 running as well.
The Rogers IPV6 DNS addresses are:
Primary IPv6 DNS:
2607:f798:18:10:0:640:7125:5204
Secondary IPv6 DNS:
2607:f798:18:10:0:640:7125:5198
Just for trial purposes, I entered those into the IPV6 DNS entry windows and they were accepted even though the modem is running in IPV4 mode only.
I get the same error message, but, just checked, my modem is in Dual mode for testing. Forgot about that, sorry :(.
You could simply kick the modem into Dual mode, input both IPV4 and IPV6 addresses, and then kick the modem back into IPV4 mode. I'll have to look at this later on, don't have time at the moment.
@danielct slow IPSEC throughput has already been noted on the Hitron CGN3xxxx and CODA-4582 modems. That isn't necessarily a bug, depending on your point of view. More likely a design choice made by Intel in terms of running the packet processing for IPSEC traffic through the CPU instead of the hardware accelerator/processor on Puma 6 and 7 modems. The Puma 6 modem is used worldwide, so this problem is seen with other ISPs as well. Puma 7 (CODA-4582) modems are seeing wider distribution now but the issue is unchanged from the Puma 6 modems as seen from other user comments on this issue. This has been raised previously but I haven't seen any posts regarding changes for IPSEC processing. This issue is mentioned at the bottom of the following post which details the firmware updates for the various modem models used by Rogers. @RogersDave might be able to provide an update on this issue.
Edit: The fact that the IPSEC throughput is approx 25 Mb/s does not imply traffic shaping by the ISP, as is indicated in other posts on this issue. This is an in the weeds issue that Tech Support at any ISP would not have any knowledge of. It would take a systems engineer with access to the firmware, either directly or thru the manufacturer to determine how the Puma 6 and 7 modems handle IPSEC traffic, which in this case turns out to be throttled in comparison to the modems non-IPSEC throughput.
-
515249 views
-
215 Likes
-
-
