Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[broadstairs]

Yes the HG622 is performing well on my connection as well, as you say certainly very good possibly the best although my old D-Link was pretty good before it went t**s-up. Wireless N only for me seems a little better but I agree about signal strength, I suspect a router with external aerials would be better. I may consider replacing my WAP with an N capable one later especially if we get a smart TV.

Stuart

[GigabitEthernet]

Eric, so it performs better than the HG612, despite using the same chipset? How exactly does it perform better? Does it produce less errors, a faster speed, etc?

[roseway]

The HG622 connects at a higher speed under the same conditions. When I last used the HG612 I was tweaking the SNRM down slightly (by about 1 dB), and I had a connection speed of ~8050 kbps; now with the HG622 I get a connection speed of 8138 kbps with no tweaking.

Both routers proved to be extremely stable, and their CLI interfaces provide more comprehensive data than other Broadcom-based routers I've used.

[broadstairs]

I'd agree with Eric about performance, in fact my HG622 will sync at just over 9000kbps but so far I've actually used the rs-ux option to slightly increase the snrm above the 6db profile and find the 8758kpbs I now achieve slightly better as there are fewer errors, but it was not dropping the link, also I may let it go back to the default 6db in a few days just to see what happens. Originally it was running at this 9000+kbps when TT had their problems last weekend and initially I dropped it lower than it is now because I thought the problems I was having might be my sync speed and errors..

Stuart

[les-70]

  I am fairly ignorant on ports and security but "shields up" gives me all clear with my DG834G but port 631 open on the HG622.  Port 631 is for internet printing and I think that is turned off on my PC.

   I can't fathom out how it might be disabled or set to stealth on the HG622.   Please can anyone offer advice?

[broadstairs]

Same here I'll take a look and see if I can fathom out how to turn it off for completeness. I suspect it is something to do with the HG622 being able to have a printer connected by USB directly to it.

Stuart

Edit: I just had a look and the firewall wont reject it and there is no setting on the USB page to disable it, so at present I've not found any way to turn it off completely.

[roseway]

Port 631 is the port used by CUPS, the Unix printing system. If you can get at the file /etc/cups/cupsd.conf to edit it, replace the line

Code: [Select]

Listen *.631with

Code: [Select]

Listen 127.0.0.1:631
but I don't know if it's possible to edit this file in situ.

[Edit] Unfortunately that file doesn't exist, so I don't know where port 631 is set up. I've no more time now, but I'll look further later on.

[les-70]

  Eric,

    I assume you are  referring to a PC running Linux and not to editing the HG622 file system.  I am running Windows XP, in that, unless you use it, the advice seems to be to turn off the internet printing service via the registry.  I have done that but the open port is at the router I think.  Going back my DG834G closes the port (or sets it stealth).  I just feel it ought not to appear as open.  I have static IP and notice quite a few port scans and other intrusion attempts so I like to careful.

 Paul

[roseway]

No, I was referring to the possibility of closing the port in the HG622, which is of course an embedded Linux system. Some of its config files may be editable.

[broadstairs]

I just wonder if you could forward the port within the HG622 to as non-existent PC, that might make a difference. It is a bit naughty that you cannot turn it off and that the firewall does not prevent access.

Stuart

Edit Success port forwarding does indeed get this port stealthed. Just setup to forward from any source address to a single destination on your LAN whcih you know will never be used.

[les-70]

  Thanks, that seems to fix it.  I will have a further explore to see if anything else stops it.  I wonder if that cure suggests that my PC is responding when it shows as open I will see if I can explore that as well.

[roseway]

I hate to have to ask this, but I can't make this work. How do you set it up?

[les-70]

  I can say what I did,  I added under NAT- port mapping - an entry

close port    WAN1_INTERNET_R_ATM1_0_38    TCP/UDP        631    631    631    192.168.0.254    Enable

   Close port is my name for the entry.  However I really don't know what I am doing and I hope there is better approach other than a spurious redirection. I am concerned that the PC should not respond itself.

[roseway]

Thanks, that's done it.  I was trying to set it up in the Firewall section.

[burakkucat]

What concerns me is that port 631 is visible from the WAN side, by default. 

I have not yet looked at all the suggestions made above but until an nmap executed from elsewhere and pointed to The Cattery shows that all ports are 'filtered' (in 'stealth' mode), I shall not be happy to use my HG622.