Kitz Forum
Broadband Related => Broadband Hardware => Topic started by: DrTeeth on January 10, 2008, 09:27:43 PM
-
Does anybody know where I can get a v2 version of this router? Zyxel tells me it has a faster CPU than the original. No retailer that I have come across mentions a v2, so I need help.
TIA
DrT
-
Are the V1 and V2 the same price etc... like the Netgear DG834 v1,v2 etc series? If so, you'd probably be better off phoning and actually speak to a retailer to ask if they are shipping the V2 at all, and get a promise that if they did ship and it wasn't the V2 you could return it for a refund?
-
The retailers generally don't have a clue. One has said, "the V1s were discontinued when the ROHS compliancy laws came into affect, which I think was August 2006. They are therefore unavailable, and we only stock the V2s".
Zyxel says that v2s are not on sale in the UK :doh: :hmm: !!!
-
hmm conflicting advice indeed.
I must admit I havent looked too hard, but I dont seem to be able to find anything specific on the differences between v1 + v2 - since they both appear to use the same datasheet. The only real difference I could see was the firmware in use.
P-660HW-D1 3.40(AGL.4)C0 N/A 02-26-2007
P-660HW-D1 v2 3.40(ATA.0)C0 N/A 04-26-2007
Dunno which store it was that told you they only stock v2s.. so as chris says get a promise from them if it turned out not to be v2 which they seem confident in stating, then you could return the router for a refund.
-
Hi Kitz,
It was broadbandbuyer.co.uk that told me they only had the V2s in stock.
I think I will hold them to their 'promise.
Cheers
DrT
-
I would
- although I dont have any personal experience of broadbandbuyer Im afraid.
Good luck and let us know how it goes...
although I am curious as to why you chose that particular router - Is there supposed to be something new/good in it that we all may be interested in knowing about?
-
Hi Kitz,
I currently have an ST 585 v6. I am not averse to having to use a CLi in principle, but I narks me no end >:( when the documentation is terse and even simple things like changing DNS servers cannot be done through the GUI. I'm not tinkering as much as I'd like :(.
I was looking for a fully functional GUI (though the Zyxel still has a CLi) and I have found it in the 660. I have looked though several manuals and found the Zyxel has the best documentation, value for money and responsive tech support. It is the only router that I have come across that actually details the number of NAT sessions available, and the GUI lets one choose a maximum value per ethernet port. Has good content control that does not rely on thrid party, subscription-based service etc.
I currently have a profile of 5500 (33dB att) and can get to 6000 with DMT. Pushing it I can get 6500. TBH, it ain't worth the weeks of angst waiting for the SNRM to drop on its own if it goes pear shaped.
As long as it syncs at 5500 profile rates minimum, I'll be happy ;D.
Cheers
DrT
-
>> I was looking for a fully functional GUI (though the Zyxel still has a CLi) and I have found it in the 660.
Ahh thats fair enough.. I was only being nosey really :D
I can to a certain extent understand where you're coming from... even worse is the routers with even very little CLI info :)
>> TBH, it ain't worth the weeks of angst waiting for the SNRM to drop on its own if it goes pear shaped.
true :/
>> As long as it syncs at 5500 profile rates minimum, I'll be happy
at the risk of repeating myself... good luck and let us know how it goes....
aside from that, feedback is always useful to others who may be looking at different routers :)
-
Will do, once I've a chance to have a good play with it :).
-
Howdy all.
Ended up with a Netgear DG 834G *v4*. If anybody is interested I managed to find a reliable supply in my local computer shop, two doors down the road from my practice. Details via PM on request.
The Zyxel looked good but the company was clueless in the extreme. There is a current v2, which is a minor revision of the original and there is a v2 in the pipeline which will be a major revision. The current router will not longer have any new firmwares released - damn poor show for a piece of kit that is plentiful in the pipeline.
Back to the Netgear...it is supported by DMT v8 and I tried this just after I set up the router (used DG 834 GT instructions). Performance is good so far. Seems snappier than the ST 585. Some things don't seem to work as expected, but that could be me...it's early days but very happy so far.
TTFN.
-
Thanks for the update Dr.T.
It will be interesting to see how you get on - but really 'we' also need someone on a long dodgy line to really test this new router against Thomson and 2Wire etc.
-
Thanks for the feedback DrTeeth.
>> Some things don't seem to work as expected,
Was there anything in particular?
>> Seems snappier than the ST 585.
For some reason I seem to prefer my Voyager 2110 (broadcom) than the ST. Dont get me wrong the ST works fine and I dont really have any major complaints with it, and it does one thing that the voyager cant do - such as tell me the chipset at the dslam... but... theres just something about the voyager that I like.
As regards to different routers on different lines, this really is a minefield, particularly when Ive seen things like the old frog modem retain syncing, or even the v2,v3 dg834g will increase stability. Seems sometime a case of suck and see which is best for your own line... but unfortunately not everyone has the ability to test different routers to see which works best :(
-
@Kitz
The thing that I noticed is that I like to allocate fixed IPs on my LAN *of my choosing*. I could not quite get this to work with the Netgear. One can edit the entry, but I did not reboot the router (manual does not say I have to) just the PC itself.
uPnP does not seem to work too well. Not to fussed as it is much easier to set up port forwarding with the Netgear and it works. Could never get it to work with the ST.
That's it so far. I'm enthralled with what the GUI lets me do compared with the ST.
Cheers
DrT
-
>> he thing that I noticed is that I like to allocate fixed IPs on my LAN *of my choosing*.
hmm something that would annoy be too since I seem to be in the habit of doing that. I know it was easily possible on the old netgear so cant see why they wouldn't let you do this. :/
-
Port forwarding can be made to work with the ST, but the GUI is truly awful. I managed to make it work with my ST576, but it was a bit of a head scratcher working out how.
-
>> he thing that I noticed is that I like to allocate fixed IPs on my LAN *of my choosing*.
hmm something that would annoy be too since I seem to be in the habit of doing that. I know it was easily possible on the old netgear so cant see why they wouldn't let you do this. :/
It did eventually cave in to my will without too much of a struggle 8).
-
good stuff. :thumbs:
-
I spoke too soon. The router seems to have problems obeying what is entered in the GUI.
The fixed IP issue has not been resolved and I had a devil of a job trying to get emails sent. They were being sent long after the relevant option had been deselected. There have been other issues, difficulty logging in etc.
Will try to swap it for a DG 834GT in the hope it will behave itself. I may get another v4, but as I got it from a local shop, I don't want the retailer (an excellent chap) to lose out if I return a second one.
Netgear tech support got me to reload the firmware - no change (no surprise). They now recon that I had call their 24/7 0898 number - wonder which country their support is based <shudder>.
-
Get a Netgear DG834G Ver3 from Maplin. Oh I hate to advertise Maplin but at least they have them and I expect any day now a firmware upgrade ........ 30A to be released
-
Loads of online retailers have v3s.
What will be so special about the expected firmware?
I like the tweakability of the Broadcom chipset. I can get at least 1 extra profile level with no problems.
-
>> What will be so special about the expected firmware?
iirc its to do with the bit swaps .. in relation to those lines that had problems with the AR7 chipset issue.
If you weren't affected before then you probably wouldn't notice any difference.
-
It is not for me to give the precise details but I believe that the told named texas AR7 chipset firmware upgrade will make routers with that configuration even more acceptable to more users. Another problem that has been detected with some routers using the Broadcom chipset for the modem is in some cases they use a different manufacturers chipset for the wireless configuration and that is the background to another source of difficulty. I shall leave it to the manufacturers to anounce when they are ready.
Kitz I dont agree with your over simplistic explanation in regard to the AR7 chipsets and their corresponding firmware.
I must also add that I stated yesterday a figure of 10db per kilometer I should have said 10db per mile as the maximum line attenuation that should be accepted. That is a figure that was accepted in addition up to the few honest staff in BT up until one year or so ago. All the acceptance tests in obtaining those figures were the result of refereed papers from such research. So I refute any critisism.
-
According to Zen on their forum, the current AR7 firmware is optimised for speed on long lines, using some deprecated frequencies, whereas Broadcom firmware is optimised for stability. The new AR7 firmware addresses this issue with the intention of getting a more stable result (at the expense of a little speed, presumably).
-
@ graevine - Im afraid then you and me will just have to both disagree.
I was trying to make it simplistic for Guy, who I know already has a good solid understanding of adsl.
If I was wrong about the firmware upgrade then I apologise.. but I should imagine I know just about as much about it as you.
Since its not out on official release yet, nor has there been any proper feedback then I wont say anything more.
What I dont nor do I do.......... is give out veiled hints for something that I am unsure about... nor hint at stuff which I dont understand.
As regards once again bringing up BT and the 10dB thing.. I totally disagree with you on that too.
Just because I didnt respond in the other thread doesnt mean that I agree with you.
The only reason I didnt respond is that the major concern of this forum is to help users.. not turn it into a battle and snipe at BT
If you want to bring things up in another thread then so be it, but what does annoy is the taking of other threads off-topic about it- particularly bringing it up in threads where others are trying to help the OP about an unrelated question doesnt help matters.
[edited to clarify who the post was addressed to ]
-
Roseway, If you obtain the appropriate calibrated test equipment you would discover that the AR7 chipset produces a faster throput that the Broadcom. and that is refereed work also !!!!!
-
>> I must also add that I stated yesterday a figure of 10db per kilometer I should have said 10db per mile as the maximum line attenuation that should be accepted.
So as not to take the debate further off topic from the original post - discussion taken to this thread
Loop Loss - dB's per km (http://forum.kitz.co.uk/index.php/topic,1448.0.html)
[edited url]
-
Kitz, the link to the loop loss thread does not seem to work.
Cheers
DrT
-
>> the link to the loop loss thread does not seem to work.
edited - thanks. :)
-
>> What will be so special about the expected firmware?
iirc its to do with the bit swaps .. in relation to those lines that had problems with the AR7 chipset issue.
If you weren't affected before then you probably wouldn't notice any difference.
Not Just the AR7 issue.
The new firmware has fixed the NAT and routing issues you see with Netgears. The UPNP is also working properly. There have been some major changes to the Firmware and so you really should see a difference.
-
Not Just the AR7 issue.
The new firmware has fixed the NAT and routing issues you see with Netgears. The UPNP is also working properly.
Thanks for the update azzaka - that info wasnt mentioned earlier... does Saffy know about those too?
http://bbs.adslguide.org.uk/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=general&Number=3238116
-
The info wasn't released as it was noticed as a side effect on the testing version.
-
The info wasn't released as it was noticed as a side effect on the testing version.
Excellent news :thumbs: