Kitz Forum
Broadband Related => Broadband Hardware => Topic started by: mnotgninnep on July 22, 2018, 10:11:10 PM
-
Ok, to cut a long story short, I tried a Draytek Vigor 130 modem which didn't like my Huawei cabinet, completely f****d my line, DLM kicked in and lots of other things went wrong. I returned it and after quite a bit of research, bought a TP-Link TD-W9970 with a broadcom chipset and supposedly supporting bridge mode, G.INP and Vectoring. So far so good, the line is stable and things are going well, improving gradually even. Problem is my setup depends on MTU 1508 for my IPv6 tunnel to work. I would expect to be able to ping packets 1472 but can only ping 1464 suggesting the MTU is 1500. In bridge mode, I don't seem to be able to change this MTU. Can I change it or have I bought another dud?
Thanks in advance.
Michael
C:\Users\mnotgninnep>ping -n 1 -f www.yahoo.com -4 -l 1464
Pinging atsv2-fp.wg1.b.yahoo.com [87.248.98.8] with 1464 bytes of data:
Reply from 87.248.98.8: bytes=1464 time=29ms TTL=54
Ping statistics for 87.248.98.8:
Packets: Sent = 1, Received = 1, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 29ms, Maximum = 29ms, Average = 29ms
C:\Users\mnotgninnep>ping -n 1 -f www.yahoo.com -4 -l 1472
Pinging atsv2-fp.wg1.b.yahoo.com [87.248.98.8] with 1472 bytes of data:
Request timed out.
Ping statistics for 87.248.98.8:
Packets: Sent = 1, Received = 0, Lost = 1 (100% loss),
-
Welcome to the Kitz forum, Michael. :)
I wouldn't go as far as labelling the TD-W9970 as a "dud". From your tests, it does appear that device is not configurable for a MTU greater than 1500. Essentially you need a device that can support baby jumbo-frames . . . but such a device is a rarity when considering normal domestic consumer-grade hardware.
-
Welcome to the Kitz forum, Michael. :)
I wouldn't go as far as labelling the TD-W9970 as a "dud". From your tests, it does appear that device is not configurable for a MTU greater than 1500. Essentially you need a device that can support baby jumbo-frames . . . but such a device is a rarity when considering normal domestic consumer-grade hardware.
Yeah, I just got off the TP-Link chat and the rep confirmed what you said, it doesn't support baby jumbo frames. Bother. It's a good stable modem otherwise. I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
So... Can anyone suggest a modem that's not too expensive, supports MTU1508, G.INP, Vectoring and has a Broadcom chipset to work with my Huawei street cabinet please?
-
There is very very little choice of Broadcom chipset with 1508 mtu bridged PPPoE.
Huawei HG612
or
Zyxel VMG1312-B10A
more info on the Zyxel in the following thread
BCM63168 Modems that Support Baby Jumbo Frames (Bridge Mode) (https://forum.kitz.co.uk/index.php/topic,21273.0.html)
-
Of course you can see if you read the thread, but also these both support 1508 in bridge mode with the right firmware:
ZyXEL VMG8324-B10A
ZyXEL VMG8924-B10A
Pretty sure kitz should be getting paid by zyxel at this point. :D
-
So there is a "GPL" package available for the W9970 and I had a look through it, applying the 1508 patches should work fine, bcmxtmrt.c and the relevant Makefile are there.
But from the README included:
5. After building the code, you will get the bootloader and linux kernel image, then you can make rootfs with mksquashfs too, but you can't upgrade these images to your router through web management page.
So I guess some packing magic with the right header is required...
There is a serial port with known pin out:
https://wikidevi.com/wiki/TP-LINK_TD-W9970_v2
Seems you can pick these up for a little over £10 used, maybe I should get one and try, would be nice to have a cheaper option to the zyxels that supports baby jumbo frames. Anyone know if the BCM63381 it uses performs any better than the HG612?
-
Welcome Michael! ;D I too can confirm that the ZyXEL VMG 1312-B10A works beautifully as a straight modem with MTU 1508 provided it is used with our very own johnson’s excellent special build of the firmware.
-
Thanks guys for the warm welcome and the advice. I'll have a really good read of that thread and decide what I want to do.
I'm not at all up to modifying the TP-Link firmware myself so will leave that the the experts/enthusiasts.
-
Can I ask how it syncs compared to the vigor 130? Better I assume as the broadcom huawei combo, but by how much?
-
Can I ask how it syncs compared to the vigor 130? Better I assume as the broadcom huawei combo, but by how much?
The Vigor 130 didn't like my line/huawei cabinet at all. I was getting tons of dropped packets/line syncs. My line rate compared with the Plusnet HubOne (BT HH5) dropped from 65Mb down to 48Mb over a week. I've since found lots of posts online of people having issues with the Vigor 130, Plusnet and/or Huawei cabs. Being a Lantiq chipset, it would be better suited to an ECI cab. I've also seem something somewhere about G.INP/Vectoring being a last minute addition to the firmware and apparently disabling it in the web interface fixes stuff. Of course there's also the possibility I was unlucky and got a faulty unit, but by that point I'd fallen out with it and was running out of time to return it for a full refund. With the TP-Link, everything became stable, but as you can see, I've just found that it doesn't support baby jumbo frames.
Sync rate has recovered somewhat over the last couple of weeks and it's currently syncing at 65Mb down and 20Mb up.
-
Thanks for the info. Has your attainable increased over the HH5A?
-
Thanks for the info. Has your attainable increased over the HH5A?
Hard to say because of the damage the Draytek did to my line sync. I've only gotten interested in exactly how VDSL stuff works since I replaced it. I only replaced it because whenever I downloaded more than a couple of large files at once, it was rebooting. Yeah, not losing sync, actually restarting.
In terms of attainable speed, only now have I got back to where I was before I tried to switch. It also didn't help I had a copper line fault that has also been fixed. Yes I continued with the Draytek after but that still persisted in causing issues. When I first signed up, I was getting ~77Mb. Now my cabinet is full, OR engineer says there are only 3 ports left on the whole thing, and cross talk has done its dirty work bringing my speed down. My line is only ~300m he said.
I suspect I'm going to be better off as things are still settling. Also if I can get this baby jumbo frames thing, I'll see a small increase in speed because I won't be fragmenting and wasting packets.
-
Ok, I have options for a
ZyXEL VMG8324-B10A for ~£50 delivered
or a
ZyXEL VMG1312-B10A for ~£50 delivered
Is there any difference either in terms of features, spec or reliability between the two bearing in mind I'm going to be using it as a bridge to a Unifi USG?
If no real difference, I'm leaning to the VMG1312-B10A because of the lay-flat layout of the unit with the cables out the back.
Thanks
-
Cant speak for everyone, but I guess most would go for the VMG1312, it has a nicer box and internal heatsink, some report it syncs fractionally higher... but these are small things. £50 for either is a little over the odds if you are willing to wait a bit on auctions.
-
No B10As on auction at the moment. Lots of B10Ds though and very cheap. Obviously on the info above I'm going to the B10A but what's the difference if you'll excuse my ignorance please?
-
Have you checked your PMs?
-
I have now thank you.
-
No B10As on auction at the moment. Lots of B10Ds though and very cheap. Obviously on the info above I'm going to the B10A but what's the difference if you'll excuse my ignorance please?
The B10D variants use a slightly inferior chipset and have been widely reported to achieve lower sync rates (this may be the chipset, or skimping on the input filtering, or a combination of the two). I don't see any reason that they couldn't be used with the 1508 patches, given zyxels excellent open source policy (insofar as they provide a source package that makes working firmware), but most people who care about 1508 also want the highest rates too, so it has not been done yet.
-
I recommend the Zyxel VMG1312-B10A as it contains a BCM63168 which is 1 of Broadcom's better performing chipsets. It also has an additional noise filter not seen on the D variant. The D variant uses a budget Broadcom Chipset which syncs considerably lower for me/most others.
The 8324/8924-B10A shares this chipset and noise filter combo with the 1312-B10A.
They have Gigabit LAN ports over the 1312's 100Mb LAN ports. The 8924 also has 5Ghz AC WiFi.
Used as a pure bridge though the 100Mb LAN port isn't a bottleneck and you won't need the WiFi.
The 8x24 probably stands better.
The 1312 wall mounts much better though.
I wall mount mine right next to the master socket. The 8x24 comes with a bracket to wall mount that makes it hang out from the wall so there's space for the Ethernet cables on the back. I'm not a fan of the design.
-
Thank you all. The friendliness and amount of advice here is awesome.
Johnson pointed me in the direction of an 8324 on ebay on auction and I got it for a fair price. There were no 1312s on auction.
I'm delighted and so pleased you guys have been so helpful.
I'll come back with an update of how I get on when I've received it and got it up and running. I'll also get what stats I can from the TP-Link before I swap over. Is there anything specific you want me to get/look out for?
-
I recommend the Zyxel VMG1312-B10A as it contains a BCM63168 which is 1 of Broadcom's better performing chipsets. It also has an additional noise filter not seen on the D variant. The D variant uses a budget Broadcom Chipset which syncs considerably lower for me/most others.
The 8324/8924-B10A shares this chipset and noise filter combo with the 1312-B10A.
They have Gigabit LAN ports over the 1312's 100Mb LAN ports. The 8924 also has 5Ghz AC WiFi.
Used as a pure bridge though the 100Mb LAN port isn't a bottleneck and you won't need the WiFi.
The 8x24 probably stands better.
The 1312 wall mounts much better though.
I wall mount mine right next to the master socket. The 8x24 comes with a bracket to wall mount that makes it hang out from the wall so there's space for the Ethernet cables on the back. I'm not a fan of the design.
Thank you, from what you say, any of them would do for me. Working in IT, I have excellent knowledge of networking, routers, servers, you name it, but when it comes to broadband, it's not my area and I'm completely stumped. As you say, I don't need gigabit ethernet, as the modem passed straight into a Unifi USG. This then passes into a gigabit switch which passes the network around the house. Wireless is carried by 3 Unifi AP-AC Lite access points so WiFi isn't a concern on any modem/router. In terms of cosmetics, the 1312 would have been best because it's format would have allowed it to lie nicely on a 1u rack shelf. The 8324 however was less than half the price in the end.
-
Thank you all. The friendliness and amount of advice here is awesome.
You are welcome. :)
Our members have differing skill-sets and when they all fit together a positive result is often the outcome.
-
B10A is supposed to have a high quality analog front end because if some sort of filter which is absent in the B10D. Others will know a lot more though.
I am not sure if this matters at all if you have a good quality line, or if you have VDSL2.
I have bought a load of B10As. (I have three lines.)
-
B10A is supposed to have a high quality analog front end because if some sort of filter which is absent in the B10D. Others will know a lot more though.
I am not sure if this matters at all if you have a good quality line, or if you have VDSL2.
I have bought a load of B10As. (I have three lines.)
Analogue filter helps keep down errors I find on my line with the B10A and I think Roseway has tried the B10D and found the A better. I am on VDSL2.
-
I think Roseway has tried the B10D and found the A better
I did try the VMG1312-B10D quite a long time ago, and its DSL performance was poor compared to the other Zyxel devices mentioned above, but I've never used a B10A.
There's another product from the same family which has excellent DSL performance, the VMG3925-B10B, but I don't know if it supports baby jumbo frames. I'm using one now as a full modem/router, and I'm very happy with it. It also looks better than the horrible glossy black models.
-
[Off topic : I rather like the glossy black of the B10A, don't know if this is included.]
-
+1
-
RESULT!
Despite buying a Zyxel VMG8324-B10A, a VMG8924-B10A turned up. Not fussed, put on johnson's vustom firmware from 30th June and all is well. No longer am I losing traffic to failed packet fragmentation, but I'm getting some more speed. Still syncing at 65Mbps but speedtest is 61.55/18.33, 3-4Mb faster down than before.
If there's a better command to get stats, let me know.
> adsl info
adsl: ADSL driver and PHY status
Status: Showtime
Last Retrain Reason: 0
Last initialization procedure status: 0
Max: Upstream rate = 24677 Kbps, Downstream rate = 65636 Kbps
Bearer: 0, Upstream rate = 19999 Kbps, Downstream rate = 65664 Kbps
Bearer: 1, Upstream rate = 0 Kbps, Downstream rate = 0 Kbps
-
adsl info --stats
adsl info --Bits
adsl info --SNR
adsl info --QLN
adsl info --Hlog
adsl info --pbParams
(The commands are case-sensitive.)
-
Thanks roseway. I've had to attach the output in 2 files as it was over 300kB and too long for a post. I don't understand any of it of course...
General opinions and consensus welcome.
-
In exchange for those two textual files, I offer you a montage of the four "snapshot" plots . . .
-
Ooh, are those generated from my logs? That's nifty, thank you.
I still have no idea what it all means... ???
-
Your line looks pretty healthy to me.
Connected to a Huawei cabinet which is good.
You have retransmission low (aka G.INP) set on the downstream
The line looks to be running with a 6dB SNRM target.
If it remains stable DLM may lower it to as low as 3dB which would give you another 10-12Mb (roughly, from looking at your current bitloading that's my educated guess).
1 thing I do note is
rtx_tx: 223190763
I have no idea how to reset this. That figure will be from the previous owner.
Could you run adsl info --stats again after about 24 hours and upload the results.
I'd like to see the difference between the 2 rtx_tx figures (downstream retransmit).
Also 5 LEFTERS in just over an hour, seems a little high.
If you're not sure on what some of the stats mean
https://kitz.co.uk/adsl/linestats_errors.htm
-
rtx_tx: 223190763
I have no idea how to reset this. That figure will be from the previous owner.
It can't possibly be from the previous owner of the device, surely? Maybe the count would be retained at the DSLAM, considering that for the downstream, it'll be the DSLAM maintaining that counter of how many DTU it retransmits. Section 12 of G.998.4 also states "The counters shall be reset at power-on.".
-
Your line looks pretty healthy to me.
Connected to a Huawei cabinet which is good.
You have retransmission low (aka G.INP) set on the downstream
Good news. is exactly why I came to you guys for advice on modems having failed myself...
The line looks to be running with a 6dB SNRM target.
If it remains stable DLM may lower it to as low as 3dB which would give you another 10-12Mb (roughly, from looking at your current bitloading that's my educated guess).
1 thing I do note is
rtx_tx: 223190763
I have no idea how to reset this. That figure will be from the previous owner.
Excellent. I would hope it would improve. When first connected, I was getting 77Mb but put the drop down to the cabinet being full. There are only 3 ports left apparently. I hope the speed does rise again. I'm already faster than I was before all this kicked off.
The rtx_tx figure is more likely from:
a) The line fault the Openreach engineer fixed, previous owner put the line under a wooden floor and it got crushed. He was surprised the number was so high and thought the line fault was to blame. I think it's Cabinet side as the number has persisted (increased) between the early Draytek readings and this.
b) The issues I had with the Draytek Vigor 130 not liking the Huawei cabinet.
c) The issues I had with the TP-Link TD-W9970 being stable but not working with 1508 MTU so data getting lost. I couldn't be bothered to reconfigure the whole network because I knew the ZyXEL was coming.
Could you run adsl info --stats again after about 24 hours and upload the results.
I'd like to see the difference between the 2 rtx_tx figures (downstream retransmit).
Also 5 LEFTERS in just over an hour, seems a little high.
If you're not sure on what some of the stats mean
https://kitz.co.uk/adsl/linestats_errors.htm
Will do. Those were obtained not long after putting the ZyXEL in, so may be residual.
It can't possibly be from the previous owner of the device, surely? Maybe the count would be retained at the DSLAM, considering that for the downstream, it'll be the DSLAM maintaining that counter of how many DTU it retransmits. Section 12 of G.998.4 also states "The counters shall be reset at power-on.".
I'm fairly sure the number came up on the OR engineer's device. Anyone fancy arranging a local powercut?
-
Anyone fancy arranging a local powercut?
It would have to be for an extended period, in excess of eight hours, during which time all Openreach (or more correctly Operate (as the "fibre" cabinets are classified as exchange equipment)) technicians would have to be otherwise occupied elsewhere and so be unable to change the cabinet batteries!
-
It would have to be for an extended period, in excess of eight hours, during which time all Openreach (or more correctly Operate (as the "fibre" cabinets are classified as exchange equipment)) technicians would have to be otherwise occupied elsewhere and so be unable to change the cabinet batteries!
Haha, I forgot that. Before I moved house, I was with Virgin and they weren't required to have backup power so every time there was a power issue, the phones and everything went out with it.
Could you run adsl info --stats again after about 24 hours and upload the results.
Here you go.
> adsl info --stats
adsl: ADSL driver and PHY status
Status: Showtime
Last Retrain Reason: 1
Last initialization procedure status: 0
Max: Upstream rate = 24468 Kbps, Downstream rate = 65839 Kbps
Bearer: 0, Upstream rate = 19999 Kbps, Downstream rate = 65216 Kbps
Bearer: 1, Upstream rate = 0 Kbps, Downstream rate = 0 Kbps
Link Power State: L0
Mode: VDSL2 Annex B
VDSL2 Profile: Profile 17a
TPS-TC: PTM Mode(0x0)
Trellis: U:ON /D:ON
Line Status: No Defect
Training Status: Showtime
Down Up
SNR (dB): 6.4 15.3
Attn(dB): 13.4 0.0
Pwr(dBm): 13.7 3.3
VDSL2 framing
Bearer 0
MSGc: -6 26
B: 243 237
M: 1 1
T: 0 42
R: 10 16
S: 0.0000 0.3781
L: 17056 5374
D: 8 1
I: 254 127
N: 254 254
Q: 8 0
V: 0 0
RxQueue: 51 0
TxQueue: 17 0
G.INP Framing: 18 0
G.INP lookback: 17 0
RRC bits: 0 24
Bearer 1
MSGc: 154 -6
B: 0 0
M: 2 0
T: 2 0
R: 16 0
S: 6.4000 0.0000
L: 40 0
D: 3 0
I: 32 0
N: 32 0
Q: 0 0
V: 0 0
RxQueue: 0 0
TxQueue: 0 0
G.INP Framing: 0 0
G.INP lookback: 0 0
RRC bits: 0 0
Counters
Bearer 0
OHF: 0 1621124
OHFErr: 57 899
RS: 776004888 713393
RSCorr: 70982 16106
RSUnCorr: 0 0
Bearer 1
OHF: 1444606 0
OHFErr: 5 0
RS: 14445447 0
RSCorr: 121 0
RSUnCorr: 18 0
Retransmit Counters
rtx_tx: 7469 0
rtx_c: 7111 0
rtx_uc: 40694 0
G.INP Counters
LEFTRS: 120 0
minEFTR: 65218 0
errFreeBits: 183374826 0
Bearer 0
HEC: 0 0
OCD: 0 0
LCD: 0 0
Total Cells: 2909878671 0
Data Cells: 39268053 0
Drop Cells: 0
Bit Errors: 0 0
Bearer 1
HEC: 0 0
OCD: 0 0
LCD: 0 0
Total Cells: 0 0
Data Cells: 0 0
Drop Cells: 0
Bit Errors: 0 0
ES: 25 359
SES: 10 2
UAS: 113 103
AS: 23212
Bearer 0
INP: 47.00 0.00
INPRein: 0.00 0.00
delay: 0 0
PER: 0.00 3.98
OR: 0.01 64.22
AgR: 65283.00 20063.54
Bearer 1
INP: 4.50 0.00
INPRein: 4.50 0.00
delay: 3 0
PER: 16.06 0.01
OR: 79.68 0.01
AgR: 79.68 0.01
Bitswap: 1195/1195 1474/1475
Total time = 1 days 4 hours 43 min 13 sec
FEC: 164418 29401
CRC: 618 1245
ES: 25 359
SES: 10 2
UAS: 113 103
LOS: 1 0
LOF: 8 0
LOM: 0 0
Latest 15 minutes time = 13 min 13 sec
FEC: 0 15
CRC: 0 1
ES: 0 1
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Previous 15 minutes time = 15 min 0 sec
FEC: 446 14
CRC: 0 8
ES: 0 5
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Latest 1 day time = 4 hours 43 min 13 sec
FEC: 6761 11227
CRC: 1 52
ES: 1 47
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Previous 1 day time = 24 hours 0 sec
FEC: 157657 18174
CRC: 617 1193
ES: 24 312
SES: 10 2
UAS: 113 103
LOS: 1 0
LOF: 8 0
LOM: 0 0
Since Link time = 6 hours 26 min 51 sec
FEC: 70982 16106
CRC: 57 899
ES: 12 115
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
NTR: mipsCntAtNtr=0 ncoCntAtNtr=0
-
The Vigor 130 didn't like my line/huawei cabinet at all. I was getting tons of dropped packets/line syncs. My line rate compared with the Plusnet HubOne (BT HH5) dropped from 65Mb down to 48Mb over a week. I've since found lots of posts online of people having issues with the Vigor 130, Plusnet and/or Huawei cabs. Being a Lantiq chipset, it would be better suited to an ECI cab. I've also seem something somewhere about G.INP/Vectoring being a last minute addition to the firmware and apparently disabling it in the web interface fixes stuff. Of course there's also the possibility I was unlucky and got a faulty unit, but by that point I'd fallen out with it and was running out of time to return it for a full refund. With the TP-Link, everything became stable, but as you can see, I've just found that it doesn't support baby jumbo frames.
Not just you. I had exactly the same experience with a Vigor 130. After syncing for years at 80/20, I lost 6 Mbps in just 3 days with the Vigor. And it never recovered until I eventually switched ISPs (and my line underwent a full reset). There's something about that chipset that really upsets the DLM on Huawei cabinets.
I wish they did a Broadcom version of that modem.
-
For ADSL1/2/2+ users, I loved the fact that the Vigor modems do PPPoEoE on the LAN side to RFC2364 aka PPPoA protocol conversion, and allowing IP 1500 MTU on the DSL side of things. So I am surprised that they do not offer MTU 1508 with VDSL given that they are already handling PPP MTU 1508 with PPPoEoE on the LAN side in the ADSL case.
I take it that it is not a problem with a router not speaking RFC 4638 ie supporting ethernet baby jumbo frames with a 1508byte oversized L2 payload.
-
For ADSL1/2/2+ users, I loved the fact that the Vigor modems do PPPoEoE on the LAN side to RFC2364 aka PPPoA protocol conversion, and allowing IP 1500 MTU on the DSL side of things. So I am surprised that they do not offer MTU 1508 with VDSL given that they are already handling PPP MTU 1508 with PPPoEoE on the LAN side in the ADSL case.
I take it that it is not a problem with a router not speaking RFC 4638 ie supporting ethernet baby jumbo frames with a 1508byte oversized L2 payload.
The Draytek did 1508 MTU fine. It just wasn't keeping the line in good sync.
It was the need for a broadcom based modem that did it that was the tricky part.