Print

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

[burakkucat]

The Eagle knoweth. 

I thought I had read one of his posts, earlier today, where he attempts to explain the "mess and muddle". 

[Bald_Eagle1]

The Eagle knoweth. 

The Eagle kneweth but has forgotteth.

Since the latest BT software update I have managed without the HG612's GUI so I can't check at the moment.


Also, as DLM was only reset via a visiting engineer on Saturday, following replacement of my faceplate & NTE5 that were damaged during fairly recent thunder/lightning storms, I'm monitoring how my connection copes & don't wish to disturb things by forcing a resync via a firmware update at this time.

Someone still with a GUI could maybe cross-reference the GUI values & the values shown in the xdslcmd info --stats data & confirm which are incorrect in the GUI?.

[Howlingwolf]

I did take a brief look at that myself but the matching xdslcmd values seem to be scattered about and in at least one case has a totally different label.

So I await enlightenment from Those Who Know   

[les-70]

Here is a fast path example The GUI FEC looks like is is really CRC
The GUI HEC is the same as the dslstats HEC

If someone with interleaving can post the same it might help.

 
from gui
CRC errors   0    0    0    0
FEC errors   2017    40    0    0
HEC errors   508    0    0    0
from dslstats
FEC:      0      352
CRC:      2017      40
ES:      446      38
SES:      1      0
UAS:      25      25
LOS:      0      0
LOF:      0      0
LOM:      0      0

(corrected HEC interpretation 06/08/2014)

[twdsamy]

Hi,

Is there any way I can force the HG612 to set at a lower s/n. The VDSL2 cabinet is consistently on 6.3DB and rock solid, and by lowering to 3DB I may be able to get maximum speed. I am 490 metres from the DSLAM.

Have tried using DSL stats to force lower s/n, but does not work.

[roseway]

It can't be done on a BT VDSL2 connection.

[twdsamy]

It can't be done on a BT VDSL2 connection.

Hi,

Many thanks.

Rgds.

[Chrysalis]

I dont understand, what was wrong with removing BT agent?

I have the no btagent version and its been great.  I preferably want a firmware where it is removed.

[NewtronStar]

I dont understand, what was wrong with removing BT agent?

nothings wrong with the BT agent removed it's just the modem won't get the latest firmware, as with any software and devices these days any update is better than none, just like a windows update it's supposed to fix & close a security hole.

You see 90% of the general public with an FTTC modem don't care wether it's unlocked with GUI or with or without BT Agent active so we as the minority can choose what to do with are modem.

[Chrysalis]

The whole idea of removing the bt agent tho is so it wont update, did people really complain about it not updating when they chose the non bt agent?

I havent updated yet and I wont without a BT agent removed firmware or if I am forced to by openreach

[NewtronStar]

The whole idea of removing the bt agent tho is so it wont update, did people really complain about it not updating when they chose the non bt agent?

That's were we have a difference of opinion CHRY you seem to think the BT Agent is a bad thing were as any firmware updates from the BT Agent has been more positive than the older firmware apart from each time its updated the HG612 own GUI disappears that is very annoying to say the least 

[Chrysalis]

I am just asking who requested it be removed, seems odd there is no "no btagent" version.  I would like the choice back thats all.  Although I guess I could just start autokilling it again, messier but worked ok on the first version.

and yes of course I am no fan of automatic firmware updating, I update my modem when I am ready

[atkinsong]

Nothing wrong with deciding when you want to update, however you must remember that in this case we are all depending on the efforts of one particular member to make that even possible.

To quote from HW's original post in this thread:-

In both of the new versions, BTAgent is untouched and still active. However in the version with the web interface it has been neutered by disabling it's VLAN.

This can be re-enabled through the web interface by going to Basic --> WAN.
- Select ptm1.301 under Connection Name.
- In the config panel below that, Enable 'WAN connection' and submit.

This will give people the choice. Enable it to receive updates or disable it to prevent them.


So you still have the choice - auto update or not. What's the big deal?

[Chrysalis]

Its not a massive deal, I just prefer it removed.

Of course to me its also not a big deal to update the firmware so I am staying on the older one anyway.

[Howlingwolf]

I dont understand, what was wrong with removing BT agent?

There were several issues.

Primarily, there were too many different builds and people were already confused over which one to use. A situation which would have become exponentially worse with the release of multiple builds for each new version.

It was that proliferation which led to the wrong patch file being applied to one of the BTAgent builds,  resulting in it being neutered by completely removing it's VLAN. Effectively turning it into a bodged NoBTAgent build.

Hence my decision to start again with a 'clean slate', limiting this and all future releases to two builds. One with and one without a web interface.

I havent updated yet and I wont without a BT agent removed firmware or if I am forced to by openreach

That's entirely up to you. No one is going to force you to run around wearing a sou'wester and wellies in this sort of weather...