Print

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

[roseway]

I'm guessing here, but as the same firmware is used for the wireless and non-wireless versions then the firmware must check out the hardware when it boots and set an internal flag to specify whether it's a wireless machine. Perhaps this internal flag just got lost through a glitch.

If you ever want to manually reboot the router again, you can do it from the web interface instead of pulling the plug. There's a reboot button on the Diagnostics screen.

What version of the firmware do you have? This is shown on the status screen. If it's not the latest it might be worth considering an upgrade.

Eric

[delia]

Thanks for reply. The firmware is V4.01.06.

[roseway]

You have the latest (v3) version of the router. That's still very new, and there isn't a lot of information about it on the net. There was a problem using the original 4.01.04 firmware in the UK (in fact Netgear said don't use it in the UK) but presumably the 4.01.06 has been modified to suit the UK. I can't really suggest anything more about the loss of the wireless setup link, but perhaps you should just shrug and put it down to 'one of those things'.

Eric

[kitz]

>> you should just shrug and put it down to 'one of those things'

heh thanks for the firmware suggestion first though eric..
but I think you may be right. :-s

[bob.gas]

>> Attenuation - 59 db

On *traditional* adsl you would have only just scraped 1Mb (limit is 60dB).

>> Noise margin - 9db

You have a bit of room for manoeuvre there (SNR margin often decreases as the evening goes on). so hopefully you should be stable.

>> d/stream = 1952 kbps

hmmm, that means your data rate will be set at around 1.5Mb which is a bit more than 1Mb, but not much.

You are soooo close to 2Mb, but not quite there, does the figure increase if you plug the netgear into the master socket?..
 
or even better the test socket behind the master socket?
Details half way down the page
http://www.kitz.co.uk/adsl/lowSNR.htm

Hi Kitz

Bit late I know :roll:
 
Am unable to test at master socket  as PC upstairs in office and socket downstairs in hall (miles away).
Still only getting under 1 Mbps:




Connection Speed    1888 kbps    448 kbps
Line Attenuation    59 db    15.5 db
Noise Margin    2147483644 db    16 db

EFH said it's worth hanging on to see if speeds improve, so that's what I'm doing, unless you have a miracle cure.lol

Would it help if I fitted a BT NTE5 filtered faceplate?

Bob.

[kitz]

>> Connection Speed 1888 kbps

which means your bRAS profile should be set at around 1500.  Do EFH know what it is set at?
speeds of 946 kbps is more indicative of a 1Mb bRAS profile.

>>> Would it help if I fitted a BT NTE5 filtered faceplate?

They certainly do help an awful lot of pple on longer lines.  
Normally I suggest testing from the test socket behind the faceplate on the master socket first as an indicator.  If your stats are better from this test socket, then that is when the NTE5 adsl faceplates will help.

[roseway]

Connection Speed    1888 kbps    448 kbps
Line Attenuation    59 db    15.5 db
Noise Margin    2147483644 db    16 db

That's false reporting of the noise margin by the router. What it actually means is that the noise margin has gone negative, and the connection will drop pretty soon if it stays that way. 59dB of attenuation is rather on the edge for ADSL, and you will always be vulnerable to noise margin problems.

A filtered faceplate would be your best technical option to get the most out of your line, but you would still be stuck with running a new cable from the faceplate to the computer room. One solution (if domestic matters permit) would be to install a wireless router near the filtered faceplate.

If this isn't an option you might well get some improvement with your present setup by opening up each telephone socket in the house and disconnecting the wire to pin 3 (the ring wire). The ring wire is redundant when you have ADSL because ADSL filters contain their own ring signal generation. Nearly all modern phones don't use the ring connection anyway. The ring wire acts as an aerial which picks up interference and degrades the ADSL noise margin, and disconnecting it will often effect an improvement.

Eric

[mr_chris]

As roseway said, the ridiculously large number for your SNR margin means it's gone negative.

The DG834Gv2 seems to be brilliant at holding onto sync on a low SNR margin. Mine frequently goes to 0 or -1 and yet I never lose sync!

However, I would expect that the reason for your slowdown is the sheer number of errors that will be on your line due to the SNR margin being so low.

if you re-sync, it should be able to adjust and sync at a slower speed than before, but ironically you'd probably get better throughput due to fewer line errors.

Consider roseway's suggestion about filtered faceplate and wireless router at the master socket - it could improve things for you a lot.

[bob.gas]

Many thanks Kitz, Eric & Chris.

Going away for a few days, so will give your suggestions a go when back.

Just a thought!
A couple of peeps have mentioned buzzing on my line when phoning me. Would this happen with the probs I'm having?

And what distance would you call a long line Kitz?
Mine has been stated as 2.70 kilometers from exchange (as the crow flies).

Many thanks again.

Bob

[roseway]

You can't go by the 'as the crow flies' distance. A line can travel all round the houses (literally) before it reaches you. 59dB of attenuation means that it's a long line (and a good bit longer than 2.7km).

Eric

[mr_chris]

As a very very VERY (that's VERY!) rough scale, you can divide the attenuation by 10 to get a very very VERY rough idea of your line length in km.

So 59dB of attenuation would roughly equate to a 5.9km line.

(Like I say, it's a very rough guess - have I made that clear enough? )

[delia]

Could someone help me again, please. Trying to block sites, then allow using a trusted IP address. Which trusted IP address do I use-have tried the one supplied by ISP (which is dynamic anyway)- also tried 192.168.0.1-neither worked. Thanks.

[delia]

Just tried 192.168.0.2 and this works...

[roseway]

I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to do here, Delia. The purpose of the 'Block sites' capability is to restrict access to certain specific web sites. So the information which you need to enter is keywords to block (e.g. strong swear words) or a domain which you want to block (e.g. www.farm_animal_porn.com).

The 'Trusted address' is the local IP address of a computer which will not be subject to the blocking, i.e. a 192.168.0.x address (where x isn't 1 because that's the address of the router). If you use one computer for yourself and your kids use another then you could make your own machine trusted with full access, while the kids are subject to the blocking of some sites.

Eric

[delia]

That's exactly what I've done Eric, it's just that I didn't explain it very well! Thanks for replying anyway.
Delia