Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Right, firstly my little story (ill keep it short):
I had the superhub, was causing me problems, rang CEO office, got VMNG300

when i first typed that it was at least 30 lines!

Anyway the problem:
On the superhub I got channels 125, 126, 127 and 128, this is exactly the same on the modem. however upstream, on the superhub would mostly connect to channel 6, but if i restarted a couple of times it would get channel 5, which seemed a lot less utilised and gave me lower ping. On the modem it only gives me channel 6 (or so it would seem).... i posted on the VM forums and asked why I couldnt get 5 (i spent 45 minutes sat next to the modem pulling the power lead out and plugging it back in (yes im sad:p:)) anyway the guy on VM forums told me that I was connected to channel 5, and double checking the modem stats it said channel 6, so does the modem have a firmware bug where it reports channel 5 as being channel 6?

if it is a bug, i can certainly see why is hasnt been picked up lol, i cant really see how anyone would notice it, unless in the same situation as me

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Oh do you realise what you have started :LOL:

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

well i wasnt going to post it after the farce the other day, but i thought it was well worth it, especially seeing as VM are paying me £12 an hour to take some attention away from the superhub

(thats a joke by the way)

---------- Post added at 14:55 ---------- Previous post was at 14:53 ----------

http://imageshack.us/m/696/908/upstreamchannel.png

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

It's not a bug, some hardware starts counting at 0, some at 1.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

but its not put me on 7 (or 6 as it would be)

maybe thats why the superhub "wasnt that good", becuase it automatically puts you on saturated channels

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

I'm on channel 3 on my vmng300

Good or bad?

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3_%28number%29

thats about all i can tell you, as im not on your port, or even your CMTS then I cant say whether channel 3 is good

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

I am on channel 3 as well. While we are talking about channels and ubrs i want to moan about that site everyone goes on about which shows the utilisation of the ubrs in your area. You have got 11 or 12 colours crammed together which is crap for colour blind people because I cant see which line is mine :(

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

See what you've started craig?

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

this was the one I was talking about http://ukinternetreport.co.uk/cmts/

Are these physically separate servers or are they cards sat within a server which customers are assigned to?

Either way, just as this site shows the latency of the ubrs serving a particular area, is their a report we can access which shows the latency or channel utilisation of each ubr we are on?

i.e if I know I am on linc11, is there anyway I can compare the upstream channels we are talking about?

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Nope as even when I called up using the Superhub he said I was on channel 2 when I was on channel 3... So it makes no difference what modem/hub you have.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

and its my fault how? are you saying we shouldnt make threads?

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

One of the things ignition told me was to check the frequency rather than the id as the id is cosmetic and can change even tho you on the same channel still. So if you can remember the frequency of the lower utilised channel and compare it to the one on the vmng300 you will know if it is different or not.

The last month or so I was on the superhub VM activated a 2nd upstream channel so I had channels 7 and 8, 7 was significantly lower utilised than 8 and yet the superhub 9 times out of 10 picked 8, my logic was that the superhub scans from top down (not other way) so unless there is a issue connecting to 8 then 7 wont get picked. Hence my trick of artifically reducing the signal to 8 by half removing the cable so 7 gets picked. A short time before I got the vmng300 the channel 7 changed to a docsis2 channel which looks like it merged in the channel 8 as well so the 2 smaller width channels merged into a single big width channel. As the last week or so on the superhub it seemed to keep picking channel 7. This has carried on to the vmng300 now I always get channel 7 and I did check the frequency which is the same as the channel 7 was on the superhub. So for me its either.

1 - still 2 channels but VM stopped the round robin and forced customers onto specific channels.
2 - is only 1 channel now its docsis2.
3 - as you say the vmng300 is acting odd, but its worth saying whenever I plugin my superhub it always gets channel 7 now as well. you should be able to do same test if your superhub is still activated.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

the superhub is still activates chrys, but im not sure it will work after the last beating i gave it, i was intending on introducing it to my airsoft gun, but i thought its better in one piece, especially if VM will want it back if i ever cancel.

ill plug it in sometime this week when iv got some time, and ill check the frequencies of the channels, im on the upgraded upload speed, so docsis2 16qam

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

About the only bug I can find is that it says "Channel Id" on downstream (I have 93-96), then the correct "Channel ID" on the upstream (5). Hardly a dealbreaker. :D

Although now I look closer, upstream power level is rated 57 dBmV, is that within nominal range? (Downstream is ~-0.3 for all four.)

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

shouldnt be above 55

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

If you are having issues with an Upstream that high then we would normally tech it.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

he wouldnt be having an issue otherwise it would have been apparent, he wouldnt have just "happened to notice it" when he checked the stats

however people report upstream problems at 55.1 never mind 57 :erm:

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

He needs to report it to support to get it teched and it is good for other readers to see such an issue and realise that it can be worth calling in to get it resolved.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

i never said it wasn't :D

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

We expect people to call in above 55 as nowadays those levels are more likely to cause issues.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

well iv just had the superhub hooked up, and (not) to my surprise it is still activated, despite nopanics well written scripts :D

the channel it locked onto for the upstream was channel 6, and had the same frequency as channel 6 on the VMNG, so im missing out on channel 5 here, where has it gone? it was better on channel 5

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Here is mine (VMNG300):

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2011/05/57.jpg

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Post your downstream as well.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Here you go:

http://s2.postimage.org/gkc2wsj68/Untitled.jpg

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Downstream waaaaay too high for a VMNG300!

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

In Telford that probably an averge DS powerlevel.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

I just thought I'd humour him for a change as he has posted elsewhere the levels have just been checked by a tech and they are supposedly OK!

Posted today!

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Well mine have creeped higher on the upstream so I've passed it on to VM.

Telford's wild BSing about an £800 leased line... :D

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Heh, my D/S channel ID's aren't in order: Channel Id 29 27 28

Probably means nothing, but it does seem odd.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

well thanks for hijacking my thread!

any ideas why the VMNG doesnt see channel 5?

---------- Post added at 19:48 ---------- Previous post was at 19:42 ----------

also, have you any idea why my power supply is making a high pitched squealing noise?

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Haven't a clue, if it's not a problem why does it matter?

If it really bothers you go back to the plooperhub!

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Its not a problem, but channel 5 was visibly less utilised, I put the dud back in yesterday and it went to channel 6 as well, but it did in the past, only after about 4 or 5 reboots it went to channel 5, but i cant get the modem onto channel 5 for the life of me

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

to be honest plugging in the superhub once with it connecting to same channel as modem has got you no evidence the channel is still available. You need to manage to get the superhub back on this missing channel or just have to forget it :(

In my situation I think channel 8 is either gone or unavailable as even the superhub always gets channel 7 now. Luckily for me channel 8 was the higher utilised one so am not that bothered its gone. Personally I think it got merged as channel 7's utilisation has gone up somewhat since it happened but not as high as channel 8 was.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Does the channel you connect to with the modem appear over utilised? If not the modem is doing it's job and putting you on the best available channel.

AFAIK you have never been able to force a channel change with the modem.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

the channel i am connected to now (6) isnt over utilised, but is clearly higher utilised than 5 was. I havnt really got the time to be swapping modems about, but I would like the VMNG to connect to 5, as that would be an awesome connection. channel 5 was good enough on the superhub, but when that rebooted magically it sometimes put me onto 6

iv got some time to waste at the weekend, so I will have a play with my toys

does anyone have a clue about the squealing power supply?

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Get a replacement power adapter, keep trying until you get one that doesn't squeal. As they don't send them out serarately you will end up with a large POS supply!

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

the one I received with the VMNG300 was a netgear one identical to the superhub power supply, so iv swapped it over for the one that came with the superhub, so all is working and no squealing!

i now have all the good kit together and all the crap stuff together ;)

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

I have a few PSUs that make high-pitched squeals, I always figured it was a result of poor quality components used in the stepdown process, a theory added to by the fact the noisest ones also tend to run the hottest.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

craig I Was checking the old LE3 thread for something and found my old channel 7 frequency, it does seem although the modem reports channel 7 I am actually on the old channel 8.

Here is my old channel 7 frequency.

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/35176947-post369.html

Upstream Channels
Lock Status Modulation Channel ID Max Raw Bit Rate Frequency Power
Locked TDMA 7 10240 Kbits/sec 44000000 Hz 43.9 dBmV

I am now on and have been since docsis2 45800000 Hz

I would have expected if merged for the start to still be 44000000 Hz.

Given my upstream is now looking more shaky utilisation wise I am also curious if I can get back on another channel somehow.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Exactly my problem. I tried for about 1hour 15mins to get my beloved channel 5 back, but nothing, i was even doing the trick with pulling the wire out, then putting it back in when the modem disconnected. However as I I posted on here a few weeks ago around the time of the royal wedding there was an upstream issue which required work on the network and things havnt been the same since. The channels have the same number and frequency on both the superhub and VMNG300, so it definitely the same channel, and if the superhub could see number 5 then why cant the modem?

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Igni has answered that for you previously. If the frequency is the same then it is the difference between CPE's Some start the channel count at 0, some at 1.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

whoops :D

read again, the channel number and frequency matches on both the superhub and VMNG300 i.e. they are the same, so whatever number they start from, they both start from the same one

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

tonight or tommorow I will be disconnecting the cable a few times to see if the vmng300 finds its way to another upstream channel :)

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

i might have to try the superhub just to see if channel 5 is actually available any more, but the modem wouldnt connect to anything else

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

I doubt if it will do it Chrys.

---------- Post added at 18:31 ---------- Previous post was at 18:26 ----------

So this was a mistake?

:D:D:D

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

right, your mixing me up now :D

Both the superhub and the modem report channel 6 upstream on frequency 35800000Hz

There was another channel i used to get, channel 5 (not sure of the frequency) which i got on the superhub. Since installing the modem I have never had channel 6, so i queried it on the VM forum, and they told me I was connected to channel 5, even though the modem said 6.

The channels and their frequencies match up on the superhub and the modem, but obviously both of those count the channels from 1, and the CMTS counts from 0

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

The the difference in how channels are numbered is probably between the CPE and the systems virgin use.

Virgins starts at 0 while the superhub and bettermodem start counting from 1.

Probably :p

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

thats what I said, but i want to know why i cant connect to the less utilised channel, which comes through on the modem as channel 5 and probably on the CMTS as 4

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Its probably not any less utilized now. If it was a good channel before, then gradually as modems were rebooted they would have hopped onto it and eventually it would cease to be the channel modems prefer.

That dosent explain why my downstream channels are out of order mind. How on earth it can go 28 27 29 is beyond me. I guess 27 is worse than 28 but better than 29.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

the superhub puts them out of order since R25, dont know why, it was reported in the beta firmware thread but they said it didnt matter. However the VMNG300 puts them in order

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Skie what I remember from when I could use the other channel was if I left the superhub to its own devices, then 9 times out of 10 it would pick the higher utilised channel. If it was a completely random logic then it would be roughly 50% chance of getting either channel. The only time I seen the lower channel was when I emulated fault conditions. The very first time I got on it was after a long outage, then the other times was when I either did a lot of power cycles 20+ or after deliberatly reducing the SNR by half removing the cable. So if anything it appeared to be used as a fallback channel.

Then a change to docsis2 occured and I eventually got the vmng300. Since utilisation remained fairly low I stopped bothering trying to jump channels and I also wrongly thought I stayed on it anyway by the channel id been 7 on the vmng300. Now utilisation is going up again my curioisity is back. However.

1 - is the channel even there anymore it may have been merged into the larger docsis2 channel.
2 - if its there is it still available to use to my modem as VM may have made it unavailable to me.

I will try later to see if I can change channels but wont try forever :) maybe for 20 minutes or so.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

well you have the 2 different channels before the 'major' changes to the network, but the network didnt change at all around here and changing to the modem meant that i couldnt find the channel anymore, since having the modem, there was an upstream fault (noise) which was resolved, but still no channel 5. it has to be there somewhere, just a question of finding it

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Actually I forgot to consider that the superhub the channel id actually stayed on 7 even tho the frequency changed.

So previously channel 7 was 4.4mhz and channel 8 (higher utilised) was 4.58mhz.
After network changes channel 7 was 4.58mhz on the superhub.
So different frequency but same id.

I think I probably wont get anywhere but i will try anyway.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

The downstream channel numbers aren't really a cause for concern.
On reboot the modem (or modem side) must lock onto one downstream channel first. All the information the modem needs to operate on the system is sent through that channel. That could explain the out of order channel numbers.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

yeah the downstream order isnt an issue, if the first one is highest utilised doesnt matter as the traffic is auto balanced to lowest utilised channels anyway. Thats whats so great about bonding. On the 20mbit service I had to keep hopping downstream channels as when a channel worked well one day it was over utilised the next day.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

That's why with some a little knowledge is dangerous, they tend to look for problems that don't exist or make them suit their problem.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

ok I finished playing.

Was harder to do and I also failed.

On the vmng300 if removing the cable it seems it eithers works with normal power levels or doesnt work, I couldnt get it to be partially connected at reduced power levels. The numerous recconections were all on the same channel.

When I tried on the superhub because of bridge mode I had the same problem I had with the vmng300 in that I couldnt keep refreshing the page to check the channel status as I had to keep doing dhcp renew's on the router to keep been able to connect to the GUI, the superhub had an additional problem because of this I couldnt relogin after a dhcp renew due to a ghosted session and the superhub restriction of one login at a time. Nevertherless I did about 10 attempts and all same channel.

So I am stuck with this jitter now until VM do another upgrade.

Pinging 194.168.4.100 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=252

Ping statistics for 194.168.4.100:
Packets: Sent = 10, Received = 10, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 8ms, Maximum = 25ms, Average = 13ms

It was only 2-3 weeks or so back when ignition signed up and I posted on his thread I had much better then that to the same ip.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

heh I did another and I just about hung onto 10ms average.

Pinging 194.168.4.100 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=5ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=252

Ping statistics for 194.168.4.100:
Packets: Sent = 10, Received = 10, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 5ms, Maximum = 17ms, Average = 8ms

here is some from earlier tho in afternoon. I used to be able to get like this in the evenings also only 2 or so weeks ago. I think VM have dumped some users on my port with some rebalancing.

Pinging 194.168.4.100 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=252
Reply from 194.168.4.100: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=252

Ping statistics for 194.168.4.100:
Packets: Sent = 10, Received = 10, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 6ms, Maximum = 10ms, Average = 7ms

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Told you it wouldn't work!:D

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

your sometimes right ;)

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Most times but don't always put it over well.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

thats where i come in handy :D

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Yeh bvut you think channels make a difference- they don't!

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

they do

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Pantomime time!!!

No they don't!!!

He's behind you!!!:D:D:D:D:D

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

enlighten us then.............

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Nopanic!!!!!!!!!!!

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

hmm there is a 2nd channel, I got one on 3.58mhz and the ID is 4.

The modem d/c by itself and recconected and I was on that channel but it couldnt lock to a downstream so I waited and then it came back online but back on 4.58mhz :(

I have had about 2 or 3 d/c during the day as well which were not me messing about.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

I have a VMNG300, not a Superhub

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

doh, either way it doesnt matter

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Sounds like it could be upgrade work happening in you area.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

I hope so. It needs it.

speedio slowing down on some tests now.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

speedio freezes in firefox, just a warning. had to do mine in IE

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Chin up!

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

this was in IE, its fast again now.

Re: Possible Bug in VMNG300 firmware?
 

Yes I've noticed a few of these on my particular piece of the infrastructure too. In lieu of better information I'm deducing that it is due to UBR upgrades/changes for better superhub support and/or UBR upgrades/changes to make more of the VM network 100Mb compliant.

Whatever it is, at least they have the good sense to wait until late evening/early morning to start messing with the network.