Superhub Virgin Business Superhub now has Modem Mode - Page 4

APS · 21-11-2014, 12:22

After waiting for another 20 mins to get through to report another lockup (see above) we were sent an engineer who changed the attenuator on the line. He said our signals were marginally low but did not really know whether the new firmware was more or less sensitive to this. He seemed to think that if the modem could not sync it would not respond to pings or service its webpage access. Since then, touch wood, we have not lost the connection.

Because I kicked up a bit of a fuss about this I did speak to someone in second level support who indicated there were issues being investigated with the new firmware. One thing I was told was there was a problem with some routers behind the modem doing test pings to remote devices, which we use to detect the line state. I was told if the ping fails there was some sort of memory leak which eventually made the modem unresponsive. Apparently there was a similar issue in the previous firmware which was supposed to be fixed in this new version but it seems it may not be and the result seems ominously similar to what we have seen.

qasdfdsaq · 21-11-2014, 13:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by huwjr

Today we have had a visit from an engineer who tells us that they have seen our SNR dropping as low as 26 and that since the firmware update the minimum should be 29 (apparently it is indeed more sensitive since the update).

Irrespective of the firmware update either 26 or 29 is too low, 29 may officially be the bare minimum to get any sort of connection but the practical minimum is at least double that, at 32dB and ideally 35dB+

---------- Post added at 13:41 ---------- Previous post was at 13:40 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by APS

One thing I was told was there was a problem with some routers behind the modem doing test pings to remote devices, which we use to detect the line state. I was told if the ping fails there was some sort of memory leak which eventually made the modem unresponsive. Apparently there was a similar issue in the previous firmware which was supposed to be fixed in this new version but it seems it may not be and the result seems ominously similar to what we have seen.

This sounds like a pretty common (and lame) failure mode for badly programmed NAT tables.

InsaneNutter · 24-11-2014, 12:08

I'm having a lot of problems with the new BUS_V2.37.13 firmware. The modem appears to crash every 12 to 24 hours.

After speaking to Virgin a few weeks ago I was downgraded to the BUS_V2.37.06 firmware which worked perfectly.

For two weeks the modem worked fine, then was dead on Monday morning, i reset it, then realised the modem had been upgraded back to the BUS_V2.37.13 firmware.

Since then the modem has crashed every 12-24 hours.

Is there a better way i escalate this issue with Virgin? I've been calling 0800 953 0180 which always involves someone taking the business details, running a check on the line which always comes back fine, then saying an engineer will call me back, which never happens.

I have a few reference numbers from previous calls which no one ever wants when i call up saying its an on going issue...

APS · 24-11-2014, 12:29

Despite an engineer correcting the signal levels by the changing attenuator our modem has just locked up again this morning on its LAN ports. Needed to reboot to get it to route again. Version 2.7.13 firmware.

InsaneNutter · 24-11-2014, 12:41

After an hour on hold I managed to speak to someone who informed me a lot of people have been reporting the modem crashing on the BUS_V2.37.13 firmware.

He said Virgin now have a system in place that will allow people who have reported issues with that firmware to be downgraded back to the BUS_V2.37.06 firmware and not automatically be upgraded again in a couple of weeks’ time.

Currently awaiting a call back from an engineer who’s going to take care of that.

rhyds · 24-11-2014, 13:17

My SH with a routed subnet configured hasn't upgraded to 2.37.13.

ccarmock · 24-11-2014, 13:20

Interesting - I was upgraded early last week and my superhub has been 100% stable since being on BUS_V2.37.13.

I wonder if there is a pattern here - the service I have has 6 Fixed IP addresses and I did not try modem mode. I did hearrthere could be problems if you have tried modem mode and the advise is to pinhole reset the subperhub, which will wipe all settings, and configure it from scratch.

If you try this make sure you know the username/password for the PPP/L2TP tunnel

rhyds · 24-11-2014, 13:23

Aside from Modem mode what other improvements are there in the latest firmware?

ccarmock · 24-11-2014, 13:26

The other feature added is a SIP ALG, configured under the Firewall settings. If you don't need that or modem mode, there is not real benefit that I am aware of in upgrading.

from what I was told modem mode works ok for those that have a dyanmic IP address, since that servie is pretty much the same as the residential service.

rhyds · 24-11-2014, 13:32

Thanks for the info. IIRC the only difference between business and domestic dynamic IP services is that the "peak hours" are redefined for office hours.

huwjr · 02-12-2014, 16:54

Ahh interesting! nice to hear some logic/reason to what sounds like utter madness to me, personally I've never seen anything beneath 39-42 snr but the logs on the SH are only since last reboot, and only a few lines at that, so presumably the "virgin gods" have some real logs/graphs of SNR from their switches.

Quote:

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Irrespective of the firmware update either 26 or 29 is too low, 29 may officially be the bare minimum to get any sort of connection but the practical minimum is at least double that, at 32dB and ideally 35dB+

---------- Post added at 13:41 ---------- Previous post was at 13:40 ----------

This sounds like a pretty common (and lame) failure mode for badly programmed NAT tables.

Verminmedia · 15-12-2014, 12:46

We have been having problems since the SH firmware was upgraded to BUS_V2.37.13.

It has been particularly bad this morning with around five interruptions that needed a power cycle to fix. Tried phoning VMB who have an announcement on their system saying that there is an issue affecting their 50Mb business service and advising users to power cycle their SH ...

APS · 18-12-2014, 13:22

I have the lockups due to the firmware as a formal complaint with VM Business Customers services who keep phoning back saying they are working on it and even offering some form of refund.

I said I would rather it worked reliably than have the hassle of chasing small refund payments.

They tried to offer me the 152 Mb service instead which they say is reliable, but confirmed it does not have fixed IP support. I asked for timescales for this support to be added and they said:

"At the moment there are no definite plans to release this and this is still currently being looked into"

So not much chance of that happening any time soon!

huwjr · 18-12-2014, 13:35

Yep same here APS.

They practically begged us to end our contract early and leave as well.

ccarmock · 18-12-2014, 15:52

The 152 Mb/s service is due to get the FixedIP address option. I have been quoted Q1 2015 on two occasions now - once by sales and once by someone involved in the firmware issues in VMB. He confirmed that the firmware to offer that option on the Superhub 2AC, used for the 152Mb/s service is being developed now.

Ignitionet posted a comment there though that there are issues with running the PPP stack on the VMB equipment at these higher speeds, so not sure whether firmware or the problems with the PPP performance will be fixed first, but I was assured they will launch fixed IP on that service as soon as they can.

Quite why they don't just roll back the SH1 business firmware for those having problems I don't know - as the stability issues only started after the new firmware was rolled out. I have the Fixed IP 50 Mb/s service and am on the new firmware and not experienced any issues. No reboots at all.

Wondering why some are and some are not having these problems. Possibly a combination of new FW and what kit is used for CMTS I wonder?