Superhub Modem mode - what does it fix ? - Page 2

Chrysalis · 23-12-2011, 15:10

yeah as I said earlier it adds latency/jitter. For reasons unconfirmed.

kwikbreaks · 23-12-2011, 16:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by djfunkdup

log into the super hub and disable 'ip flood detection'

you will find it in the 'services' menu

That was one of the things VM "fixed" early on in the Superhub saga. As it was fixed quickly I suspect all that was done was to ignore whatever the setting was on in the GUI and handle it as off. Whatever was done it got rid of the embarassing false "dropped packet" reporting from pingtest.net Plus of course in modem mode it will never have any effect even if it can be set.

morley04 · 28-12-2011, 11:30

A quick phone call and im back to the trusty old VMNG for the time being untill I either upgrade to 100Mb or there is new FW for the hub that fixes the issues.

General Maximus · 28-12-2011, 13:22

Good for you dude, it must feel great to be using a proper modem again

Ignitionnet · 28-12-2011, 13:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by General Maximus

Good for you dude, it must feel great to be using a proper modem again

Yeah we all feel emotionally moved by the CPE we use to access the Internet.

General Maximus · 28-12-2011, 16:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Yeah we all feel emotionally moved by the CPE we use to access the Internet.

you must be as sad as me then. You have got to be honest though, for something you use, benefit from and enjoy everyday, you have got to feel good when you have got a piece of equipment that kicks ass, especially when you can tell the difference as you have gone from something rubbish to something good.

It is just like car lovers going from a noisey tin can to a brand new Audi or something.

morley04 · 28-12-2011, 16:27

Well I noticed the difference straight away

and im now a happy bunny!

General Maximus · 28-12-2011, 17:45

so

Ignitionnet

Ignitionnet · 28-12-2011, 19:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by General Maximus

you must be as sad as me then. You have got to be honest though, for something you use, benefit from and enjoy everyday, you have got to feel good when you have got a piece of equipment that kicks ass, especially when you can tell the difference as you have gone from something rubbish to something good.

It is just like car lovers going from a noisey tin can to a brand new Audi or something.

No idea, Shub in modem mode seems to work. Couldn't care less what hooks me up to the internets so long as it works which the Shub appears to in modem mode.

In routing mode it's a disaster mind you, and the network around here is still debatable.

--- 194.168.4.100 ping statistics ---

5 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 0% packet loss

round-trip min/avg/max = 7.2/8.8/10.2 ms

EDIT: Wouldn't surprise if the Superhub for the above poster locked to a different, more utilised upstream than the VMNG. Nothing to do with the hardware and purely coincidence.

Chrysalis · 28-12-2011, 19:36

ignition I back up his claims (assuming you reading this)

When I was last able to compare the superhub to the vmng300 I was able to verify the same upstream channel and it wasnt just jitter, the actual base latency also increased which was visible on my tbb graph. In my view it only shows itself if there is sufficent upstream congestion hence people still getting good latency in low utilised areas.

The superhub was fine on sustained downloading, large files etc. But latency sensitive stuff it was visibly laggier and that included web browsing.

My gut guess is that the configuration is tuned to higher queue depths which allows higher speeds in congested areas (hiding congestion) but also adds delays to packets. As in my view the superhub on my connection did give more sustainable speeds under congestion conditions which in theory should make me happier however the latency made almost everything 'feel' slower.

General Maximus · 29-12-2011, 07:50

true true. I know a modem is supposed to be a modem but when I ran my speedtests on speedtest.net (with the shub) it always took a few seconds for the page to load, then the testing interface and I always my ping always came back as 35.

When I got my VMNG300 reactivated the first thing I did was head back over to speedtest.net and I knew everything was back to normal straight away; the page loaded pretty much instantaneously and apart from jumping from 21mbits up to 80 something in the test, all my pings were 15ms

Ignitionnet · 29-12-2011, 08:47

It should be clarified that 'modem mode' is VM speak for non-NAT, it's no longer doing NAT, firewalling, etc, but it's not a 'modem'.

Instead of the half-bridge you get from router mode where you see your first hop as VM and VM will see your Superhub's WAN side as your final hop it becomes a full bidirectional bridge between LAN and WAN sides of the Superhub.

Looks like in some cases this bridge causes issues. I guess I'm lucky in that it's one of the few things about my VM service that I can't fault since it was put into non-NAT mode for me as a trial in June.

kwikbreaks · 29-12-2011, 10:31

So does the way it operates in "non-NAT mode" differ significantly from just putting your router in a DMZ and turning off wireless? If not why did it take all that time to develop?

General Maximus · 29-12-2011, 13:29

Well that explains a lot, thanks

Ignitionnet · 29-12-2011, 19:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwikbreaks

So does the way it operates in "non-NAT mode" differ significantly from just putting your router in a DMZ and turning off wireless? If not why did it take all that time to develop?

It's been in the original firmware for ages, unsure about VM's *******ised version. It is somewhat different from putting router in DMZ - that still has the Superhub routing traffic and doing NAT, this doesn't it's just bridged straight between LAN and WAN sides of the Superhub's router.

EDIT: I question how much of a swear word the name for a child born out of wedlock is, but that's the word that the filter caught above.