General Discussion
  >> Fibre Broadband


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.


Pages in this thread: 1 | [2] | 3 | (show all)   Print Thread
Standard User greenglide
(member) Thu 10-May-12 20:25:46
Print Post

Re: Sam Knows white box


[re: BP1] [link to this post]
 
If you read the faq as MrSaffron stated it clearlly states HH to white box and all other client devices connected to white box


I did edit my post to admit that I had misinterpreted the setup. I seem to recall that the instructions were very skimpy (it isnt rocket science) but I am sure that it wasnt clear that the wired devices were to be plugged into the WhiteBox (although it is quite logical).

Until recently only a network printer was wired and now only the SKY box is wired and I havent found anything worth downloading from there so it isnt a problem.

However, with a GigaBit switch in the router and a wireless N network actually achieving a 300mb/s I have some slight worries over performance as the the WAN port on the WhiteBox appears not to be GigaBit frown I may swap it back again!

Ex <n>ildram , been to SKY MAX - 15,225 Download
BE Unlimited - 21,000 Download 1,200 Upload,
Moved house, now BE Unlimited 6,500 Down, 1Mb/s up - gutted!
FTTC Cab installation commenced 12th April - expect full 80 / 20 - bye bye BE, hello BT Infinity soon!
Standard User greenglide
(member) Thu 10-May-12 20:56:52
Print Post

Re: Sam Knows white box


[re: Kr1s69] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by Kr1s69:
Off topic question, do you think Ashington will be done by the end of June? I'm waiting on it too smile


<ot>

I think Ashington is doable by the end of June - the CABs near me (Fallowfield) seem to have been done along with the ones south of the river (Stakeford) which I had assumed were on the Bedlington exchange which was activated last yeat (and where I lived until February).

There are still works all over the place and I don't know whether the fibres are in place. It may be that Ashington is fed from Bedlington which in its turn is fed from Cramlington and the fibres need to be in place!

I would guess at 50/50 and am "suffering" from moving from 21Mb/s at Bedlington (just down the road from the exchange with an active fibre CAB that seemed not worth the effort for the location to 7 - 8 Mb/s at Ashington but at least the new CAB is less than 100 metres!

</ot>

Ex <n>ildram , been to SKY MAX - 15,225 Download
BE Unlimited - 21,000 Download 1,200 Upload,
Moved house, now BE Unlimited 6,500 Down, 1Mb/s up - gutted!
FTTC Cab installation commenced 12th April - expect full 80 / 20 - bye bye BE, hello BT Infinity soon!
Standard User RobertoS
(sensei) Fri 11-May-12 00:44:33
Print Post

Re: Sam Knows white box


[re: greenglide] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by greenglide:
However, with a GigaBit switch in the router and a wireless N network actually achieving a 300mb/s I have some slight worries over performance as the the WAN port on the WhiteBox appears not to be GigaBit frown I may swap it back again!
Is the switch in the HH gigabit?

In any case, what relevance does the WAN port on the white box have to that?

I don't think there is a problem smile.

My broadband basic info/help site - www.robertos.me.uk
My domains,website and mail hosting - Tsohost. Internet connection - Plusnet Value Fibre.

"Where talent is a dwarf, self-esteem is a giant." - Jean-Antoine Petit-Senn.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.

Standard User qasdfdsaq
(member) Fri 11-May-12 02:26:42
Print Post

Re: Sam Knows white box


[re: RobertoS] [link to this post]
 
Indeed, with a 6mbps download speed (now) and expecting up to 76mb, lack of gigabit will make little difference. Especially since the Openreach FTTC modem doesn't have gigabit either.
Administrator MrSaffron
(staff) Fri 11-May-12 08:43:42
Print Post

Re: Sam Knows white box


[re: qasdfdsaq] [link to this post]
 
Any local wireless to LAN traffic would end up going over the 100 Meg port, so might cap users local lan activity.

Using a 100 Meg port for a 82 Meg throughput service is pushing things to the limit, and raises question what CPU capability the units have to cope with that level of traffic.

The Virgn 100 Meg service should not record their usual odd average over just over the speed sold. Not 100% sure that some of the SamKnows testing is to a server on the ISPs own network.

Andrew Ferguson, [email protected]
www.thinkbroadband.com - formerly known as ADSLguide.org.uk
The author of the above post is a thinkbroadband staff member. It may not constitute an official statement on behalf of thinkbroadband.
Standard User qasdfdsaq
(member) Fri 11-May-12 08:51:53
Print Post

Re: Sam Knows white box


[re: MrSaffron] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by MrSaffron:
Any local wireless to LAN traffic would end up going over the 100 Meg port, so might cap users local lan activity.

If it's connected as recommended (Modem <-> White box <-> EU Router) that wouldn't happen, wireless traffic would never go over the white box since local devices are all behind the end user's router

Using a 100 Meg port for a 82 Meg throughput service is pushing things to the limit, and raises question what CPU capability the units have to cope with that level of traffic.

The unit looks like a WR740n whose CPU is capable of about 220mbps routed throughput.
Standard User greenglide
(member) Fri 11-May-12 09:06:12
Print Post

Re: Sam Knows white box


[re: MrSaffron] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by MrSaffron:
Any local wireless to LAN traffic would end up going over the 100 Meg port, so might cap users local lan activity.

Using a 100 Meg port for a 82 Meg throughput service is pushing things to the limit, and raises question what CPU capability the units have to cope with that level of traffic.

The Virgn 100 Meg service should not record their usual odd average over just over the speed sold. Not 100% sure that some of the SamKnows testing is to a server on the ISPs own network.


What potentially concerns me is, indeed, the local Wireless LAN to wired LAN traffic over the 100Mb/s connection as well as the 100Mb/s limitation of wired to wired LAN connections when used - most of the time there arent any but it is sometimes required.

Of course on these occasions I can plug the devices into the GigaBit switch on my Router.

I have no intention to use the HH and realise that the Router <> Modem link will be pushing the 100Mb/s connection extremely hard.

Which raises the question, when vectoring comes in a Modem and Router capable of over 100Mb/s will be required. Even with the current profile it is possible to have a maximum attainable in excess of 100Mb/s which cannot be achieved with the hardware supplied! I suspect it will be a while before anyone truly "needs" it but it is in future plans (to trump Virgin?).

I know that SamKnows shares results (with no personally identifiable content) with partner ISPs - not sure that this includes measurements to ISPs own servers. In network measurements would obviously be of value but none show up in the reports available to us.

Ex <n>ildram , been to SKY MAX - 15,225 Download
BE Unlimited - 21,000 Download 1,200 Upload,
Moved house, now BE Unlimited 6,500 Down, 1Mb/s up - gutted!
FTTC Cab installation commenced 12th April - expect full 80 / 20 - bye bye BE, hello BT Infinity soon!
Standard User greenglide
(member) Fri 11-May-12 09:16:56
Print Post

Re: Sam Knows white box


[re: qasdfdsaq] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by qasdfdsaq:
In reply to a post by MrSaffron:
Any local wireless to LAN traffic would end up going over the 100 Meg port, so might cap users local lan activity.

If it's connected as recommended (Modem <-> White box <-> EU Router) that wouldn't happen, wireless traffic would never go over the white box since local devices are all behind the end user's router

Using a 100 Meg port for a 82 Meg throughput service is pushing things to the limit, and raises question what CPU capability the units have to cope with that level of traffic.

The unit looks like a WR740n whose CPU is capable of about 220mbps routed throughput.


With an ADSL modem / router (which I have at present) then wireless traffic would go over the white box. With a seperate modem connected as Modem <-> White box <-> EU Router would this work? The white box could not authenticate with the ISP network and would not have access to the DHCP facilities of the router being connected to the WAN input. The Samknows diagram clearly places the whitbox after the router.

Ex <n>ildram , been to SKY MAX - 15,225 Download
BE Unlimited - 21,000 Download 1,200 Upload,
Moved house, now BE Unlimited 6,500 Down, 1Mb/s up - gutted!
FTTC Cab installation commenced 12th April - expect full 80 / 20 - bye bye BE, hello BT Infinity soon!
Standard User qasdfdsaq
(member) Fri 11-May-12 09:34:56
Print Post

Re: Sam Knows white box


[re: greenglide] [link to this post]
 
Ah - I got confused by you saying two opposing things in the same post. Grr.

Yes, if LAN devices connect direct to the Whitebox then through the Whitebox to your router, then it may limit you. I would in that situation recommend a second wireless router (giving you three devices in total, yuck) operating in AP mode and connected behind the Whitebox. Or a seperate modem which is the case in BT FTTC, though you'd have to get the modem or Whitebox to handle your PPPoE session which may not be practical.
Standard User paul1360
(member) Fri 11-May-12 09:46:23
Print Post

Re: Sam Knows white box


[re: qasdfdsaq] [link to this post]
 
OK now once again I'm confused (not hard for me).
I've had this for 2yrs+ now and I'm connected this way:-
OR Modem>>>>>>HH3>>>>Samknows
!
!
PC & Lap Top

If this is the wrong way then have they not told me so, also why is the information that I get is ok, have a monthly report card et al and they seem happy as had no contect over this. Sorry for ramble not well this am soory
iechyd da

Pages in this thread: 1 | [2] | 3 | (show all)   Print Thread

Jump to