Sam Knows white box

I have the FTTC modem and HH3 running 80/20 at max speed and have been sent a white box from SamKnows, i am confused as to how it's meant to be connected though.
Is it Modem > Whitebox > HH3?

Modem ---- HH3 ---- Whitebox ---- all your computers

The idea is your PC's connect via the whitebox so it knows when you're using your connection. It will then avoid doing its tests when your connection is in active use as the results wouldn't be accurate.

What about other kit connected either wired or wireless to the router?

That's what i was going to ask next, 1 Laptop and a PS3 are wired, another laptop and a Smart tv are wireless.

Everything is meant to connect via the white box.

Did they not send a FAQ out?

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Everything is meant to connect via the white box.

Did they not send a FAQ out?

No it doesnt!

The SamKnows White Box (I have had one since January) plugs into the router (in your case the HH) BUT NOTHING ELSE CONNECTS TO THE WHITEBOX.

The whitebox listens via the wireless to prevent it running tests when the system is busy but it "int interested" in what the devices connacted to the LAN are doing and th switch in the router won't pass any data to it. So the map is:-

Modem ---- HH |------Witebox
|-------Other Devices
|-------Other devices

etc
All of the tests are run by the whitebox connecting to the WAN and running tests with the SamKnows servers.

Its ping monitors are very good as the packets are not "fighting" outbound traffic that the TBB BB monitor does and it's speed tests also seem to have huge bandwidth - on my BE* connection they are very stable reporting a solid 6.5 - 7 Mb/s when my line syncs at around 8 Mb/s.

EDIT - had a look at the SAMKNOWS site and I am wrong - the wired devices DO plug into the whitebox see here SamKnows site

Just waiting for Ashington to go live with FTTC - the CAB seems to be finished as do many others

Edited by greenglide (Wed 09-May-12 23:54:04)

Having had one now for 2 years I think. Right from the off, you connect the box to your router via one ethernet connection move all other all wired devices to ethernet ports on white box white box (black in my case). Wireless devices are not changed they stay as is, as far as I am aware it looks at wirless signals in its range.

When I first connectedthe white box I was on 2 meg now over 60meg how times haved changed since 28kps dial up.

Information is useful its amazing how fast your connection is in the middle of the night.

In reply to a post by greenglide:

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Everything is meant to connect via the white box.

Did they not send a FAQ out?

No it doesnt!

The SamKnows White Box (I have had one since January) plugs into the router (in your case the HH) BUT NOTHING ELSE CONNECTS TO THE WHITEBOX.

The whitebox listens via the wireless to prevent it running tests when the system is busy but it "int interested" in what the devices connacted to the LAN are doing and th switch in the router won't pass any data to it. So the map is:-

Modem ---- HH |------Witebox
|-------Other Devices
|-------Other devices

etc
All of the tests are run by the whitebox connecting to the WAN and running tests with the SamKnows servers.

Its ping monitors are very good as the packets are not "fighting" outbound traffic that the TBB BB monitor does and it's speed tests also seem to have huge bandwidth - on my BE* connection they are very stable reporting a solid 6.5 - 7 Mb/s when my line syncs at around 8 Mb/s.

EDIT - had a look at the SAMKNOWS site and I am wrong - the wired devices DO plug into the whitebox see here SamKnows site

Just waiting for Ashington to go live with FTTC - the CAB seems to be finished as do many others

If you read the faq as MrSaffron stated it clearlly states HH to white box and all other client devices connected to white box
https://www.samknows.eu/index.php/en/guides/installa...
See installation guides

Off topic question, do you think Ashington will be done by the end of June? I'm waiting on it too

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 I may swap it back again!

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

<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>

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 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 .

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

In reply to a post by qasdfdsaq:

Ah - I got confused by you saying two opposing things in the same post. Grr.

Sorry - crawls away and hides

Will cross this bridge when it has been built! Hopefully by end of June

Odd choice of box then, as the WR740n has 10/100 WAN port. So while CPU can cope its going to be at its port limit for Virgin 100 Meg, and too slow for Openreach FTTP

Perhaps a different box will ship for the faster services.

I'd certainly assume so, yes. I've not seen the box in person, just going off the picture on the official website. Some more intense googling shows it's actually a TL-WR741ND, same basic setup, pretty basic cheap hardware.

In their defence, at the time they started doing this 8mbps DSL and 10mbps cable were the fastest services widely available in the UK

Edited by deleted (Fri 11-May-12 10:10:35)

As I said, I was misled

Mine is a Linksys WRT160NL
iechyd da

Both WAN and LAN ports are 10/100 on that model of linksys I believe.

And mine is the TPLink supplied in February this year.

It does "work" quite happily when connected the "wrong" way with the wired devices connected to the router rather than the white box. However if the line is maxed out by any devices that the whitebox doesnt see when it is doing its hourly speed test or its much more frequent ping test the results might be seen as congestion when it is not actually present.

The system has its limitations just as the TPP BB monitor does.