Cisco DPC3825 Modem Owner's Thread

[bowmah]

I just received the DPC 3825 and called in to tech to get it provisioned. I was told that this modem cannot be flashed into bridge mode and the only thing I can do is turn off wireless access. I would like to disable as much as I can on this unit and run my own router. What else can I disable in here? And is the tech right about not being able run this unit as a dummy modem (bridge mode)?

Also, I was told nothing else needs to be tweaked so my existing router is now 192.168.1.1 and dishing out IP's in this range and the new modem is at 192.168.0.1. I have disabled wireless so in theory, no clients will be getting an IP from the .0.1 range (except for the router?) I guess? Is this this most efficient setup?

Just tried accessing 192.168.0.10 and it went to teh web server's (WHS) log in page! That is not good. The web sever is hard coded to a 192.168.1.xx IP address. Something surely can be tweaked in this setup to make sure all the port forwarding in the existing router will still work?

Sure enough, accessing WHS via the internet now no longer works. The existing router now has an Internet IP address of 192.168.0.10. Don't tell me I need to set port forwarding int eh Cisco modem to the router, then from the router to internal IP's?

[bowmah]

Can anyone confirm that this unit cannot be flashed into bridge mode?

I tried port forwarding the Cisco 192.168.0.1 to my current router 192.168.1.1 so that all all my server connections will get through but the Cisco is telling it's not a valid IP. I think it is expecting a .0.1 ending. I also tried disabling DCHP on the Cisco but that lead to no internet connectivity. Anyone have some insight on this?

[bowmah]

Hope this can help someone. Just figured out a way to port forward. Since the Cisco (192.168.0.1) is runnign DHCP and has given the current router a 192.168.0.10 IP, I have port forwarded the same ports on the Cisco to 192.168.0.10. Now, I can reach internal servers from the Internet.

Still, I would like to flash this unit into bridge mode as I do not want to use the wireless or router functions on this thing. There is no point in running 2 routers 1 right behind the other. If anyone knows how to do this, please do share.

[Saint41]

Just went to BB50 and I was given a Motorola Surfboard SB6120 cable modem. I told the sales person at shaw that I already had my own router and this is what they gave me.

Might be an option for you instead of their modem/router.

http://www.motorola.com/Consumers/US...m-SB6120-US-EN

[bowmah]

Well that is interesting. I did not know there are modem options. I was told the Cisco was their newest modem. The older Dcosis 2 worked wonderfully. Now the question is... Which is better? New Cisco or new Motorola. Any Shaw staff know?

[Tearrek]

I also just got the Cisco DPC3825 DOCSIS 3.0 Gateway, and my problem is I am paying for the unlimited 100 and the fastest speed I get is extreme speed.

I had the smc previously but someone at shaw told me I need the cisco to get the 250 unlimited once it's available.

The SMC I consistantly saw 80-90 according to speedtest.net, now like I said 25-30.

I called shaw and they said it's all setup and working properly according to them so they sent tech down, tech replaced cisco with another cisco and same speeds, he's now coming back on monday to see wtf he can do to help me. He said he had something like this the other day and someone pushed a magic button @ shaw and voila it worked right. Hope the same magic button works for me.

[bowmah]

I have have an update. Just spoke with another Shaw staff and was told the Cisco is the newest and ONLY modem that works with the Broadband packages. Not sure if anyone here can confirm this. It would be good to know so we do not give out wrong info here.

As for your Cisco slowness Tearrek, the worst thing is you pay for 100 and get much lower than that! I also had horrible speeds until I cold booted all my gear and reset the Cisco using the reset button. Now, I can achieve 45 mbps down and 2.9 mbps up.

And use speedtest.net. Some Shaw techs suggest using speedtest.shaw.ca but I have a feeling their servers (data center an network) are not up to par - odd to think this as you would think Shaw wants a fool proof way for users to test the maximum speed possible but, use speedtest.net to get a more accurate internet speed . I do not ever remember getting faster speeds using the Shaw speedtest... ever.

With any luck, you may be able to get your speed up and cancel that tech service call!

So you are saying there is a 250 mbps line coming from Shaw?

I wish Shaw would let us tune our up and down speeds. Wouldn't it be great? For my usage, I would go with 30 mbps down and 20 mbps up (total of 50)! Then sharing photos over the internet would not feel like we are using a 56K dial up connection. We can dream can't we?

[okanagan1]

I had Broadband 50 installed on Aug 16 with a SMC modem (D3GN) and have been averaging download speeds of 41 - 46mb/s and upload of 2.8. tests have been done on Speedtest.net I am in Penticton. Todate service has been great with no problems. Also have tv and shaw phone

[Flash604]

I just received the DPC3825 3 days ago. Hooked it up and got 49.8 on my first test. If you read the various threads here and elsewhere, most of the speedtesting sites can't keep up with the new BB connections; especially those where they have multiple different donated sites all over the country/world. Try www.terago.ca/speed-test/.

I have my own routers running DD-WRT, but looking at all the options for this one, I'm really have no reason not to use it. The gigabyte LAN is an added bonus.

[tux]

The DPC3825 is not the ONLY modem that works with the BB packages. Both the Moto 6120 and the SMC D3GN modems will work with BB50 and BB100 , as these are 4-channel DOCSIS 3 modems [capable of ~160 Mbps].

However, the DPC3825 is currently the only modem that supports BB250, which is starting to launch in some areas, because it's an 8-channel modem [capable of ~300 Mbps]. Once the "Bump-Up" program takes effect, this modem may be required for the BB packages, due to the possibility of being bumped to BB250 or Unlimited 250.

There is one other device Shaw offers which would be capable of providing BB250 service, and that is the Gateway. The Shaw Gateway has an integrated 8-channel modem, which theoretically allows it to be used for high-speed internet, as well as an integrated eMTA, which theoretically allows it to be used for home phone. However, Shaw has not yet chosen to activate these features, and I'm not certain whether they have any plans to do so.

As far as tuning your upload speed, due to technical issues, it is far more difficult [and expensive!] for Shaw to increase your upload speed than it is to increase your download, which is why you'll never see a fast symmetrical service over cable. However, when Phase 2 launches, you'll be able to get 10 Mbps up through BB100, or 15 Mbps up through BB250.

[bowmah]

Thx for all the info Tux. As for the up and down speeds, I cannot comment on the technical aspects but from a consumer perspective, Canadians who live in a fiber optic enabled community have been enjoying 10 Mbps down and 10 Mbps up since 2005. If other providers can do it, surely the giant Shaw can as well? In fact, in other countries, it's not unheard of to have 100 / 100 or even 300 / 300 for less than $30 CAD per month. All I can say is, Shaw should also bump your BB 50 users to at least 10 mbps up when the next phase rolls out. Please pass this customer feedback on to Shaw. besides the bandwidth cap, in reality, what is the real world difference between 50 and 100? Probably not much so do bump both up speeds to 10.

[Shaw Champ]

Originally Posted by bowmah

Well that is interesting. I did not know there are modem options. I was told the Cisco was their newest modem. The older Dcosis 2 worked wonderfully. Now the question is... Which is better? New Cisco or new Motorola. Any Shaw staff know?

The 6120 has been discontinued and wouldn't be able to do 250mbps when it comes through. It only has 4 downstream channels. Saying that I've had mine for about 2 years now and it is rock solid. The Cisco DPC3825 has 8 downstream channels and will be the future one to get. With the shortage on modems we have, I haven't made the transition yet as I would rather have the customers get them first. We do have one servicing the building I work at though as a free wireless hot-spot - range is not too bad, not the best, but not too bad.

Airdrie in Alberta currently offers 250mbps speeds with Shaw only with the Cisco DPC3825 though. Docsis 3.0 is not limited, you can go over 1000mbps on it now so there is no rush for fibre build, it's more complimentary. The difference in price between 50 and 100mbps is only $10 at the moment with Shaw. Once the Digital Network Upgrade is done I would expect to see the next phase go into action and over the next year who knows if there will be more modems/routers (like in the past) for now though the DPC3825 is the way to go.

@Tux regarding the Gateway Modem there are no immediate plans here I would suspect more info next year on it.

[tux]

@ShawChamp While it is true that DOCSIS 3 is not limited in terms of maximum theoretical speed, there are limitations in that you need CPE and headend equipment to support the number of upstream and downstream channels needed. For example, if Shaw wanted to increase everybody's internet speed to 1 Gbps using DOCSIS 3, they would need to purchase and supply customers with 32-channel modems. Such modems don't currently exist, and are unlikely to be available any time in the near future. Any substantial increase in DL speed would require a new modem with additional DS channels, and that level of speed would likely require a large portion of the frequencies reserved for cable to be reallocated to internet, to the point where Shaw would likely need to reduce its TV lineup. For this reason, I doubt if Shaw will ever offer speeds above the Phase 2 level, over HFC/coax.

@bowmah One of the technical limitations of HFC coax architecture (used by Shaw and other cable providers) is that it's designed for downstream communications, and as a result upload will always be much slower than download over coax. Fibre is a whole different beast, and it would be much easier and less costly to offer ultra-high-speed symmetric connections over fiber, than it would over coax or copper. In the 1 Gbps DOCSIS 3 scenario described above, the bandwidth available for TV would be severely limited, and the upload speeds would be substantially lower than the download (probably under 100 Mbps). Comparatively, Shaw's fiber trials offer 1Gbps internet now, which I believe is also symmetrical.

[pp1111]

Can anyone confirmed that Cisco modem cannot run is bridge mode like the SMC?
Whichmeans you can't get 2 real/public IP with CISCO?

[bowmah]

@Shaw Champ, thanks, as always for chiming in on this issue. Your insight and info you provide here is very valuable. I guess the only other customer feedback that I can pass to Shaw is this... If Shaw wants to move everyone over to Personalizer + bump up internet programs, then let's make it worthwhile for the average user. For me, worthwhile does not mean the fastest download speed. In fact, a stable and efficient network even at 25 mbps is very sufficient. The only draw back I have is with the upload speed. @Tux is indicating that it's a technical issue with coax but I am only going to speak from a point of a customer. Many home users are NOT uploading and downloading grey area / illegal stuff. In this day and age, sharing photos and videos with friends and family all over the world is a reality. Being a BB 50 customer (definitely NOT one of your lower internet options) and coupled with a high priced TV bundle just makes me feel that I am stuck in 2008 with a slow 3.0 mbps up speed. It is just painful when uploading and sharing large media files through Shaw at the moment. I would expect to have slow speeds if I was one of your litespeed or normal highspeed customer. But at BB 50, I just expected a much faster up speed.

Like I said, downspeed is like megapixels in digital cameras. Everyone wants to brag about how fast of a line (how many megapixels) they have. For those of us who work in technology, I would rather see a very stable 30 mbps line and a good 10 mbps up line. I mean, our bill is $150+ a month and this is without Shaw phone. 3.0 mbps up just does not cut it in my opinion.

But as @Tux had said, this could be a technology issue. And it would cost a lot to invest in some thing like fiber to the door. But many communities are doing this. Again, I don't want to get into the technology. I just want Shaw to bump up your higher tiered customers (ie. Broadband internet packages) who pay a hefty sum of money on internet and TV services with Shaw. Just a few of my thoughts.