Posted: Fri Jun 21, 2024 5:35 Post subject: I'm not a newbee, I'm just stupid
LOL... As the subject line says, I have a less than difficult issue, but I'm too stupid to figure it out.... it's a network issue, but I can't claim it's an ADVANCED network issue to put this post in that area of the forums.
Ok, what I have here is a Netgear Nighthawk CM1200 as my cable modem, and an Asus RT-AC3200 loaded with the latest version of DD-WRT.
About 6 months ago, I received a 3-year 1/2 price offer from Spectrum for 1GB service (I currently had 500gb). I snapped that offer up, as you can imagine. However, when I speedtested, my download speeds didn't change (about 420 mb download), although my upload speed doubled to 30 mb.
I waited awhile, hoping it would be just a glitch at Spectrum, but my wife kept on me to change my cable modem over to Spectrum's (because it was free). But hey, I spent good money on that CM1200, and I didn't want to give it up for the **** router that Spectum gave me, a Sercomm ES2251 (which has known issues)
OK, tonight I decided to tackle the issue --- I connected the CM1200 directly to my desktop PC, bypassing the router and sure enough --- I speedtested and got 981 mb down, 48 mb up... just what I expected 6 months ago. Put the router back in the picture, and I'm back down to 350-425 mb.
So, that tells me I have a network issue between the CM1200 & the AC3200.
As most people would know -- the IP address for the cable modem is fixed at 192.168.100.1 and there is NO user-changeable setting on modem's webpage. Unfortunately, I've had my router setting set for the 192.168.100.xx subnet (commencing @ 192.168.100.2 ---- which is the router's address) for a long time, to accommodate for the deficiencies of a previous cable modem ... and now I have well over 100 devices with static addresses on the router --- I really don't want to get involved in the drudgery of changing all those devices to a different subnet. But I do know it's not a wise idea to put both the router and modem on the same subnet --- but as I've said... I am rather stupid and yea, kinda lazy.
Does having both the cable modem & the router on the same subnet have something to do with the speed deficiencies I am experiencing ?
If so, what can I do to resolve this problem (without changing all those static device IP addresses, hopefully)?
Oh yea --- given that both the router and modem are on the same subnet --- why can I not log into the cable modem using that 192.168.100.1 fixed setting ? I can't even ping that address !
If this router supports CTF+FA under Shortcut Forwarding Engine, that would be the only thing to try and test, but as already stated, this is a hardware limitation more than likely. A mini x86_64 PC router is probably a better option. Also, there is content in the forum and in the Wiki about connecting to a cable modem from behind DD-WRT. _________________ "The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep." - Robert Frost
"I am one of the noticeable ones - notice me" - Dale Frances McKenzie Bozzio
... that's about the best you'll ever be able to do (~500-600Mbps w/ SFE enabled, even less if NOT). That's simply a limitation of the hardware
Huh .... Now, I'm not attempting to be obstinate or anything ... but I do, on occasion ... tend to require to be led by the hand (given my level of stupidity).
I looked up the specs on the router using the link you provided ... and I saw nothing there that indicates those hardware limitations you mentioned.
I DID, on the other hand .. see this : WAN: 1x GbE (RJ45), LAN: 4x GbE (RJ45)
Why on earth would the manufacturer indicate a WAN Gigabyte (GbE) connection when the hardware within cannot support that speed ? That's one of the reasons I selected this router to begin with !
But, spilled milk and all that ... I certainly will take your word for it.
On the other hand ... exactly what specific hardware 'spec' on that page you referred to ... is what is limiting my WAN speeds so that I may shop around for a router that WILL help me achieve those speeds that I am paying for ?
I DID, on the other hand .. see this : WAN: 1x GbE (RJ45), LAN: 4x GbE (RJ45)
Why on earth would the manufacturer indicate a WAN Gigabyte (GbE) connection when the hardware within cannot support that speed ? That's one of the reasons I selected this router to begin with !
But, spilled milk and all that ... I certainly will take your word for it.
Because the other option would be to support 100Mbps. Better to suppprt 1000Mbps when you otherwise have 500-600Mbps capability, then 100Mbps.
Quote:
On the other hand ... exactly what specific hardware 'spec' on that page you referred to ... is what is limiting my WAN speeds so that I may shop around for a router that WILL help me achieve those speeds that I am paying for ?
It's an old AC router, built at a time when 1GB from your ISP was unusual. The manufacturer is only going to provide hardware sufficient to support what is available from the typical ISP at that time, NOT 10 years later. They'll do *anything* to cut costs, esp. when there is no perceived benefit. And so you end up w/ low-end SoC routers (1GHz CPU is nothing to write home about anymore) that are just sufficient to meet the immediate needs of the customer. Saves money and keeps you coming back to get new routers.
If this router supports CTF+FA under Shortcut Forwarding Engine, that would be the only thing to try and test, but as already stated, this is a hardware limitation more than likely.
SUCCESS !
I took a look at that setting (Shortcut Forwarding Engine) you mentioned, and it was already set by default to (SFE) ..... I disabled that setting and my speedtest results dropped badly, to 310 mb (down 25%).
So, I changed (Shortcut Forwarding Engine) to (CTF) --- and BOOM ----- the download speeds almost tripled, as shown below.
Not as fast as the download results as when I directly connected to the Cable Modem, nor quite as fast as the upload speeds either ---- but close enough to the nominal 1 GB service to be happy.
So my question is --- there is an additional setting just below, (Flow Acceleration) --- should I leave that disabled (and leave well enough alone) or should I change that setting to (CTF) or (CTF & FA) ?
I suggested testing CTF+FA if it were available, at least that is what was implied in my previous comment. _________________ "The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep." - Robert Frost
"I am one of the noticeable ones - notice me" - Dale Frances McKenzie Bozzio
