cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

ANOTHER thread on HOW BAD the 582n is

Community Veteran
Posts: 6,740
Thanks: 250
Fixes: 20
Registered: 16-02-2009

ANOTHER thread on HOW BAD the 582n is

Well I have had my new fibre router for just over a week, and installed since Wed 3/10.
Results:-
VERY POOR WIFI - Even with ONLY ONE device connected - an Orange Liveradio - AND NO OTHER TRAFFIC on a clear channel I get drop outs listening to streaming radio.
Looking at the stats, I see it has dropped from 150Mb to 30Mb - ok it doesn't need much b/w for radio but it can't even hold that !
EDIT: this is in a reasonably modern house (1950's) and in the NEXT ROOM,
EDIT 2: NOW 18Mb that is nearly b speed not n!
Not at all happy with this new router PN.
45 REPLIES
Plusnet Alumni (retired) chrispurvey
Plusnet Alumni (retired)
Posts: 5,369
Fixes: 1
Registered: 13-07-2012

Re: ANOTHER thread on HOW BAD the 582n is

I'm guessing that your speeds are OK from a wired connection?
Have you been through all the channels on your router?
Community Veteran
Posts: 6,740
Thanks: 250
Fixes: 20
Registered: 16-02-2009

Re: ANOTHER thread on HOW BAD the 582n is

I have NO issues with it wired. It is only my wifi devices that are P***s poor.
It is on channel 11 there are 3 other routers round here ALL on ch 1.  Grin This is from the cx-01 wifi scan.
I have NOT manually selected another channel as there is no interference on this one, I am showing a 65db connection but < 20K/s not really usable for video streaming which is what this device does. (Android TV stick cx-01)
As I said with nothing downloading and a 72Mb download speed, I can NOT GET STREAMING RADIO! with this router, it keeps dropping and buffering or dropping completely.
I used to use a thompson g router and had no issues with the wifi, I started using a BT HH2 and it had no issues (wireless n) but this one USELESS  Lips are sealed
Community Veteran
Posts: 6,740
Thanks: 250
Fixes: 20
Registered: 16-02-2009

Re: ANOTHER thread on HOW BAD the 582n is

Given that there is now about a dozen POOR reports for this router, I think it is time it was replaced. I am willing to be part of a trial again.
ALL THE REPORTS ARE ABOUT WIFI BTW. Cry
Plusnet Alumni (retired) chrispurvey
Plusnet Alumni (retired)
Posts: 5,369
Fixes: 1
Registered: 13-07-2012

Re: ANOTHER thread on HOW BAD the 582n is

It is something we have fedback on, but this has been in general a very reliable router.
Have you been able to try connecting any other wireless devices to the router and see if you get the same performance?
Community Veteran
Posts: 6,740
Thanks: 250
Fixes: 20
Registered: 16-02-2009

Re: ANOTHER thread on HOW BAD the 582n is

Given that this is something I rely on it doesn't really make any difference to to me if the others work fine, this device is wifi ONLY and I use it to listen to streaming radio all the time,
I have tried the cx-01 and it gets the same poor speed - I used it to check the wifi channels.
I am not looking for great performance - although that would be good - but RELIABILITY I can't rely on it to keep the wifi connected all the time, even though there is no throughput other than the radio ~ 190Kb/s not a lot. 
I know you will say you have x routers out there and only y people on here have complained, but maybe we are the savvy ones that KNOW something is wrong not just accept it.
Plusnet Alumni (retired) chrispurvey
Plusnet Alumni (retired)
Posts: 5,369
Fixes: 1
Registered: 13-07-2012

Re: ANOTHER thread on HOW BAD the 582n is

I'm not saying that nothing is wrong, obviously there is something wrong and I am just trying to identify the issue.
I have created a ticket(#60793243) on your account which you can view at http://help.plus.net as to try and help the situation.

Community Veteran
Posts: 6,740
Thanks: 250
Fixes: 20
Registered: 16-02-2009

Re: ANOTHER thread on HOW BAD the 582n is

OK I will try it. But given that on here someone is on their SEVENTH router I doubt it will make any difference.
vetterlein
Grafter
Posts: 68
Registered: 11-01-2008

Re: ANOTHER thread on HOW BAD the 582n is

Just to note , since I switched from a thome585v8 to the technicolor 582 ... WifI signal is a lot better
Community Veteran
Posts: 6,740
Thanks: 250
Fixes: 20
Registered: 16-02-2009

Re: ANOTHER thread on HOW BAD the 582n is

OK update:
Got new router yesterday.
Wifi stayed up last night - good
DNS ISSUES on LAN! - BAD
I use nfs mapping by name, my main "server" is called acer, after replacing the router yesterday and setting the dhcp's to static here is what I am getting:-
hairybiker@duo:~$ ping acer
PING acer (192.168.1.68) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from acer (192.168.1.68): icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=0.190 ms
64 bytes from acer (192.168.1.68): icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.196 ms
64 bytes from acer (192.168.1.68): icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=0.165 ms
64 bytes from acer (192.168.1.68): icmp_req=4 ttl=64 time=0.201 ms
64 bytes from acer (192.168.1.68): icmp_req=5 ttl=64 time=0.184 ms
--- acer ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 3998ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.165/0.187/0.201/0.015 ms
hairybiker@duo:~$ ping acer.lan
PING acer.lan (192.168.1.64) 56(84) bytes of data.
From duo.local (192.168.1.67) icmp_seq=1 Destination Host Unreachable
From duo.local (192.168.1.67) icmp_seq=2 Destination Host Unreachable
From duo.local (192.168.1.67) icmp_seq=3 Destination Host Unreachable
From duo.local (192.168.1.67) icmp_seq=4 Destination Host Unreachable
From duo.local (192.168.1.67) icmp_seq=5 Destination Host Unreachable
--- acer.lan ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 0 received, +5 errors, 100% packet loss, time 4024ms
pipe 3
hairybiker@duo:~$

The ping by name is via a host file, the dns entry is from the router - notice the difference HuhCrazy Crazy Crazy Angry
I spent 20 min on this last night trying to get my media player to map the share by dns name, gave up and used the ip address (I was using the name as that is what I have in the mount script).
Now this is the FIRST time I have come across this, as usually they use the same dns/dhcp server app on these devices.
It is still down today and I will spend more time trying to fix it, something I shouldn't have to do with a box!  Crazy
Community Veteran
Posts: 6,740
Thanks: 250
Fixes: 20
Registered: 16-02-2009

Re: ANOTHER thread on HOW BAD the 582n is

Thought I would reboot the router to start with:-
hairybiker@duo:~$ ping acer.lan
ping: unknown host acer.lan

So now it has lost all the dns entrys  Sad
EDIT:
Ok a delve into telnet and input the settings manually and it is working again, but I SHOULDN'T HAVE HAD TO DO THAT!
vetterlein
Grafter
Posts: 68
Registered: 11-01-2008

Re: ANOTHER thread on HOW BAD the 582n is

Wooa ... lots of issues:
1: Do you run  your own DNS ? ... do you one on 582 ... do you use external one ?
2: I assume you spotted you had pinged two different names ? acer.lan and acer  ... not clear if you have a default domainname set?
i: # cat /etc/nsswitch.conf
# /etc/nsswitch.conf
... <elided>
hosts:          files mdns4_minimal [NOTFOUND=return] dns mdns4
...

So on my system, name resolution is 1st by files .. 3rd by dns
# tail /etc/hosts
...
192.1.2.3  acer
192.3.4.5  acer.lan
192.5.6.7  acer.home
So I can get :
# ping acer
PING acer (192.1.2.3) 56(84) bytes of data.
...
# ping acer.lan
PING acer.lan (192.3.4.5) 56(84) bytes of data.
...
# ping acer.home
PING acer.home (192.5.6.7) 56(84) bytes of data.
...
You can find you default (dns) domain name  via dnsdomainname(1)
also look @ /etc/resolv.conf to see what search is getting done  ... nowadays 'network manager' messes with this file
(you may be interested in t his bug BTW  https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nss-mdns/+bug/140663 ) sinvce I suspect you don't
run multicaset  DNS
....need to switch macines ... to get examples...
# dnsdomainname
Community Veteran
Posts: 6,740
Thanks: 250
Fixes: 20
Registered: 16-02-2009

Re: ANOTHER thread on HOW BAD the 582n is

I have no local dns it is handled by the router.
On ALL previous routers I could ping by the dns name, whether .lan or .home, and get a reply. (I manually name the hosts on the dhcp page on the router)
With this one it uses .lan (as the previous 582 did)
I know I pinged 2 different names, as I said one uses the host file the other the router. (acer=host acer.lan=router dns)
I don't have any default dns search name set.
But WHY should this one give out a totally spurious address?
Normally these devices use Dnsmasq, which ties the dhcp address to the dns address, this one doesn't.
Given that ALL has been working fine for several years prior to the input of this router, what do I blame? As soon as I plugged in this router I lost the shares and found it had issued a new ip address to acer, I then set them all to fixed in the router, but didn't try the ping to name at that time only last night when we wanted to watch media via the stp.
vetterlein
Grafter
Posts: 68
Registered: 11-01-2008

Re: ANOTHER thread on HOW BAD the 582n is

OK so to continue: (I've renamed /numbered to avoid revealing my network addresses)  external is 80.x.y.z , techicolor is 192.168.1.* and internal (house) is 10.1.*.*
root@eddie:~# hostname
eddie
root@eddie:~# dnsdomainname
home

root@eddie:~# nslookup eddie  <---- This goes to DNS (not hosts)
Server: 127.0.0.1
Address: 127.0.0.1#53
Name: eddie.home
Address: 10.1.0.1                                  <---- dns says eddie is 10....
root@eddie:~# head /etc/hosts
127.0.0.1 localhost
127.0.1.1 eddie.home eddie        <----- see, hosts says eddie is 127.....
# The following lines are desirable for IPv6 capable hosts
....

root@eddie:~# ping eddie  <----------- see ping considers /etc/hosts (nslookup does not)
PING eddie.home (127.0.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from eddie.home (127.0.1.1): icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=0.089 ms
64 bytes from eddie.home (127.0.1.1): icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.062 ms
  C-c C-c
--- eddie.home ping statistics ---
2 packets transmitted, 2 received, 0% packet loss, time 999ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.062/0.075/0.089/0.016 ms

root@eddie:~# ping 10.1.0.1
PING 10.1.0.1 (10.1.0.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 10.1.0.1: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=0.080 ms
64 bytes from 10.1.0.1: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.055 ms
  C-c C-c
--- 10.1.0.1 ping statistics ---
2 packets transmitted, 2 received, 0% packet loss, time 999ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.055/0.067/0.080/0.014 ms

root@eddie:~# nslookup 10.1.0.1
Server: 127.0.0.1
Address: 127.0.0.1#53
1.0.1.10.in-addr.arpa name = eddie.home.

root@eddie:~# nslookup 127.0.0.1
Server: 127.0.0.1
Address: 127.0.0.1#53
1.0.0.127.in-addr.arpa name = mydnsbox.  <---- not DNS says 127.0.0.1 is the DNS box (which is true there)

FYI. Now I use dnsmasq(Cool ... used to do it the hard way with bind and dhcpd
vetterlein
Grafter
Posts: 68
Registered: 11-01-2008

Re: ANOTHER thread on HOW BAD the 582n is

looks like our posts crossed over ... think I'm stumbling over terminology here:
1: When you say 'static' are you simply referring to the 'static' setting in the 582 GUI (which is just a predefined DHCP address of course)
    ...if so what address does the GUI show?
2: What does /etc/host say on the machine you are doing the ping from (is the machine commonly called "duo" BTW)
3: Which of the two addresses 192.168.1.68 vs 192.168.1.67  is 'correct'
4: on the machine 'acer' what does ifconfig say ? what does it think it's address is (I'm guessing 192.168.1.68 because SOMETHING is repsonibg to ping to here)