Re: RCN and an "unapproved" modem

That is a bunch of BS. They changed their list probably just because nobody really uses the older ones but are 100% DOCSIS 1.0/1.1 compatible which RCN uses AND fully supports. I used to use my Motorola SB3100 with them which is basically the same as the currently approved (as of 04-13-2008) What's funny is, the SB4200 is a really hackable modem as well as most of them.. In fact I've even given them different model #s when signing up and they don't even know. The only way they'd know is if the checked the model via SNMP (provided you don't block it with your "customized modem") Their management and trouble ticketing system, call takers (the ones from India are the most helpful! They will bend over backwards to help you and are very intelligent about the system and how to diagnose or escalate a problem most likely resulting in a visit from a tech every time.) One call taker actually troubleshot me reading off a piece of paper and I know because of several reasons. 1) I used to work as the highest level tier ("engineering") for a huge satellite internet provider. 2) I'm a Network Engineer. So anyway, she proceeds to trouble shoot me by having me "power cycle" which I did all of the possible troubleshooting short of climbing the pole and messing with drop and tap. Side-note, I have a dedicated drop that bypasses the box on the side of the house increasing signal. There is no customer cable involved so they can't blame me for that. The drop goes directly in my house with their wiring and directly into the cable modem. And still off track, I'm in my 1st month of dealing with trouble shooting my internet with them cause they refuse to admit it's their fault. I had to call my counties cable commission. I've already had literally at least 7 techs out which just take readings which to them are "fine". Unfort. from an engineering viewpoint that means nothing. I'm getting ranging errors and my modem reboots all the time and cuts out. It's not just the signal that counts. It's the quality of data coming over it that a meter can't see. So I get them to run a "flap test" that runs on their headend (CMTS). look it up.., which monitors my modem every time it flaps or has the ranging error etc which means that every something seconds the modem requests to the CMTS to negotiate the upstream power. what happens with me is it gets to the point where it times out all the time and shuts down. They must have spent 100s of dollars sending techs out when they could have sent

2 or 3 and escalated it to the point where all a network engineer does is login to the cisco cmts and type in a command remotely! It will keep track of all that stuff. Then they were supposed to get back to me.... still waiting.. calling the cable commission again.

In closing, it has become clear to me that due to their negligence and time wasted thus far, they'd rather drop a customer who signed up from day 1 than proper escalation to the proper tech/engineer to resolve the problem in a timely fashion saving them money and keeping a happy customer (funny story I had major probs and they sent a network engineer to my home..). What was even more infuriating was during the time I was working with them to fix it I got a call from the "Customer Loyalty Department" offering me a 2 year contract at a lower rate with more speed (wait a min.. I cant even get MY service working as is!.) So I called them back and they never returned the call. How's that for Loyalty. I guess RCN called Merriam-Webster and redefined loyalty. Followed by that I received 3-4 other automated sales msgs.

So yeah RCN is great if things are working but if something goes wrong.. good luck and "thank you for being an RCN customer"


(above post is my experience and my opinion only.. yours may vary. if it works for you, great! =)

On Mar 1 2004, 7:54 pm, w_tom wrote:

Your insistence on obtaining the irrefutable fact or the > 'why' is admirable. They said the modem is not on the > approved list but not once provided a good engineering reason > for the 'why'. The answer was "We know its not on the > approved list and that is all you need know". A better answer > might be thatRCNdoes not use a full set of DOCSIS - orRCN > just does not trust any customer to do anything correct. > Warren does suggest further possible reasons such as *maybe* > they do certain provisioning. Why doesRCNput on these > requirements? Every answer has one underlying common thread - > "we don't really know, but we speculate that .... ". > > Kudos for asking questions persistently as any good engineer > or innovator would. But unfortunately, the answers are only > typical of good technicians who know how to use equipment, > don't knowRCNfrom an engineer's perspective, and really > don't know underlying details of why only some equipment > works. > > RCNshould only require a MAC address. ApparentlyRCNhas > other criteria such as maybe they want to inspect your site > for other 'not provided' reasons. I can think of three or > four reasons why they might want a technician to visually > inspect your site should you make changes. But that too would > not answer your questions - only add to the list of speculated > reasons. > > Suppose you toldRCNthe old modem died, a new modem is now > on site, and you want to put new modem on-line. If that is > sufficient and they accept the MAC address, then good. > However, part of every MAC address is unique - identifies the > manufacturer. They might complain. In short, I suggest that > you try it - see what happens. That is how innovation > happens. That is also why the phone company can no longer > tell you which phones and modems can and cannot be used. > People innovated and caused archaic rules to be changed. > > There is absolutely no good reason to power cycle a modem > weekly - other than a gross defect known toRCNwhen they > provided the modem. For example, DSP program inside modem > might have a bug that is cleared by power cycling. Instead of > upgrading the modem,RCNinstead had you perform a weekly > kludge solution. > > Reasons given for not using an internal modem (other than > not on approved list) are not relevant. Your interest in an > internal modem is admirable and typical of how innovators > think. It could be thatRCN'simplementation of DOCSIS once > was defective - and this 'only approved modem' solution solved > a problem that no longer exists. Approved list also negates > anRCNtech from putting hands inside a computer. No good > reason has been provided for 'only approved modems'; only > speculation. However no company wants to roll a truck twice > because the customer bought a known and crap modem (only used > price to select a modem) - or because the computer did not > have a spare slot for the internal modem. > > Try it. Don't tell them the modem is not on approved list. > Just provide information and see what happens. Currently the > weekly reboot is not acceptable. > > Mikhail Teterin wrote: > > Warren wrote in : > >> Mikhail Teterin wrote: > >>> Warren wrote: > > >>>>>RCNhas a list of "approved" modems at: > >>>>>
formatting link
> >>>> It's not on the list. It can't be provisioned. End of story. > > >> If the modem is not on the approved list, the game is over. > >> Nothing else matters. Period. > > > Of course. And every auto-manufacturer will tell you the same story > > about the "genuine" parts, and how anything else will void your > > warranty, explode your car, and increase the chance of cance. Most > > of these claims are not entirely truthful, and I suspect it to be > > the case here. Your countless repetitions (for "slow people" and > > others) is not convincing. The modems have been standardized over > > the years (DOCSIS?). Do you know, thatRCNneeds them to be somehow > > customized on their network? From the sheer size of the list of > > "approved" modems, it seems to me, they don't actually do > > anything with them other than "write a few numbers down". I don't > > believe, they would maintain dozens of different images for > > TFTP-ing (or even more than five). > > >> Each modem on the system needs to be provisioned. Part of that > >> provisioning involves TFTP-ing a configuration file, and possibly > >> a firmware update, for that particular make and model of modem. > >> If your modem is not on the approved list, there is no > >> configuration file for it to download. You can enter the MAC > >> address into the database, but the provisioning cannot be > >> completed. > > >> In most cases you'll simply have an expensive door stop. The > >> best case scenario is that they tell the system that the MAC > >> address belongs to a supported modem, and it'll download the > >> config file and any firmware updates for the wrong modem, but it > >> might be close enough that it'll sort of work sometimes. > > > It "sort of works sometimes" _now_. I was wondering, if I can > > improve on that. You are brow-beating me into giving up -- may be, > > it is time you demonstrate your credentials, before I simply plonk > > you for really being an arrogant a-hole, you appear to be from > > this thread... > > >> You have a modem that isn't on the approved list. That's as far > >> as it goes. > > ...
Reply to
Loading thread data ... Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.