TR Forums

Hi all,

Recently upgraded my DSL from 7 meg to 20 meg service. Had to buy a new router for the new tech, and went with Centurylink's Actiontec C1000A. I feel stupid.

Damn thing doesn't seem to stay connected to my Chromecast at all. I find myself having to reset my wifi on my tablets at least a couple times a day to reconnect. Just... doesn't feel right.

Considering purchasing a replacement, would appreciate input on best brand/model to pick up for either a gateway, or a separate modem/router combo (if they even do that anymore).

I will be trying to map static IPs on the LAN first as a last ditch effort, but I'm not holding out hope.

Thanks!

You should never use Actiontec's stuff for WiFi (their products are good as wired modems but not much else). Instead get a dedicated AP for all your WiFi needs (you can even buy some routers like Asus RT-N66U and set them as dedicated AP) and connect it (with a network cable) to your existing modem (whatever it may be).

Yeap, set it up as a transparent bridge with a better router handling the PPPoE, routing, and wireless and all should be well. If you're paying for a rental, which I'm guessing you probably are, pick up a GT701D for $40 in addition to the new router. You'll pay it off in a few months, saving on the rental fee.

Even though the Actiontec is setup as a transparent bridge, and you can't get http access to it, or ping it, it can still cause an ip address conflict. Make sure it and the router have different addresses. If you have any problems with your VPI and VCI or other DSL settings on the Actiontec, you'll need to factory reset it to regain http access, and start over. You can get your VPI and VCI from your C1000a's dynamic configuration, but you'll need to manually configure it when you make it a transparent bridge if I'm remembering correctly.

Paid cash for the C1000A.

So make the C1000 a transparent bridge, effectively making it only the modem, correct?

So I'm just buying another gateway and disabling the modem, effectively?

I'll muddy my way through all this network setup stuff... But honestly, static IPs in my LAN (and a DMZ back in college) is the fanciest I've ever gotten. Thanks!

Nah, just grab a decent Linksys router, no modem required. It just needs PPPoE on the new router.

Is the venerable WRT54GL too old now? Should I spend extra $$$ on an N router? Does dual band make a lot of difference?

Router will be upstairs in office to hard wire to PCs. Will feed numerous wireless devices downstairs though.

DairyCreamer wrote:

Is the venerable WRT54GL too old now? Should I spend extra $$$ on an N router? Does dual band make a lot of difference?

Router will be upstairs in office to hard wire to PCs. Will feed numerous wireless devices downstairs though.

The Asus RT-N16 and its family members are the new WRT54GL. There's DD-WRT and Tomato available for alternate firmwares if that's your thing. N gets you a lot more throughput at the expense of some range, so the intended use comes into play as well.

You don't need to buy a full-featured router... You can just buy an access point, put it to whatever floor that will give your WiFi devices best signal strength, then connect it with network cable to your modem. All you'll have to do is to login to AP and set up its options (such as WiFi encryption, channel, band, etc.), you don't even have to change any settings in your modem itself (other than disable its WiFi). The modem will continue its DHCP and routing/port forwarding duties for all your devices, wired or otherwise.

Getting an access point and letting the Actiontec handle the routing and DHCP won't do a whole lot of good for stability. It will probably fix his wireless problems, but he's better off using the Actiontec as a transparent bridge and letting something competent handle PPPoE, routing, DHCP, and wifi since he's already spending cash. Do it right the first time.

There is nothing wrong with that - the Actiontec's hardware is perfectly capable of doing all router functions. I have a Verizon FiOS-specific version of Actiontec router right now and use it for all routing/firewall/port forwarding needs (my current Asus WiFi router is set up as a "dumb" AP). I have absolutely 0 issues with that and it allows the Actiontec to be easily replaced by Verizon's technicians or my family members without affecting any WiFi devices at home (which is important in case if I will not be at home since no one else in my family can modify router settings).

I have one of these...it appears to be the only VDSL2 modem on the market right now which is unfortunate. The Q100 has a good reputation but they're hard to find. My plan is to bridge the C1000A to a secondhand Cisco router because I like doing things the hard way, but bridging it to a consumer router would work too. My experience is that the more crap they cram onto the board the more likely it is to fall down go boom so I would suggest a non-wireless router (or an all-in-one with wifi turned off) plus a second wireless router set up as an access point.

I use my DSL router as a dumb modem...best thing I ever did in terms of stability for both wireless and wired connections. I haven't had to touch it since setting it up.

You know, it's quite possible they had to improve their design for the throughput FiOS offers. I don't know, I'm nowhere near FiOS availability, so I've never seen one of those in the wild. But I've never seen an Actiontec DSL router perform reliably until the routing is moved off of it, just speed and stability issues left and right. But every time, you set them up as a bridge and all is well.

Ethyriel wrote:

You know, it's quite possible they had to improve their design for the throughput FiOS offers. I don't know, I'm nowhere near FiOS availability, so I've never seen one of those in the wild. But I've never seen an Actiontec DSL router perform reliably until the routing is moved off of it, just speed and stability issues left and right. But every time, you set them up as a bridge and all is well.

No direct experience as I'm a Comcast customer but I've always believed in separating modem duties from network routing duties.

So, while its a little late now, was I an idiot to buy the C1000?

Well, I wouldn't call you an "idiot" - you needed DSL modem, you got one. And you didn't know that Actiontec's WiFi implementation sux ass on all of their hardware. Plus as I said - you can still easily fix WiFi issues by simply getting a dedicated AP which should work well with the modem you already have.

Here, I'll make it easier for you - Amazon sells plenty of models by different brands. If you wanna go for "stealthy" look and don't need the coverage for your whole house - you can go with something like this:
http://www.amazon.com/Ubiquiti-Networks ... =pd_cp_e_3
You can mount it on a ceiling and use the included PoE injector so there's only one wire to route. The range is not very great, though, due to its compact size and no external antennas.

If you don't mind extra bulkiness - you can use something like this instead:
http://www.amazon.com/TP-LINK-TL-WA901N ... cess+point
It is larger but has better range due to external antennas with higher gain and it also supports PoE (PoE injector is also included).

These cost cheaper than a fully-featured router and give you much greater flexibility (you can change/replace your DSL modem and these AP's independent of each other with very minimal adjustments or downtime). So before you will change your current modem with another model or go with a fully-featured router - you should try one of these instead, if they won't work for your current setup - you can always return them.

So I've gottem two stories in this thread, I think. Pardon as I think aloud in this post, because I want to make sure to have this right before I pull the trigger on anything.

1.) C1000A (Actiontec on the whole) WiFi is bad. Fix with dedicated AP.

2.) C1000A (Actiontec on the whole) router is bad. Fix with dedicated router.

This requires:

1.) Disable WiFi antenna on C1000A -> Plug in AP to a LAN slot -> Configure appropriately.

Or

2.) Disable router function (transparent bridge) -> Plug in wireless router to a LAN slot -> Configure appropriately

Configuring #1 seems extremely simple. #2 would require a bit more, like transferring PPPoE login to new router, and perhaps giving modem an IP so I can get to it.

So... This sounds like a question of trust. Trust in C1000A's routing capability.

I hate decisions like this... Doesn't look like it would cost much more to get a full fledged router and not worry about it anymore. But of course spending more money to fix a problem that might not be sucks too.

Is there any way I can evaluate if it's strictly the Wifi connectivity, or if the internal router is playing a role?

Thanks!

The Actiontec Wi-Fi is bad and it's a known problem. It appears that routing functions, though, are good. As JohnC says, a Wi-Fi AP will fix your problem and you'll be good to go. Those of us advocating turning the Actiontec into a modem/bridge passing through to a full-functioned router are not doing so based on the routing implementation on the Actiontec, but instead for the possibilities that come from a full router and open-source firmware implementation. We're also the belt & suspenders types who believe that combining too many functions into one box leads to single point of failure problems.

Config on a stand-alone Wi-Fi/hardware router will take about 2 minutes as long as you have your PPPoE credentials written down somewhere.

Like I said, buy the AP from Amazon (or even your local store), test it out. If the routing features of your current modem sucks - get a new DSL modem and use this AP with your new modem OR return the AP and get a full-featured router and bridge your DSL modem to it. Any way you should not lose any money with new AP purchase (you might actually save some).

Don't feel bad about buying a C1000A, it's the only VDSL2 modem currently available. Only consumer modem at least...$500+ gets you a nice Cisco box but that would probably be overkill.

Captain Ned wrote:

Those of us advocating turning the Actiontec into a modem/bridge passing through to a full-functioned router are not doing so based on the routing implementation on the Actiontec, but instead for the possibilities that come from a full router and open-source firmware implementation. We're also the belt & suspenders types who believe that combining too many functions into one box leads to single point of failure problems.

Well, I'm advocating it because I've never had an Actiontec be stable until I move the routing off of it. You throw too many TCP/UDP connections at them and they choke pretty universally across the DSL models I've been encountering for the last dozen years. Even if you don't hit them hard with connections, they tend to need power cycles way too often. The specific problem the OP is concerned with can probably be cured with an AP (unless it's a DHCP issue), but that doesn't mean there won't be more issues beyond that. My experiences tell me that there more than likely will be.

You could hook a couple devices up to it by wire and see how it performs, that will tell you how it's handling your load. Personally, I'd get the most Linksys or Asus router you can afford, and be done with it. If you get an AP and run into routing issues down the road, you need a router. If you get a wireless router and want a wireless upgrade down the road, you can more reasonably weigh cost to performance.

Well, that's not entirely true, because personally I have a little Atom machine running PFSense and an Ubiquiti AP behind a GT701d. But if I didn't enjoy geeking out and/or had a limited budget, that's what I'd do. The only other issue is configuration, but if you aren't using a Century Link model already, you've already setup the DSL settings manually. You just need to make sure the IP addresses don't conflict, make the Actiontec a bridge, and setup the PPPoE on the router.

Ethyriel wrote:

Captain Ned wrote:

Those of us advocating turning the Actiontec into a modem/bridge passing through to a full-functioned router are not doing so based on the routing implementation on the Actiontec, but instead for the possibilities that come from a full router and open-source firmware implementation. We're also the belt & suspenders types who believe that combining too many functions into one box leads to single point of failure problems.

Well, I'm advocating it because I've never had an Actiontec be stable until I move the routing off of it. You throw too many TCP/UDP connections at them and they choke pretty universally across the DSL models I've been encountering for the last dozen years. Even if you don't hit them hard with connections, they tend to need power cycles way too often. The specific problem the OP is concerned with can probably be cured with an AP (unless it's a DHCP issue), but that doesn't mean there won't be more issues beyond that. My experiences tell me that there more than likely will be.

You could hook a couple devices up to it by wire and see how it performs, that will tell you how it's handling your load. Personally, I'd get the most Linksys or Asus router you can afford, and be done with it. If you get an AP and run into routing issues down the road, you need a router. If you get a wireless router and want a wireless upgrade down the road, you can more reasonably weigh cost to performance.

Well, that's not entirely true, because personally I have a little Atom machine running PFSense and an Ubiquiti AP behind a GT701d. But if I didn't enjoy geeking out and/or had a limited budget, that's what I'd do. The only other issue is configuration, but if you aren't using a Century Link model already, you've already setup the DSL settings manually. You just need to make sure the IP addresses don't conflict, make the Actiontec a bridge, and setup the PPPoE on the router.

Truthfully, just about every mid to low end router is going to choke if you throw to many tcp/udp connections. I actually use this exact model of modem. First just set it up as g if you are going to use the wireless because it certainly chokes on n more. I personally haven't really had a problem with to many tcp/udp connections, I don't torrent either though.

I would just get a good access point myself. Most of the time I have to power cycle my modem (only about 6 times in the last year) is because I live about 7 miles out of town and we lose power about that many times.

DairyCreamer wrote:

So I've gottem two stories in this thread, I think. Pardon as I think aloud in this post, because I want to make sure to have this right before I pull the trigger on anything.

1.) C1000A (Actiontec on the whole) WiFi is bad. Fix with dedicated AP.

2.) C1000A (Actiontec on the whole) router is bad. Fix with dedicated router.

This requires:

1.) Disable WiFi antenna on C1000A -> Plug in AP to a LAN slot -> Configure appropriately.

Or

2.) Disable router function (transparent bridge) -> Plug in wireless router to a LAN slot -> Configure appropriately

Configuring #1 seems extremely simple. #2 would require a bit more, like transferring PPPoE login to new router, and perhaps giving modem an IP so I can get to it.

So... This sounds like a question of trust. Trust in C1000A's routing capability.

I hate decisions like this... Doesn't look like it would cost much more to get a full fledged router and not worry about it anymore. But of course spending more money to fix a problem that might not be sucks too.

Is there any way I can evaluate if it's strictly the Wifi connectivity, or if the internal router is playing a role?

Thanks!

Well you can see processor usage, memory usage, and tcp/udp usage on the c1000a. Run everything you have wired on the worst condition you can think of and see if it breaks or has acceptable performance. Modem status then resource table.


Umm when did I get 2000 posts....

I had horrible connection speeds with the 2 C1000A modems from century link. Finally I got to a representative that let me return it for a Q1000 made by Zyxel because I was within the warranty period for the C1000A I'm guessing they don't offer it much because it has Qwest written on it. My connection speeds through my house went from 1-3mbs to 10-12mbs which was the connection speed I should get. I'm so glad to get rid of the C1000A.

I put my C1000a into transparent mode and using a Dlink 655. Internal speeds are back where it should be. Only problem, the actiontec seems to disconnect overnight even it you tell the router to connect. So, transparent isn't all transparent? Or, I didn't config correctly? I have to powerdown the Actiontec and back up. Also: IP conflict: When it is a bridge, it just passes the IP to the Modem, no? Where would the conflict be?

My c1000a was not working with my chromecast, and after doing the following steps it works fine (in this order). Note: I was unable to perform setup at all, and have not discovered the "Dropping connection" issue that others in here have described.

Going to Advanced Setup -> UPnP -> Disable NAT-T State

Going to Wireless Setup -> Radio Setup -> Select Channel: 11, (From Automatic)

Going into Advanced Setup -> DMZ Hosting -> Enable DMZ -> Select Chromecast (Showed up in devices listed) and then applying those.

Tried connecting again, did not work.

Rebooted my modem via the settings menu (Utilities -> Reboot).

Ran the setup on my smartphone as soon as the wifi came back up and the chromecast has been working.

Mainly posted this for people who google it months from now!

I am moving to a faster speed internet from Century link. They are pushing the Actiontec C1000A.
There has to be better options available, right?
I didn't know about the problems and with this product until I came along this.

So what should I buy?
I have Smart phone a laptop and a Smart TV.