Thread: Has anyone tried routertech firmware on UT Starcomm UT-300R2U ?

The routertech.org site says their custom firmware supports UT-300R2U. Here is the link to the page where supported routers are listed RouterTech • RouterTech » Compatible Routers As it is a custom firmware it might be a little more stable on long and noisy lines. If anyone has tried it please mention the board id of the UT-300R2U version on which it works.

Originally Posted by goodyet

The routertech.org site says their custom firmware supports UT-300R2U. Here is the link to the page where supported routers are listed RouterTech • RouterTech » Compatible Routers As it is a custom firmware it might be a little more stable on long and noisy lines. If anyone has tried it please mention the board id of the UT-300R2U version on which it works.

The site clearly says that the LEDs may not work properly.

Later we may not have copy of original firmware to revert back. Perhaps there is no point in overcoming line noise by firmware alone, when we can approach the ISP for repair of cable pair.

We should not repent later by jumping into a unknown new firmware

There are two models of UT300R2U.
The model being provided by BSNL has common hardware board of Beetel220BX/110BxI/Wa3002-g4 ( plus WIFI)
DD-WRT may be referring to old model.

@goodyet:
If you are prepared to do FW upgrade AT
your own risk
for whatever reasons you want to do it,
please provide following information.
Access your modem.
1. 192.168.1.1 admin admin
2. type 192.168.1.1/look.html
3. the firmware version will be shown.
4. Post it here.
5. You can try any Beetel FW version.
6.Or if you need command prompt application,( No need to access the modem
menu pages)
Beetelupgradetool with one old version, is available. If succesful you can upgrade to the latest version normally.
I am not sure about CFE requirement/s.
Only LINUX savvy members can help/comment. .

Post full details here.

MINE 110BX1:

Device Info
Extract:
Board ID: 96338L-2M-8M
Software Version: 3.12L.01.A2pB023k.d20k_rc2
Bootloader (CFE) Version: 1.0.37-0.7

2. 192.168.1.1/look.html
系统信息

软件版本 V8.24.01.01
软件编号 T2Q-0Q-007 ( * Firmware

version)
SVN版本 3.12L.01_India.13
编译日期 Wed Apr 16 13:12:33 CST 2008
固件版本 3.12L.01.A2pB023k.d20k_rc2
CFE 版本 1.0.37-0.7
IP 地址 192.168.1.1
MAC 地址 00-1e-40-ba-cc-44
上行速率 (Kbps) 519
下行速率 (Kbps) 2063

Here my router stats

BoardID: 96332CG
Software Version:UT300R2U-0011.01
Bootloader (CFE) Version: (before 1.0.37-8L.BSNL_02.

and 192.168.1.1/look.html ststs

ϵͳÐÅÏ¢

Èí¼þ°æ±¾ V8.27.01.01
¹Ì¼þ°æ±¾ 1059_102108-3.08L.BSNL_02.
CFE °æ±¾ (before 1.0.37-8L.BSNL_02.
IP µØÖ· 192.168.1.1
MAC µØÖ· 00-1b-da-4d-26-64
Èí¼þ±àºÅ TJL-18-001
±àÒëÈÕÆÚ Tue Oct 21 10:59:08 EDT 2008
ÉÏÐÐËÙÂÊ (Kbps) 830
ÏÂÐÐËÙÂÊ (Kbps) 1938

Can I use beetel firmware?

On the following forum http://forum.lowyat.net/topic/458185/+1340 its mentioned that d-link dsl-520b has same board id. If d-link dsl-520b firmware works on ut300r2u it would be better

Can I use beetel firmware?

No. Firmware board not identical.
Seems to be old model of BSNL>
I don't know . Never attempted dd wrt.
2.
Whatever you do, you are changing the menu pages/commands,
or add new options like virtual server, or ddns etc.
The EPROM contains the version.
I feel the speed of IC's, ram size
etc are not improved.
3.
With this modem speed increase unlikely.,
if that is what you expect.
4. Borrow and try
with another Router Linksys's or Dlink with original FW
and check any improvement .

@goodyet, Why do you wish to update firmware? Firmware update for BSNL provided routers is not recommended.

Actually I live far away from the exchange, and I face disconnection issues. I bought a dg834g v4 for it was known to show stability on longer lines. It did perform better for me. But it used to reboot frequently because of lower voltage in our area. When it stopped working I got a newer version of dg834g which was v5. And it solved my power issue, it never reboots, and it also remains sync for longer time than v4. But its downstream sync rate is about 1 Mbit less than v4 or ut300r2u. If v4 or ut300r2u sync with 2500 Kbits, v5 only syncs with 1700 Kbits, which is well below my broadband plan rate (2048). This difference was because v5 has conexant chipset and v4 had Broadcom chipset (ut300r2u also has broadcom chipset, and that's why v4 or ut300r2u sync with same downstream rate). But dg834g v4 remains sync for longer time than ut300r2u. So stability depends on the firmware. The following document has more info on it (pay attention to the section "Dropped PPP Connections") Performance Tuning and Troubleshooting
I got it on following site Single list of HOWTOs The best collection of linux howtos.

Whatever line rate rate is shown in the modem, the speed from BSNL connection matters.
Even if you have 2048 Kbps as D/L, shown in modem, the speed in reality will vary between
1 Mbps to 1.8 Mbps.(*conditions apply !)

The download speed I get won't be affected if the downstream rate is above 1890 Kbits, If its below than that then I experience slowdown, my netgear dg834g v5 average sync rate is 1700 Kbits.

Here is the link to the page RouterTech • View topic - Router Upgrade Checker (Class II routers only) where a tool can be downloaded to find out if your router is compatible with routertech firmware. It comes with an excellent readme file to guide you through the process.

RapidShare: 1-CLICK Web hosting - Easy Filehosting
h t t p://rs322.rapidshare.com/files/112733463/T2Q-0Q-007_bcm96338R_2M_16M.img
AVAILABLE.
TRY AT YOUR OWN RISK
RapidShare: 1-CLICK Web hosting - Easy Filehosting
h t t p://rapidshare.com/files/178506774/3.12L_Disables_USB_T2HQ007.rar

will give my FW version from another forum if required.

As my routers board id is different than yours I feel it would be too risky. Once I had downloaded a firmware for my earlier ut300t2u router from bsnl site, and when uploaded router got bricked. The reason for posting this thread was to get info about routertech firmware. The site explicitly says their firmware works on many routers, so I wanted to know if anyone has tried it.

Now the only remaining solution is to adjust PPP LCP-echo settings of the router. The following extract explains what it is:

Why does PPPoX have such a bad rap?

The occasional disconnects is one of the biggest gripes. PPP seems to be sensitive to any interruptions in the connection. Generally a disconnect means a new IP. And there are those that say PPP, by its very nature, was never meant to be an "always on" protocol. PPP is a session management protocol at heart, that requires a user to initiate a connection and authenticate him or herself. PPPoE/A are not yet particularly mature protocols either. They do not have much of a history or track record. Some would say the telcos and hardware manufacturers have rushed this out the door. PPPoE also requires an additional layer of software just to maintain the connection. This is one more layer of code and one more potential point of failure. Also, more system overhead is utilized to manage the connection.

The impact of the disconnect problem can potentially be eased by adjusting the PPP LCP-echo settings to extend the period before the local end of the connection decides to terminate the session. Each end of the connection uses LCP echoes to make sure the other end is still "there". Nothing much can be done if the remote end decides to tear down a session (other than to do what you can to make sure you are responding to it's LCP echoes).

And the guide to adjust PPP LCP-echo settings Linux PPP HOWTO

And thanks essbebe, you've really taken pains to help me out.