Update to 6.3.9.63-Plus

lozcart · Nov 03, 2011, 13:05:39

My BT2700 updated its firmware automatically last night to 6.3.9.63 has anyone else had this happen?

RogerP · Nov 03, 2011, 13:34:03

Hi Lozcart

Just done a check and I can confirm mine has been upgraded to the above some time yesterday.

Can't at the moment see any differences on router pages??

Rogerp

Polchraine · Nov 03, 2011, 13:45:54

My 2701 was updated yesterday.

There are a few minor changes to the layout of pages - I have a second 2701 to compare it with.

I have tested the new firmware and it now downloads files greater than 2GB which the older firmware on 2700 and 2701 did not.

kinmel · Nov 03, 2011, 14:05:54

One of my V6s updated yesterday and for some reason is causing problems for my webserver across the LAN.

If I access the pages from outside my LAN, or through a proxy from my LAN, then everything works perfectly. However, with the updated V6, pages delivered locally from the webserver are lacking al CSS rendered elements.

I can do a work around by adding the domains into the hosts file pointing directly to the server IP, which suggests it DNS related.

A V6 without the update renders the pages correctly.

Very strange and the loss of Fusion means it is necessary to give visitors access to the LAN, rather than just an internet connection. I know you can lock it down, but the V6 is now just a Singe SSID, with an unusable spare.

BT specialise in buggy firmware.

Polchraine · Nov 03, 2011, 15:36:53

Quote from: kinmel on Nov 03, 2011, 14:05:54
One of my V6s updated yesterday and for some reason is causing problems for my webserver across the LAN.

If I access the pages from outside my LAN, or through a proxy from my LAN, then everything works perfectly. However, with the updated V6, pages delivered locally from the webserver are lacking al CSS rendered elements.

I can do a work around by adding the domains into the hosts file pointing directly to the server IP, which suggests it DNS related.

A V6 without the update renders the pages correctly.

Very strange and the loss of Fusion means it is necessary to give visitors access to the LAN, rather than just an internet connection. I know you can lock it down, but the V6 is now just a Singe SSID, with an unusable spare.

BT specialise in buggy firmware.

Single SSID - no, it still has the Openzone capability.

Buggy firmware - not BT, but 2wire who write/modify the firmware to meet BT's product requirement spec.

lozcart · Nov 03, 2011, 16:11:33

Thanks chaps I'm glad I'm not the only one who got the update.

It's perhaps to early to speculate but I've not come across any problems yet

kinmel · Nov 03, 2011, 16:34:05

Quote from: Polchraine on Nov 03, 2011, 15:36:53
Single SSID - no, it still has the Openzone capability.

On the dual SSID 2700HGV, the router label provides two SSID identifiers and passcodes. ie BT-Business Hub - xxx and BT-Fusion -xxxx. There is no reference at all on the router to the Openzone facility, which requires no passcode.

With the new firmware, the Fusion identifier and passcode are no longer usable and Openzone remains unaffected.

The second SSID has been disabled and only one of the SSIDs referred to on the router, the instructions and the BT website is now available.

It is a crippleware version of the BT Business Hub and many BT business customers are not happy to have had the facility removed without notice.

J1mbo · Nov 03, 2011, 18:17:54

My router updated recently, and I noticed that accessing externally accessible web servers from an internal host (but using the external address - hope this makes sense!) is broken with this firmware.

However on the plus side, static route entries to other internal subnets is at last fixed (broken in 6.1.48).

Anyway, here is the issue:

- Internel web server 192.168.1.1
- Internal client 192.168.1.10
- BT router 192.168.1.254
- External static IP say 200.200.200.200
- Port forwarding for port 80 configured to 192.168.1.1

So, exernally the web server is accessible as http://200.200.200.200.

Internally, under 6.1.48 it would also be accessible using the same address (sometimes called 'loop back').

However with the new firware, while external access works OK, access from within the network to http://200.200.200.200 results in much mising content and hence incorrectly displayed web pages in certain cases.

Packet traces on the client itself show the router serving dupe ACKs on each GET then after some point reset all connections (literally, TCP reset). Obviously that stops the browser dead. More odd is that it seems to serve content from IIS OK, but not from apache.

More research needed...

Rik · Nov 03, 2011, 18:19:10

Hi and welcome to the forum.

kinmel · Nov 03, 2011, 20:09:45

J1mbo
Welcome to the forum

So far as I can see the missing content is that managed by the CSS, everything else seems to get through ok.

For a reason I have not worked out yet, adding the domain into the hosts file pointing directly to the server's actual IP on the Lan fixes the problem. (192.168.1.1 in your example ).

J1mbo · Nov 04, 2011, 22:01:10

Thanks

Adding the local address in hosts file will bypass the router (the browser will be communicating directly with the LAN server) hence the issue won't arise. CSS is an interesting idea and may well have some mileage - I'm looking at this more now.

As an aside I came across another bug in 6.3.9.63-plus this mornig, which is that is had cut-off the web server altogether due to 'excessive sessions'. The result of this should have been that all browser sessions were redirected to an explanation of this fact, however the router was serving HTTP 302 (temporary redirect) to http://gateway.2wire.net/xslt?PAGE=HURL07 and since I don't use the router for DNS, this led nowhere (it should have served the redirect to it's IP address, i.e. http://192.168.1.254/xslt?PAGE=HURL07).

mirrorsandglass · Nov 07, 2011, 11:09:10

I can confirm kinmel's and J1mbo's bug as happening on my Router.
Definitely the css and js files and even direct access to picture files(png, jpg and gif) failed about 99 out of 100.
Model: BT2700HGV
Hardware Version: 2701-100589-005
Firmware Version: 6.3.9.63-plus.tm
The hosts file change on local machines worked for me.
Thanks for the solution this has been driving me mad for a week.

Rik · Nov 07, 2011, 11:17:39

Hi and welcome to the forum.

Glenn · Nov 07, 2011, 11:27:44

kinmel · Nov 07, 2011, 18:27:56

It appears that BT have stopped upgrading to the new firmware, I wonder why ?

Rik · Nov 07, 2011, 18:30:18

Things started going bump in the night, Alan?

mirrorsandglass · Nov 08, 2011, 15:56:11

Quote from: kinmel on Nov 07, 2011, 18:27:56
It appears that BT have stopped upgrading to the new firmware, I wonder why ?

Thank goodness for that. Do you think they do any "real world scenario" type testing or just throw these updates out willy-nilly?

lozcart · Nov 11, 2011, 13:25:34

It's just over a week since my router updated, during this time I've no major problems but web browsing particularly with the iPad seems to have lost some "snappiness" web sites with a lot of pictures seem to load slower and some pictures not at all, this is fixed after a refresh of the page.

I've also had on a few occasions when using a MacBook with Firefox had the router seem to lock out completely, to resolve this I have to turn on/off the wifi on the laptop and the router starts working again.

Given the option I would definitely downgrade to the last firmware version, in fact I've got another 2700 in the loft that's not update I may consider using this.

lozcart · Nov 13, 2011, 17:48:07

I've dug out my other 2700 which runs 6.1.1.48.1 and connected it up. Straight away the difference is noticeable, web sites load quicker with no errors and the snappiness is back. Would this be a DNS issue with the updated firmware.

I will now leave this router connected and hope it's not updated too.

mirrorsandglass · Nov 14, 2011, 09:53:11

I can confirm a "feeling of" slowness in site delivery compared to previous tests(no actual bandwidth tests run).
Also some pictures not being delivered if they are hosted on other sites or are produced by scripts on other sites e.g. things like Google badges etc.
I noticed this when I had to run some tests on new site features this weekend.
DNS seems the most likely to me too.

J1mbo · Nov 14, 2011, 17:12:01

I've also found this, although speed tests should good raw throughput on the line (c.13Mbps measured on an 18Mbps sync in my case). But browsing is definitely slower, indeed my wife has commented on it.

Re DNS, I run BIND9 internally with OpenDNS as forwarders directly. I just run a whole bunch of queries with near instant replies. Running the same queries against the router's DNS server are slower, but not by very much.

So IMO it's not DNS related.

Hudders · Nov 20, 2011, 16:04:30

Seeing the same "loss of snapiness" in web browsing too, although download tests/speeds are still perfect. I called BT, and they just say "we see nothing wrong with your line....it must be your equipment". I guess the 2700 is "mine"....but has anyone heard any more/info to fix this issue, or do we just sit like lemons and wait for another "upgrade" ?

kinmel · Nov 20, 2011, 17:03:33

Quote from: Hudders on Nov 20, 2011, 16:04:30
Seeing the same "loss of snapiness" in web browsing too, although download tests/speeds are still perfect. I called BT, and they just say "we see nothing wrong with your line....it must be your equipment". I guess the 2700 is "mine"....but has anyone heard any more/info to fix this issue, or do we just sit like lemons and wait for another "upgrade" ?

BT are aware of the problem, but have offered no date for a fix. You can sort of work around the problem by adding your server IP address and domain name into the Windows hosts file on each computer on your LAN.

Hudders · Nov 20, 2011, 18:28:24

Well, I guess atleast BT know about it ! Maybe I will log a call about slowness, and state that it has only happened since the router firmware upgrade.

Not sure I follow your workaround though. Adding my server IP ? what server IP ? My clients are DHCP assigned from a server on my network, which within the scope uses and internal DNS server, which forwards directly to BT's DNS servers. I thought someone said "IMHO this is not DNS"...and I tend to agree. nslookup from a client gives resolution back in milliseconds to a previously non-resolved site. It is almost like the 2700 is doing content screening...even though it is turned off.

Or am I missing something ?

Does anyone know how to DISABLE content screen ? It is enabled....but none of my clients have any restrictions (hence disabled in theory).....but I would really like to see status:DISABLED to make me feel better ! Just one thing I have been trying to do since this blessed slow-down

J1mbo · Nov 21, 2011, 15:05:32

Think some wires are crossed here... there is no known fix to the slowness of response, although it has been suggested that disabling content filtering might help (I've not tried it; apparently content filtering is always running even if it appears not to be).

Polchraine · Nov 21, 2011, 15:41:53

Quote from: J1mbo on Nov 21, 2011, 15:05:32
Think some wires are crossed here... there is no known fix to the slowness of response, although it has been suggested that disabling content filtering might help (I've not tried it; apparently content filtering is always running even if it appears not to be).

Content screeening does not appear to be visible on any page of 6.3.9.63-plus - and without visibility, how can it be accessed?

Or should I say Pages B_1_0, B_1_1 and B_1_2 are there but are blank.

Hudders · Nov 21, 2011, 19:51:23

Well that is odd then, as my 6.3.9.63-plus does have http://<host>/xslt?PAGE=B_1_2 where I can choose content screening settings

J1mbo · Nov 22, 2011, 00:01:40

It's all there on mine too. Apparently it's disabled (properly) by performing a factory-reset then adding a dummy static route to the BT provisioning server, or something like that anyway.

Personnally I'm consideing changing it for something like a Draytek 2820. I found that although the routes to local subnets is fixed, it's only partitally fixed as those subnets can't get any access out.

It is a bit of a shame - good, stable and capable hardware nobbled by cr*ppy firmware.

Polchraine · Nov 22, 2011, 09:52:19

Definitely NOT there on mine just blank pages and considering it was on a BT line with attempts to stop it talking to the BT servers - rather odd.

Currently using a 2701 with 6.3.9.41-plus - it is present there but missing on the 2700 with 6.1.1.48.1-enh

I have seen reports of 6.3.9.41-plus with and without Access Control and it seems almost random as to whether 6.3.9.63-Plus shows the controls.

Hudders · Nov 29, 2011, 23:52:51

Well....I just so happened to "come across" (borrow) an original 2700, with 5.29.117.6 - man.....is my Internet speedy and snappy now ! such a subtle contrast to 6.3.9.63

So, in calling BT, the ever-so-helpful BT tech said "yeah....we have been hearing alot about this, along with the losing of the 2nd wireless/fusion". He confirmed that 6.3.9.63 is not being rolled anymore due to the issues. He was also not sure replacing the 2700 with a replacement 2700/2701 would fix the issue, as it may have the new firmware and wll def loose the 2nd wireless channel. I, personally, am not too concerned over losing that wireless feature, I just want the Internet to get back to proper speed, so will be trying a new 2701

Finally, it seems BT are looking to completely replace the 2700 in the coming months - do not know what with, or any other details.....but that was the story.

J1mbo · Dec 03, 2011, 20:22:33

I finally got fed up with random pages not loading and linux updates taking forever and swapped out the 2700 for an old NetGear device for now. As said chalk-and-cheese, everything wizzes along for me now

But I had cause to call BT to get the DSL credentials, and the person I spoke to was very up-front that the firmware release has rendered the 2700 useless and... *** I would be getting an entirely new hub soon from an alternate provider ***

Obviously being BT, 'soon' could be 2 years, but even so that would be a great result if it turns out to be the reality of it.

Tacitus · Dec 03, 2011, 21:13:19

Quote from: J1mbo on Dec 03, 2011, 20:22:33
........that would be a great result if it turns out to be the reality of it.

Given how good the 2700 is on poor lines it is to be hoped that any replacement will be as good or better

Knowing BT, that is far from certain.......

Polchraine · Dec 03, 2011, 21:30:49

Quote from: Tacitus on Dec 03, 2011, 21:13:19
Given how good the 2700 is on poor lines it is to be hoped that any replacement will be as good or better Knowing BT, that is far from certain.......

The new hub is on field trials at present - it is no where near as good and does not have a VOIP breakout capability.

Tacitus · Dec 04, 2011, 17:02:39

Quote from: Polchraine on Dec 03, 2011, 21:30:49
The new hub is on field trials at present - it is no where near as good and does not have a VOIP breakout capability.

Sigh.... Why doesn't that surprise me. Even as we speak I bet people are hoarding 2700s ready to sell at a premium on eBay

Rik · Dec 04, 2011, 17:07:45

I certainly am.

FritzBox · Dec 04, 2011, 19:08:31

Quote from: Tacitus on Dec 04, 2011, 17:02:39
Sigh.... Why doesn't that surprise me. Even as we speak I bet people are hoarding 2700s ready to sell at a premium on eBay

Funny you should mention that, I have four brand spanking V1's that I shall flash with the SBC firmware which as far as I'm concerned is the best on a long line. Was thinking today that I might test the water at £60, so rare now, like hens teeth

My ISP swears by em

Tacitus · Dec 07, 2011, 11:33:05

Quote from: FritzBox on Dec 04, 2011, 19:08:31
Funny you should mention that, I have four brand spanking V1's that I shall flash with the SBC firmware which as far as I'm concerned is the best on a long line. Was thinking today that I might test the water at £60, so rare now, like hens teeth
My ISP swears by em

Having had good experiences with the 2700 I bought a couple more BNIB to keep as spares. At £5-10 each you can't go wrong, but unfortunately they all come with the V6 firmware which rules me out for trying the SBC variety.

If I can pick up another one for around £5 or so I might go for it. I have seen some on eBay advertised as Version 3 so I'm not sure what that implies unless they mean version C.

Polchraine · Dec 07, 2011, 11:54:46

Quote from: Tacitus on Dec 07, 2011, 11:33:05
Having had good experiences with the 2700 I bought a couple more BNIB to keep as spares. At £5-10 each you can't go wrong, but unfortunately they all come with the V6 firmware which rules me out for trying the SBC variety.

If I can pick up another one for around £5 or so I might go for it. I have seen some on eBay advertised as Version 3 so I'm not sure what that implies unless they mean version C.

The box for a 2701 states Version 3 ...

Tacitus · Dec 07, 2011, 16:07:55

Quote from: Polchraine on Dec 07, 2011, 11:54:46
The box for a 2701 states Version 3 ...

OK thanks

lozcart · Dec 20, 2011, 13:19:27

BT are at it again I've had my other 2700 updated to 6.3.9.63-plus.tm from 6.1.1.48.1-enh.tm last night.

I'm considering replacing my 2700s now, what is a good replacement, i'm thinking a Billion 7800N?

Polchraine · Dec 20, 2011, 14:20:55

Quote from: lozcart on Dec 20, 2011, 13:19:27
BT are at it again I've had my other 2700 updated to 6.3.9.63-plus.tm from 6.1.1.48.1-enh.tm last night.

I'm considering replacing my 2700s now, what is a good replacement, i'm thinking a Billion 7800N?

They are doing 30,000 per night from yesterday ... I need an update but they cannot say when!

lozcart · Dec 20, 2011, 15:28:01

Quote from: Polchraine on Dec 20, 2011, 14:20:55
They are doing 30,000 per night from yesterday ... I need an update but they cannot say when!

Do you know if the firmware update is exactly the same as the original 'buggy' version or has it changed and they've kept the same version number.

Polchraine · Dec 20, 2011, 17:19:40

Quote from: lozcart on Dec 20, 2011, 15:28:01
Do you know if the firmware update is exactly the same as the original 'buggy' version or has it changed and they've kept the same version number.

I wish I knew ... but they say that there are quite a few problems arising at present and firmware ill fix it ... so maybe it is a new version retaining the older number but that should not happen in software releases.

lozcart · Dec 20, 2011, 17:33:00

I haven't noticed the loss of "snappiness" like I did when my other router was updated but there are still problems with content screening locking up the router when a site it doesn't like is attempted to be viewed, this is with screening turned off. I therefore think this is a different version.

I wonder if I connected up my router with the buggy version installed it would up date to this better version.

kinmel · Dec 20, 2011, 18:12:02

This latest version is intended to correct the last lot of bugs, no doubt new features will appear in this one.

I am hiding behind a V5 until it all settles down

Polchraine · Dec 20, 2011, 18:31:50

Quote from: kinmel on Dec 20, 2011, 18:12:02
This latest version is intended to correct the last lot of bugs, no doubt new features will appear in this one.

I am hiding behind a V5 until it all settles down

No version 5 on 2701s !

My problem is that 10 days ago my FTTC started to play up - speeds were all over the place. Router was .41 and tried another .41 with same issues but put a .63 in place and it solved it! Just waiting to see what happens with te update. If it solves it or not - if it does, what has happened elsewhere to cause the problems.

lozcart · Dec 22, 2011, 09:40:15

After using this latest updated router for the last few days I can confirm using the internet has lost a degree of "snappiness" but nothing like the loss when my other router was updated in November. I haven't mentioned this last update to my family and I've had no complaints from them regarding loss of speed.

To confirm:
Early November update to 6.3.9.63=Noticeable loss of snappiness and incorrect loading of websites
Late December update to 6.3.9.63=Minor loss of snappiness and occasional incorrect loading of websites

Tacitus · Dec 22, 2011, 09:53:51

Wasn't there some way of blocking these updates using static routes?

arobertson676 · Dec 23, 2011, 19:05:05

Quote from: Tacitus on Dec 22, 2011, 09:53:51
Wasn't there some way of blocking these updates using static routes?

There was/is and the full method can be found at: http://bt2700hgv.tripod.com/163.htm

Tacitus · Dec 24, 2011, 06:47:53

Quote from: arobertson676 on Dec 23, 2011, 19:05:05
There was/is and the full method can be found at: http://bt2700hgv.tripod.com/163.htm

Thanks for this - I thought there was a method somewhere, but failed to locate it on the tripod site

Polchraine · Dec 29, 2011, 00:54:43

The latest version of v6.3.9.63-plus.tm HAS got content screening and access control! the build number is the same as before ... and the module numbers are the same too, but there is definitely a difference in the code. I have both OLD and NEW versions of v6.3.9.63-plus.tm visible and can see access control on two, but not the other.