From understanding the BTU that is in use has the ability to work as a VLAN untagging switch.

If TM is so paranoid about letting users gain access to these BTU which you want them to remain as your termination property, why can't you just untagged the ports on the BTU specifically for internet, TV, and phone allowing users to plug their own HGW, devices and phones to use on them?

Saves you the effort to supply crappy HGW router that requires VLAN untagging and so much complications.

As far as I know, the latest deployments of FTTH in Vietnam etc only supplies a single unit of ONT that comes with 4 port switch/wireless and FXS VoIP phone ports built into a single box.

Can someone explain why?

so that.. if router spoil you still can make phone call

If router spoil, I'll go out and buy a new one to replace instantly.

Phone still works because it's connected to the BTU(ONT or VDSL2 modem) FXS analogue RJ-11 port?

Consumers should be given the freedom to do what they want beyond the BTU ports?

customers are dumb.. nuff said

Like maxis, why da hack need limit us to use router for VoIP function? I see the gpon can VoIP also what? And now they don't let us touch the 850a settings firewalled ..... frustration....I dunno if my problem can solve by getting a new gpon/btu unit...

coz unifi got two kind: one fiber then VDSL...

they want to make thing easy so use same router always... jus the modem is different..(fiber or vdsl) .

if all house using fiber maybe tm will use single box also...
but coz high rise and like that need vdsl.. so need another kind

using router as fixed device always same... and hypptv connected to router.. so config on router is fixed on all unifi

the only difference is modem depend on technology used. simple right?

Because Maxis has no right to access the ONT device, so they have to use everything on the Thompson. If Maxis have access to ONT, we probably be getting DLINK DIR 615 as well..

coz there are user in malaysia use both maxis and tm,

yes,, one unifi and one maxis,, using same fiber..one BTU 2 services, need two different router right

This post has been edited by amirsubhi: Jul 27 2012, 11:02 AM

Doesn't your VDSL2 modem also have 4 ethernet ports + FXS phone port?

I'm talking about VLAN untagging the ethernet packets using the switches on the BTU and leave the rest to the home gateway for routing.

Not only Maxis has no rights over the BTU, even consumers also are not allowed to touch it due to claims that TM reserves the rights over its ownership.

That said, if you don't want users to touch your BTU/modem/media converter/bridge, your customers should at least be allowed to use their equipment on its ports thereafter.

Beyond the ports of the BTU, it's up to the customer to set up their network the way they want it.

That depends on how you configure the BTU and the virtual connections in it.
The extra ports allow you to plug in different devices at the same time depending on your setup inside the BTU.
There si also an alternative method by using a multi WAN load balancing switch. However for simplicity reasons, isps will issue you 2 lines unles they could provide line bonding which is unheard of for fibre internet

I am getting confuse here, does that mean any router will work on the modem? So why don't they allow such? Definitely their controlling right ? I wan to use my own router, to do so I need to change setting of modem right? And this is where they block access to it.

Of course if they strip the VLAN tags away from packets from the BTU(bridge/modem) ports, you can install any router you like beyond them.

Why do they make the home gateway(router) do it instead?

If you can do that aren't you saving the customer 1 less device and see some drastic cost reduction?

In UNIFI/Maxis context, VLAN tagging is used for traffic and service segmentation, and probably QoS purposes too. Without VLAN tagging, if the IPTV, VOIP and general Internet traffic are mixed into one single pipe, guaranteeing reliability for the first two services is going to be hard if someone in the household started his/her BT sessions.

The untagging process has to be done on the router level instead of the BTU level is because the HSBB is supposed to be used by many ISPs, not Telekom only. This will allow the usage of only one BTU per household, even if the household subscribe to multiple ISPs.

I don't really see why router-level untagging can be a problem. The only problem that can come out from this is the quality of the provided router, which is not really good. Just because the DIR-615 is a crappy POS, doesn't mean that the router-level untagging concept is flawed in any way.

That's a pretty lame excuse given by TM themselves. You saw how simple the 3rd party router guides by both Unifi and Maxis users overcame this simply but logging into their BTUs and untick VLAN tagging and select port binding for the supposed ports.

Is it hard for the installers to configure these settings according to which isp the customer selects? It only takes less than 10minutes to configure the 3 VLAN IDs(internet, voice and IPTV) if you have access to the BTU and untag them at the desired ports so that you can use any routers after this point at the built in switch ports on the BTU. Another suggestion is to ask your vendor to write a simple firmware update/flashing software to automatically pre-configure the different VLAN IDs according to different ISPs.

Why is it so hard to train them when they can already set up the accounts inside your home gateways? If they are not up to it there's always the vendor to pre configure your BTUs according to which ISP you're going to set up for with proper sticker labelling.

If they can do this customers don't even need to touch their BTUs because they can freely connect their favourite routers to the BTU ports as the wish. You get to save the cost of having to supply a POS router and force it down to customers.

Is there any guides out there that allows you to go into the BTUs legally? Most of the guides out there use SOHO-grade routers with its own VLAN tagging capabilities to replace the POS routers that TM gives out to their customers. I have not seen any guides out there that allows you to get into the BTU legally and allows you to do things like untagging the VLAN there.

If the untagging process is done in the BTU, then if a customer need to have UNIFI and Maxis at a household at the same time, there will be a need for two BTUs, or the tagging process will need to be redone again, you didn't address this issue. Plus, you didn't even want to address the QoS issues that will result from having Internet traffic + VOIP + IPTV on the same virtual line. I can already see the usual 'The IPTV service broke because my housemate starts Bittorrent!' whine if TM adopts your VLAN untagging suggestion.

As far as I'm concerned, the VLAN scheme that TM and Maxis used for for their HSBB service is a solid one, and the only problem that usually plagued those service users are the POS routers they give out to their customers. And you know what, if any customers out there are not satisfied with the POS routers TM/Maxis gives out to them, there are quite a number of third-party routers out there that can replace them. In fact, if I ever get to have UNIFI at my place (2020 at the earliest), when the installer comes to my house to install it, I'll tell them to keep the DIR-615 outside my house, and will use my own Cisco gear instead as the replacement. Feel good man to be a CCNA engineer!

Don't like the DIR-615? Get a better router! You can already do so today. You don't even have to touch the BTU. No need to ask TM/Maxis to do VLAN untagging at the BTU level.

Well legal or not it's because they themselves made the whole setup so troublesome that encouraged this sort of attempts. Right?
All the customer wants is that they want to plug in their own favourite routers into the the BTU switch port. IF you've done it correctly and lock it up no one will one to touch it because they get to play around with their routers instead.

You know the HSBB contract? If you want both services from ISP they'll have to pull another fibre line with another BTU into your premise.
A whole new set of equipment will have to be dispatched to you from your BTU, router and cordless phone all stated in the contract.
I've also never seen cases where you can subscribe both Streamyx and Jaring DSL on the same phone lines. you can do that with FTTH?

QoS? That's already well taken care of with the different VLAN IDs on the ethernet packets. The separate VLAN ID for IPTV is to ensure uninterrupted bandwidth needed for TV when you use the internet.It's already taken care of Bit Torrent sessions never interrupts the TV or the phone.

The strategy they're configuring the BTU is really bad and inflexibly troublesome. That's what I have to say. You don't want customers touching the BTU then you preapre a nice port for them to plug in any router they like.

With the current setup, what prevents you from putting a better router than DIR-615 to the BTU? Nothing at all! There are plenty of third-party UNIFI routers out there, just buy one to replace the one TM gives to you.

You do not need to pull another fiber cable to your household once HSBB fully rolled out. Of course there will be new routers/STB/VOIP phone, but only one BTU is needed for multiple ISPs. The only reason why two fibre cables need to be proviosioned to your household is if those two ISP has different infrastructures.

You cannot run Streamyx and Jaring ADSL on the same phone line, but you can with UNIFI and Maxis HSBB. Remember, ADSL != FTTH!

You say different VLAN ID will take care of QoS, but what you want in the first place is to remove those VLAN IDs in the first place so that you can put your 'favourite routers' to it.

You can already put any router you want to the BTU. All that is needed is for the router to support VLAN tagging feature. Plenty of those seen at Low Yat Plaza or LYN forum Garage Sales. Just buy one and replace the DIR-615, and problem is solved.

Oh BTW, if a router doesn't support VLAN tagging, then that router is no better really than the DIR-615.

You can run Streamyx and Jaring ADSL on the same phone line, with 2 vpi vci, higher port speed cap, or just easier, use a multi-dial able modem/router.

it's the same with unifi, just need to get all the config done from top to bottom.

actually, your idea will most probably work if a single service such as internet only is offered. For a multi service environment, L2 segregation has to go all the way to the router. The BTU is just a bridge, untagging the VLAN there will cause a problem to the router to bring up all services; Internet will work, but voice or IPTV?

You also need to consider if bridged multicast IPTV or routed multicast IPTV is being offered. In case of Unifi, still bridged but more and more ISP will shift to routed multicast scenario, because it's more flexible and allow the offering of more than one set top box.

TM wants the BTU locked up and they are not being open enough to their customers. All the VLAN IDs that they have and protocols are all these while hidden and if it was not the contribution of some veteran knowledgeable users here doing self discovery it would have been kept secret till everything is blurred caught up in a smoke.

Talk about professional. Why isn't all these clearly explained in their user start up guide and provided users a detailed information of what ports is to be used on their BTU, what kind of settings is to be done(untagging, what protocols are used in place, which 3rd party routers are certified with what firmware versions can be used to replace the POS DIR-615, Thompson?)

They just hid every detail that is from users letting them to find for themselves.

Again as I said if you want to lock up the BTU then at least tell the customer what comes out of your ports.

If you can many people will be delighted to subscribe multiple residential Maxis 10mbps packages to bond them for cheap 30mbps instead of buying expensive.
I would also like to bond a 10mbps Maxis Fibre + 20mbps Unifi VIP20. All together I get 2 fixed phone lines(with 2 cordless phones), 30mbps bonded speed, HyppTV IPTV all at once.

You know their T&C never allowed this in the first place.

By removing(stripping off the VLAN) on a specific port of the BTU, it allows you to buy ANY wireless router you like and use.
Why do you want to complicate it for your customer? If they want to control and lock the settings of the BTU, consumers have no issues with that but they want their own plug in their favourite routers beyond your property(the BTU).


This post has been edited by Ahn3hn3h: Jul 29 2012, 05:02 PM

Technically yes, but the T&C doesn't allow you to subscribe both a Streamyx account + a Jaring account on a same TM line.

The wholesale structure that TM leases to Jaring requires them to buy a physical port for every account they rent from TM on their DSLAM equipments even though you can dial both a Streamyx account or the Jaring account on the same line.



This post has been edited by Ahn3hn3h: Jul 29 2012, 05:20 PM

Potential ISPs will still follow Unifi's model since they are the owner of the HSBB network. None of them will try to do something funny like routed multicast or encapsulated DHCP assigning with a passive optical network. That'll bring extreme headaches to come. It might get them into serious security issues on a public passive optical network as well with ID spoofing.

That is the extra benefit of point to point active ethernet that PON will never get to have.

A routed approach on a passive optical network will lead to many vulnerabilities.

Yeah, the FXS port on BTU only works for UniFi because TM owns the BTU. TM will not allow other ISPs to run their voice service on the BTU, hence the Maxis approach of VoIP. Same goes for IPTV. That's why I'm saying L2 segregation will have to go all the way to the router because of this access network sharing arrangement

Have you seen any ISP that encourages open usage of any routers on their residential service? I don't think so, eventually it's not technical, it's about business. Monopolizing every part of it is what they will always try to do. Easy for them to support, more profit for them.


This post has been edited by gogetter83: Jul 29 2012, 06:26 PM

Because there is no need for the end-user to know things like that. Only one port needed to be used on the BTU, and its the one that the router should be connected to. I think D-Link and TP-Link already have their own UNIFI-certified routers out there, all you have to do is to connect things to the router and you are done.

Sheesh, you can do that already if you have the money for that. If I so desire and if the service is available at my place, I can get myself 3 VIP20 accounts, then connect them to a single Cisco or Mikrotik router and do channel bonding with them. I believe nothing in the ToS will prevent me from doing so. Point me to the specific section in their ToS that forbid channel bonding from being done.

I can do so already with Streamyx service, so why not with Unifi?

I will also get of course 3 cordless phones and 3 IPTV STB that I will probably never use.

You can already do so today, so what's the problem? Do you actually want to replace the POS DIR-615 with yet another POS router?

Can you give me an example of your 'favourite router'? Don't tell me it is something like D-Link DSL-2542B or ASUS RT-N15.

Say I'm at the clinic dispensary and you're supposed to pass me my medication from your room which you won't let me in to see inside, you don't want to tell me what you're going to pass me and which hole you're going to use? Then what's is this supposed to mean? You want me to figure out myself by self discovery or just take whatever you throw out?

The least you can do is tell your customers what VLAN ID is bound to which port and what they are used for. Not leave them in the dark.
There are those who are more knowledgeable who wants to configure their own switches/routers will find this very useful for their work.

Then the T&C you signed will include 3 times the install visits, 3 sets of equipment and 3 separate billing?
Are you talking about customized arrangment by sitting down and discussing with a TM manager?
That's an entirely different story and I'm not sure he'll allow you to do so unless you're willing to pay for the leasing of a single fibre strand all to yourself. Again this is isolated rare case of provisioning not meant for the masses.

Please la not that kind of cheap stuff. I know you're going to say the expensive ones will have VLAN untagging capabilities so what's my problem but no, what if I choose not to complicate things and have them turned off?

The VLAN IDs is very well known, and all 3 of them are bound on one single Ethernet port at the BTU. If you use UNIFI-certified routers, you do not even need to know what the IDs is. This is no different really when you buy a STreamyx-certified modem router and get it to work without even knowing the VPI/VCI of 0 and 35.

Yes, 3 set of equipments, 3 set of everything, and 3 installation visits (which can be reduced to one if you ordered at one go). 3 bills too. Is there any proof you have that disallow you from having more than 1 UNIFI account in a household? Nothing I have heard about that one. What is so wrong with having 3 UNIFI accounts on a single house?


Because you want to complicate things by wanting to do VLAN untagging at the BTU level. The current UNIFI setup is OK as it is, if IPTV and VOIP is taken into account. I know already you won't want to answer this question hehehehe. Come on, give me an example of your 'favorite router'.

what's the problems?

my friend already installed with 3 different services (UniFi, Maxis, P1) simultaneously from 1 BTU.
BTU port 1 for unifi, 2 for maxis, 3 for P1..

The intention of this thread is to ask WHY would TM want to lock up the BTU and at the same time keep the VLAN settings of the ports away from the user while requiring them to have a router that have VLAN tagging capability that complies with them?

-Then you have answers coming in and say it's because the BTU can be used by many ISPs who shares the same network with it so it must be locked up to allow the provisioning of multi ISPs on a single BTU allowed only for 1 household.

-Next another person is telling me that his close friend is using 3 different ISP internet accounts on 3 different ports of the BTU by gaining exclusive access to the BTU changing its settings inside.

I'm not saying that router tagging is a problem but why complicate a set up by having additional hardware when you can do it with less boxes?

You can already configure your BTU to provide the necessary ports and accomplish VLAN untagging, I don't mind if it's because you want to provide a wireless access point and internet sharing with the additional router. But why get the router to untag the VLAN services when you can do it already with the 1st device which is the BTU?

I know with Unifi, there are already compliant routers being sold that comes preconfigured to work with Unifi, but how about the other HSBB ISPs?
They need to rely on their routers instead for the FXS phone ports as well as configure their own routers accordingly to work with the different VLAN IDs instead.

Is this some sort of a dirty monopoly strategy that TM keeps itself from the other players? They maintain better support and keeps a simpler setup for themselves in order to stay ahead of competition?

Why am I asking this? It's because there's no official guidelines and VLAN ID lists for all the different ISPs just in case the other ISP users want to configure their routers. They need to keep playing the guessing game, they are stucked with a crap router supplied by their ISP, they are getting different results in different areas. They don't even know which port is configured to have what at the BTU suchas which has port binding to which VLAN ID, which has it tagged etc.

I am not bothered if you can configure your BTU to gain access to 3 different ISPs on 3 different ports or even bind them all because it's ILLEGAL to do so. How you managed to gain access into it is also not a concern probably because it's done by inside staffs.

The only interesting thing I want to know now is what is being pumped out of those ports that you secretly keep in your locked BTU for users to use and why can't you just make BTU pump out clean ethernet packets stripped of their VLAN tags from those ports to make everything simple for everyone?

What is the problem? Your friend has broken into other people's property and did something illegal.

How you did it I don't want to know but I know the user has all the rights to make use of the ports of the BTU assigned for internet with their own devices. Yes you might find life easier with Unifi, but other ISP users are not.

What are you going to do about it Maxis, P1, Celcom, RedTone about your wholesale leasing from the incumbant HSBB wholesale provider? They selling you something and held back added advantages to themselves to downplay competition?

If VLAN untagging is done at the router level, if a user want to have more than one HSBB account (let say, 3 UNIFI accounts) he/she needs to have 3 fibre cables and 3 BTUs to the house. This is extremely inefficient. Why do 3 cable runs if one run is enough for everyone? Why is that you want to complicate things with having more BTUs when one is enough? Please answer this question: why is that you want people who wants multiple HSBB accounts to have extra BTU boxes? If VLAN untagging is done at the BTU level, and I want to have 3 UNIFI accounts, I will end up with 12 boxes (3 BTUs, 3 POS routers, 3 STBs and 3 VOIP phones). If VLAN untagging is done at router level, there will be only 10 boxes (1 BTUs 3 POS routers, 3 STBs and 3 VOIP phones). I can cut down the router count to one if I were to do load balancing or channel bonding.

FACT: Your method will cause more boxes. The current setup doesn't.

There are also Maxis-compliant routers out there, dunno about P1 ones though. But in the future, I believe the UNIFI/Maxis/P1 routers will be more widespread once the coverage increases. It is just like when Streamyx first become available, the modems is rare at first and all you can get is the Ericsson one, now everyone and its dog produced one. Surely you are around in the likes of tmnet.communities when the HSI project first being beta tested back then. Oh no, you didn't....

Another complaint of yours is about VLAN IDs being a top supersecret information (it doesn't really - as if the ISPs think there are no people out there who will not find out the info straight away) and not being made available publicly. My argument against this is that people doesn't need to know those info, mainly because of the reasons mentioned above. People can go out there and buy Streamyx/Jaring router modems and just connect it to the phone line without even having to change VPI/VCI values. This is already the case for UNIFI and Maxis (again, dunno for P1). The selection is sparse at the moment, but the same also happens when Streamyx was introduced.


Citation needed! Else, I will just assume that you are talking out of your ass here. Show me how is it illegal to have more than one Internet service in a household. As long as you have the money, you can do so.

---

Added on July 30, 2012, 7:35 pmYou better has any proof that having 3 services in one BTU is illegal. There are times I wonder whether you really know what you are talking about.

This post has been edited by asellus: Jul 30 2012, 07:35 PM

This is what I am talking about exactly. Kudos mate

As an end user there is no need for me to know all these information , all I want is a unifi-capable modem which handles. If people want to get their hands dirty , this is why we have communities like LYN , whereby geeks come together and explore the device and post up guides and hack our existing device to work with it. Do you think an average user out there would want to do the same ? I don't think so

When UniFi first came there weren't any compatible 3rd party routers , now you have people like ASUS and TP-Link making em UniFi compatible. Plug it in and enter your unifi details and bam its taken care of. I don't need to sit and worry about creating bridges , untagging this , untagging that , writing some script , etc...

TM has made it clear that BTU belongs to them. I don't know if it's illegal to access and gather info about the BTU setup, but definitely they don't need to let you know how the BTU is setup, they are not obligated to do so because those are not user information. They should let you know your access username and password, because that's pertaining to each user, but network setup? Don't need to.

I don't know if they are doing it for the wrong reasons, but TM's approach is correct as that simplifies open network concept. They make it clear that demarcation point is the BTU and segregation of pipe are up till that point. If they un-tag the VLANs at the BTU, other ISPs will have trouble to offer all service on the same access network. L2 segregation is quite necessary all the way to BTU.

Almost every ISP that I've worked with does this kind of network setup. If you want to use your own router, no ISP will encourage it because it will put the burden of support on them. When they don't encourage it, why should they give you this information?

This post has been edited by gogetter83: Jul 30 2012, 08:33 PM

This is an easy challenge. Please ask TM to start providing subscribers with the necessary user/passwords needed for accessing their BTUs then. I don't want to start hearing stupid excuses from then for denying me the password saying you can't touch the BTU.

Please allow current Unifi users that have their contracts ending soon or have ended to apply for Maxis Fibre 10mbps. Tell them there's no need to arrange a TM contractor to come to their house. Just have the Maxis technicians come over and give them the new router settings to connect. Oh yeah, can I skip the initial installation charges?

I already have a BTU sitting here ready to just make the switch by just changing configurations. Will I be entitled for further savings because you're not going to give me a new BTU, waive the charges for pulling another new drop line and contractors spending another half a day at my house?

I wish to continue using the DLink DIR-615 for my Maxis service. Do you think the Maxis technician will allow me to keep my new Thompson and continue using my DLink?

Huh, if you already have UNIFI, then want to cancel it and want to have Maxis HSBB, just go ahead and call your Maxis agent to arrange for installation. This is what going to happen:-

1. Maxis contractor will come up to your house and install the router/VOIP.
2. TM contractor will come to your house to reconfigure port 1 to be used with Maxis.
3. You cannot use the DIR-615 anymore because you are cancelling the UNIFI service. You did know right the D-Link did not belong to you? But if you have your own D-Link DIR-615, tell them to configure the router. After all, D-Link doesn't make Maxis-certified router as of today.

Just call your Maxis agent and tell them you want to switch from UNIFI to them (tell them a BTU is already at your house). If they know you already have a BTU, Maxis will make an appointment with TM to reconfigure your BTU to add their VLANs to the BTU, and the Maxis contractor will show up with the router and VOIP and install them. There will be no new cable run to you.

If the Maxis agent tells you otherwise, then you are just getting ripped off.

This sentence is all we that wanted to here right from the very start of this thread.
The ability for the Unifi technician to reconfigure the ports when he makes the appointment to your house.

I would like to know is, can the customer make a simple request to the techncian to leave the tagged option for a particular Internet VLAN ID unchecked to facilitate the unstripping of the VLAN tags inside the BTU itself?

I am most interested in this because it'll allow the customer later to use any router he wants on port 1 without the need have VLAN untagging features. Can? Is that too much of a request to ask?

Are you sure? I've heard that some Unifi users had to pay for their damaged STB and routers after having their getting damaged after a year or so. The BTU is confirmed to be TM's property with a lifetime replacement.

Equipment warranty : Lifetime
Price: RM 500
http://www.tm.com.my/unifi/home/Pages/equipment-BTU.aspx

But the Residential Gateway aka router:

Equipment warranty : 1 year
Price: RM 120.00 (effective 25th April 2012 onwards)
http://www.tm.com.my/unifi/home/Pages/equipment-RG.aspx

STB:
Equipment warranty : 1 year (only for STB)
Price: RM 400.00 (effective 25th April 2012 onwards)
http://www.tm.com.my/unifi/home/Pages/equipment-STB.aspx

The customer will not be able to request that, because it will render the BTU useless for provisioning multi-ISP services. And as I said before, it will cause more boxes to be used.

Oh BTW, multi-ISP services on one BTU is COMPLETELY LEGAL. Therefore, if you so desire, with only one BTU, you can have UNIFI + Maxis + P1 all in one BTU.

Cancel your UNIFI service, even after you exceeded your contract duration, and TM will ask you to return the router, STB and VOIP phone. While the warranty for them isn't unlimited, the devices is still isn't yours.

Your answer is fairly straight forward. At the end it's just all up to the TM installers themselves giving different treatments to their clients. They may choose to do it if you pay more, they want to help you a not or keep it to themselves.
Like they say, "ikut suka hati lah sajelah I suka".

Great, that would mean TM is refusing to entertain replacement claims and at the same time wants to hold the ownership of all the equipments supplied to HSBB users?

Well, if you want to bribe them (illegal, unlike having multiple ISPs in one BTU), you can always do so. Just don't expect it to become SOP.

Nope, TM will entertain your request to replace them, as long as you pay. After all, while you can replace the router yourself, the STB and VOIP devices cannot be replaced easily. If the VOIP use standard like SIP, maybe you can, but how about the STB?

to be honest TM should have leave the VLAN tagging on the BTU itself, and leave the router for user to choose their own router(with an option to supply TM router if the customer is too dumb to get their own router).

D-link 615 cost money, I dont like them but I am FORCE to pay for them when I subscribe any services.

From what I understand, the router, DECT Phone & IPTV STB belongs to the customer after 1 year. If you cancel within the first year, you will have to return them. But after the 1st year, its yours to keep even if you cancel.

Only the BTU belongs to TM and must be returned if you cancel your service.

Hmm... I understand if the router become the customer property after the contract is finished. But the STB and the VOIP too? Those two are piece of junk without the UNIFI service.

Yup, which is why these equipments come with 1-year warranty only. While the TM-owned BTU is given lifetime warranty since its TM-owned. Its just like previously, the telephone set given to all fixed-line phone subscribers are free but TM-owned, and TM shall replace for you anytime if its faulty.

Turn off the DIR-615 wifi and you dont have that heat issue. Its wifi is craps for sure. Early Unifi adopter here. No problems with DIR-615 and heavy user with 3 or more HD streaming vids concurrently.

This post has been edited by XPS: Aug 18 2012, 10:47 AM

Well for me I would just solve my problem by myself. Even if it means modding or hacking the router to fit my requirements haha dun care about warranty.

I guess just wait 5 years and the manufacturers will come out with VLAN capable routers, who doesn't want a piece of cake in this rapidly growing market?