Tutor
•
3 Messages
3G Microcell U-verse Dropped Calls After 30 Seconds
I recently switched over from DSL to U-verse. Several months prior to that I had purchased a 3G Microcell and had little to no issues with it. After the switch though, I have had nothing but problems.
The current issue is that about 30 seconds into the call, the person on the other end is no longer able to hear the voice of the person connected through the 3G Microcell. Then usually about 1 minute into the call, it drops out. If End Call is pressed, the iPhone connected to the microcell freezes for several seconds before returning to the home screen. After this, the 3G bottom light on the microcell will often begin blinking as the connection to the AT&T servers appears to reset.
Initially I had 10% packet loss, but was able to resolve this with U-verse. They scheduled a technician visit, and had the problem fixed before he even arrived. I now have 0% packet loss and either an A or B rating with pingtest.net.
I also attempted to manually configure my router settings by changing the MTU to 1492 and setting up Port Forwarding for UDP 123, 500, 4500 and TCP 443 to the microcell in the Pace 5031NV router settings. This had no effect, so I have since taken the further step of placing the microcell in the router's DMZ.
Since I occassionally would receive a 102 error message (the registered address does not match the actual device location) when attempting to deactivate and re-register the microcell, I verified with AT&T that the GPS coordinates being sent by the microcell matched my address, which they did.
I also took my iPhone 5 to the AT&T store to swap the SIM card. This had no effect either. Neither did disabling LTE on the phone or disabling hand-out on the microcell.
After many calls to tech support, AT&T finally sent me another 3G Microcell to try. Unfortunately, this did not resolve the problem either.
At this point, I am considering trying out Charter internet or giving up on microcell entirely and trying Magic Jack. At least with cable service, I would have the option in that case of bypassing the router for the microcell by connecting directly to the modem.
When I last spoke with AT&T microcell group they recommended I speak with U-verse or even Cisco for further troubleshooting as they blame the problem on the internet connection. However, when I called U-verse, they were unable to help and transferred me back to Mobility for the microcell...
Running out of ideas. Appreciate any thoughts or suggestions...
OttoPylot
ACE - Expert
•
24.2K Messages
11 years ago
Thanks brian.25 for reporting back. I'm putting together some updates to the Technical Guide so this might be a good addition to it. I have seen other non-MicroCell issues reported with the Pace's (no model number given) so for the MicroCell folks, this might be the answer to their problems.
0
0
New_User2013
Mentor
•
32 Messages
10 years ago
0
OttoPylot
ACE - Expert
•
24.2K Messages
10 years ago
I've made AT&T aware of the Pace issue but until they can confirm the problem, they won't acknowledge it. Basically, not enough complaints from the MicroCell side. I'll pass along the new info.
0
0
DoglipsV
Contributor
•
1 Message
10 years ago
Just confirming New_User2013's solution. I had EXACTLY the same symptoms with my AT&T microcell when I upgraded to U-verse. I also had the Pace 5031NGV gateway. I had them send me the 2Wire 3600HGV, and the microcell now works flawlessly !
0
0
OttoPylot
ACE - Expert
•
24.2K Messages
10 years ago
I've passed that info along to AT&T. Thanks for reporting.
0
0
New_User2013
Mentor
•
32 Messages
10 years ago
I read on another forum posting that it was becoming a trend for field techs to bring customers the Pace 5031NV, even if they were slated to receive a Motorola or 2Wire (as was the case with me). I don't really understand the logic there, based on my experience. My Motorola NVG510 has been solid for weeks (as was my Motorola 2210, for years). By comparison, the Pace had more firmware configuration options, but the Web interface was extremely slow and then, of course, there were the horrible Microcell/VOIP issues. I can only imagine that it will be a matter of upgrading the firmware, but I really wish the field tech who migrated me to U-verse would have just given me the Motorola that I was slated to receive.
0
0
OttoPylot
ACE - Expert
•
24.2K Messages
10 years ago
According to some of the U-verse forums I've read, folks are quite happy with their Pace modems, as far as U-verse goes. I think the percentage of MicroCell-Pace users is so low, that the numbers of complaints with that combo is below the radar of those who pay attention to those stats. I will keep bringing it to their attention like I did with the Samsung Note 3 issue, and that was taken care of a lot quicker than I had anticipated.
0
0
New_User2013
Mentor
•
32 Messages
10 years ago
I just wanted to note that the Accepted Solution in this thread has been viewed 1,012 times. Hope AT&T is keeping score...might be worth looking into a Pace 5031NV firmware upgrade.
0
0
OttoPylot
ACE - Expert
•
24.2K Messages
10 years ago
Good timing. I received some general information yesterday that as soon as I can organize it I will include it in the next update to the Guide.
Basically, it depends on what kind of U-verse service you have, ADSL2+ or VDSL2/VDLS2 bonded pair. That, in turn, is determined somewhat on what is already deployed in your area.
For ADSL2+, the Motorola NVG 510 is the newest offered for sale to the customer. However, it does have issues with marginal connections and has some DNS issues.
For VDSL2 RG, and customers who don't have a bonded pair or IPTV, the Pace 5031 is what is being sold to customers.
If you have VDSL2 and a bonded pair (which requires a special NID at the MPOE), the Motorola NVG 589 is what is rented to customers.
For customers who are between 1900 and 3000 feet that don't fit into a category above, the 2Wire 3801 is what is recommended for VDSL2 RGs.
VDSL is a bit more problematic because it is less tolerant of line faults like bridge taps and AM interference but if it is installed correclty (installed correctly is the operative term here) it should be fine.
0
0
New_User2013
Mentor
•
32 Messages
10 years ago
Otto, thanks. That's very helpful info. It's clear that to refer to a connection simply as "U-verse" is a bit simplistic, as there are so many possible technologies/topologies at work. If one were to try and simplify the definition, it would seem to be "any and every possible way to utilize existing copper phone lines to provide high-speed Internet." I recently found out that the majority of my neighborhood is on VDSL and being offered speeds up to 45 Mbps, while I am inexplicably on ADSL2+ and limited to 3 Mbps. The field tech who came out said he's going to try to get the issue resolved for me, but I'm stumped as to why AT&T would connect multiple homes without U-verse subscriptions to a VRAD and leave me, a long time AT&T DSL customer, out in the cold, as it were, having to reach all the way to the CO. I suppose that's getting a bit off-topic for this thread, but I will say that the one advantage of the situation is that I can use a Motorola NVG510. I know a lot of people have complained about them, but I haven't had a single problem with it, and it means I can still use my Microcell. Apparently the 2Wire's aren't bad, but if anyone asked me which brand I trusted for a gateway, I would say Motorola, based on years of DSL usage experience.
0
0