[c-nsp] cisco 675 and 678

[John Neiberger]

>>> "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm at toybox.placo.com> 3/30/05 1:13:35 AM >>>
>cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net wrote:
>>>>> "Voll, Scott" <Scott.Voll at wesd.org> 3/29/05 11:10:41 AM >>>
>>> What's the difference between a 675 and a 678?  Which would DSL
>>> providers suggest?
>>
>> The 675 is CAP only, while the 678 can run either CAP software or
DMT
>> software (but not both at the same time.)
>>
>> I would advise you to stay away from both of them, however. I
really
>> can't stand them. They can be a pain to configure depending on your
>> requirements.
>
>Only if you are foolish enough to try to make them work as routers.

Heh heh... you might be right about that. :)  Qwest initially forced us
to use them so we were stuck with making them work for us. 

>
>The 678 is the absolute best DSL modem you can get on the Qwest DSL
>network
>that is supported by Qwest.  (Qwest only supports the 678 and the
various
>ActionTec DSL models)  That isn't to say you can't get an 827 to work
on
>Qwest's DSL network
>of course.

We didn't go with the ActionTec models when they came out because they
couldn't be configured to work in our environment at the time. We use
the SOHO 97 and that does kind of irritate the Qwest DSL support people
when I call in with a problem. They're less irritated when they discover
that this is a private network and that I am, in effect, the ISP.

>The Cisco 827 runs IOS also and has a DSL port on it.

I almost picked the 827 over the SOHO 97. It has a few more features
that I considered using, e.g. HSRP, but we went with the cheaper but
less functional SOHO 97. I haven't had any issues with interoperability
with Qwest's DSL, though. They've been pretty solid routers.

John
--