SIMBA Fibre Broadband

[derrace]

D-Link DPN-BE7212GR BE7200 Dual Band 10G Wi-Fi 7 EasyMesh Router
https://www.dlink.com.sg/product/dpn-be7212gr-be7200-dual-band-10g-wi-fi-7-easymesh-router/

Has anyone managed to change the admin pw? I can get in via admin credentials listed on the router but am unable to change admin password? The url redirect from initial login page just base64 encrypts the creds, it's so bad =/.

 

[froztheart]

https://www.hardwarezone.com.sg/tech-show-brochures/view_brochure/24930/

 

[acidcrash]

Just received this...hmm

Should i stay or should i go?

 

[SPEED]

Just received this...hmm

Should i stay or should i go?

Go for it.

 

[xiaofan]

Just received this...hmm

Should i stay or should i go?

If you got no issues with SIMBA, you can always continue with it. Enjoy the S$21.80/30 days pricing until 13-May-2025 and then jump to 10Gbps service at S$29.90/30 days pricing after that.

Usually I do not recommend new users to go with SIMBA (not-so-good-support for average users, CGNAT without static IPv4 add-on for power users), but for recontract users, I think it is an okay choice if you have no issues.

 

[hdb2rm]

Has anyone managed to change the admin pw? I can get in via admin credentials listed on the router but am unable to change admin password? The url redirect from initial login page just base64 encrypts the creds, it's so bad =/.

Try choose user to set, then use admin log in but use new pw?

 

[luei74]

Anyone having Simba not connection at Northeast area?

 

[SPEED]

Anyone having Simba not connection at Northeast area?

my area is northeast. no issues.
running smooth.

 

[luei74]

After their maintenance have to do hard reset in order to gain back the connection

 

[Foetid]

If you got no issues with SIMBA, you can always continue with it. Enjoy the S$21.80/30 days pricing until 13-May-2025 and then jump to 10Gbps service at S$29.90/30 days pricing after that.

Usually I do not recommend new users to go with SIMBA (not-so-good-support for average users, CGNAT without static IPv4 add-on for power users), but for recontract users, I think it is an okay choice if you have no issues.

oh CGNAT, that time i google means cannot ownselfs open firewall to direct traffic for personal servers right?

 

[xiaofan]

oh CGNAT, that time i google means cannot ownselfs open firewall to direct traffic for personal servers right?

Two main issues.
1) No port forwarding. This cause issues for things like hosting servers at home.
2) IP banning issues by web servers or streaming media providers. This one does not only affect power users but also average users.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier-grade_NAT

Disadvantages​

Critics of carrier-grade NAT argue the following aspects:

• Like any form of NAT, it breaks the end-to-end principle.[6]
• It has significant security and reliability problems[clarification needed], by virtue of being stateful.
• It does not solve the IPv4 address exhaustion problem when a public IP address is needed, such as in Web hosting.
• It may create a performance bottleneck that limits scalability.
• Carrier-grade NAT usually prevents the ISP customers from using port forwarding, because the network address translation (NAT) is usually implemented by mapping ports of the NAT devices in the network to other ports in the external interface. This is done so the router will be able to map the responses to the correct device; in carrier-grade NAT networks, even though the router at the consumer end might be configured for port forwarding, the "master router" of the ISP, which runs the CGN, will block this port forwarding because the actual port would not be the port configured by the consumer.[7] In order to overcome the former disadvantage, the Port Control Protocol (PCP) has been standardized in the RFC 6887.
• In cases of banning traffic based on IP addresses, a system might block the traffic of a spamming user by banning the user's IP address. If that user happens to be behind carrier-grade NAT, other users sharing the same public address with the spammer will be inadvertently blocked.[7] This can create problems for forum and wiki administrators attempting to address disruptive actions of a single malicious user sharing an IP address with legitimate users.
• Streaming media services may see CG NAT activity as equivalent to Virtual Private Network or Account sharing traffic. Such services often block or ban VPN users for breaching terms of service under an assumption they are accessing content from a cheaper region in an attempt to pay less money for the service, and account sharing traffic being blocked for multiple distinct households or users accessing the content for the price of one login.

 

[Foetid]

Two main issues.
1) No port forwarding. This cause issues for things like hosting servers at home.
2) IP banning issues by web servers or streaming media providers. This one does not only affect power users but also average users.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier-grade_NAT

Disadvantages​

Critics of carrier-grade NAT argue the following aspects:

• Like any form of NAT, it breaks the end-to-end principle.[6]
• It has significant security and reliability problems[clarification needed], by virtue of being stateful.
• It does not solve the IPv4 address exhaustion problem when a public IP address is needed, such as in Web hosting.
• It may create a performance bottleneck that limits scalability.
• Carrier-grade NAT usually prevents the ISP customers from using port forwarding, because the network address translation (NAT) is usually implemented by mapping ports of the NAT devices in the network to other ports in the external interface. This is done so the router will be able to map the responses to the correct device; in carrier-grade NAT networks, even though the router at the consumer end might be configured for port forwarding, the "master router" of the ISP, which runs the CGN, will block this port forwarding because the actual port would not be the port configured by the consumer.[7] In order to overcome the former disadvantage, the Port Control Protocol (PCP) has been standardized in the RFC 6887.
• In cases of banning traffic based on IP addresses, a system might block the traffic of a spamming user by banning the user's IP address. If that user happens to be behind carrier-grade NAT, other users sharing the same public address with the spammer will be inadvertently blocked.[7] This can create problems for forum and wiki administrators attempting to address disruptive actions of a single malicious user sharing an IP address with legitimate users.
• Streaming media services may see CG NAT activity as equivalent to Virtual Private Network or Account sharing traffic. Such services often block or ban VPN users for breaching terms of service under an assumption they are accessing content from a cheaper region in an attempt to pay less money for the service, and account sharing traffic being blocked for multiple distinct households or users accessing the content for the price of one login.

Thank you!!

 

[chewst7873]

Can the TP-link eb810v and Hb710 routers from StarHub be compatible and used with SIMBA 10gbps broadband?

 

[xiaofan]

Can the TP-link eb810v and Hb710 routers from StarHub be compatible and used with SIMBA 10gbps broadband?

Yes.

But I will recommend TP-Link Archer BE805 (dumped by M1 users, less than S$300 BNIB) over EB810v as it is cheaper, has more FW features and more stable than EB810v. EB810v has better HW spec though (three 2.5G LAN ports vs four 1G LAN ports).

HB710 at S$192 is of very good value. But Archer BE805 will have better CPU, more wireless coverage and four more LAN ports than HB710.

FYI I have both Archer BE805 (bought from an M1 user at S$300) and HB710 (bought from Starhub at S$192). I am not using mesh, but rather use them as individual router, Archer BE805 for SingTel 5Gbps plan and HB710 for Starhub 5Gbps plan

 

[bitsoffish]

has anyone here transferred your SIMBA broadband from one address to another? does SIMBA require any proof of the subscriber's residency in the new address? im looking to move the connection to a relative's place, while i sign up a new Starhub connection.

 

[chewst7873]

Yes.

But I will recommend TP-Link Archer BE805 (dumped by M1 users, less than S$300 BNIB) over EB810v as it is cheaper, has more FW features and more stable than EB810v. EB810v has better HW spec though (three 2.5G LAN ports vs four 1G LAN ports).

HB710 at S$192 is of very good value. But Archer BE805 will have better CPU, more wireless coverage and four more LAN ports than HB710.

FYI I have both Archer BE805 (bought from an M1 user at S$300) and HB710 (bought from Starhub at S$192). I am not using mesh, but rather use them as individual router, Archer BE805 for SingTel 5Gbps plan and HB710 for Starhub 5Gbps plan

Thanks xiaofan.
Is there any need for resetting or reconfiguration of TP link routers eb810v/hb710 purchased from StarHub straight out of the box for connection with SIMBA? I am intending to sign up this weekend for the SIMBA promotion while ensuring a bit of time for the SingTel port to be released for incoming SIMBA. I have recently renewed my Homehub 10gbps contract with StarHub and purchased a EB810v for that. For the SIMBA plan, I am thinking to purchase another unit HB710 from StarHub instead of the Eero Max 7 offered by SIMBA but has been unsure if this will work.

 

[chewst7873]

I checked with TP link support and they say the EB810v and HB710 are customised StarHub models and are not sure they are ‘locked’ and cannot guarantee will work with SIMBA broadband. Hence I am seeking advice on this.

 

[HiHelloBye]

I checked with TP link support and they say the EB810v and HB710 are customised StarHub models and are not sure they are ‘locked’ and cannot guarantee will work with SIMBA broadband. Hence I am seeking advice on this.

can use with other telco...

 

[chewst7873]

Great. Thanks.
My aim is to connect the router to SIMBA ONT modem through data point in room with LAN cable run to the 10G port.

 

[SPEED]

using Archer BE805 and Fenvi 10G NIC PCIE (AQC113 chipset) with Simba 10G plan.
Here is my results. seems like the upload speed is capped or max out at around 7.5Gbps