Moved ISPs to (Dec/2007)

The bethere broadband logo We Changed ISPs from “Freedom2surf” to “Be” because it is a faster and cheaper connection.

The connection details that Be supply are minimal to say the least. This is because they expect you to use their pre-configured “BeBox” that they send you for free. We didn’t like the way the BeBox looked and we didn’t like it’s web interface and we didn’t want to have to re-configure our whole network and firewall – so we messed around with our existing Netgear DG834G until we got a working connection. These are the settings you need to enter:

  • Basic Settings
    • Does Your Internet Connection Require A Login? No (then leave “Account Name” and “Domain Name” empty)
    • Internet IP Address: tick Use Static IP Address, then enter the numbers supplied to you in the intro letter from Be. For me, they were as follows: IP Address:, IP Subnet Mask:, Gateway IP Address:
    • Domain Name Server (DNS) Address: tick Use These DNS Servers (then enter87.194.0.51 and
    • NAT (Network Address Translation): leave Enable ticked.
    • Router MAC Address: leave Use Default Address ticked.
  • ADSL Settings
    • Multiplexing Method: Select LLC-BASED
    • VPI: 0
    • VCI: 101
    • DSL Mode: Select ADSL2+ (but this option was only available after I upgraded the netgear firmwhere to “V4.01.28” – It worked before without this option)

With these router ADSL settings, you won’t need to change anything on your machines (Ubuntu or Windows). What’s Be’s speed like? Disappointing considering it’s supposed to be 24MBits! (although it’s better than before).

screenshot of our connection speed, 12MB down and 1MB up

We started messing around with the Netgears firmwhere and the MTU and RWIN size but didn’t have any better results.

2 responses to “Moved ISPs to (Dec/2007)”

  1. Dave

    I am thinking of changing to ‘be’ as well. I am doing some research, does this problem still exist?



  2. Martin

    In reality, probably 8 Mbps is about the max. that’s TRULY advantageous to pay for, currently, with 2-4 Mbps being OK.

    24 Mbps etc scam deals are a waste of money at the moment, as the majority of the billions of site servers around the globe are designed to mete out a hugely restrained, trickle feed of data, to ensure that as many potential users as possible will have a bandwidth portal available to log-on to their site, boost visitor numbers, increase audience-reach thus advertising spread, with SOME information flow… reserving a lot of bandwidth on standby for any future potential visitors.

    This ensures that everyone on their site, and those yet to visit, will get a little bit of a s l o w information data stream, rather than the first user to visit any site gets phenomenal speed, rapid link transition & immediate page browsing, with the rest of the World being locked out from that site until that user logs off, ready for the next-in-line exclusive viewer to visit, and so on !!!!

    Give it another 6 to 8 years, and we may get a more general, GENUINE 6 to 8 Mbps response from any updated Web site servers, DNS servers, more advanced fibre-optic systems and thinner chip technology.

    Unfortunately, the MARKETING of the theoretical MAX speed of the information transfer rate from your workstation to your ISP server fools most users into thinking that that is the speed of transceiving from your ISP, around the Earth, to the website you’re viewing, and back to you…

    You’ve got to laugh at the conning marketing, eh?… Next they’ll be kidding us that an infinite number of MEGAPIXELS on a tiny camera imaging chip will give a better photograph, rather than the fact that it’s actually ADDING grain and colour mis-registration to try and fit so many pixel triads on such a miniscule area… It certainly helps sell MILLIONS of cameras to the uninformed.

    Shame, as maybe up to an 8 Mp chip, with quality coated lens elements and RAW picture processing algorithms is all you need for a 10 ft x 8 ft bigger-than-life-size QUALITY poster print !!!

    A severe case of Pixel-Envy !!!!?

Leave a Reply