We have had our BT Youview for just under a year with no problems, I have recently install a new BT Smart hub as a part of the contract renewal process, since then we get Intermittent YVM102 errors.
I have tried both Resetting the router and Factory reset of the youview Box to no avail
I have been in contact with BT support, and after going over the above again and various line checks, again to no avail, They have now booked an Engineer visit.
I have also been looking at the event log on the Hub, and have noticed that when the errors appear I get:-
(Note: eth2 is the port the youview box is on)
21:27:20, 27 Mar. eth2:[Device Connected] MAC Address:cc:4e:ec:22:20:3e Host Name: IP Address: 192.168.1.72, lease duration is 86400 seconds.
21:27:20, 27 Mar. BR_LAN:The DHCP options that are offered by the device (id:2): DiscoverOptions: 53,55,125 | DiscoverOption55: 1,28,2,3,15,6,12,44,47,125,121,249,252,42 | RequestOptions: 53,50,55,125 | RequestOption55: 1,28,2,3,15,6,12,44,47,125,121,249,252,42 | HostName: | VendorId:
21:27:20, 27 Mar. : DHCP Confirmation of Request
21:27:18, 27 Mar. eth2:An Ethernet port is now connected (3/1000/FULL)
21:26:57, 27 Mar. eth2:A device has been disconnected from an Ethernet port (3)
I have now set the IP address on the YouView box to manual (Static Address), Since then I have not seen the error
My questions are has anyone seen this before?, could this be a fault on the BT Smart Hub?, what if any is the downside of using a static address?
Thanks for the offer, The BT Engineer was here today, and hopefully fixed the problem, when he used his cable checker he found pin 5 and 7 broken. therefore he has remade both ends & the intermediate joins as the colour did not match throughout.(Not originally installed correctly)
I think the old hub was connecting at 100Mb hence does not use pin 5 & 7 where as the new hub connects at 1000Mb and therefore requires all 8 cores, which explains why this started after chainging the hub.
Note: in my original post i said setting a static address seem to fix the problem, this was not true, it just for some reason reduced the frequency of accordance.
Hopefully the information in this post will be useful to others