I think it's done
My router too (Powered by LuCI lede-17.01 branch (git-17.100.70571-29fabe2) / LEDE Reboot 17.01.1 r3316-7eb58cf109)
Today after reading about LEDE/Luci I decided to configure the router and use it insted of my old ADSL router. I can not get ADSL working, DSL status is DOWN.
Status: DOWN
Line State: not initialized [0x0]
Line Mode:
Annex:
Profile:
Data Rate: 0 b/s / 0 b/s
Max. Attainable Data Rate (ATTNDR): 0 b/s / 0 b/s
Did you need to install DSL support after installing LEDE?
I didnt install anything after LeDe install.
Maybe your problem is cable connection because I could see the DSL signal even if my settings were wrong.
Very strange I just reverted to TP-Link firmware and ADSL works. With LEDE there was no ADSL. And I planned to use this router for coming VDSL next month. Can someone please help with LEDE/xDSL?
This is a shot in the dark as I don't have first-hand experience with ADSL lines, only VDSL lines on this router. But AFAIK the annex setting is relevant for ADSL (not for VDSL). Did you select the correct annex in network's dsl config? I.e.,
config dsl 'dsl'
(...)
option annex 'b'
("a", "b", or "j" respectively)?
Hi i have a VDSL line too, but i know for the ADSL are the "config atm-bridge 'atm'" are relevant too.
You need the right VPI and VCI values and you must specefied the exact right DSL specification like: Annex B G992.1
VDSL should be work automatic.
The xfer_mode is on ADSL normally (i think soo) atm.
be shure that the Firmware a installed:
opkg list-installed | grep dsl-vrx200 should get:
dsl-vrx200-firmware-xdsl-a and dsl-vrx200-firmware-xdsl-b-patch
or
dsl-vrx200-firmware-xdsl-b and dsl-vrx200-firmware-xdsl-a-patch
How the loading (and patching) process work can be see in this script:
/etc/init.d/dsl_control
you can specified the firmware what should be used via:
option firmware 'path-to-your-firmware'
note that the restrubale firmware does not support vectoring if you need vectoring you can extract any other firmware from a vr9 device like FritzBox 7360 and use them.
see here: https://xdarklight.github.io/lantiq-xdsl-firmware-info/
Thanks. I tried some more options but no luck so far. Just to be sure .. I have W8970B, not plain W8970 as most of you probably, version V1. I hope that hw flavour is also supported with the same firmware.
BTW I have
dsl-vrx200-firmware-xdsl-b and dsl-vrx200-firmware-xdsl-a-patch
installed
I hve progress here. ADSL is now UP
DSL
DSL Status
DSL Status: UP
Line State: showtime_tc_sync [0x801]
Line Mode: G.992.5 (ADSL2+)
Annex: B
Profile:
Data Rate: 9.216 Mb/s / 862 Kb/s
Max. Attainable Data Rate (ATTNDR): 25.160 Mb/s / 1.523 Mb/s
Latency: 8.0 ms / 7.0 ms
Line Attenuation (LATN): 6.6 dB / 4.3 dB
Signal Attenuation (SATN): 5.2 dB / 4.1 dB
Noise Margin (SNR): 16.4 dB / 16.3 dB
Aggregate Transmit Power(ACTATP): 8.9 dB / 4.6 dB
Forward Error Correction Seconds (FECS): 0 / 53
Errored seconds (ES): 17 / 99507
Severely Errored Seconds (SES): 17 / 99362
Loss of Signal Seconds (LOSS): 2 / 99196
Unavailable Seconds (UAS): 79 / 79
Header Error Code Errors (HEC): 0 / 16829
Non Pre-emtive CRC errors (CRC_P): 0 / 0
Pre-emtive CRC errors (CRCP_P): 0 / 0
Line Uptime: 27m 30s
ATU-C System Vendor ID: Broadcom 177.169
Power Management Mode: L0 - Synchronized
but I still do not have access to internet. This is what I see in log
Mon Apr 17 17:27:06 2017 daemon.info pppd[9864]: Plugin rp-pppoe.so loaded.
Mon Apr 17 17:27:06 2017 daemon.info pppd[9864]: RP-PPPoE plugin version 3.8p compiled against pppd 2.4.7
Mon Apr 17 17:27:06 2017 daemon.notice pppd[9864]: pppd 2.4.7 started by root, uid 0
Mon Apr 17 17:27:21 2017 daemon.warn pppd[9864]: Timeout waiting for PADO packets
Mon Apr 17 17:27:21 2017 daemon.err pppd[9864]: Unable to complete PPPoE Discovery
Mon Apr 17 17:27:21 2017 daemon.info pppd[9864]: Exit.
Mon Apr 17 17:27:21 2017 daemon.notice netifd: Interface 'wan' is now down
Mon Apr 17 17:27:21 2017 daemon.notice netifd: Interface 'wan' is disabled
Mon Apr 17 17:27:21 2017 daemon.notice netifd: Interface 'wan' is enabled
Mon Apr 17 17:27:21 2017 daemon.notice netifd: Interface 'wan' is setting up now
Mon Apr 17 17:27:21 2017 daemon.info pppd[10852]: Plugin rp-pppoe.so loaded.
Mon Apr 17 17:27:21 2017 daemon.info pppd[10852]: RP-PPPoE plugin version 3.8p compiled against pppd 2.4.7
Mon Apr 17 17:27:21 2017 daemon.notice pppd[10852]: pppd 2.4.7 started by root, uid 0
Mon Apr 17 17:27:36 2017 daemon.warn pppd[10852]: Timeout waiting for PADO packets
Mon Apr 17 17:27:36 2017 daemon.err pppd[10852]: Unable to complete PPPoE Discovery
Mon Apr 17 17:27:36 2017 daemon.info pppd[10852]: Exit.
Mon Apr 17 17:27:37 2017 daemon.notice netifd: Interface 'wan' is now down
Mon Apr 17 17:27:37 2017 daemon.notice netifd: Interface 'wan' is disabled
Mon Apr 17 17:27:37 2017 daemon.notice netifd: Interface 'wan' is enabled
Mon Apr 17 17:27:37 2017 daemon.notice netifd: Interface 'wan' is setting up now
this is my config:
config dsl 'dsl'
option xfer_mode 'atm'
option line_mode 'adsl'
option annex 'b'
config interface 'wan'
option ifname 'nas0'
option proto 'pppoe'
option username 'XXX'
option password 'XXX'
config atm-bridge
option encaps 'llc'
option payload 'bridged'
option vci '32'
option vpi '1'
I talked to the guy at the provider. He says 15s (as seen from the log) is not enough, login usually takes longer for most customers for whatever reason. So it seems like I have to increase timeout on 40s or so. But where can I do this change? Forum search did not bring me much.
config atm-bridge
option encaps 'llc'
option payload 'bridged'
option vci '32'
option vpi '1'
are vpi and vci values true ?
for example, My country's ISS values vpi:8,vci:35
Yes, I tripplechecked them.
I found in file pppd/plugins/rp-pppoe/pppoe-discovery.c there is method "discovery" which tries 3 x 5s to get PADO reply. From there I see no light 
I think I will have to use my old modem/router till my line switches to VDSL in 6 weeks and then try W8970B again.
That is quite curious. I've never had a line where PPPoE wasn't virtually instantaneous or generally failed.
Although I never experienced it myself, I have read about cases where even ADSL lines need the correct VLAN ID. See the OP's problem above.
Also, does your ISP care about your modem's MAC address? I'm guessing not since you can switch between modems without any problem, but some do.
I don't understand networking PPPoE and such. But I can confirm that my old modem lights up DSL line and only after considerable amount of time Internet light comes up. It may very well take half a minute.
I talked to another guy at ISP as it is evening now and this time I was given information too about instantaneous connect. (as I believe takimata is saying) Besides he did not seem to know what "PADO timeout" I was talking about
I don't know how to set up VLAN ID for ADSL. I could not find it in the luci neither in the uci.
"too instantaneous"? That's the first time I heard about that, and the fact that you got two different answers from two different people makes me think that you've reached a lower support level where guessing is still a valid reaction.
At any rate, you can test if you're connecting too fast. Disable the WAN interface, unplug and replug the DSL line, wait a sensible amount of coffees and then reactivate the WAN interface.
network.dsl.xfer_mode='atm'
network.dsl.line_mode='adsl'
network.dsl.annex='b'
network.wan=interface
network.wan.proto='pppoe'
network.wan.ipv6='auto'
network.wan._orig_ifname='ptm0'
network.wan._orig_bridge='false'
I tend to believe problem lies in these lines:
network.wan.ifname='ptm0'
network.wan_dev.name='ptm0'
I compared my config with stock config and I see change in network.dsl.xfer_mode from ptm to atm. So what ptm0 means actually? And what is nas0? I tried that setting too.
I believe this is more nuanced, both VDLS and ADSL ITU standards use lettered annexes, but unfortunately they use the same letters for different meanings. For VDSL2 all bandplans are defined in Annex B if I recall correctly, while for ADSL Annex B is a specific bandplan that is compatible with ISDN. PTM and ATM are two different beasts entirely, think about them as different coding schemes on the wire (not entirely true). PTM actually was introduced as an Annex to ADSL2 (see ITU G.992.3 Annex N), but as far as I can tell is not used on ADSL links at all; while on VDSL2 links both ATM and PTM seem permitted only PTM seems to be used. In short for an adsl link you will in all likelyhood need network.dsl.xfer_mode='atm'.
Okay, this is actually starting to point to an issue. Obviously, only a small fraction of OpenWrt/LEDE supported routers do have an internal modem and so it will only affect a small part of the user base. But configuring an internal modem, what to choose and how to choose it, is woefully badly documented.
Especially if you're on ADSL (which, interestingly, a lot of people are regressing to nowadays), your exclusive source for documentation is random bits and pieces mentioned in some routers' Wiki pages. And as the issue at hand shows, they may even be wrong or outdated. Most notably, internal DSL configuration is completely absent from the network configuration pages and doesn't have any supplemental documentation.
See, and that directly contradicts what is written on OpenWrt's Wiki page for this router that says you should set PTM. Yes, of course, not LEDE pages. But like me right now, you have to be told that this is wrong by someone more knowledgeable, because even if you are somewhat familiar with the technologies and the abbreviations, see if you find an article that explains that PTM came with VDSL and ADSL in all likelyhood doesn't use it. And good luck finding anything that explains "ptm0", VLANs on PTM, and what "nas0" is (or isn't anymore, I'm still not quite sure about that one).
This is quite frustrating. Yes, I realize I shouldn't give advice on things I didn't do myself, but this is something that should be remedied.
(As for me, I will go further up and remove any guesswork/bad advice from my posts and keep my mouth shut about the ADSL business I never tried first hand.)
That seems to be true, but I note I have looked into the ITU standards but have not configured ADSL/VDSL in lede/openwrt at all, so take what I say with a grain of salt...
That sounds not great, I am planning of getting a router with a VDSL2 modem, and this looks like it will be a challenge to get working properly; I guess I will not retire my old modem-router before the replacement works well.
My reading of that section is simply an instruction how to set the different options without any information under which conditions one should select which, so not a direct contradiction, but also not too enlightening.
No, please keep advising people, even if you are not 100% sure, just label such more experimental recommendations accordingly. It will always be more helpful than total silence 
Best Regards
normaly but not tested via the file: /etc/ppp/options
try this:
...
lcp-echo-failure 5 # mean 5 trys = are failure
lcp-echo-interval 10 # mean interval in seconds to the next request
...i hope this file survice a uci reload