To jpteltonika in response to my comment four days ago.
The information is from a RUT240 (RUT24006E000 with serial number 1105559562) that is used "in production". Hence, it is not used to test the issue. The unit's firmware is RUT2XX_R_00.01.11.3. The unit is used in Bridge mode with mobile data connection as main (and only connection, i.e. no WAN Failover).
Here's my view on what's causing the issue:
1) the hardware
2) the software (firmware), or
3) the carrier
In the case of a general hardware or a software issue, you should be able to reproduce it without the need for log files.
I'm not an expert, but the irregularity in the number of hours between "unplugged" and "plugged in" (sometimes shorter than the lease time, other times longer than the lease time) indicate a hardware or software related issue.
- Shorter than the lease time: I don't understand why the internet connection would be lost after an hour if the lease time is two hours.
- Longer than the lease time: Could it be that not all events are being logged?
Further, perhaps you should consider changing the event text in a future firmware release because unplugging/plugging in the LAN cable isn't what triggers the event log entry.
Searching the forum, I find one post from 17 July 2019 (Regular LAN port plugged/unplugged events, N.B. for a RUT950), one from 28 December 2019 (Cable unplugged), and one from 6 February 2020 (RUT240: LAN cable unplugged / terrible performance until reboot) all seemingly describing the same issue. This thread was opened more than seven weeks ago. The one from July soon 8 months ago. Hence, should it be a firmware issue, then it's not only affecting the latest version. Should it be a hardware issue, then either not all units are affected or the majority of the users haven't discovered the issue yet.
The router's product page describes it as delivering "high performance for mission-critical cellular communication ..." (my formatting). With such a statement, I believe it's fair to expect Teltonika to prioritizing investigating and solving the issue. Would I have known about the issue discussed in this thread (and in the others referred to above), I wouldn't have bought the unit, nor would I recommend it to be used for "mission-critical cellular communication".
Should they, as implied in the comment from jpteltonika on 6 March 2020, consider it to be a carrier issue ("the carriers have the tendency to drop lease connections at a fixed time, some times at 3600 seconds others at 7200 seconds"), then they should probably not market it as to be used for "mission-critical cellular communication".
Should it be needed, I can send you log files. If so, please provide info on how to do that via private message. As moderator you should have access to my e-mail address.
Hoping for a quick resolution.