| reply to Spetsnazgg
Re: DSL Modem Recommendation i have been working with the actiontec gt701-wg for about a week now and i am VERY unhappy with it and their tech support.
although the device functions it does so just barely and will NOT work with my VPN!
first, the delivered cd software would not run on my win98 system. since it would not run i do not know if it has alternative configuration methods from using http to the device as outlined below.
second, none of the data entry boxes for ip addresses on the http configuration screens accept class a or b addresses (such as 10.1 or 172.16.1). these LEGAL addresses have worked since the invention of ip. forcing us to write ALL addresses in class c style is not only absurd but noncompliant with the RFCs.
third, the http configuration screen for "advanced- port forwarding" does NOT allow user-entered protocols by name nor number. this prevents me from configuring access for nortel's VPN client i am required to use for access to my employer. furthermore, one cannot change the internal config files (that drive iptables for the firewall and nat functions) one would require in order to "work around" the brain-dead actiontec interface. the file system is "read only".
fourth, complaining to qwest has been futile. their head-in-the-sand response is "we don't do modems nor vpn"! they simply say that this has to be done by actiontec. how is still in question.
fifth, actiontec refuses to accept complaints in this area. their response is "you have to pay us to make that feature work but we won't guarentee it will work with VPNs". what kind of crap is this? i have already paid for a device that is expected to be "fit for this purpose (merchantilability)". besides, this is a VERY common requirement today and should actually be easy to do. i think the device has the basic capabilities since it is linux based. however, actiontec chose not to make the needed interfaces available even though it would be easy.
sixth, dumping the iptables config for any of the default configs shows that actiontec has mistakes in it. you can telnet to the device and run "iptables -L" and "iptables -t nat -L" and see for yourself.
seventh, the nortel VPN client has limited and simple protocol and port requirements that should be easy for any respectable dsl device. [i have those requirements for those interested.]
eighth, setting the actiontec firewall off, basic or low is risky business and counter to all network security tenants. since i have not gotten this VPN operational at any firewall setting level i can't say it is pertinent to my issues. clearly one should run this at the highest possible firewall security level (i suggest NOT to use this modem).
ninth, simply put- don't use the actiontec. the device is crap and so is the company's support. i'm researching for a better, more professional device and company. i will be complaining to qwest's top management with all of this so they will have no room for excuses and sending back this actiontec ASAP. maybe this is why people desire the cisco?
painter |
|
| So are you suggesting I get the cisco? 
Which one? |
|
 LavaJoePremium
join:2004-02-01
Denver, CO | said by Spetsnazgg:
So are you suggesting I get the cisco?
Which one?
My recommendation is the Cisco 678. You can get them on Ebay. Solid hardware! |
|
|
|
ktig
join:2004-03-24
Longmont, CO | I agree. My cisco 678 has been solid now for about 2 months. Best $75 I've spent in a long time. The actiontecs, 1524 and 701 only lasted hours before have to be reset. |
|
| So far my 701g has been going weeks without a reset. |
|
| reply to richpainter
Does the actiontec not do IPSec (aka VPN) passthrough? My wife uses the Notel VPN client and it works fine through my Cisco with IPSec passthrough. I think Nortel also supports NAT-T for getting through a difficult router. Since that is just UDP traffic the actiontec shouldn't know what is going on.
michael |
|
