bclbob
join:2000-06-23
Oak Park, IL
clubs: | reply to jmatthi
Re: U-Verse Static IP's: Not Working, Can't figure out problem
I do need to get back to that lol |
|
jmatthi
join:2009-10-26
Dallas, TX | reply to CJ Texas
Why can't someone just hack the thing and so we can put it out of our(it's) misery.  |
|
gdm
Premium,MVM
join:2001-06-15
Mchenry, IL
clubs: | reply to jmatthi
No you can't use the 2700 that's for a ADSL circuit not VDSL which is what U-Verse is. The 3800 is the only modem that can currently be used with U-Verse. |
|
jmatthi
join:2009-10-26
Dallas, TX
| reply to CJ Texas
Can you use a 2700 2wire device with Uverse? If so, you could get the bridging option needed since it is in there and active.
Ebay has quite a few that could be purchased. 
I just got Uverse with 5 Statics and I am guessing I will need 5 routers (one for each IP available) to route over to my firewall to get it working with my network like it used to with DSL.
I tried IP aliases and that doesn't seem to be working. Is there any other options that I have missed besides VMWare?
Thanks |
|
UHerse Deliv
@sbcglobal.net
| reply to Robert75
said by Robert75 :
Oh boy am i glad I found this thread. I did order uverse bus a week ago for a project I have in Dallas and I was going to buy a new Zyxel VDSL2 modem for the project next week.
Now that I know that I can't bring my own vdsl2 modem and the 2wire gateway can't be bridged and made dumb i will have to call at&t and cancel the installation.
This thread saved me time and travel expenses since our main office is in Harlingen, TX
Yeah, very unfortunate that such a very basic common feature was taken out and/or disabled for U-Verse. All the standard 2wire devices that you get directly from 2wire has this? What gives? |
|
Robert75
@sbcglobal.net
| reply to CJ Texas
Oh boy am i glad I found this thread. I did order uverse bus a week ago for a project I have in Dallas and I was going to buy a new Zyxel VDSL2 modem for the project next week.
Now that I know that I can't bring my own vdsl2 modem and the 2wire gateway can't be bridged and made dumb i will have to call at&t and cancel the installation.
This thread saved me time and travel expenses since our main office is in Harlingen, TX |
|
mythulto
join:2009-08-07
Arlington Heights, IL
| reply to CJ Texas
Except for the squabbling, this was a very useful thread. I was all psyched today when ATT installed U-verse TV and internet. But it looks like tomorrow I will have to cancel the internet portion. I spent about 30 minutes tinkering with the 2Wire before checking this forum and finding this post. Looks like you guys saved me many hours of grief. The inability to act as a simple bridge is a real shame.
Fortunately, my Comcast account is still working great. The Comcast business account with 5 static IP's, running on their bridged modem, coupled with my SonicWall router/firewall does everything I need flawlessly. |
|
bclbob
join:2000-06-23
Oak Park, IL
clubs:
| reply to CJ Texas
Once they figure out they don't need to charge for a truck roll, I might try out the static IP service to see whats going on it with. DMZplus is useless, because its still filtering and it loses the mapping once in a while.
But to spend $99 on a truck roll is ridiculous. |
|
satnone
join:2009-07-05
| reply to CJ Texas
HWL and jnessen,
You guys absolutely will not be able to do what you want to do. I had to cancel my service because of this and go with Time Warner who I gotta say so far has been great as long as its business class and NOT residential service. They will give you a cable modem/router which does those 2 things and only those 2 things, like any other normal business class internet service (an unfiltered untouched pipe to the internet). |
|
TwoWireEvil
@sbcglobal.net
| reply to jnessen
said by jnessen  :I think from what I read above, I can not use a router behind the RG using static IP's... Is this right? Since I do not have the need for additional static ips, I can not post my personal experience about this. I do not think you can pass the ips to a specific device behind the RG to handle the ips. Basically, if your going to be using your own router, I have heard it is VERY tricky, and you need to follow a very specific set of instructions, and it still isn't setup properly, but works.
Again, someone that has had to personally deal with multiple static ips and their own routers could probably answer better.
said by jnessen :My current set up uses two separate routers post DSL modem on two static IP's. One I need for QoS (SIP traffic) and one is for T-Mobile @Home service (this one requires their "special" router with a sim card in it). My home was to assign a static to each one of these and turn off all firewall rules to/from them, and let them handle the NAT for my internal networks. Is this a possibility? From reading above, it sounded like I could do it, then in the last few posts it sounds like I can't. My service is being installed next Tuesday, and my existing DSL is being ripped out this Friday  Any help to get to the bottom of this before I am DSL-less would be appreciated. Unfortunately, the 2WIRE RG does not have a 'bridge mode', you can only dmz+ (which forwards all ports) to a single specific device to handle. Their are some options to disable certain firewall features, and you can grab a public ip this way, however, the 2Wire is still acting as a proxy between your traffic, and processing it, which results in a double NAT condition. There does not seem to be a way to have the 2wire "just stay out of the way" at this point. The feature has been 'locked out', 'removed', 'disabled', for whatever reason.
Again with the multiple IP assignment, someone else will have to comment. The UVerse RG makes things pretty messy, and really breaks the way of proper routing when it comes to custom setups behind it. |
|
jnessen
join:2009-07-29
Simi Valley, CA
| reply to CJ Texas
I think from what I read above, I can not use a router behind the RG using static IP's... Is this right?
My current set up uses two separate routers post DSL modem on two static IP's. One I need for QoS (SIP traffic) and one is for T-Mobile @Home service (this one requires their "special" router with a sim card in it). My home was to assign a static to each one of these and turn off all firewall rules to/from them, and let them handle the NAT for my internal networks. Is this a possibility? From reading above, it sounded like I could do it, then in the last few posts it sounds like I can't. My service is being installed next Tuesday, and my existing DSL is being ripped out this Friday
Any help to get to the bottom of this before I am DSL-less would be appreciated. |
|
UErrors
@sbcglobal.net
| reply to CJ Texas
Also with that said, I am overall happy with the stability and consistency of the service. I think there are just some minor issues that need to be taken care of, that is really holding UVerse back. Other providers I have used usually have a few major issues that seem to be never taken care of properly, with UVerse, I just see several minor issues, but they still need to be taken care of. Its new technology, learning experience for everyone, weeding out bugs, etc.., but it gets to a point, come on, you keep wanting to sell sell sell, but the flaws are there, not being fixed. |
|
UErrors
@sbcglobal.net
| reply to dave006
said by dave006 :Just for the record, you do understand that U-Verse was designed to deliver IPTV, the triple play was just a benefit of the pipe Note: Most of the complaints here are related to the requirement to use the RG. Some customers just want a bridged device and to run their own router. This option is not available with either U-Verse options. If you want to run your own router then you will have to choose the DMZplus option and then the Static IPs become much more complex to manage. For me, and I THINK most others, this is the biggest complaint. If it is really meant for JUST IPTV, and the other 'fluff' broadband, phone etc.. is just secondary, then they need to stop offering internet only service, and business service internet, that is truly so restricted and limited... If they are going to continue offering it, they really need to get out of lock-down mode, and allow these internet customers some of the basic featuers every basic small router/modem/gateway can do. As noted before, all the other 2Wire Att devices (for basic DSL) can do these features without the problem, why is ATT locking down this RG so much, and forcing everything to go through it, no matter what the options. It is, in the end, VERY limited, and VERY difficult to work with, if you want anything more than just a single ip with a pipe for a few computers to the internet. There are issues that need to be worked out.
My personally documented issues (not rants) that I have been able to repeat easily:
1. We all know the DNS issue, I guess the simple fix would be just assign the DNS servers to each system, instead of forcing them through the RG. Maybe there is some limitation with the STBs (TV Custs) though that requires this.
2. Wireless, while I am overall impressed with the wireless range, there is a glitch regarding 2.4Ghz phones. Even if you have NO wireless devices connected, a 2.4Ghz phone can easily cause interference with your broadband service, causing 'glitches' and timeouts. Why is this interference being passed through to your connection?
3. The RG will bog, and bog hard, under more heavy load, and a lot of connections. Rarely causing total failure, but certainly must slow responses for doing anything that has to go through it.
4. Basically to sum up, I think that maybe the fault comes down the the RG hardware. Maybe it doesn't have the power to handle everything they are trying to get it to do. They really need to look at allowing some offloading, and not forcing EVERYTHING to be processed by the RG. Does anyone have the technically specs for the device? I have not been able to find them. Maybe its a firmware compatibility issue with the RG? Something needs to be done though regardless, 2years, with the same issues, that all point to the RG (even after replacements), that are very reproducible (even at another location with a uverse cust.) and nothing has been done. What gives ATT? |
|
dave006
join:1999-12-26
Boca Raton, FL
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to HWL
1. Short answer is Yes. The major differences between U-Verse and U-Verse Small Business is that Small Business is High Speed Internet (HSI) with no option for IPTV and the pricing options are different.
2. Static IPs are available on both options. You will get a minimum of a standalone subnet of 8 IP addresses with 5 Static IPs that can be assigned to your hosts behind the RG. The DMZplus option is different from having a public segment with static IPs. Yes, you can use a combination of NAT, DMZplus and a Public IP segment all at the same time.
The RG by default does provide some additional Advanced Firewall protection for your Public Static IP segment. You have the option disable all "Firewall" protection. Very easy to do via the Web UI.
You also have the option to have some hosts on the Pubic Segment with static IPs and some other hosts on a private segment if you choose.
I would suggest that if you have further questions, that you consider starting a new thread that is specific to your set of questions.
Note: Most of the complaints here are related to the requirement to use the RG. Some customers just want a bridged device and to run their own router. This option is not available with either U-Verse options. If you want to run your own router then you will have to choose the DMZplus option and then the Static IPs become much more complex to manage.
Dave |
|
HWL
join:2009-07-26
Houston, TX
1 edit | reply to CJ Texas
Hi all...
I just ordered UVerse Small Biz and after reading this post I have many questions.
1. Is UVerse residential available with (5) statics? Can it run a server/mail farm?
2. More importantly, I now have 5 IPs (from my present ISP) that are "out there", no FW...thats what I want - 5 IPs open to the WAN. Is that what I am going to get from UVerse or do I get one DMZ and 4 behind a firewall? This post has confused me...probably unnecessarily.
Thank you. |
|
dave006
join:1999-12-26
Boca Raton, FL
·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to Nicko773
Hey, thanks for the rant. You did not mention who you were selecting when you make that 8 AM call to cancel U-Verse. Please make sure you post another rant when you have your new TV provider.... 
Just for the record, you do understand that U-Verse was designed to deliver IPTV, the triple play was just a benefit of the pipe. The AT&T U-verse system will continue to evolve and the iNID solution will bring yet another generation of service options and even more rants from the anon posters or posers.
You also might want to read the TOS of your new TV provider to make sure that they don't sell your viewing demo data since Dish, DIRECTV, TiVo and all Cable providers provide this data. Oops.
Just for the brave "anon" user, I don't work for AT&T and I never have worked directly for AT&T. My company has a long history of working with and competing against AT&T in the Global IT / Telecom marketplace.
I think I will agree with the following post as this thread may have descended into the darkness....
said by apeface :epeen wagging FTL... Dave |
|
dave006
join:1999-12-26
Boca Raton, FL
·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to ralfwolf
said by ralfwolf :Thanks. That helps. The strange thing is, when I was trying to use the RG firewall, I turned *off* Miscellaneous and the RG stopped return traffic from the outside. I used tcpdump on an inside host and on an outside server and found that the syn got from my inside host to the outside server and the server sent a syn-ack but the syn-ack never got to my inside client. I also saw alerts on the RG saying it had detected packets for an unknown session. That led me to conclude that Miscellaneous actually does something more than just blocking bad stuff but it sets up some basic state that maybe other firewall features required. It seemed very counter intuitive that turning off a firewall feature would cause traffic to be blocked. Oops, it looks like your conclusion might be wrong. If you turned "off" the Miscellaneous setting in the 2Wire Firewall - Advanced Settings while you have an active connection to a mapped connection you should expect to restart your client connection to your outside host.
Once you remove the Miscellaneous Setting Check-box setting you "Submit" the settings and in the case of active mapped sessions you will need to restart your session(s).
My 2Wire Firewall configuration has the "Excessive Session Detection" and the "Miscellaneous" options deselected and all my applications work just fine.
You might try clearing the Invalid TCP Flag Attacks (NULL/XMAS/Other) option and see if your SYN_ACK (SYN/ACK or SYN-ACK, since you like to complain about case selection used in a web forum) make the trip through the 2Wire Firewall Gauntlet
Again, once you submit your Firewall Settings, the 2Wire will reset the SPI Firewall state so any active TCP connections may be impacted. You should restart any client / server connection since that active session port/host mapping may have been impacted by your tweaking of the Firewall settings.
I think in your specific case you might just turn off all of the 2Wire Firewall Advanced Settings and then retry your tests to your remote server and see what pops up in your tcpdump.
This way you can't blame the 2Wire Firewall feature for breaking your TCP 3-way handshake.
Dave |
|
Nicko773
@sbcglobal.net
| reply to UHerse Delivered
I love your guys above posts, because they are the 100%truth. It's all about "control". And the U-Verse firewall software limits the customer to just that. What the techs forget, is that WE are paying AT&T to provide a service to the RG only. But it goes beyond that. You have to manipulate all your equipment to get it to work. You will NEVER see the RG have a bridge mode. That's where they lose control. They want you to use their equipement, which they could remote in without you knowing at any time. But with your own firewall running that could not be possible. They don't like that. I am not sure why they are doing this, possibly taking in revenue to see what TV channels you are watching, or monitoring your system. Who knows. I see in the future AT&T raising a fee for internal usage. U-Verse is a great TV system and it's great for the simple web customer who wants to browse the web. Go beyond that and the simple is out of the picture. There is more to this U-Verse than meets the eye.. I would love to see what information they gather from our RG's. Tech's on this forum don't seriously understand there are alot of very smart people on this site, ex.., the writers up above. These people can out match and gun any tier 2 tech working for AT&T. Just because they are not employed by AT&T doesn't mean they don't know what they are talking about. They are extremely smart. The techs always come back to the "Did you try and use the 2Wire full capability?" Yes they have, and they know what the truth is. Ya this a rant or whatever you want to call it, but it should be known to future people who are thinking about signing up to U-Verse. The sales people tell you whatever you want to hear to get the sale. I am going to be making that call at 8am this morning also to cancel my U-Verse. I always remember Walter C talking on the black and white TV signing off saying...... Thats the way it is...Goodnight... |
|
ralfwolf
join:2009-07-03
San Jose, CA
| reply to UHerse Delivered
Thanks. That helps.
The strange thing is, when I was trying to use the RG firewall, I turned *off* Miscellaneous and the RG stopped return traffic from the outside. I used tcpdump on an inside host and on an outside server and found that the syn got from my inside host to the outside server and the server sent a syn-ack but the syn-ack never got to my inside client. I also saw alerts on the RG saying it had detected packets for an unknown session. That led me to conclude that Miscellaneous actually does something more than just blocking bad stuff but it sets up some basic state that maybe other firewall features required. It seemed very counter intuitive that turning off a firewall feature would cause traffic to be blocked. |
|
UHerse Delivered
@sbcglobal.net
| reply to CJ Texas
After skimming through the guide, it looks like quite a bit of the options people are looking for have been purposely removed or disabled (either by 2wire or uverse) for use with the UVerse system. I mean, the 2wire I got from ATT for their dsl services even has all these features. Not sure why they are not available with the UVerse RG. |
|
