dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
10582
share rss forum feed


r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
Reviews:
·row44

4 edits

SemiFIXED - NVG510 - Doesn't Work Anymore - Fix or Replace?

I have had the NVG510 since January.
I have the IP passthrough set to go to my dd-wrt router.
The first month I had problem where the NVG510 gave my router an IP, but would not route.
I switched from DHCPS-fixed to dynamic and the problem went away.
Another 2 months and it happened again, rebooting fixed it.

Today, it happened again. I get an IP, but the NVG510 will not route anything to my routers public ip address.
It has been 3 hours now and nothing will fix this. Rebooting and saving settings will not work.
I can connect with a 192.168.1.X ip, but the IP passthrough will no longer work.

Does anyone know of a fix to this or do I need to call ATT to get a different modem model?
I never had a problem with DSL for 10 years, but these Uverse modems are junk. There has to be some kind of recall on these NVG510s or some kind of fix.

Partial Solution Here w/ testing info - »Re: NVG510 - Doesn't Work Anymore - Fix or Replace?
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.



ILpt4U
Premium
join:2006-11-12
Lisle, IL
kudos:9

Re: NVG510 - Doesn't Work Anymore - Fix or Replace?

If the modem was acquired via AT&T, and it is less than 1 year old, the devices do have a 1 year warranty



r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
Reviews:
·row44

I dont think there is anything wrong with the hardware. It seems like a software problem.

I emailed the uverse tech support. We shall see what they say.
I refuse to call them unless I have no choice as it would mean explaining things over and over again and being transferred for a few hours. Hopefully someone capable of fixing this problem with ip passthrough will read my email.

Are there any other modem models that people know work with bridging or with some kind of ip passthrough without issues?
Has anyone solved this problem before?
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.


cramer
Premium
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:8
reply to r81984

Ah, such is the way of things when you're forced to buy the BS hardware from the carrier. Your only option is to call them and get a tech sent out to replace the bad modem. Even if it is software, make them send a person out to replace it. Every time it breaks. One would think they'd eventually see how much this is costing them and give you something that actually works. (note: don't hold your breath.)



Forosnai

join:2011-09-30
kudos:2
reply to r81984

Tier 2 will probably offer you a replacement 510, but if you'll never use the routing on the 510 you might as well ask for a 2210 moto modem, it's IP passthrough is pretty simple to configure, less settings to go awry. The passthrough on the 510 bugs out and the only real way to fix it is to configure all the TCP settings static, in the 510 and your router, and use static DNS servers in your router or on your individual devices.
I would try setting the NVG510 DHCP range to nill, then setting the passthrough to 'fixed' with the routers WAN mac address filled in.
The solution on this post shows the steps as it applys to an AEBs, if it's any help. »forums.att.com/t5/Features-and-H···9#M29846



r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
Reviews:
·row44

I had my range set to 192.168.1.2-192.168.1.2.
I also had it set to static IP Passthrough.
I had DNS set to googles DNS servers in my router. I tried others during my troubleshooting.

I have tried DHCP-fixed and dynamic. The router always gets an IP, but the modem will not route to it property.
If connect to the modem with a 192.168.1.x address it works without a problem. I would rather not do this as I use DDNS on my router.
I also tried using 255.255.255.0 and other iterations instead of 255.255.255.255 invalid mask.
The only thing I did not try was turn off the wireless as that is what I am using to edit all the settings to try and get it to work.

This started sometime today between 2pm and 6pm. Before I had no problem since a few months ago. Nothing changed.

I reset the modem to factory and re-set it up and that did not work either. I tried every combination of settings.

This is the software version: 9.0.6h0d48
I wonder if there was an update today that killed ip passthrough?
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.



r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
Reviews:
·row44
reply to r81984

I get a response from a tier 2 tech today.
All it said is they cant do anything even though I provided my account number unless I send him some arbitrary 4 digit pin number they made me setup for uverse.
I replied with the pin and no response. (That is a joke that they would even care about that to troubleshoot their own problem, I was not changing anything on the account.)
I actually thought about sending the pin originally, but I was not sure if they want you to send that around since normally when someone calls it a pin number you should keep it private except to use self service automated services.

LOL. Day 1 wasted as they used the pin number to delay fixing my issue. I really hope they have a fix for this.
If it really is a Motorola defect with software, I wonder why ATT does not setup with a new vendor and return everything back to Motorola and ask for their money back??
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.


cramer
Premium
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:8

I'm pretty sure this a more an att-f***ed-with-it issue than motorola screwing it up.

(btw, all indications are the thing is running linux. but they've not admitted it, and are not providing any of the things the GPL requires of them.)



r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
Reviews:
·row44

That is funny.
If you look at the router logs, it is 100% clear they run linux.
They also have the "GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE" linked in the router so they are well aware of releasing the source code.

said by from modem page :
For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that you have. You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code. And you must show them these terms so they know their rights.
We protect your rights with two steps: (1) copyright the software, and (2) offer you this license which gives you legal permission to copy, distribute and/or modify the software.
Does anyone know where from ATT you can get the source code?
It looks like we should be able to fix the programming in the software ourselves.

--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.


Forosnai

join:2011-09-30
kudos:2
reply to r81984

That Pin isn't arbitrary, it's FCC mandated for componies that hold private information. Your bank accounts have a pin, if you had service with another provider you'd need a pin, your cellphone account has a pin.
Don't let one bad interaction prevent you from working towards a resolution.


cramer
Premium
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:8
reply to r81984

Good luck with that. While your at it, ask Cisco for the linux software for their broadcom based VDSL modules. (runs an embedded linux.) And ask netgear ala MontaVista where the source is for the "GPL" broadcom SoC driver in their 24-48 port switches. (the module clearly says "GPL", but they don't include the source anywhere.) I could add more examples, but you can tell there are *lots* of people ignoring the GPL.



r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX

After I get my problem fixed or modem replaced I will ask for the source code.
Ill ask through both ATT and Motorola just to see what they say.
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.



r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
Reviews:
·row44
reply to cramer

said by cramer:

Good luck with that. While your at it, ask Cisco for the linux software for their broadcom based VDSL modules. (runs an embedded linux.) And ask netgear ala MontaVista where the source is for the "GPL" broadcom SoC driver in their 24-48 port switches. (the module clearly says "GPL", but they don't include the source anywhere.) I could add more examples, but you can tell there are *lots* of people ignoring the GPL.

It looks like they did release the source code.
»sourceforge.net/projects/nvg510.···a/files/
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.


InvisiBill

join:2004-12-01
Saranac, MI
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
reply to r81984

What's the IP of the NVG510? What IP range are you using behind your router?

Make sure your LAN is using a different subnet from what the modem is using. If the NVG510 is 192.168.1.254, set your router and LAN to 192.168.2.x or something. Having the same IP range on both sides of the router will make things more difficult.



r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
Reviews:
·row44

said by InvisiBill:

What's the IP of the NVG510? What IP range are you using behind your router?

Make sure your LAN is using a different subnet from what the modem is using. If the NVG510 is 192.168.1.254, set your router and LAN to 192.168.2.x or something. Having the same IP range on both sides of the router will make things more difficult.

I had to do all that to set up my connection in the first place.
My router gets the public IP, but the modem will not route to it. Before tuesday it worked without issues for months.
Nothing changed, resets did not fix anything.

I have my NVG510 set to 192.168.1.1. My router is 192.168.2.1.
If I connect my laptop or another router with the public IP address (does not matter if static or with DHCPS), same thing happens. The modem will not route traffic.
Now if I connect anything using 192.168.1.X then I can use the internet.
I have the firewall turned off on the modem. I have IP passthrough. I was using static, but I tried every combination of fixed and dynamic. My router will receive the correct IP, but no internet connectivity is routed to it.
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.


InvisiBill

join:2004-12-01
Saranac, MI
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse

Ok, you had mentioned 192.168.1.x earlier and I just wanted to make sure. I've seen a lot of people trying to set their LAN to match the modem's IP when that actually causes more problems.

These issues sound like the same NVG510 problems I read about time and time again before signing up for U-verse. From everything I've read, there are just bugs in the device's firmware. »Current status of NVG510 IP Passthrough? has links to some of my research before I actually decided to upgrade to U-verse. »www.ron-berman.com/2011/11/24/mo···e-users/ has some good info on the unit's issues and some workarounds.

I bought my own (new, still sealed) 2210-02-1ATT from a private seller online and used that instead of the NVG510 I was forced to order along with my U-verse upgrade. I don't know if a used unit would be just as easy, but I simply plugged in my 2210 instead of the NVG510 and it just worked. It's been less than a month since I upgraded, but based on the last few weeks, I'd have no problem recommending a 2210-02-1ATT to anyone using U-verse IP-DSL with their own NAT router. We'll see how well it holds up - my SpeedStream 4100 ran for years without a hitch, but I've seen comments implying the 2210 has a tendency to fail rather quickly.

Either give up and just switch to a modem that you know will work, or do like ILpt4U and cramer said and force AT&T to support your NVG510. (You might be able to combine those two and get AT&T to replace your NVG510 with a different model.) Hopefully they'll realize it's a problem and actually fix the firmware. Though it does seem surprising to me that people have documented such horrible problems with it, and yet every single owner isn't complaining. I'm assuming that most people just reboot it and it works "good enough" so nobody ever forces Support to look at it. But if it worked fine for you for several months, maybe it's some weird intermittent condition that causes problems. *shrug*

Theoretically you may be able to do something with the NVG510 source code, but you may not have everything you need to actually authenticate with AT&T's network. Only the GPL binaries that they're distributing need to have source supplied, so you may not get certs and other AT&T "data" needed to actually make the whole unit work as an AT&T modem. It'd be great if you could actually fix things like IP Passthrough not working and poor DNS timeout settings, but I wouldn't be surprised if you could end up making a great router firmware which just won't work with the U-verse network.



r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
Reviews:
·row44

Im like 4 emails in with tech support.
So far they have been telling me nothing useful and asking for the same info over again.
I just retyped my settings to them again.

I am so glad I did not call them. It really would have been a waste of 5 hours with no resolution.
I have a feeling the person answering my emails is not that experienced. At least with email if they put another person on the problem they can read everything without having me to repeat it all again.

I saw some 2210-02-1ATT on ebay. But when I signed up for uverse they made it 100% clear there is no way to activate a used ATT modem onto my account. So I dont think that will work. It sounds like the modem you bought is linked to someone else's account, but then again maybe they never deactivate the modems since you will only have a physical uverse connection if you pay for it.
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.


cramer
Premium
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:8
reply to InvisiBill

a) statistically, few people complain about their problems. b) a great many ("most"?) simply take it out of the box and use it as is. When the internet doesn't work, they reset (power cycle) the modem.

The most basic, out-of-the-box configuration only has a few minor issues -- mostly due to idiotic dnsmasq settings that aren't user controllable resulting in DNS timeouts. "Try again" works almost 100% of the time. (or thats what the people who are posting about indicate.)

As I've said before, almost all of the issues I've seen reported with the NVG510 can be traced back to the way AT&T has configured it, or the steps they've taken to lock the user out of it.

I'm really surprised your 2210 "just worked". It really should not have worked. Anyway, I've held a running 2210; I heartedly believe the reports of them burning themselves up. (it's been replaced by some model 2wire 3600/3800 I didn't pay that much attention.)



r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
Reviews:
·row44
reply to r81984

Now he says my modem firmware is out of date.
I have 9.0.6h0d48 and the newest version is 9.0.6h2d21.

Now to force the upgrade he said do a factory reset.
I did that on Tuesday and it did not upgrade. I will try again.
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.



tims3429

@emory.edu

Did the factory reset work to update the firmware? Any luck with the problem?



Dennis
Premium,Mod
join:2001-01-26
Algonquin, IL
kudos:5
reply to r81984

said by r81984:

Now to force the upgrade he said do a factory reset.
I did that on Tuesday and it did not upgrade. I will try again.

Hmmm...that should usually work. If you want to PM me your BAN I can take a look to see why it didn't upgrade.
--
My Blog. Because I desperately need the acknowledgement of others.

The Judd Family site!


R8

@phonoscope.net

I am at work. I wont be home until later.
I emailed your dslr email address with the info.



Dennis
Premium,Mod
join:2001-01-26
Algonquin, IL
kudos:5

Ok got it and replied.



InvisiBill

join:2004-12-01
Saranac, MI
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
reply to r81984

said by cramer:

a) statistically, few people complain about their problems. b) a great many ("most"?) simply take it out of the box and use it as is. When the internet doesn't work, they reset (power cycle) the modem.

The most basic, out-of-the-box configuration only has a few minor issues -- mostly due to idiotic dnsmasq settings that aren't user controllable resulting in DNS timeouts. "Try again" works almost 100% of the time. (or thats what the people who are posting about indicate.)

As I've said before, almost all of the issues I've seen reported with the NVG510 can be traced back to the way AT&T has configured it, or the steps they've taken to lock the user out of it.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking too. For the average clueless user, the standard setup works for the most part, and is easy to "fix" when it doesn't, so these issues aren't big enough to get investigated and properly fixed.

said by r81984:

It sounds like the modem you bought is linked to someone else's account, but then again maybe they never deactivate the modems since you will only have a physical uverse connection if you pay for it.

said by cramer:

I'm really surprised your 2210 "just worked". It really should not have worked

I'm not up on the details of exactly how AT&T's IP-DSL system authenticates. My assumption is that there's just an AT&T cert in their custom firmware that allows it to communicate with their servers. There's no user-specific information visible to me in the 2210's interface, and I doubt they keep a database linking each user to a specific piece of hardware. If that were the case, they'd have to update that database for every replacement modem issued as well before your connection would work again.

I haven't tried it, but my guess is that a used AT&T IP-DSL modem would work just fine on someone else's new account. However, old ADSL modems and IP-DSL modems without AT&T's firmware (specifically, the cert) would obviously not work. It's probably just easier for first-level support to tell everyone that it will only work with the new modem that you buy from them, than to actually explain (or know) exactly what would and wouldn't work.

As I said, the one I bought was a brand-new, never-used, still-sealed 2210-02-1ATT. Assuming they don't link individual serial numbers to specific users, there should be no difference between this 2210 and if AT&T had sent me a 2210 with a new U-verse setup before they started using the NVG510. It may or may not be different if the modem has actually been used already.

When I called to RMA my NVG510, the rep didn't say anything about me using my own IP-DSL modem. At first she thought I was still in the process of switching from ADSL to IP-DSL, but I clarified that I switched a few weeks ago and had been running great on my own modem since then and didn't need their modem (but didn't have the option to remove it from the online order). She didn't say anything about it not working that way or even sound slightly confused or curious about the fact that it was working. She just told me to ship the NVG510 back with the included label.

said by cramer:

I've held a running 2210; I heartedly believe the reports of them burning themselves up. (it's been replaced by some model 2wire 3600/3800 I didn't pay that much attention.)

It's obviously too early for me to conclude anything about longevity, but I actually checked my 2210 this morning and it felt what I would consider "slightly warm". About like a small desktop (e.g. 5-port unmanaged) switch would be. Keep in mind that using IP Passthrough rather than the builtin NAT router should result in the modem needing to do a lot less work itself. Based on the posts I've seen with questions about the 2210, very few people know how to properly use IP Passthrough. This means that a large percentage of 2210's out there are probably doing quite a bit of work (more than mine just acting as much like a "dumb modem" as possible).

cramer
Premium
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:8

said by InvisiBill:

I'm not up on the details of exactly how AT&T's IP-DSL system authenticates...

Only AT&T knows for sure. We do know it's 802.1x, however, the specifics are not known. It is generally thought to be certificate based authorization incorporating the unit serial number. (much like a username and password.) However, again, we do not know the exact EAP method(s) they are using. (somone on a BPON needs to capture the traffic. all traffic. every. single. ethernet. frame. between the ONT and their gateway from power-up to browsing the network. that would un-muddy the picture a lot.)

Yes, there is a certificate, most likely more than one. (signing cert for firmware updates, etc.) No, it most certainly will NOT be exposed to the user. (yet another reason the cli is disabled.) Yes, AT&T has an associated list of hardware assigned per user; this is the equiv. of a user/pass database. Plus, a lot of the hardware is rented, so they have to keep up with it.

A modem should only work so long as it's in the database (i.e. assigned to someone's account.) A "new" "sealed" (anyone can have a shrinkwrap machine) modem does not mean it was not sent to someone else originally, and just never used. I don't know if poking that sleeping bear is a good idea, but it might be wise to check with AT&T to make sure that modem is the one on your account. (someday it might magically stop working.)

IP Passthrough on these things still runs through the NAT/routing engine. (you can still use a private network behind it at the same time.) The one I spoke of was not a "-1ATT" model (the difference is just firmware) but a regular ATM/ADSL one, and it was in (real) bridge mode. I wouldn't expect PTM firmware to make any difference, but who knows. (if it came with the at&t software cd, look through there for the -1att firmware file.)


r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
Reviews:
·row44
reply to Dennis

Thanks Dennis for offering to help and verifying that my modem looks to be connected properly. I may have to take you up on the help if the tier2 email support does not pan out.

I did not get a reply from the tier2 support today.

My router still says version 9.0.6h0d48 and will not update to 9.0.6h2d21. I have done a total of 4 hard resets and no update.
I will try to unplug the power for a while and then plug it back in.
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.



r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
Reviews:
·row44
reply to r81984

They are going to send another NVG510 that they hope comes with the newest firmware.

At this point if a firmware change fixes this, then I would have to say that ATT changed something on tuesday which somehow affected my modem with old firmware to where IP passthrough just stopped working after several months. That does not really make much sense, but we shall see.
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.



r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
Reviews:
·row44
reply to r81984

said by r81984:

Now he says my modem firmware is out of date.
I have 9.0.6h0d48 and the newest version is 9.0.6h2d21.

Now to force the upgrade he said do a factory reset.
I did that on Tuesday and it did not upgrade. I will try again.

I received a new modem and it has the same firmware 9.0.6h0d48.
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.


mackey
Premium
join:2007-08-20
kudos:10

said by r81984:

said by r81984:

Now he says my modem firmware is out of date.
I have 9.0.6h0d48 and the newest version is 9.0.6h2d21.

Now to force the upgrade he said do a factory reset.
I did that on Tuesday and it did not upgrade. I will try again.

I received a new modem and it has the same firmware 9.0.6h0d48.

I think he was mistaken about that firmware version. Mine is also 9.0.6h0d48. Google has no hits at all for 9.0.6h2d21 but quite a few for 9.0.6h0d48.

/M


r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
Reviews:
·row44
reply to r81984

I tried several resets it would not upgrade to 9.0.6h2d21.
I cannot see how the tech could tell me the wrong firmware number.

The new modem does exactly the same thing as my old modem.
It will assign the public IP address, but will not route traffic.
I can get the public IP with my router or with my laptop either way no traffic will route.
I have tried the assigned ATT DNS and google's 8.8.8.8, 8.8.4.4

Basically on May 29 IP passthrough stopped working on NVG510s (nothing was changed on my setup, it was working since Feb)
.
Does anyone have IP passthrough working anymore with a NVG510?
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.