US Telco Support > AT&T > AT&T U-verse > SemiFIXED - NVG510 - Doesn't Work Anymore - Fix or Replace?

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

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

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.

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.)

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

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.

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.

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.)

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.

---

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.

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.

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.

reply to cramer

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.

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.

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.

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.)

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.

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