dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
22273
share rss forum feed


wayjac
Premium,MVM
join:2001-12-22
Indy
kudos:1
reply to tomdlgns

Re: uverse bridge mode

The 5100a is a bridge modem and it's not easy to make configuration changes to it.


tomdlgns
Premium
join:2003-03-21
Chicago, IL
kudos:1

said by wayjac:

The 5100a is a bridge modem and it's not easy to make configuration changes to it.

who said anything about making configuration changes to it?

also, it looks like the 5100a, it might not be that, exactly. i can check next time i am there.


wayjac
Premium,MVM
join:2001-12-22
Indy
kudos:1
reply to tomdlgns

said by tomdlgns:
wayjac, i appreciate your help, but am i reading this wrong?

said by wayjac:
Maybe maybe not......Sometimes I have a hard time conveying information.........sorry

said by tomdlgns:
The dmz plus option shares the public ip address, when a device has a public ip address there is no need to forward ports."

said by wayjac:
This is a true statement.....I think you are forgetting that your devices are connected to a second router

said by tomdlgns:
if i dmz the second router, you state that i dont need to open ports.

said by wayjac:
I did not ask you to dmz the second router.
It''s the 3801 that I told you to dmz plus....
If this alarms you don't dmz plus the 3801.....but
If you don't dmz plus the 3801
You will need to forward ports on the 3801 and the second router whenever you needed ports opened.

said by tomdlgns:
the linksys is a standard linksys router, i think it is a wrt54g. it HAD ports open back when it was my only router and the DSL modem was in bridge mode, that is how i was able to view the web cameras off site.

said by wayjac:
When making big changes to a setup like you're considering it's wise to factory reset and start anew.

said by tomdlgns:
right NOW it is connected to the 3801 with DHCP disabled (the linksys) and wifi disabled (the linksys). with DHCP disabled, it is basically a switch with an IP address (192.168.1.1)..

said by wayjac:
Ok...but you are about to make some changes and the new configuration may not mirror the old setup



wayjac
Premium,MVM
join:2001-12-22
Indy
kudos:1
reply to tomdlgns

In your first post is this:
the dsl modem had to be put into bridge mode


tomdlgns
Premium
join:2003-03-21
Chicago, IL
kudos:1

yes, the device i had before uverse. i dont have that anymore.


tomdlgns
Premium
join:2003-03-21
Chicago, IL
kudos:1
reply to tomdlgns

ok, let's start over.

forget what i have, explaining my current setup and trying to talk about the new setup might be a bad idea.

i have a 2 wire uverse all in one router that i want to bypass and use my own equipment.

however, i would like to make sure the following is possible:

-open a port or ports...on the linksys, which sits behind the 2wire

-bypass the 2wire, allow it to only act as a gateway for the linksys/rest of the network.

in order to do that, this is what was recommended:

"Configure the 3801 or second router so that they don't use the
same subnet. If you need to disable the wifi of the 3801 do it

Set the wan/internet port of the second router to use dhcp.

The 3801 has a dmz plus option, apply that option to the second router.

Release and renew the wan/internet port ip address of the second router

Doing this will allow the 3801 to share it's public ip address with the second router"



wayjac
Premium,MVM
join:2001-12-22
Indy
kudos:1

I really don't to go over info I've already posted.....

Once you make the changes to the 3801 and the second router has a public ip address you can forget about the 3801

You'll be able to forward ports on the linksys

You seem to be convinced that the 3801 will not allow you to operate like you were in the past.
I think what you want will happen because it's possible without bridge mode..

Doubts will prevail when you ask "what if"


tomdlgns
Premium
join:2003-03-21
Chicago, IL
kudos:1

got it, thank you for the confirmation. that is what i am looking to do, operate as if the 3801 is not there.

i just got the sense that there was wrong info after re-reading some of the posts.

thank you.



wayjac
Premium,MVM
join:2001-12-22
Indy
kudos:1

You are going to do something new.....it's normal to have serious doubts and want to go back to what you know works

While there is a wealth of good information to be found.....
There is just as much or more bad information to be found too

You don't even need to use the second router the 3801 can do it alone


tomdlgns
Premium
join:2003-03-21
Chicago, IL
kudos:1

1 edit

i dont think the 3801 can do it all, for starters, i cant use my own DNS servers. i already opened up the ports i need in the 3801 to get the cameras working, but i cant do what i want with it.

that is why i put the old dsl modem in bridge mode and used my own router.

now, if you can tell me how to use my own static DNS servers and push them out to the rest of the network, please share.

thanks.



wayjac
Premium,MVM
join:2001-12-22
Indy
kudos:1

said by tomdlgns:

i dont think the 3801 can do it all

OK......

, for starters, i cant use my own DNS servers. i already opened up the ports i need in the 3801 to get the cameras working, but i cant do what i want with it.

said by tomdlgns:

that is why i put the old dsl modem in bridge mode and used my own router.

The 5100a has only one mode bridge it can't be set to any other mode

said by tomdlgns:

now, if you can tell me how to use my own static DNS servers and push them out to the rest of the network, please share..

You can configure your own static DNS servers on each device.

tomdlgns
Premium
join:2003-03-21
Chicago, IL
kudos:1

ok.....

1. i want to do more than just open ports

2. i never said i had the 5100a i said it looked like it. the one i had can be put into bridge mode, but it is not in bridge mode by default.

3. yes, of course you can, but why would i want to statically assign DNS servers on all the random devices that might connect to the network when i can automate it and never have to touch a users device?

thanks.



wayjac
Premium,MVM
join:2001-12-22
Indy
kudos:1

said by tomdlgns:

i never said i had the 5100a i said it looked like it. the one i had can be put into bridge mode, but it is not in bridge mode by default.

My bad on the modem, I'll cease the 5100a comments

said by tomdlgns:

yes, of course you can, but why would i want to statically assign DNS servers on all the random devices that might connect to the network when i can automate it and never have to touch a users device?

I've always used att dns they work just as well as the others

tomdlgns
Premium
join:2003-03-21
Chicago, IL
kudos:1

as far as DNS lookups/resolution, they work fine, i havent seen any issues, but this network was using OpenDNS for content filtering.

until i try what was posted above, the network is no longer using OpenDNS for content filtering.



wayjac
Premium,MVM
join:2001-12-22
Indy
kudos:1

said by tomdlgns:

as far as DNS lookups/resolution, they work fine, i havent seen any issues, but this network was using OpenDNS for content filtering.

I agree with this


ymhee_bcex
Premium
join:2006-04-21
Tarzana, CA
Reviews:
·voip.ms
·PHONE POWER
·AT&T U-Verse

1 edit
reply to tomdlgns

This thread has had 34 posts in less than 10 hours; unfortunately, some are too adversarial to my liking... I, too, had Time Warner modem, and Buffalo router with OpenWRT. While putting a router into DMZ is quite easy, I ran into numerous problems trying to "mimic true bridge mode". The biggest was "double-NAT". Having two network segments caused a lot of problems for my phone calls. Granted, I have an IP phone from work, ATA (sometimes 2), and PIAF PBX... But with a single router and single network segment everything was working quite smoothly.

On top of that, I couldn't set it up so that I connect to my router with PKI only (I can see a lot of scanners attempting to login as root; I didn't want to take a chance that somebody guesses my password). last, for whatever reason, I couldn't make it forward one port on the router to another on the actual machine (say, my-public-ip:8080 to webserver:80). Probably, I could figure out what was going on - but removing two segments from the picture somehow made it work.

I have 3600HGV, if it makes any difference. It has 4 LAN ports (at 100Mbps - and I got used to streaming HD video over Gbps LAN, which is noticeably slower now). And the wireless is just terrible - no signal withing 10ft, I am not exaggerating! So, I set up Buffalo as a wireless access point - but it's a far cry from what I had before.

I had trouble with Time Warner that I don't have any more (latency, uptime) - so, I don't regret switching. But if TWC fixes their problems - I'll jump back as soon as I can.

--
Technical problems are more often than not management incompetence masquerading as technical issues



DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

Certain batches of 3600's have a known flaw on the wireless, you should have requested a new one ( it is supposedly fixed now )


tomdlgns
Premium
join:2003-03-21
Chicago, IL
kudos:1
reply to ymhee_bcex

said by ymhee_bcex:

While putting a router into DMZ is quite easy, I ran into numerous problems trying to "mimic true bridge mode". The biggest was "double-NAT". Having two network segments caused a lot of problems for my phone calls.

this is what i was trying to confirm with all those posts.

according to wayjac the second router should act like a regular router and i should not experience any double-nat issues. that is what i dont want.

the other thing i dont like is that anyone can put the ip of the gateway in their browser and see alot of info. they cant change/see alot of the advanced stuff w/o the password, which i changed from default, but i still dont like that they can see it. when the linksys was my main router, you had to authenticate before you could do anything.

i may just convince the owner to ditch this setup and switch to cable if i cant get this working the way i want. wayjac gave me some good info and i need to go on site and try it.

cable might be more expensive, but when you call them and tell them you want a modem/gateway only, you get just that. (comcast is my provider).


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

You can get a modem only on U-Verse. You need to attain a Motorola 2310


tomdlgns
Premium
join:2003-03-21
Chicago, IL
kudos:1

i requested one when i ordered the service and they told me that the tech would have one and that they would put it in the notes.

of course i didnt get one.

i am still going to try what wayjac suggested and see how that goes.

if it doesnt work out, i will call them and request a modem only.

thanks for posting that.



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

If a tech says he doesn't have one, refuse the work until you get a tech that has one. They are out there


tomdlgns
Premium
join:2003-03-21
Chicago, IL
kudos:1

right, normally i would do that, however, that day i was going from DSL to uverse and the tech called me while he was switching the wiring from old dsl to uverse. since it was on a second line for the business he wanted to make sure we didnt need internet/on the phone while he was completing the work.

at that time, i asked him if he had gateway only and he said no, but i asked him to keep going because:

-i could only be at this site for a short period of time
-he already started the wiring, i didnt want to make him do extra work
-not his fault if the dispatcher didnt properly write down my notes
-the dsl was extremely slow, less than 1 Mbps and uverse was 12 Mbps. i could deal with not having the gateway i needed (temporarily) for the better speed.

thanks.



ymhee_bcex
Premium
join:2006-04-21
Tarzana, CA
Reviews:
·voip.ms
·PHONE POWER
·AT&T U-Verse
reply to ILpt4U

said by ILpt4U:

You can get a modem only on U-Verse. You need to attain a Motorola 2310

No, you can't - at least not in this service area. This was the only choice of the gateway (reminds me of elections in the Soviet Union - you have a choice of one candidate).

Probably I could get a replacement for the gateway... but it takes an hour on the phone; and waste an hour for something that I don't even need is just not worth it!
--
Technical problems are more often than not management incompetence masquerading as technical issues


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

As long as you have single pair VDSL2 U-Verse, the Moto 2310 is a compatible U-Verse VDSL2 modem, nationwide. Getting your hands on one may be trickier



ymhee_bcex
Premium
join:2006-04-21
Tarzana, CA
Reviews:
·voip.ms
·PHONE POWER
·AT&T U-Verse

said by ILpt4U:

As long as you have single pair VDSL2 U-Verse, the Moto 2310 is a compatible U-Verse VDSL2 modem, nationwide. Getting your hands on one may be trickier

You may be right; and AT&T support may be wrong. However, I get the service from AT&T, and for better or for worse, their opinion prevails. So, I have to go with what they said - that the only gateway that is compatible with my service is the one that they sent.

I don't know whether I have single pair VDSL2 U-Verse... Frankly, I don't even know what it is.
--
Technical problems are more often than not management incompetence masquerading as technical issues

tomdlgns
Premium
join:2003-03-21
Chicago, IL
kudos:1

1 edit

here is something that is pissing me off. when i first made this thread, i was able to access the camera system on site over the internet, which tells me that i port forwarded the ports properly.

i had to create user defined ports and assign them to the computer. again, it was working because i was viewing them from an off site location.

was working friday, saturday, sunday...sunday night. tried this morning, nothing is working.

i have log me in access to the camera computer. i confirmed the router still has the proper ports opened. computer firewall is off (windows xp), PC still has the same static IP address.

this is funny, it just stopped working. i am wondering if a reboot of the modem/router will fix it, but i cant do that from where i am at. i might invest in a power adapter that i can control over the internet so i can power cycle the equipment whenever i want.

»www.proxicast.com/shopping/index···id=29918

very strange. i have been running a ping -t command on the WAN IP.

6402 packets sent
6365 packets received

37 lost

0% loss

normally i dont see a loss of more than 1-5, even though it shows 0% loss, something doesnt seem right, i wonder it AT&T is working on something?

edit- i called someone on site who has access to the room where the dsl equipment is in and asked them to power cycle the DSL modem/router. after that, everything that i couldn't be accessed remotely started working. nothing wrong with power cycling, but it hasnt been a week yet, so i hope this isnt normal.

another reason to buy that internet ready power outlet box.


tomdlgns
Premium
join:2003-03-21
Chicago, IL
kudos:1
reply to wayjac

said by wayjac:

It's very simple.......
Configure the 3801 or second router so that they don't use the
same subnet. If you need to disable the wifi of the 3801 do it

Set the wan/internet port of the second router to use dhcp.

The 3801 has a dmz plus option, apply that option to the second router.

Release and renew the wan/internet port ip address of the second router

Doing this will allow the 3801 to share it's public ip address with the second router

these directions were 100% accurate.

the only thing i would add (assuming someone who hasnt done this before/worked with uverse equipment before) is to make sure you know the mac address of the second router when you are at this step.

"The 3801 has a dmz plus option, apply that option to the second router."

the directions wayjac posted are accurate, but i didnt think to get the mac address of the router i was going to DMZ, it popped up in the 2wire list as unknowndeviceMACADDRESSHERE.

once i re-read that step and selected the unknown device, which i confirmed was my router, i rebooted the second router and it had grabbed a public IP address.

i know that Sebehk posted saying that wayjac's instructions were correct, but i wanted to update the thread now that i am on site and was able to try for myself.

my final test was to disable some ports/rules in the second router firewall and confirm that i could not connect from the outside. once the connection failed, i enabled the rules/ports and the connection from the outside computer/devices started to work, confirming that the 2wire gateway is bypassed and that my linksys router is handling all the traffic/ports.

thanks again.