dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
28
Paralel
join:2011-03-24
Michigan, US

Paralel to dod1450

Member

to dod1450

Re: Att U-verse IPv6

If I'm not mistaken, AT&T ruined HE tunneling with the latest firmware upgrade somehow. I think we have a topic on that somewhere around here.

owine
Premium Member
join:2002-08-29
Chicago, IL

owine

Premium Member

said by Paralel:

If I'm not mistaken, AT&T ruined HE tunneling with the latest firmware upgrade somehow. I think we have a topic on that somewhere around here.

This has not been the case for me, my tunnel still works just fine.

David
Premium Member
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL

David to Paralel

Premium Member

to Paralel
I believe that was just for the 2wire products only, it's a security issue is what it is. So far I haven't seen any evidence/posts/topics stating this was disabled on the NVG589.

rolande
Certifiable
MVM,
join:2002-05-24
Dallas, TX
ARRIS BGW210-700
Cisco Meraki MR42

rolande

MVM,

David, I never pinged you back on the info you found out because I've been busy travelling for work. I am guessing the over zealous 2Wire security features broke the ability for a 6rd tunnel to NAT and pass through the router? I figured it was an order of operations issue with NAT and the native 6rd tunnel feature.
Frodo
join:2006-05-05

Frodo to owine

Member

to owine
said by owine:

This has not been the case for me, my tunnel still works just fine.

I've been monitoring the stats here. »www.uvrealtime.com/stats.aspx
If you have the two wire, from what I'm hearing on the other thread, tunneling works with the firmware 6.3.7.50-plus.tm. The tunneling breaks with firmware 6.9.1.42-plus.tm because it blocks protocol 41?

Checking it lately, it seems that the firmware is being distributed to the 3600's. They were at 0% two weeks ago.

rolande
Certifiable
MVM,
join:2002-05-24
Dallas, TX
ARRIS BGW210-700
Cisco Meraki MR42

rolande

MVM,

said by Frodo:

The tunneling breaks with firmware 6.9.1.42-plus.tm because it blocks protocol 41?

I don't believe it actually blocks protocol 41 because 6rd works just fine from the 3801 itself. It is a 6rd or protocol 41 tunnel attempting to pass through the router leveraging NAT that gets broken. The router should NAT the destination on the tunnel traffic if a NAT rule exists. But it appears that it does not do that and the traffic gets dropped instead.
RonV
join:2003-12-19
Hoffman Estates, IL

1 recommendation

RonV to Paralel

Member

to Paralel
said by Paralel:

If I'm not mistaken, AT&T ruined HE tunneling with the latest firmware upgrade somehow. I think we have a topic on that somewhere around here.

AT&T may be playing games with the IPv6 tunnels in the Chicago area. Every couple of weeks my tunnel performance drops from averaging 5 to 8 mbps down to 256 kbps. AT&T's support denies any type of stream manipulation but states that I should recycle my router/RG. Of course this does nothing.

A few days later the performance is back. When you check the status on HE during this time everything appears to be working fine at their end. I have given up for now with IPv6 though AT&T Uverse until a more native solution comes from them.

I am running Uverse over their 3800HGV-B with an Asus RT-N66U running Toastman's Tomato in DMZ+.

whamel
Premium Member
join:2002-05-09
Evergreen Park, IL
·AT&T FTTP

whamel

Premium Member

said by RonV:

said by Paralel:

If I'm not mistaken, AT&T ruined HE tunneling with the latest firmware upgrade somehow. I think we have a topic on that somewhere around here.

AT&T may be playing games with the IPv6 tunnels in the Chicago area. Every couple of weeks my tunnel performance drops from averaging 5 to 8 mbps down to 256 kbps. AT&T's support denies any type of stream manipulation but states that I should recycle my router/RG. Of course this does nothing.

A few days later the performance is back. When you check the status on HE during this time everything appears to be working fine at their end. I have given up for now with IPv6 though AT&T Uverse until a more native solution comes from them.

I am running Uverse over their 3800HGV-B with an Asus RT-N66U running Toastman's Tomato in DMZ+.

What exactly do you mean when you say that AT&T is playing games with IPv6 in Chicago area? I just got the NVG589 and it has IPv6 enabled by default. I too live in the Chicagoland area, I have the 45Mbps Power tier using pair bonding on the NVG589.
RonV
join:2003-12-19
Hoffman Estates, IL

RonV

Member

You have native IPv6 on your NVG589. I am stuck with the 3800HGV-B which is only IPv4. So for my network to get IPv6 I have to create a 6in4 tunnel though Hurricane Electric. I configured my tunnel to their Chicago location.

Usually what I find it that sites and apps that route though the IPv6 tunneling behave very well most of the time and I can get up to 80% of my base AT&T U-verse though the tunnel. But then usually starting around 2:00 Sunday afternoon my IPv6 based connections begin to drop off to the point where I can't even stream a video or even web pages paint in a timely fashion. When I run a speed test when it becomes unbearable I see peeks of about 512 kbps but averaging about 256 kbps.

At this time I just keep IPv6 turned off until AT&T can provide me some native capability.

whamel
Premium Member
join:2002-05-09
Evergreen Park, IL
·AT&T FTTP

whamel

Premium Member

Well FYI I turned off the IPv6 support because it was causing higher than normal latency and odd routing. I actually lost 10Mbps on the download side using IPv6. I'm staying with IPv4 especially since my XBOX was dropping connection on IPv6. I don't get it but I'm sticking with what works best...that's IPv4....

trparky
Premium Member
join:2000-05-24
Cleveland, OH

trparky

Premium Member

You can turn it off?

whamel
Premium Member
join:2002-05-09
Evergreen Park, IL

whamel

Premium Member

Yea, under some tab. I forgot where but its a drop down box on a config page.

NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
TP-Link TD-8616
Asus RT-AC66U B1
Netgear FR114P

NormanS to trparky

MVM

to trparky
said by trparky:

You can turn it off?

Indeed:

Disable IPv6 here.


Just uncheck the IPv6 Protocol box and reboot.

trparky
Premium Member
join:2000-05-24
Cleveland, OH

trparky

Premium Member

I knew about that already but I was talking about turning it off in the gateway itself.
RonV
join:2003-12-19
Hoffman Estates, IL

RonV to NormanS

Member

to NormanS
I would not turn off IPv6 at the OS side. Windows needs IPv6 to support homegroups and discovery services. Best to just turn it off in the router.

whamel
Premium Member
join:2002-05-09
Evergreen Park, IL
·AT&T FTTP

whamel

Premium Member

said by RonV:

I would not turn off IPv6 at the OS side. Windows needs IPv6 to support homegroups and discovery services. Best to just turn it off in the router.

EXACTLY why I did it at the RG. Also did it there because of the routing, speed, and latency issues I was having using IPv6 externally.

NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
TP-Link TD-8616
Asus RT-AC66U B1
Netgear FR114P

NormanS to RonV

MVM

to RonV
said by RonV:

I would not turn off IPv6 at the OS side. Windows needs IPv6 to support homegroups and discovery services. Best to just turn it off in the router.

Sounds like a flawed RG design. Glad I don't have to use it. Can it be bridged? Or does it have an "IP passthrough" option which mitigates the issue?

rolande
Certifiable
MVM,
join:2002-05-24
Dallas, TX
ARRIS BGW210-700
Cisco Meraki MR42

rolande

MVM,

said by NormanS:

Sounds like a flawed RG design. Glad I don't have to use it. Can it be bridged? Or does it have an "IP passthrough" option which mitigates the issue?

You can run IP passthrough and establish an IPv6 tunnel from your own router thru the 589.