Topic 'Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?' in forum 'AT&T U-verse' - dslreports.com

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Sun, 02 Jul 2017 11:41:18 EDT

sean8102 posted :

The UPnP and WPS info you see for your mystery 5268AC WiFi device is interesting, but I did not see any references to any UPnP or WPS installed devices when the 5268AC WiFi device was interfering with my network. I keep UPnP disabled on my entire network, and WPS as well as both 5268AC radios were disabled on my 5268AC (I run a very tight security shop).

I just switched from using a Asus router with my 5268AC to just the 5268AC for everything and now show 5268ac as one of the devices connected to the 5268AC like you guys are seeing. It's been assigned 192.168.1.77

My only guess is what I posted before, that it has something to do with some kind of Wi-Fi mesh product AT&T wants to re sell at some point. Mainly because of the airties.com info.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Sun, 02 Jul 2017 07:53:39 EDT

Gerard1234 posted : I see the stb are on the 5 ghz band using the arris ap provided by at&t

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Sat, 01 Jul 2017 23:44:37 EDT

NetFixer posted :

said by JEFFML5:

Could it because i have 2 wireless STB

That would be my guess.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Sat, 01 Jul 2017 21:40:08 EDT

JEFFML5 posted : Could it because i have 2 wireless STB

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Sat, 01 Jul 2017 18:47:23 EDT

NetFixer posted : The UPnP and WPS info you see for your mystery 5268AC WiFi device is interesting, but I did not see any references to any UPnP or WPS installed devices when the 5268AC WiFi device was interfering with my network. I keep UPnP disabled on my entire network, and WPS as well as both 5268AC radios were disabled on my 5268AC (I run a very tight security shop).

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Sat, 01 Jul 2017 15:40:50 EDT

z06gal posted : Yes. That is the way I have it set up. One SSID and one password. For the record it has not dropped since I changed the wifi channel an hour or so ago. I have reset network settings on my phone twice in 24 hours tring to make sure it is the gateway

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Sat, 01 Jul 2017 15:09:15 EDT

sean8102 posted : Just to confirm do you have the same SSID on both the 2.4 and 5Ghz networks and the same password for both? If either is different then band steering will not be enabled.

Just want to make sure so I can have the same test setup as you.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Sat, 01 Jul 2017 13:34:28 EDT

z06gal posted : Thank you! The tech told me to always leave the channel to auto but I am going to change the 2.4 channel and will see if that helps. I had Timewarner for years and never ran the wifi bands on auto.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Sat, 01 Jul 2017 13:16:57 EDT

sean8102 posted :

said by z06gal:

I had to do a factory reset earlier this week and decided to leave the band steering alone this time. I just changed the password. Prior to this I had the bands separate by just adding a 5 at the end of the 5ghz band and I have not had issues with that but the 2.4 has been awful. It just drops out. They sent a tech out and he tested everything and of course it was fine..lol

Hmm I'm halfway tempted to try using just the 5268AC alone for a little while to see how it goes. So far for the past 2 weeks as things have been rock solid with the 5268 AC and Asus RT-AC88U.

I can't do it right now, to many people using the connection. I'll switch over later tonight and let you know how it goes tomorrow with my 5268AC handling the Wi-Fi and everything.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Sat, 01 Jul 2017 12:06:55 EDT

z06gal posted : I had to do a factory reset earlier this week and decided to leave the band steering alone this time. I just changed the password. Prior to this I had the bands separate by just adding a 5 at the end of the 5ghz band and I have not had issues with that but the 2.4 has been awful. It just drops out. They sent a tech out and he tested everything and of course it was fine..lol

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Sat, 01 Jul 2017 11:52:56 EDT

sean8102 posted :

said by z06gal:

Has anyone had issues with wifi dropping on the 5268ac? I have not had any Ethernet issues and fortunately I had Ethernet run in the areas of the house where needed a couple years ago but wifi on this modem drops frequently for me. I need it for phones, iPads and a Roku tv. They replaced the modem but the issue still persists.

I switched to using my Asus RT-AC88U for Wi-Fi. But I ran with just the 5268AC running the latest firmware for 2 weeks or more and didn't experience any issues.

Are you using the band steering feature? It's automatically activated if your 2.4 and 5 Ghz networks have the same SSID and password. Maybe that is causing problems for some of your devices, but I was using that feature as well with no problems.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Sat, 01 Jul 2017 10:29:21 EDT

z06gal posted : Has anyone had issues with wifi dropping on the 5268ac? I have not had any Ethernet issues and fortunately I had Ethernet run in the areas of the house where needed a couple years ago but wifi on this modem drops frequently for me. I need it for phones, iPads and a Roku tv. They replaced the modem but the issue still persists.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Sat, 01 Jul 2017 03:05:43 EDT

Paralel posted :

said by sean8102:

I get the same sort of thing with all ipv6 traces. It shows just two hops and then the destination. Hop 1 will be my Asus router, hop 2 my gateway, and hope 3 will be whatever I'm tracing to. Happens even when not using a 3rd party router and being connected directly to the 5268AC. It's the only thing I've notice, everything else is working fine including ipv6 in general.

Oh, that's really weird.

However, my IPv6 test also fails, says "No IPv6 IP address" despite my network adapter showing an assigned IPv6 address, so something is wrong with my setup somewhere.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Fri, 30 Jun 2017 19:42:05 EDT

sean8102 posted :

said by Paralel:

Ok, I rebooted both, now I can get two hops in, before it fails:

Could force flashing the 428 firmware trigger this?

ipv6 trace
ipv4 trace

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Fri, 30 Jun 2017 18:35:04 EDT

Paralel posted : Ok, I rebooted both, now I can get two hops in, before it fails:

[att=1]

Could force flashing the 428 firmware trigger this?

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Fri, 30 Jun 2017 18:16:36 EDT

Napsterbater posted :

said by Paralel:

Looks like the problem is inside my own network somewhere

Hmmm... reboot the gateway?

And/Or the device running the trace.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Fri, 30 Jun 2017 18:15:38 EDT

Paralel posted : [att=1]

Looks like the problem is inside my own network somewhere

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Fri, 30 Jun 2017 18:02:47 EDT

Napsterbater posted :

said by Paralel:

Edit: Ah, from looking into it further, it appears that no IPv6 DNS server was provided, that would explain it.

No, IPv4 DNS can provide IPv4 and IPv6 information, and IPv6 ones can do IPv4 etc. so that would not explain it.

If you trace to ipv6.google.com what happens?

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Fri, 30 Jun 2017 17:58:47 EDT

Paralel posted : I don't appear to have any IPv6 connectivity, despite the gateway being set to use IPv6 and an IPv6 address being assigned to my network connection

Edit: Ah, from looking into it further, it appears that no IPv6 DNS server was provided, that would explain it.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Fri, 30 Jun 2017 17:52:34 EDT

Napsterbater posted :

said by Paralel:

Does anyone have a new link for the IPv6 fix the one here:

What wrong with your IPv6? The previous issue (bad/no routing) has been solved.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Fri, 30 Jun 2017 17:50:29 EDT

Paralel posted : Does anyone have a new link for the IPv6 fix the one here:

»esupport.att3.2wire.com/ ··· pat-tool

Has been taken offline for some reason

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Fri, 30 Jun 2017 02:16:01 EDT

JEFFML5 posted :

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Thu, 29 Jun 2017 20:22:47 EDT

Zer0Evil posted :

said by Paralel:

Anyone have the 428 firmware so I can downgrade?

»gateway.c01.sbcglobal.ne ··· kgstream

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Thu, 29 Jun 2017 19:46:22 EDT

Paralel posted : Anyone have the 428 firmware so I can downgrade?

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Thu, 29 Jun 2017 19:43:09 EDT

Paralel posted :

said by m00ster:

The new firmware reset the ipv6 configuration of the gateway to its default state which is not properly implemented on the ATT network yet. You will have to re "enable" ipv6 on the gateway by visiting the following page to restore the working 6rd configuration:

»esupport.att3.2wire.com/ ··· ndex.jsp

This will push the config change and correct your ipv6. This must be another bug with the upgrade.

Um, it didn't push an update to mine with the 454 firmware, it says :

Modem or gateway firmware:

"The modem or gateway you are using supports IPv6, however a firmware update is required to enable this functionality.

IPv6 compatible firmware is not yet available for your device. Your device will be automatically updated when IPv6 compatible firmware becomes available."

Damn. I never would have flashed it if I had known it was beta firmware.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Thu, 29 Jun 2017 19:37:45 EDT

nwrickert posted : Then I'm glad that I have not forced the upgrade. I'll wait until AT&T pushes it, and hope that the problems are gone by then.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Thu, 29 Jun 2017 19:34:42 EDT

Paralel posted : I'm having VoIP issues with the latest firmware for the 5268ac. It will appear that the phone service is fine, then the phone won't ring, and all calls go to voicemail until I pull power on the gateway and reboot it

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Tue, 27 Jun 2017 19:14:53 EDT

anon posted : Thats bizarre. I only have the 5GHZ radio enabled and running on DFS channel 100 for my work laptop.
I've been running this software since sat and havent noticed anything weird or wrong or odd.

But yea, that device is there. I suspect it has something to do with the way the AP can talk on 2.4/5.0 ghz with the same SSID/Password. But I dont know. I have 2.4ghz disabled. The area I live in is way too crowded for anything on 2.4ghz.

Initially the pseudo device grabbed an ip in my range (my RG is set for the 172 network vs default 192) but it let me hard code it to a 'static' ip and its remained such through the week and a few reboots.

Ideally I'd like someone to chime in as to what the heck this device is and why some of us have it and why you dont now....its inconsistent.

I hate these dam RGs. I wish we could just get a dam modem like the cable company has but while Im not impressed with the RG at all, I hate the cable company even more....

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Tue, 27 Jun 2017 18:59:48 EDT

NetFixer posted :

said by hanadark0:

I too had this odd 5268ac device (wifi) showing up in my devices list. It grabbed a random IP. I hard coded it and it has never caused me any grief nor changed since setting it up as such.

However I do not know why its there nor how do get rid of it but it doesnt seem to appear to cause any issues....

I'm glad that you found a workaround for the bogus 5268AC WiFi device. I was not able to assign that device either a static or a pre-assigned DHCP IP address, so the new firmware kept randomly re-assigning it different IP addresses that always conflicted with existing IP addresses on my network. My only solution was doing multiple factory default resets, and re-loading the original 5268AC firmware (which eventually did get rid of the bogus 5268AC WiFi device). At no time (except for very brief periods following the factory default resets) did I have the 5668AC WiFi radios enabled.

When I re-installed the new firmware again (in order to try to get the new much needed advanced firewall rules and NAT loop-back working) that mysterious 5268AC device did not return.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Tue, 27 Jun 2017 17:31:14 EDT

JEFFML5 posted : That looks good hopefully it works if thats what there are going to do Thanks for like

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Tue, 27 Jun 2017 15:31:57 EDT

gsmornot posted : I see you too are using pfSense with ATT fiber. I have the latest firmware on my 5268AC and think I have setup what I need in pfSense, basically DHCP6. It looks like I have dual stack address but still do not have IPV6 addresses on anything past my router. Any advice you could give to help with the setup?

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Tue, 27 Jun 2017 02:40:38 EDT

sean8102 posted : oh. I just noticed the air ties thing. Someone posted that AT&T was going to start introducing some mesh Wi-fi product and I think it was going to be based on airties stuff.

»www.airties.com/

I'm guessing for the 5268AC they will sell this thing to make a mesh network.

»www.airties.com/product- ··· 930.html

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Tue, 27 Jun 2017 02:20:25 EDT

JEFFML5 posted : I'm not using band steering It says UPnP Access Point

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Tue, 27 Jun 2017 01:56:58 EDT

sean8102 posted : I think that has to do with the band steering. I had the same thing when I was using the 5268 for wi-fi and had both bands set with the same ssid and password.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Mon, 26 Jun 2017 19:12:18 EDT

JEFFML5 posted : It looks like it is the Access Point

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Mon, 26 Jun 2017 15:42:27 EDT

hanadark0 posted : I too had this odd 5268ac device (wifi) showing up in my devices list. It grabbed a random IP. I hard coded it and it has never caused me any grief nor changed since setting it up as such.

However I do not know why its there nor how do get rid of it but it doesnt seem to appear to cause any issues....

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Mon, 12 Jun 2017 14:31:46 EDT

Napsterbater posted :

said by rok1:

Edit: I forgot to add that with the 5268 ATT is configured for 6rd whereas my own router will pull a normal dhcpv6 ip

Which it's pulling from the gateway. So you really are still 6rd, not native.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Mon, 12 Jun 2017 14:29:23 EDT

sean8102 posted : Just got native ipv6 today here in central Arkansas.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Mon, 12 Jun 2017 13:41:50 EDT

Tel posted : the day after I updated the firmware on my 5268AC, my gateway died and I was getting nothing but a blinking red light on the broadband line, nothing on the service light. They shipped me another overnight when the support guy couldn't even see the gateway from his end. I'm sure it wasn't caused by the update but I'll probably stick with stock for new.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Mon, 12 Jun 2017 12:19:51 EDT

janthony6 posted : Native ipv6 working in OC. Getting a /128 on wan.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Mon, 12 Jun 2017 12:12:49 EDT

rok1 posted : I am upgrading from 100 to 1000 today, figured I would put my 5268 in to see if it gets the firmware update. I can say that native dual stack IPv6 is already working in my area from use on my homebrew router working fine.

However, looks like ATT still using 10.5.3.527171-att in the El Paso area. Once ATT switches me over to gigabit, ill do some tests on my homebrew to see how good it works vs the 5268 at gigabit speeds.

Edit: I forgot to add that with the 5268 ATT is configured for 6rd whereas my own router will pull a normal dhcpv6 ip

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Sat, 10 Jun 2017 20:38:55 EDT

grabacon9 posted : Ok. Thank you.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Fri, 09 Jun 2017 19:51:17 EDT

Napsterbater posted : No, leave it..

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Fri, 09 Jun 2017 17:40:06 EDT

grabacon9 posted : I have dual stack on mine. Is it a good idea to decrease the ipv6 mtu to 1472 like it was? Thank you.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Thu, 08 Jun 2017 16:47:19 EDT

m00ster posted : Could you perhaps PM me his address? I would love to get native dual stack back if they have indeed fixed the routing. The prefix that was assigned to me looks to be routed now, just need to figure out how to get this gateway back to dual stack mode.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Thu, 08 Jun 2017 15:18:55 EDT

Kett2000 posted : This is great news that AT&T is deploying dual-stack IPv6 connectivity! I'm ready to get rid of 6RD.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Thu, 08 Jun 2017 15:06:35 EDT

Napsterbater posted : So a few days ago I fired off an e-mail to the NANOG mailing list looking to bring this to the attention of AT&T, today (well apparently yesterday) that was successful, got an e-mail from someone with the domain "labs.att.com"

The the /60 delegated block and its parent has been fixed, IPv6 is now 100%

Looks like it was intentional that the modems were switched to dual stack, there was just an mix up.

Dual stack is now working on the block, in this area atleast.

Kinda glad I didnt get a chance to run that and force the modem back to 6rd.

Note, the IPv6 addresses provided to the WAN side of the gateways is not connectable from/to the outside world, they are filtered/blocked, this is apparently by design, also note the traceroute/ping tools in the modem currently source traffic from the WAN IP, thus will have little use do to that, though they said this is on the list to be fixed. Note this dosn't effect 6rd, as there is no WAN IPv6 address.

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Thu, 08 Jun 2017 00:16:42 EDT

grabacon9 posted : Resetting it a couple of times fixed it! Thank you!

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Wed, 07 Jun 2017 22:07:35 EDT

NetFixer posted :

said by Frodo:

One problem with using www.dslreports.com as a test is, last I heard, it is not a dual-homed host. Rather, the IPv4 address is on the server, and the IPv6 address is on a proxy which may or may not be co-located with the server. When I see Hurricane Electric in the traceroute for the IPv6, it makes me think that the proxy is not co-located with the server and IPv4.

True enough, but it is not easy to know in advance what method any given web site uses for IPv6 connectivity (unless you do a traceroute and/or a DNS lookup for each site before accessing it) -- and dslreports.com is not alone in having somewhat inefficient IPv6 connectivity. That is one of the reasons why I have changed the default dual stack priority on my workstations, notebooks, and servers to prefer IPv4 over IPv6. I have no vested interest in promoting IPv6 usage, but I do have a vested interest in trying to improve the efficiency of my Internet connectivity.

[soapbox]
The poster who chastises me for doing that because it is not "normal" is somewhat correct in that it is not the default configuration for a dual stack device. And since most people don't know that you can easily change that default configuration, it seldom gets changed; so any variation from the default configuration might well be considered by some to not be "normal".

I don't own/use any piece of equipment that has not in some way been altered to work "my way" instead of the "default/recommended way". If it is a networking device that doesn't allow certain functionality to be re-configured, I quite often find a way to alter its behavior via external means. An example of this is the way I have externally implemented QoS and rate-limiting for my 5268AC (which has no QoS functionality) by disabling its internal WiFi radios (and if AT&T had decided not to allow me to disable the internal WiFi radios, I would have put it into a mini Faraday cage, as some Comcast customers have had to do with Comcast supplied cable gateways), and by having only one device attached to its LAN interface -- a Netgear GS108e switch that provides port priority QoS for real-time sensitive devices, and rate-limiting for buffer-bloat compensation for Internet access by my entire network.

Sorry for the long winded reply, but continually having to compensate for poor design is a major sore point for me. This is especially so when some of that seemingly poor design is in some cases deliberately designed to prevent most customers from varying from an ISP's or device vendor's planned usage, or to force them to purchase certain related products from the ISP or device vendor.
[/soapbox]

Re: Would you recommend upgrading the 5268ac to the newest 10.5.6.529428?

Wed, 07 Jun 2017 21:20:31 EDT

Frodo posted : One problem with using www.dslreports.com as a test is, last I heard, it is not a dual-homed host. Rather, the IPv4 address is on the server, and the IPv6 address is on a proxy which may or may not be co-located with the server. When I see Hurricane Electric in the traceroute for the IPv6, it makes me think that the proxy is not co-located with the server and IPv4.