Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Aye. That's why I love DD-WRT; I need some of the advanced features, and over time some of the ones I originally ignored have come in useful.

The point is, if the choices are there from the off they don't need to be added later, saving everyone involved a lot of hassle.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Due to failure of my own standalone modem I'm actually doing something similar on my ADSL. The O2 supplied modem/router is terminating DSL and doing all routing while my own higher power wireless router is acting purely as an access point connecting via LAN port to modem.

And, yes, DHCP is disabled on my router - multiple DHCP servers in a single segment is a bad idea ;)

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Reading all these forums is starting to depress me ....
Why, oh why, can't VM just put there hand up and admit the 'Super'hub(sic) is not fit for purpose for the majority of, how shall I put this, techy users.
Virgin, please just give us a decent cable modem, plain and simple, even if it comes with no Tech Support for the LAN connections to it.
I don't want the 4 port switch or Wireless N or any other bells and whistles.
Come on Virgin, do the right thing.!!

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

The Bridge mode will turn the SuperHub into a standlone modem, so you will be able to do exactly what you want.

However Virgin won't be going back to the Ambit modems. The Hubs are here to stay

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Sadly this won't solve the much higher than average power consumption, but I guess you can't have it all. ;)

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

no problem I will send VM a bill every month for my extra electric.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

That was quoted (at the start of this thread) as being at least 4 months away, yet Virgin chose to switch to sending only 'Super'hub 2 months ago. I'm all for trying beta-test products with willing testers, but this is imposing a half-finished release on customers who only want a working service. Until it works properly:?

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

But it is fit for purpose for most customers, who are non-technical and want a basic modem/router.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Now, there's an assumption :rolleyes: So, what's VM's offer for those who are technical and want more than a basic modem/router? At the moment, it appears to be "tough luck".

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Erm, an assumption based on over 30 years in IT, dealing with lots and lots of users on a day to day basis...;)

re the tough luck, most businesses base their model on providing the facilities that most people require/want, and then, if possible, something for the rest -otherwise, consumer items would be too complex for the mass market.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

I'll see your 30 years, and raise you to 34 :D Now, what's VM's offer for us?How many settings do "most people" use on their camera - or even their washing machine? But they're all there.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

They usually have one modem per platform and at present 30Mb and upwards only have the Superhub and considering that the will be a lot of money and a major contract involved it is very unlikely that a separate standalone modem will be provided in the foreseeable future.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

In other words - "tough luck". Why was Bridge mode not put in as an option from day 1?

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

I don't think it's just lack of features, it's the fact that in many cases even the basics on there aren't working correctly. It is my honest belief that some Super Hubs are fine and some aren't due to poor quality control, regardless of how much or how little data customers are moving through them.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

I have no idea as to why, but as myself and others have said you can always use an existing wireless router to provide a wider coverage in the house by connecting it to one of the Lan ports and remembering to disable DHCP, it may not be a perfect solution but it does the job.

Of course it is now only an access point but it extends the coverage which is all I want.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

I completely agree with this.

It's hard to explain why certain people have more problems than others doing the exact same thing with the same device, other than quality control issues.

What gets me is that for the past week or so, pretty much every other new thread in this forum has been "Superhub issues"

---------- Post added at 22:50 ---------- Previous post was at 22:45 ----------

Credit where it's due, thank you for using completely correct terminology here.

I understand for some people, all you need is better wireless coverage. But for some other people, reasons for using their own hardware extends far beyond this, whether they want to use a load balancer, run special services on their router, or even just a DDNS client so they can easily access their home computers from elsewhere. It's these users that are being shafted here, as the existing modems clearly do still exist, do work, and could be given to the vast majority of them. These may be a minority, but they're a vocal one. Again, being given a choice during the 6-month interim period while they sort out bridge mode would pretty much satisfy everyone, it can't be that hard...

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

We are getting very few in work and I have had none since Thursday and I have taken close to 100 calls in that period.

It maybe that they are calling later in the day after work.

Remember people in the main come on forums with an issue rather than to offer praise.

---------- Post added at 22:59 ---------- Previous post was at 22:52 ----------

But we now longer issue them as they have been superseded by Superhub and what stock we do have will run out soon enough.

As I have already stated we normally have one modem per tier and at present we have the hub for 20Mb and below and the Superhub for 30Mb and above.

Legacy customers calling in with a faulty modem will still get standard modems sent out to them, as for the VMNG300 we have never been able to send them out as they have only been replaced by engineers.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Yes, people do come on forums when they have problems rather than when it's working fine, but the sheer number makes it look like there's something significantly worse with the SH than previous gear. And again, the user can't choose to sort it out with their own kit, because they can't bypass the SH properly.

I understand how procedure works, it's not a case of what you or another agent is able to do in terms of procedure of what is allowed by the system. It's what the strategists at the company decided to do in terms of determining that procedure.

Simply put, it was decided to not allow you to send out VMNG300 modems, it was decided that the SH should be given to users before bridge mode was available, it was decided to force everyone to get one and solve the problems later. It was decided to supersede the VMNG300 sooner, rather than later, and before it was capable of doing what everyone wanted. VM decided the needs of the few were not important enough.

We're talking about these decisions here, not what you or any other agent can do. You're constrained by the processes put in by the company, but these processes are exactly what is aggravating customers - forcing people to use a device that is, in their opinion, not fit for purpose, and not allowing them to use the old device. It's not like the old modems became illegal to produce, so someone at VM obviously decided to stop ordering them and giving them to customers. Almost all the customers not happy with the superhub would be happy with a standalone modem, but someone at VM has chosen not to allow it, and for no good technical reason.

Put it this way, given the VMNG300 is capable of supporting all currently available tiers as they are currently delivered, if procedures were to allow you to send one out to a customer who requested one, would you object? If so, why?

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

do technical customers not matter?

even for basic use it isnt 100%, even if I do just basic port forwarding on mine it stopped forwarding ports after a while. I imagine also DMZ is used by a fair few people to point to a console and for me DMZ also bolmbs out after a while.

The only thing that seems reliable on it is simply routing outgoing requests such as web page browsing.

Then we have the poor wiresless performance, another thing that affects a fair few people.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

I've not used one, so I've no idea how it all works, but I've seen two common recommendations in the forums:

1. Use DMZ mode to allow games to work.

2. Disable firewall features as they cause poor performance.

Surely the combination of these two could mean that the user's computer is directly accessible on the Internet without any sort of firewall protection?

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Nope, it's a NAT. You'd point the DMZ at your games console anyway, so it'd be your console not your PC that is exposed. Aside from that, everything else on your network is in private address space that can't be reached from the internet, firewall or no firewall.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

But is the games console completely exposed? People do play games on PCs ...

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

I'll see your 34 with my previous six in the RAF in cryptography, and raise you an IT Director's post...:D

And household washing machines have been about for about 90 years, and household modems about 20.;) (and with the washing machine you have soap powder, clothes, electricity, and the machine - modem/routers you have the cable infrastructure, the modem/router, the PC, the multitude of software on PC, wireless/wired connection, the site being connected to, etc etc...)

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

The console is as exposed as it would be if you directly connected it to a modem with no router in-between. While not totally ideal, it's a console. It should have built-in security fit for the task. If it doesn't, meh. Your PC will have a built-in firewall that's superior to the router one anyway. If it doesn't it's far more flexible in terms of being able to install one, so you're still no worse off.

Back in the old days of 56K modems, everything connected directly to the internet so no router/NAT protection, and we didn't panic.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Ahh, thanks. That's what I was wondering.

Yes, but KA9Q didn't give access to much at all ;-)

Times have moved on. I certainly wouldn't leave a Windows PC directly on the Internet these days without a firewall. Not that ANYONE should disable the Windows firewall ...

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

I've disabled the Windows firewall. No reason not to as I have my own. Pointless having 2 firewalls running and can actually cause problems.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

I use the windows firewall for the reason its simple and basic, no SPI packet inspection rubbish and I can cleanly define rules.

---------- Post added at 01:17 ---------- Previous post was at 00:52 ----------

something for VM staff to think about whilst they defend VM.

VM have done this as a way to reduce tech support calls from the newbie users who cannot plug a cable in between a modem and router. The endgame will be for cost savings, if call volumes go down then ultimately there will be loss of jobs in call centres. Otherwise there is no cost saving.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Except that's not the whole story.

Virgin want to grow the business, and have been doing quite well over the last few years, but at somepoint the amount of calls coming in from customers wanting help with their services means it's uneconomical to continually add more and more support staff to answer the calls

Therefore Virgin have to look at ways of reducing the calls that shouldn't really be coming in in the first place.

One of these call types is Wireless setup issues. If Virgin can introduce hardware which gets ride of the majority of these types of calls, it frees up the existing call centre staff to answer those calls that they are trained to do. So rather than waiting 5/10 mins to get through to a tech support agent because there is an actual technical problem, and you are queuing behing someone who can't configure the SSID and WPA correctly, you are instead through to someone who can resolve your issue quickly

THAT is why Virgin are doing this

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

So you go from newbie unable to configure wireless, to customer unable to get signal due to poor superhub performance. ;)

incidently I havent waited for tech support to answer phone, but more all the silly menus have to navigate and then getting agents who I cant talk to properly.

The end game will be loss of staff, obviously they wont inform agents of that end game till it happens.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Well that's yet another point we shall have to agree to disagree on.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Which firewall are you using? Have you checked that it protects teredo tunnels?

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

It's funny you should choose wireless because that's the most conspicious problem with the Super Hub so far is precisely that. Dropouts, poor range etc. I actually have a couple of the routers VM used to send out (WGR614v9/DIR-615), running stock firmware they are way more stable and reliable.

I suppose the easiest way to put it is, if VM want fewer n00b calls then perhaps they should spend more time testing their gear rather than rushing it out, causing more problems than they solve because they're clearly not made well enough. Whether that's a hardware or software issue - or combination of both - remains to be seen, but it wastes everyone's time and makes customers lose faith.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Eset. Yes it does.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Yet I found it to be the otherway around. Before the SuperHub I had the DIR-615, and I had problems with Wiress range, and the speed I got when I could connect. I also could not get my Windows Home Server to work correctly with it no matter what I tried

Since I've got the SuperHub I've had none of these issues

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Disappointing really. I have had the WGR614v9 on 20Mb for more than 2 years, and it runs months on end with no problems. 90% of the household internet use is wireless and we are heavy users. Bad comments about the superhub is why I have stick with 20Mb and not upgraded to 50Mb, or indeed the new 30Mb. The new firmware would allow me to use a superhub as just a modem, and retain the WGR614v9. But that would be totally pointless because the WGR614v9 "g" wireless is maxed out with 20Mb anyway, I would see no effective speed increase...

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Sorry, I'm missing your point. It seems I should expand on mine: modern household washing machines have scores of different programmes; modern consumer cameras also have scores of features. How many of those programmes and features do "most people" use - how many simply leave the camera on 'auto' at all times, or use the same programme for every wash? Your point was "consumer items would be too complex for the mass market" with too many facilities; the mass market has shown it is perfectly able to ignore facilities it doesn't need.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

yep, whats key is having good defaults or a auto setting that does its job well, but what is also key is allowing people to deviate from the defaults, auto may not always do the job well on a camera as an example.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Virgin Media had accepted apology for issues on superhub and they had now re-activated my old 50Meg black modem VMNG300 for a time being until the superhub is fixed. They also refunded me £30 too.

Superhub: 17.31Meg on wi-fi
VMNG300 via Netgear Router N: 32.39Meg

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2011/02/20.png

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Sorry if we don't believe you :dozey:

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Even fastest on vmng300 !!!

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2011/02/19.png

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Not bad for 50Mb/s (even better for Photoshop....)

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Not a potatoshop (the image is actually hosted on the speedtests.net server).

Its likely just one of the odd dodgy results the site can give when something gets cached.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Pity that it is not even possible unless you are running Kaspersky.:D

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

telford=noob

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

So IV heard the word 'march' being thrown around. Is this when we have to wait until to get the update? Does anyone know?

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Actually it's going to be closer to May.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

whaaaaattt????????????????????????????????

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Looks like a discount is in order!

How can they possibly expect customers to pay full price for something they admit needs fixing?

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Read the first post. Testers in April, release in May.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

I am still of the view that VM will provide standalone modems if enough people say that they want their own routers to be the main portal.

I do not wish to daisy-chain my WNDR3700 in with the inferior router capabilities of the superhub. eg. The WAN/LAN throughput is nearly 500Mbps and it has a 680 MHz processor. I will cancel my order if they refuse.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

But the will never be enough people to persuade them otherwise, this is a business decision and they have a contract with Netgear to supply both hubs.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

sigh why would I want a superhub in the first place. I have a server that does my routing. I do not need a router or wireless I just want to keep my 50mbit modem and setup as it has been.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

power to the people :cleader: :cleader: :cleader:

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

business's change all the time. However I would expect to at least use their superhub stock up before backtracking so they havent wasted so much cash.

This is really the needs of tech support staff vs customers, as it appears to be released to make life easier for VM tech support. A few more bad press releases's customers leaving, not upgrading etc. and that will talk more than staff happiness.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

I think you forgot that the will be a contract in place and that they have not just bought a job lot of these hubs.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

like the contract for all past hardware thats now been ditched? it will be no different. it will be subject to certian requirements.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Contracts finish and new ones are signed all the time, but money talks.;)

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

We've recently upgraded to the SuperHub (20mb -> 30mb) and I'll have to say, it's not been a good experience.

22mbps download speed, flaky and weak wireless, "freezes" every 10 minutes or so and that's just off the top of my head! I then changed to the "DMZ Setup" with our DD-WRT-running router which now gives us the full 30mbps and is a lot more stable.

However, I can't connect to the router externally on the public IP. Is this one of the those "lost functionalities" mentioned in this thread that the DMZ setup causes?

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

I am interested in this also, are you running PPTP or OpenVPN or something else?

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Not at the moment, I'm referring to the SSH service on the DD-WRT router. I can access it internally, but not externally. It doesn't even get rejected, it just times out.

I'm guessing it is because the router is being sent the connection request (via DMZ) but it doesn't know the connection request is for it, because its address (192.168.0.2) is not the one being connected to (eg. 89.120.35.233).

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

That'd be the whole point of DMZ to begin with - to remap the target IP address to the one on your local network

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Never mind, I fixed it!

There are two separate settings on DD-WRT, I hadn't enabled the remote access for SSH.. funnily enough, it helps :)

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

the response to these problems always seems to be: wait until the firmware update.

Hang on a minute.

how can a software update increase wireless speeds. surely thats a hardware problem

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

It's not that simple (the hardware/software divide) - this may clarify things.....

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

haha.

it can resolve it by the bridge mode then putting the routing responsibility onto a decent wireless router. :)

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

So the firmware update isn't going to make a difference to wireless speeds unless you use your own router in bridge mode? Or can it make a difference?

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

It's not that simple, as not everyone is having problems, especially on the wireless side.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

I can reliably break wireless by changing the wireless speed. Needs a reboot otherwise it shows up fine but gives no bandwidth. Wired connections are fine.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

now im more confused

I might take my superhub apart, rip the modem out of it, see if it has a wan port, if not, ill make one out of the ports iv ripped apart, then make a nice casing for it. ill go fins myself a nice router to use and there we go problem solved

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

I would not advise you to do that as that will breach the Terms and Conditions of your contract as you will be maliciously damaging Virginmedia supplied and owned equipment as it is never your property.

If you lose your connection you will have to get an engineer called out who would then have to report the damage.

Also if you cancel your contract they will want the Superhub back.

So all in all not a very good idea.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Way too complex. Even an easier solution (hacking the Super Hub MAC onto, say, a VMNG300 with exploited firmware flashed) probably wouldn't be allowed by VM and even if it were, it's a good way to get your account terminated, and maybe even your account blacklisted.

The way you've listed would probably require a complete rewrite of the firmware, by the way, before even considering the difficulties of reverse engineering the hardware. Just wait a while for the bridge mode firmware update, hopefully that'll fix things.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

As I said above if he needed a technician for anything and he saw what you had done he would leave the property and report you to his manager for damaging the equipment.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

okay, calm down. I want being serious anyway

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

I was just pointing out the potential error of your ways.https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2012/12/10.gif

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

wow.

seems this guy got some progress.

looks like the firmware currently already has support for various requested features but they simply removed from the GUI.

I hope its ok to link to another forum.

http://forums.thinkbroadband.com/vir...-superhub.html

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

To me it seems stupid that people have 2 bridge the superhub to another router, after all, the superhub has both a modem & router in the box, still, typical virgin, not testing stuff before they release to the public! So people that don't already have a router will have 2 spend their money because virgin got it wrong AGAIN!

I'm surprised nobody has made an official complaint about it, forced to use something that most people cannot use for its purpose! :-)

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

The thing is most people have no issues with either hub as otherwise we would be inundated with calls.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

I think most people have had problems with the superhub but have managed to find a workaround rather than take a chance on wasting their time by having to talk to OffShore.

Even you have had to connect your original router to the superhub as an access point.

If the superhub had been purchased as a normal retail transaction I'm sure most people would have returned it as not fit for purpose.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

I have two networks one from the Superhub and one from The Edimax giving me better overall coverage in the property and both signals are about the same.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

A subtle admission that the Super Hub has weak a wireless side, I believe. :)

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Or just that it isn't dual band.(simultaneously).

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

No as they are different rooms increasing the coverage in my property.:)

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

But then, most people aren't taxing their internet connections even slightly, which makes me wonder why the majority of people bother having anything above 10Mb. This goes back to what I've been saying about the Super Hub seemingly being designed for people wanting the highest available broadband speeds for heavier traffic, yet crumbling under the weight of the traffic. Which seems ironic. Or should that be moronic? :D

So you need the increased coverage as the Super Hub can't handle the whole thing, is what you're saying. ;)

Have you set your channels "end to end"? By that I mean, put the access point getting the most traffic on channel 13 and the other on channel 1 to avoid interference as much as possible.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

As I have said we do not get that many calls with hub issues and most are simply resolved by unticking ip flood dtection.



No I already had the Edimax and a long ethernet cable so utilised the router as otherwise it would have sat in a box, and I now have a better coverage than I ever had with just the Edimax.


I left them both on Auto and they are working fine.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Having dropped the Super Hub back in for a day's test, I think the bridge mode can't come soon enough. I don't care what the results say, the performance is noticably worse and there's this suspicion that it'll need a reboot any minute.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Having recently seen a superhub I was quite impressed with it. It seems far more fully-featured than I expected. That said, I'm still eagerly awaiting the bridge mode so I can keep using my D-Link DIR825. It'd be nice if a standard modem was offered as an option, but I can fully understand why Virgin are standardising on one box.

I'm just hoping the new firmware coincides with my (hopeful) upgrade to TiVo, which should be soon-ish as I'm pre-registered for it.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

WHAT?! More fully featured but you still eagerly await bridge mode!?

Were it fully feature as you suggest you would have no need of bridge mode to use your own router!

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

if they give us bridge mode, they will have to provide support for the router we are using with it, so undoing their standardisation

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

No they won't. 3rd party router support isn't something Virgin offer now with the standalone modems, so why would it different with the SuperHub

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Personally I'm more than happy with that: my router, my business. As long as the modem side of the Super Hub works perfectly that's all VM need to worry about.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Superhub works flawlessly for me, and I'm a pretty heavy user! Not sure why people think these problems are present for everyone. I don't keep IP Flood Protection disabled, only if I want to use pingtest.net, but that only doesn't work because the router's doing its job, blocking a flood of (250) random packets. My websites load instantly, ping is low, speed tests are high. Brighton area.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Almost sounds like VM are trying to sell a "managed" internet service for pittance, funny that cause that level of service costs a fortune in the business world.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

And how can you possibly say that??

Bridge mode will be available for those who know what they are doing and won't need support for their routers.

For all other lemmings the SH will be all they need.

I am still xcurious as to why they haven't released an interim firmware just to enable bridge mode, can't be too complicated. Then release another after thorough testing for all the other problems.

Seems VM don't understand rocket science.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

As far as I'm aware the Netgear cable hubs that the SuperHub is based on don't have a bridge mode in them in the first place

So for Netgear to add it requires a more work than resolving any issues with the existing functions

And all updates would have to be fully tested before they are released

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

As far as I'm aware Ben, VM would have approached Netgear and asked them to produced a product for them at a set price to a set specification.

Now as far as I am aware there are many VM customers who have purchased their own routers at considerable expence. For VM to ask Netgear to produce anything that does not take into consideration their existing customers is a Faux Pas on VM's side.

VM could of course purchase those routers from their customers as reccompence if the equipment they were now issuing was as good as or better than what their customers have.

Stop making excuses for the inadequate performance of the superhub.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

For some customers........

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

I was addressing your specific comment about why they hadn't released an interim firmware. I wasn't commenting on the performance of the SuperHub.

New features to the firmware will take more time to do than feature fixes.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

I be amazed if there is no such thing as a bridge mode on the original model.

This would indicate either.

1 - no original stock firmware existed when VM made the order, maybe this was a new just out of dev model.
2 - a unusual development path, I suppose not too surprising when consider its crappygear.

Netgear consistently are low priced router's tend to be good for low budget's when looking at what to buy so VM seemed to have gone with the cheapest quote.

Bridge mode is not that complicated,its basically disabling NAT, firewall, and adding some kind of passthru DHCP function so the connecting device gets the net ip automatically. After that its cosmetic stuff to change in the gui accordingly so people cant configure things like port forwarding which wouldnt do anything on it in bridge mode. On a normal router which has no direct bridge mode option its usually possible to do it manually by doing as I said in terms of disabling NAT.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Here is a manual for a stock Netgear Cable Gateway. I don't see a 'bridge mode' function anywhere in it http://www.comhem.se/blob/view/-/192...CG3100.pdf.pdf

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

As I said bridge mode is basically changing 2 settings :)

any router that can disable NAT and firewall supports it.

For a router to not be able to disable NAT is very unusual.