Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

You are able to turn NAT on or off with the CG3100.

(page 52 fig 5-4)

http://www.comhem.se/blob/view/-/192...CG3100.pdf.pdf

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

According to text from an ADSL gateway Netgear make ftp://downloads.netgear.com/files/DG...UM_14Oct10.pdf

NAT automatically assigns private IP addresses (10.1.1.x) to LAN-connected devices.
• Enable. Usually NAT is enabled.
• Disable. This disables NAT, but leaves the firewall active. Disable NAT only if you are sure that you do not require it. When NAT is disabled, only standard routing is performed by this router. Classical routing lets you directly manage the IP addresses that the N300 wireless modem router uses. Classical routing should be selected only by experienced users.

That doesn't sound like a modem only mode, as to me it reads as if the gateway still retains the external IP, and you would still have to use private IP addresses on the devices connected to the Gateway

I would assume the Cable version works in the same way

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

It isn't a bridge mode, no, it's just straight routing instead of doing NAT.

Incidentally you're link thieves, I found that manual on Comhem and just FYI only reason I found it was that I knew it was there from listening to the complaints about that device from a Comhem user :D

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Have to go to a meeting will reply to this later.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

on my adsl router if I disable NAT the pc gets the internet IP address. and the router only has a lan ip address. A pure bridge mode may be a bit more complicated then I thought but the basics of it is dumping NAT and passing thru all traffic untouched to a new device.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Basically you are correct Chrys, bridge mode though would disable the router side altogether though which to me is a misleading.

The workround ATM leaves you double NATed as you know so just being able to switch off NAT in the SH would be an improvement, if the firewall is switched off as well then certainly to my mind the SH router side would pass all traffic without hinderance.

However, your personal router would still be connecting to the IP of the SH router not directly to the modem side.

We know the SH has 2 IP addys. 192.168.0.1 and 192.168.100.1 the second being the modem side. (try it, it works).

So for true bridge mode 192.168.0.1 and the accompying Guest IP of 192.168.1.1 need to be able to be disabled in the SH to give true bridge mode where your router can use either of the 2 IP addys to connect to the modem side without any conflict.

Now to answer Ben, you keep coming out with different PDF files for different modem/routers to try to explain why the SH is what it is!

The SH is what it is, is purely and simply because that is what VM asked for. There are those who have already SSH'ed into it and found many parts of the GUI disabled etc.( they still exist in the firmware/software, just turned off.).

VM got what they asked for!

For those who would like to view the result of accessing the hub see here.

http://community.virginmedia.com/t5/.../379669#M40501

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

yeah I understand what you saying.

of course on my superhub for whatever reason 192.168.100.1 hasnt worked for a while. just times out.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

No, what you've described pretty much is pure bridge mode. The "bridge mode" on cable modems is actually not pure bridge mode.

---------- Post added at 02:11 ---------- Previous post was at 02:09 ----------

Also, http://www.netgear.com/service-provi...02_CG3302.aspx

Management Specifications

• Advanced Settings: Wireless, Port Forwarding, Port Triggering
• Bridge, Cable Device, Ethernet MIB

Whatever that means.

---------- Post added at 02:18 ---------- Previous post was at 02:11 ----------

Not sure if this applies to the SH/CG3xxx but turning off NAT on most consumer residential gateways (i.e. typical home routers) pretty much is what most people want out of bridge mode on the SH. It could however convert it into a straight router as Ignition mentioned but that's not the typical nomenclature used on most home devices I've seen, not sure about the cable routers though.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

I know VM got what they asked for - they asked for a Hub from Netgear. Why do people keep on thinking I'm saying stuff I'm not?

What I was trying to point out, is that Netgear Gateways don't seem to have a pure bridge mode. As the two PDFs seem to indicate, they have 'Disable NAT' instead which puts them into a 'classic router' mode.

From how I understand this to work, if Virgin just enabled this, it would still leave the public IP on the SuperHub, and then people would have to start messing around with static IP addressess on the LAN side. Which isn't exactly a user friendly option

However, what I thought everyone wanted (and as far as I understand it what Virgin are going to deliver), was the public IP to be on whatever equipment was connected to the SuperHub, be it your own router or whatever else. In effect making it act like a standlone modem.

Based on the PDFs, current Netgear gateways (be it ADSL or Cable) can't do this

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

I know it's probably a typo, but xcurious sounds like a hip, modern slang version of "especially and/or extremely curious" and I'm adding it to my lexicon. :)

More to the point, I'm xcurious myself about the bridge mode not being rolled out with great haste, but if the beta testers who are posting here and in the hidden part of VM community are anything to go by it looks like a top priority. So, y'know, all that moaning we've been doing could end up being worth the effort. :D

So in effect VM are asking Netgear to "break new ground" by doing something they wouldn't do usually? If that's true I'm *almost* impressed. Especially as it goes towards why there is a delay.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Hi,

I was on the SH trial and although I don't know as much as some of you folk I did have a conversation with a trial support guy who mentioned that earlier firmware had a "Modem" mode for people that wanted to use their own routers.

It's a pity this was removed I have had to use dual nat to get a vpn site-to-site working. What I did was only have the vpn-router on the sh and set it to DMZ.

The R26 firmware practically killed this, the setup reduced throughput to 10% of the 100Mb/s I am paying for.

I'm still looking for an answer.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

There has never been a "modem" mode.

There was an unofficial hack that someone discovered but VM put a stop to that with R25.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

the message in question said that they are looking for testers to try the new firmware which was to stop the packet loss when testing to pingtest.net they also said that the same testers will be used to trial the bridge mode firmware, which will be released to testers towards the end of may.

this message has been deleted because the estimate for bridge mode is now june

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

In the mean time if I want to upgrade to 30 meg can I ask VM for a modem rather than a Superhub? The ones they were using for 50 meg should work.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

No.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

The latest update they have released is that it will go to Testers early May and general release in June. This information was included with the details of the R26 update and is still on the community forums.

Early May should hopefully mean it gets released to testers next week, but VM probably have some strange definition of early May.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

It looks like Mark hasn't updated that post. I recall the announcement craig is referring to.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

I did and they replaced it with no questions. And it performs better than the last one.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

I can't see any other announcement about it being delayed. The only one I can see is: http://community.virginmedia.com/t5/...11/td-p/459265 Which still says early May, along with the slightly different version of the announcement in the beta forums which also says early May.

Unless it was in an announcement that hasn't been pinned to the top.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

There is a difference in getting a superhub replaced and being provisioned with a modem in the first place.

---------- Post added at 11:52 ---------- Previous post was at 11:50 ----------

As craig said the post has been removed, it will appear again when they are ready for testers if they continue as they have in the past.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

they wont be asking for more testers, they say the people who are registered to test the beta firmwares i.e. the 2r26 or whatever the last one was (i dont need to worry about the superhub anymore (lol)) will test the bridge mode firmware as soon as its released

a pointless waste of time to me, they will ask for feedback, users will give up their own time to test and give feedback, then they will just release the buggy firmware without making any improvements, as they have done with the last 2 firmwares

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

yeah its more a formality then proper testing. We had Chris who works for VM comment on here his testing is more proper having to run scripts. I expect VM will tinker on the firewall again in R27 but not document it on the changelog so in terms of new bugs its entirely possible.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

Yes, actually.

Email the CEO's office. Be polite but insistent (i.e. mention you want to cancel if you can't get a modem) and chances are one of the folks there will take your address and send out a nice new 100Mb-capable VMNG300. When it arrives, ring up to register the MAC and ask for the speed upgrade too (free if you're on the 20Mb tier, I believe) and you should be good to go.

VM should issue a mass recall on the Super Hub, rather than throw more money at it, because whoever they've hired to engineer the firmware doesn't have a clue. Companies do this frequently on much larger products than broadband CPEs, and it saves them more hassle, embarrassment and money in the long run. Don't know why VM are ignoring standard business practice, but they are.

The VMNG300 is a fine stopgap solution while they mastermind their next buggy combined modem/router which everyone will hate. :D

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

No actually, the upgrade has to be carried out initially with the superhub. You can only hassel the CEO's office for a VMNG300 once you have the service. You will only get one if they have any left so it's not guaranteed.

Re: VM finally post news on bridge mode - superhub
 

my bets are that there is now none left, so good luck trying