![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
I have the same router and was annoyed that I could not enable a bridged mode, the WiFi performance is not very good on this router. I disabled the wifi and connected a second router via the LAN port and disabled dhcp ect so its pretty much acting as a AP.
There's a new firmware version being rolled out which addresses wifi issues apparently. I was complaining about my wifi performance and got told about it and have had it pushed to my modem. They'll push it to everyone's eventually, but if you're having as much trouble as me, it might pay to get them to do it a bit quicker.
The old version is STFH.01.02 and the new one is STFH.84.01.
Will it include Bridge mode?
Disrespective:
There's a new firmware version being rolled out which addresses wifi issues apparently. I was complaining about my wifi performance and got told about it and have had it pushed to my modem. They'll push it to everyone's eventually, but if you're having as much trouble as me, it might pay to get them to do it a bit quicker.
The old version is STFH.01.02 and the new one is STFH.84.01.
How do you get the new firmware?
All comments are my own opinion, and not that of my employer unless explicitly stated.
No, there's no Bridge mode support...
I had to call and complain to tech support about my wifi performance but was told it will be being rolled out to all devices "over time". Whatever that means.
Well, we had to reboot the modem this morning due to limited wifi connectivity. Lets just say the firmware update is a step forward, but by no means actually capable.
Did VF test this device at all? Or just get a bulk purchase deal?
So no bridge mode firmware?
________
Antoniosk
I have one of these and it's properly crap.
Constantly drops connections (wifi and ethernet!). It basically can't cope with the 15+ devices I have thrown at it.
Is there any way I can use my own high end router (that I will buy) to improve things? I know this doesn't support bridged mode and look's like I will be waiting forever. Has anyone had success using their own cable modem/router with built in modem?
can you not use the high end device as an access point?
Yeah. but this would create a double NAT headache which I prefer to avoid. I'm not good enough to make it work flawlessly to the point where incoming traffic is handled properly :P
Why isn't bridged mode available yet? The ironic thing is that its probably supported on stock firmware!
an access point doesnt do NAT, it acts as a switch and a WIFI access point because it is connected between a LAN port on your technicolour and a LAN port on your high end device
I've just had upgraded to Vodafone's 100/10 cable service today. They installed the device, and didn't hang around to even do a speedtest. Shot out the door as soon as they saw I was about to change the internal IP address range from the default 192.168.0.x to my existing network's 192.168.1.x.
I guess I should have taken that as a sign. It's been a nightmare since.
Firstly I couldn't change the IP range from the default 192.168.0.x to 192.168.1.x. Eventual workaround was to change it to 192.168.3.x. then change it to 192.168.1.x. Which again is not reassuring when you have discovered a bug at such a basic level. (Tip: if you are doing this, and you get a RELOAD link after an IP change, DON'T click on it straight away. The lazy programmers couldn't be arsed putting a timer up for you, to stop you clicking on it too early, before the router has had time to reboot. Just wait a minute before clicking.)
Then DNS proxying/relay didn't work, so all my clients with their DNS server address statically set to 192.168.1.1 wouldn't resolve an address. Would only work if I manually added an outside public address of a DNS server to each client.
Next up was port forwarding. No luck. Just didn't work.
And combined with no facility to add static DHCP assignments, nor the ability to add entries to something like DNSmasq (like I did on my displaced Tomato router) to make my web and mail server access accessible from the same address regardless of the client's location.... well, it was all too much.
So back in with the old Tomato router, and put the Technicolor device on the outside of that, with its wireless and firewall turned off. Double NAT the bugger:
192.168.1.x <--> [ 192.168.1.1 ---Tomato router ---192.168.0.254 ] <--> [ 192.168.0.1 --- Technicrappor --- 121.73.6.33 (myStaticIP)
Just needed to port-forward everything to the external interface... maybe it will work with just one global "Forward everything" rule? Alas, no dice.
Funnily, and frustratingly, the VF tech said he'd send me the unsupported instructions for setting it up as a bridge... but my internal mailserver can't get any mail because the port forwarding ain't working! So I haven't got them yet. And a bit late in the day now, for another support call.
Anybody any ideas?
try setting the Technicolor with a DMZ to your Tomato router, im sure DMZ is supported, i dont have one of those modems.
SIDE NOTE YOU MAY END UP ON A DYNAMIC IP, i seen a post floating round here suggesting this will be the case for CABLE customers with the Technicolor modems......... there was an op out email posted to all users advising of this....
[ SIGNATURE HERE ]
|
![]() ![]() ![]() |