AT&T demands we change our networks

[Roger H. Veteran]

AT&T demands we change our networks

If you recall, some time ago I had problems with my AT&T U-verse DSL service until a small village's worth of AT&T folk got involved and resolved the issues. Since then, an executive director from the "Office of the President at AT&T," who I'll call "Bob," has followed up with me once a week to make sure things are still OK.

Earlier this month Bob emailed me to schedule a telephone call, saying, "I need to discuss something with you ... Has to do with a change we are making that affects some customers ...painless and non-service affecting, but I wanted to personally cover it with you."

If you recall, some time ago I had problems with my AT&T U-verse DSL service until a small village's worth of AT&T folk got involved and resolved the issues. Since then, an executive director from the "Office of the President at AT&T," who I'll call "Bob," has followed up with me once a week to make sure things are still OK.

Earlier this month Bob emailed me to schedule a telephone call, saying, "I need to discuss something with you ... Has to do with a change we are making that affects some customers ...painless and non-service affecting, but I wanted to personally cover it with you."

We had the call and the thing he wanted to tell me was I would have to change my network subnet address and that there was a tech support document to explain what was required. The document, "Changing the private 10.x IP range on your AT&T U-verse Modem/Gateway," explains:

"As part of AT&T's efforts to enhance our network to accommodate future growth, we will be making a firmware upgrade to your AT&T U-verse Gateway. Customers who have configured their network to use the 10.0.0.1 - 10.255.255.255 private Internet Protocol (IP) ranges within their AT&T U-verse Gateway will need to change to an alternate IP range. AT&T recommends changing to a 192.168.1.x IP range. Customers who don't update their network by July 6, 2012 may potentially encounter a disruption in service."

*Emphasis Added

See More: http://www.networkwo...2-backspin.html?

[neufuse Veteran]

I just love the fact they are telling you not ot use a private IP range...

[Japlabot]

Wow they have some real Dumb Hats working for them or what.

So I can understand the shift to putting their customers behind a NAT, it is inevitable and sufficient for the "average user" but they must allow the customer to keep a Public IP if they so request. What is really dumb is that the AT&T engineers have not heard of Subnetting (using only a portion of 10.x.x.x instead of the whole block) or using a different subnet altogether in the often disused 172.16.0.0-172.32.255.255 range which will really put out a lot of customers unbeknown to them that this applies to them or will have to pay an IT Technician to reconfigure their network (especially when the sh*t hits the fan on July 6 and a lot of their business customers are screaming for an IT Tech to get them back online)

[Roger H. Veteran]

Carrier Grade NAT seems to be what the post was implying which would SUCK! I saw some posts about the 10.x range being removed from the AT&T Gateways on DSLreports after a firmware upgrade like last month or so.

I don't really need public facing IP addresses even though I have a server at home. It's more of an internal server/DLNA machine but it is accessible from the internet now if I want to download/upload a file. Currently my gilfriend in Germany does use it though to backup her school work (and of-course all the pictures she's taking) just incase laptop gets stolen and such.

Hey AT&T, I heard of this thing where Comcast is giving EACH user more IP address than you have customers. I think they called it IPv6. Yeah, i think that's it. Tell Comcast to give you 1 /64 and you can feed all your customers with a public IPv6 address easily then! :D

[Ridlas]

I don't get how your LAN IP range has anything to do with them.

[neufuse Veteran]

Carrier Grade NAT seems to be what the post was implying which would SUCK! I saw some posts about the 10.x range being removed from the AT&T Gateways on DSLreports after a firmware upgrade like last month or so.

I don't really need public facing IP addresses even though I have a server at home. It's more of an internal server/DLNA machine but it is accessible from the internet now if I want to download/upload a file. Currently my gilfriend in Germany does use it though to backup her school work (and of-course all the pictures she's taking) just incase laptop gets stolen and such.

Hey AT&T, I heard of this thing where Comcast is giving EACH user more IP address than you have customers. I think they called it IPv6. Yeah, i think that's it. Tell Comcast to give you 1 /64 and you can feed all your customers with a public IPv6 address easily then! :D

yeah Comcast is always ahead... heck they pushed DOCSIS3 like heck when TWC was complaining and moaning about having to upgrade CMTS's and crap and that cost "money".... blah blah... comcast has been pushing IPv6 for years now, and has been testing native IPv6 for a while now in some markets, and 6to4 and 6RD for a long while now (with auto configure setup and everything for routers to find it)