25 replies to this topic

[American Mafia]

Budman?

[+BudMan]

Well there you go

IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 66.108.144.XXX(Preferred)

That is public IP

NetRange: 66.108.0.0 - 66.108.255.255
CIDR: 66.108.0.0/16
NetName: ROADRUNNER-NYC-1

So they are using that GATEWAY as just a modem - and if you can not change the mode to routed with nat, then not much you can do but add another router.. This would be by design. Most people want just a modem. I bought my own because I didn't want any isp crap, etc.

I would highly suggest you disable wireless on the device - since if someone connects to it would prevent your whole network from working

Contact your ISP if you want that gateway to do nat so you can get rid of your other router - other than that your working as designed.

[vcfan]

looks like time warner is locking your modem into bridge mode on purpose so you don't use it as a router. ISPs are known to not be favorably of routers.

My ISP for example game me a hard time when my connection kept dropping 20 times a day. They kept blaming my router, even when I told them I didn't have a router(I did use one but hooking up UART on my modem I determined it was from their end). I had to keep harassing them until they sent a tech over to fix the weak signals in my line to the CMTS.

[+Brando212]

vcfan, on 26 January 2013 - 14:15, said:

looks like time warner is locking your modem into bridge mode on purpose so you don't use it as a router. ISPs are known to not be favorably of routers.

My ISP for example game me a hard time when my connection kept dropping 20 times a day. They kept blaming my router, even when I told them I didn't have a router(I did use one but hooking up UART on my modem I determined it was from their end). I had to keep harassing them until they sent a tech over to fix the weak signals in my line to the CMTS.

that's a bunch of BS. there's no reason for them to do that. the two majors Cox and Century Link don't even do that

@OP I'd contact Time Warner and ask them about it, if they are indeed locking it to bridged mode that's not right and you should demand they change that or risk losing a customer (usually the threat is enough but only do it if needed) but if it turns out it's just a problem with the modem they can get it exchanged

[American Mafia]

Thanks guys, i am contacting them now!

[vcfan]

Brando212, on 26 January 2013 - 14:19, said:

that's a bunch of BS. there's no reason for them to do that. the two majors Cox and Century Link don't even do that

@OP I'd contact Time Warner and ask them about it, if they are indeed locking it to bridged mode that's not right and you should demand they change that or risk losing a customer (usually the threat is enough but only do it if needed) but if it turns out it's just a problem with the modem they can get it exchanged

I know its BS. I've lived in many many big and small cities,and let me tell you, usually the bigger ISPs are actually more friendly towards routers, but there are some ISPs who will just plain tell me we don't support routers. if you have a connection problem and you are using a router, we wont help you. Some ISPs with modem/router devices lock down features. I've seen it because I've used them. They won't activate devices bought elsewhere unless it has a specific firmware and it was initially bought from them.

[vcfan]

just got confirmation from a someone that time warner locks access to these settings unless you are a business class customer. you have to call them and see if they'll set your modem into NAT routed mode instead of bridged mode remotely.

[Xilo]

Why can't you just buy your own router? A quality router would be miles better than connecting directly to the modem they give you.

[+BudMan]

He already has his own router and was using it. I don't really understand the issue myself.. I would be happy that they put that box into bridge mode if was me. I don't want to be using their crappy gateway device with whatever limited feature set it has.

I want to use what I want to use, and I sure don't want to be behind a double nat to do it. So the setup they have is what I would want from their device - just a modem.

Maybe he wants to have less clutter and just one box? Maybe he is just wanting to understand why he could only connect 1 device when it was a gateway? And all the documentation on that devices says it can do more than one, it has 4 lan ports and wireless - why would it be limited to 1 device sort of thing.

So I think we have answered that question, now its up to the OP what he wants to do with that info.

[+Brando212]

^ what i don't understand is why would they give you a 4 port router/modem if they're gonna force it to be in bridged mode? thus making 3 of the 4 ports completely useless

[+BudMan]

I don't get it either to be honest, seems like a waste of hardware to me. Why not just give him a normal cable "modem" if they are going to lock it down to only be a bridge.

Maybe they got some great deal on these devices But why would they not let the users use for their designed function then as a gateway with multiple lan ports and wireless?? Seems odd to me..

Im curious how much your paying for the device in "rent"? I just bought my own device a couple of years back vs spending the $5 a month then, now its $7 etc.. Paid for itself couple times over already.