AT&T U-Verse Data Setup Convention
Dan Drown
dan-nanog at drown.org
Thu Jul 30 19:18:32 UTC 2015
I have AT&T u-verse small business connection at my office with a
static IP setup, and my experience matches with the AT&T tech said.
We have a separate router behind the AT&T router. The AT&T router is
an Arris (former Motorola) NVG595. Our router has a static IP out of
our subnet and does NAT for the office network.
As far as I can tell, the u-verse supplied router cannot be replaced
with something less sucky. The problem is getting the 802.1x
certificate needed to authenticate on the wan port.
I dislike AT&T's hardware as it has more limitations than just this,
but some of those limitations can be worked around with an additional
router downstream of it.
Quoting Keith Stokes <keiths at neilltech.com>:
> I’m wondering if some can share their experiences or maybe there’s
> an AT&T person here who can confirm policy.
>
> I work for SaaS provider who requires a source IP to access our
> system to businesses.
>
> Normally we tell the customer to request a “Static IP” from their
> provider. That term makes sense to most ISPs.
>
> However, we’ve recently worked with an AT&T higher-up tech who told
> us that every U-Verse modem is locked to an address even when set to
> DHCP and will not change unless the unit is changed. Ordering a
> “Static IP” from them means your devices will individually get
> public addresses, which isn’t a requirement for us, isn’t quite as
> easy to add multiple devices and costs our customers more money.
>
> Here are my questions:
>
> 1. Is it really accurate that the customer’s address is tied to the
> modem/router?
>
> 2. For my curiosity, is this done through a DHCP reservation or is
> there a hard coded entry somewhere?
>
> 3. Do all U-Verse modem/routers behave the same way? This particular
> unit was a Motorola but the friends I’ve seen with U-Verse use a
> Cisco unit.
>
> ---
>
> Keith Stokes
>
>
>
>
>
More information about the NANOG
mailing list