Well as of the first, I am no longer employed by the aforementioned service provider. The article was interesting - but I actually wrote the author with the following after reading the article - my question is whether the 8-12GB was upload only, or upload/download Was 8 - 12 TB (TeraBYTES) the combined, or just the upload? From reading > the article it was unclear which was being referred to. > > The reason this number caught my eye is that 12 TB on a 35 Mbps > (MegaBITS/second) connection is literally 100% of a regular 30 day month. > If it's upload only - he's using his upload pegged at 35 Mbps for the > entire time he's online. I recognized that number from looking at > utilization graphs for business class customers (which don't have a cap). > I'm not in any position to comment on this officially (especially as a > former employee), but if someone is uploading 8-12 TB/month, on a shared > medium, which DOCSIS over HFC (Hybrid Fiber/Coaxial) definitely is, they > are the single largest user of upstream bandwidth on the node. > > Here's the fun part - I'm a consumer, I get that what "unlimited" means is > an arbitrary and oft debated question. Looking at data caps in the mobile > industry - is unlimited truly ever unlimited? At the other hand, I'm a > professional service provider engineer - those nodes are using shared > upstream sources, and he is utilizing 20% of that upstream on a regular > basis. How do you decide to police that? How much is too much, etc, etc. As > i said, I can't comment on that - but given that shared upstream is only > 150Mbps on a node - and that nodes serve 100s of customers, he's an > outlier, and *the* outlier, as in "you can't lie out any further". > > Granted that's all an assumption off of that being upload only - if it's > shared up/down, then it's still notable, and he's still an outlier. > > Managing these networks isn't easy - but it is getting better, Cox is > aggressively rolling out Fiber deeper into their nodes and splitting them > using newer techniques that will allow coax to deliver much faster down > speeds (10Gbps if I recall correctly) and everyone's favorite punching back > on cable - upload (up to 1Gbps). Those are contingent on newer DOCSIS > specs, 3.1 -> 4.0 and some magic caled Full Duplex DOCSIS that allow you to > use all frequences on the RF plant both directions. > I honestly have no idea how to manage a DSLAM/DSL network, are they on a shared medium like DOCSIS RF? If so individual QoS can be implemented and shared much more easier than an HFC design. Speaking to FTTH builds - Cox is still doing those in greenfield builds, as is CLINK, but it's incredibly expensive to do in brownfield (already built) neighborhoods. I live in one of the areas of GA that has FTTH and love it, but I don't relish the digging that had to be done to accomplish it. Not saying it can't be done, but I get why Google Fiber, AT&T, VZ Fios, et. al have held off for so long or have delayed/canceled their future brownfields. It's not easy - granted we'll see how 5G impacts all of this for eyeball networks. But in a forum like this, I don't see 5G for 10TB uploads anytime soon. Some of us aren't exactly eyeballs only :) Not a huge fan of the caps - but it's a nasty cycle to be in - node splits are at least 50K a pop, and when I was with former employer, they were done more often in high Business traffic areas (higher monthly revenue, no bandwidth caps), but I wouldn't be surprised to see those mitigated by the new OCML (https://broadbandlibrary.com/ocml-for-converged-access-networks/) for those builds now. - Thomas Scott | mr.thomas.scott@gmail.com On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 8:04 PM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss < plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: > I started getting taxed with Cox when I was experimenting with letting > some family and friends vpn into my storage, and everyone started > downloading off me at once. I wasn't graced to get gigablast, so no > unlimited for me. Go figure, but I got annoyed quick with cox telling me I > was going over my "allocation" and charging me to boot. I moved to CL, no > more overages, and far cheaper overall. Service is meh at times, but see > prior comments. I'll take cheap, usually fast, and allow for leeching for > the fam. > > Leeching, backups, all the same. > > -mb > > > On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 8:08 AM Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss < > plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: > >> I ended up with fiber to the home in my area, and Have used anywhere from >> 2-10 TB a month since long before its availability. Only once did I receive >> a call, I explained I was doing a backup restore to cloud and that was it. >> . I have heard nothing else since. >> >> On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 7:58 AM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss < >> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >> >>> Kind of a funny read, made me think of this Cox discussion. As usual, >>> even when you pay for unlimited, it's not really, and if you piss off a >>> random top-talker metric, you get smacked. Actually get what you pay for? >>> Nah. >>> >>> >>> https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/06/cox-slows-internet-speeds-in-entire-neighborhoods-to-punish-any-heavy-users/ >>> >>> I don't buy the FUD about the "downgrade the whole neighborhood", unless >>> the neighborhood is just overused/saturated as it is, in which case Cox >>> needs to fix it with a node split per normal direction. They won't >>> police/shape a whole neighborhood like that, rather they'd just >>> decommission or lower the bandwidth on the offenders modem usually, ala >>> this guy. >>> >>> May be a bit different if an actual Cox fiber/pon site, , but these seem >>> still rare like hens teeth, and only was deployed as buzz during Google >>> Fiber threatening them. Cox doing fiber to the home I think died with >>> Google Fiber. >>> >>> -mb >>> >>> >>> On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 9:32 AM Michael Butash >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I'll agree with the CL being saturated comment - pretty sure it doesn't >>>> matter whether DSL or Fiber, their peering and aggregation is the same per >>>> region, and really it's where they converge that is the problem, which is >>>> where said saturation occurs. CL just *feels* saturated in use, where I >>>> didn't get that with Cox. Everything loads a little slower, you can just >>>> sort of tell after using long enough. Cox would periodically too, but they >>>> tended to already be working on a fix by the time I'd hit up someone I knew >>>> there to complain. CL I have no such faith in. >>>> >>>> I'm paying almost half my Cox bill with CL however, and no random >>>> overage charges, so I'm willing to live with it honestly, and it's never >>>> been *that bad*. If I download something, it downloads quickly, be it http >>>> or torrents. Just random viewing of pages in quick succession, ala >>>> scanning news just always seems a bit slow to start. That usually feels >>>> like buffers are blown out somewhere inline. >>>> >>>> -mb >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 8:34 PM Thomas Scott via PLUG-discuss < >>>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> They are welcome to, but node splits are a 6 month minimum last I >>>>> checked 😁 - granted we're getting faster with how many we're doing. In the >>>>> next 5 years, most cable operators will implement some sort of >>>>> aggressive node splitting to keep up with demand. Current employer not >>>>> excluded. >>>>> >>>>> I've had CLink on fiber - they're upstream nodes are a little more >>>>> saturated, but they do peer locally in the valley. Current employer does >>>>> have peering with FAANG and a couple other heavy hitters in the valley (not >>>>> any proprietary information here, any trace route from the valley to those >>>>> sites will show it terminating in 2 or 3 hops), but if I recall correctly >>>>> 70% of CLink traffic hits their DCs in Phoenix. Granted it's all best >>>>> effort past that, but if you don't have a heavily saturated node, you'll do >>>>> all right. GPON fiber is GPON fiber, regardless of Service Provider. It's >>>>> just a question of how many other subscribers are on your PON port and how >>>>> big the upstream links are. >>>>> >>>>> - Thomas Scott | mr.thomas.scott@gmail.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 4:04 PM Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss < >>>>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> This last bit is interesting. I have Cox Fiber (no data cap for >>>>>> Gigablast fiber yet) and Century Link just announced a competing service in >>>>>> my area. For about half the cost. For the same Gigabit Fiber (or 940mbps as >>>>>> they are calling it). >>>>>> >>>>>> Anyone with any experience with them on residential fiber? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 5:59 AM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss < >>>>>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> So Cox subs can reach out to you when we're having saturation >>>>>>> issues? :) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Having been around for the beginnings of cable modem tech at @home >>>>>>> networks in the 90's dealing with almost every big MSO (Cox, Comcast, ATT, >>>>>>> Intermedia, etc), I like to talk about the tech as a bit proud where it's >>>>>>> gone. I liked Cox as one of the last decent hold-outs for things like >>>>>>> keeping Usenet around longer than they should, not killing customers for >>>>>>> mpaa/riaa abuse complaints, and keeping data caps off when the industry was >>>>>>> moving in that direction, so I think they're better than the rest, but >>>>>>> eventually they hopped on the money train with data caps too. And now >>>>>>> they're paying for their pro-pirate stance as well with lawsuits >>>>>>> against them winning >>>>>>> , >>>>>>> probably using that extra cap revenue to pay the trolls. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Would I go back? Not as long as they have data caps, and someone >>>>>>> else around me doesn't, but yes - much better network. I don't like random >>>>>>> overages in my bill, I get that enough with power. If I thought the covid >>>>>>> restrictions to remove caps would hold, I'd probably switch back now, but >>>>>>> I'm sure they'll find a reason to reimplement them asap as that's lost >>>>>>> revenue on your rsu's. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It's always good to hear from other docsis speakers, welcome back! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -mb >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 6:54 PM Thomas Scott < >>>>>>> mr.thomas.scott@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Day job is for a certain ISP HQ in Atlanta that supplies internet >>>>>>>> for a lot of the valley - I work in Network Operations first in Phoenix and >>>>>>>> now in Atlanta, and was surprised to see so much of what I talk >>>>>>>> about everyday in PLUG! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> CLink trying to play FTTN as FTTH, nothing new there. I live in a >>>>>>>> neighborhood outside of Atlanta that had some AT&T brownfield development >>>>>>>> for FTTH, and I've had no regrets (300 up 300 down!) Cox is moving towards >>>>>>>> "10G" with DOCSIS 4.0 and they are getting fiber closer to the home with >>>>>>>> their node splits. If you find that you all off a sudden have an extra hop >>>>>>>> in your path, that might be the seen you've been on one of those nodes that >>>>>>>> have been lit and split. The amount of bandwidth going up and down will go >>>>>>>> up dramatically. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> @Michael - yeah I don't think the caps are going anywhere, the >>>>>>>> industry as a whole (driven by big red) has moved that direction, but I >>>>>>>> think you'll see speeds and caps rise as N+0 goes to full duplex DOCSIS. I >>>>>>>> do know they've been relaxed with the COVID-19 FCC initiatives, but how >>>>>>>> long that lasts, I'm not sure. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> @Mac - the cox supplied modems are almost all going to "Panoramic >>>>>>>> Wi-Fi" and the number of holes found in DOCSIS devices is... disturbing to >>>>>>>> say the least. It was designed to be operated on a shared RF medium, and >>>>>>>> like other "trusting" protocols (i.e. BGP) has a lot of issues. The more >>>>>>>> virtualized it becomes, I think we'll see more of those go away - the >>>>>>>> smaller the broadcast domains, and the smaller the first upstream router, >>>>>>>> the better those will be able to be maintained and automated. Looking at >>>>>>>> the road maps, it will be interesting what comes next. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - Thomas Scott | mr.thomas.scott@gmail.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 3:54 PM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss < >>>>>>>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Oddly enough, the model number of your router stuck in my head, >>>>>>>>> the C3000Z, and I realized I used the same thing, but for my 150mbps dsl >>>>>>>>> modem. You sure you have actual gig fiber? They tend to misrepresent >>>>>>>>> their actual products in sales. Ask me how I know. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I say this because I called CL before going to them, and asked if >>>>>>>>> I could get fiber in the network. They said yes. Hmm, I knew damn well >>>>>>>>> they did not, as no one wants to build fiber into old peoria neighborhoods >>>>>>>>> such as mine. After some conversation and calling him out, he explained >>>>>>>>> that "oh, it's a gigabit network", just not fiber to your house. I could >>>>>>>>> get dual-band DSL, which means 75mbps x2, for a total of 150mbps, delivered >>>>>>>>> by a gigabit network! I sort of facepalmed, but ordered it anyways as it >>>>>>>>> was significantly more than I had with cox (80mbps at the time I think), >>>>>>>>> significantly cheaper, and no bandwidth cap. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If there is anything other than fiber directly in your modem, I'd >>>>>>>>> call bullocks, but FTTH is a myth to me. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Crappier service, but I'll take the (usually) cheap and fast. It >>>>>>>>> is most certainly not gigabit fiber to my house, even though that's what >>>>>>>>> they tried to sell me I was getting. Only new house/community builds get >>>>>>>>> fiber, and if even that. Cox did the same to compete with Google fiber, >>>>>>>>> and as soon as Google Fiber died, so did Cox ever mentioning fiber again. >>>>>>>>> Truth is Cox doesn't need it, shielded coax can deliver soon 10g over it >>>>>>>>> just fine with new modulation schemas and docsis improvements. >>>>>>>>> Centurylink's 100 year old 2-8 wire infrastructure cannot, all they can do >>>>>>>>> is build new with fiber, but they probably won't being decrepit. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I hear friends of mine mention they have fiber, and wonder just if >>>>>>>>> they really do. This is why Google Fiber folded, it was unrealistic unless >>>>>>>>> a net-new community build. Google fiber retrofits were a disaster >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Fun-fact: Oddly enough the guy that built Google Fiber, Milo >>>>>>>>> Medin, is the same guy that started @Home Networks back in late 90's for >>>>>>>>> Cable Modem services, and pioneered current industry standards in use today >>>>>>>>> globally to deliver cable internet. The last-mile regional MSO providers >>>>>>>>> snuffed him/company back then, took it over themselves, and then they >>>>>>>>> snuffed him out again as he tried the same incursion with Google Fiber, and >>>>>>>>> realized it just cost too damn much to compete. Cable Monopolies, flawless >>>>>>>>> victory. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Next I expect he'll team up with Elon or Bezos to try again via >>>>>>>>> terrestrial. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -mb >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 10:32 AM Michael Butash >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I tend to find the CL network a bit wonky, having moved to DSL >>>>>>>>>> from Cox (damn bandwidth caps). I find the general performance is worse >>>>>>>>>> than cox, where I suspect they simply don't manage the bandwidth and are >>>>>>>>>> far too oversubscribed as it feels like the internet buffers at times, >>>>>>>>>> literally. Cox would occasionally get that way too, and it was easy to see >>>>>>>>>> in an ongoing MTR when their peering in LA would get slammed and latency >>>>>>>>>> would jump (not to mention I know the guys that manage that bandwidth, >>>>>>>>>> telling them often got it fixed). Oddly Using MTR with CL, they filter >>>>>>>>>> icmp/udp specifically that seems to hide responses to track well. Go >>>>>>>>>> figure, truth hurts, so hide it. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Having worked for service providers numerous times over the >>>>>>>>>> years, working in and building them, routers are always an issue in a metro >>>>>>>>>> city or even interstate networks. No two platforms are ever the same, >>>>>>>>>> whether buying all Cisco, Juniper, Nokia, or any combo of all and more, >>>>>>>>>> which as you said, many do. Hardest part is usually capacity planning, >>>>>>>>>> particularly with something like covid, every isp took a kick in the groin >>>>>>>>>> at the same time to augment their networks, suddenly by some magnitude, >>>>>>>>>> when everyone else in the world is doing the same. Slowness in networking >>>>>>>>>> can often be attributed to those not having enough capacity, though they'll >>>>>>>>>> never admit it. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm on the 150mbps dsl, and a speed test can provide that for >>>>>>>>>> sure, but general usage, which I use a lot of tabs and apps, tends to bring >>>>>>>>>> things to a crawl often. I'd even go back to cox if they got rid of the >>>>>>>>>> bandwidth cap. CL might as well be government, and they're run by unions, >>>>>>>>>> so nothing happens fast, including capacity augments. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Re: mac limits, having been around Cox both as a customer and >>>>>>>>>> network engineer working there early 2000's, the mac security was more >>>>>>>>>> about limiting the amount of hosts behind a modem that could be allowed to >>>>>>>>>> a single mac and IP address. Back Circa 1998 I had my first Cox modem, >>>>>>>>>> and there were no routers, you just got yourself a phat 10baset switch from >>>>>>>>>> computer city and connected up your family on public ip addresses, each >>>>>>>>>> with their own mac and ip's. With no limits or filters that led to >>>>>>>>>> security issues (hey, I see my neighbor's c drive shared!), Cox and others >>>>>>>>>> then pushed people to then buy a router, which by then around 2002, you >>>>>>>>>> could buy a cheap wrt54g linksys. The advent of docsis also allowed to >>>>>>>>>> both filter and restrict the macs by default, also let them reduce to now >>>>>>>>>> 1:1 IP to User ratio, which was good for ip management, the abuse >>>>>>>>>> departments, and fbi warrants from legal. You used to be able to buy >>>>>>>>>> another ip, they'd push a new docsis config with mac-alowed=2, but not >>>>>>>>>> anymore. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Same reasons they're just building in the router functions now, >>>>>>>>>> it ensures they can offer some basic customer security, plus lets them run >>>>>>>>>> whatever spyware in their embedded router os they want. Better off buying >>>>>>>>>> your own standalone modem and router combo, one you ideally trust. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -mb >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 10:07 PM Donald Mac McCarthy via >>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Putting a CL modem into a bridge mode where it only handles the >>>>>>>>>>> PPPoE connection is simply checking a radial select button and hitting >>>>>>>>>>> apply. If your firewall supports PPoE, even better, as you no longer need >>>>>>>>>>> their Modem and router in the mix. But, that is just my experience, and it >>>>>>>>>>> is limited. I have a CL fiber to the door drop, and they gave me a Zyxel >>>>>>>>>>> C3000Z device for connection. I promptly ripped it out and allowed pfSense >>>>>>>>>>> to maintain the PPPoE connection. I had to call support for packet loss one >>>>>>>>>>> time, and they refused to help me. So goes it rolling your own I guess. >>>>>>>>>>> Turns out a day later we had a several hour outage due to one of the >>>>>>>>>>> multiplexing cards used to distribute the 40Gb/s core fiber to the GPON >>>>>>>>>>> devices failed. Seems like that was a likely culprit for some of the packet >>>>>>>>>>> loss the previous day. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Having just gotten off a call in which the Senior Director of >>>>>>>>>>> Security Architecture and Engineering (a friend of mine from Atlanta) for >>>>>>>>>>> Cox was a participant, before he hung up I asked him about the typical Cox >>>>>>>>>>> supplied modems. Very, very few of them are purely bridge devices - >>>>>>>>>>> especially with the push to "Panoramic WiFi". A member of CentryLink who >>>>>>>>>>> was also on the call (ISP InfoSec sharing/working group) mentioned how >>>>>>>>>>> painful it was to support the number of company issued >>>>>>>>>>> modems/gateway/router models there are for different infrastructure and >>>>>>>>>>> connections - let alone ones that customers buy and bring to the party. >>>>>>>>>>> BTW, the MAC address thing is because they do actually use a MAC locking >>>>>>>>>>> like feature for security. Apparently it is bad for the network if you just >>>>>>>>>>> go plug your modem in at several houses in the neighborhood due to the way >>>>>>>>>>> DOCSIS works. I still have to dig into that and ask some more questions on >>>>>>>>>>> that one. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> There was a collective groan among the engineers when another >>>>>>>>>>> ISP spoke up about the number of critical flaws they find in their DOCIS >>>>>>>>>>> devices each year. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> With the amount of consolidation which has happened in the past >>>>>>>>>>> 20 years in the broadband market, the landscape is riddled with legacy bits >>>>>>>>>>> and pieces of this provider and that provider somehow being coerced into >>>>>>>>>>> working together to accomplish passing traffic. One of the ISPs mentioned >>>>>>>>>>> they had no less than 350 different models of core switching equipment made >>>>>>>>>>> by more than a dozen manufacturers in their network. They have a team of 40 >>>>>>>>>>> (really 5 teams of 8) that simply monitor and ensure that the OSPF >>>>>>>>>>> functions properly among the various models and brands to make sure that >>>>>>>>>>> the network properly heals/manages congestion. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Anyway, just throwing it out so that people can see and >>>>>>>>>>> understand the picture at a higher level. The final comment on the call was >>>>>>>>>>> from an engineer at a midwestern rural provider and one that I am sure many >>>>>>>>>>> of us can relate to. She said she spends all day pulling her hair out >>>>>>>>>>> trying to keep the network functioning at the highest of levels. The first >>>>>>>>>>> words out of her kids' mouths when she gets home are "Mom, the WiFi seems >>>>>>>>>>> slow today." >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I talked with Alexander this afternoon, and it looks like he has >>>>>>>>>>> a functioning network again. The APs were reluctant to give up their old >>>>>>>>>>> configuration, so a factory reset and new DHCP leases seem to have done the >>>>>>>>>>> trick. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hopefully this sheds a bit of light on something for a few >>>>>>>>>>> people. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Mac >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss wrote on 5/4/20 4:59 PM: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Ideally when you plug into a cable modem, it comes up, and >>>>>>>>>>> passes your ethernet to the cmts in a bridge, lets one mac address >>>>>>>>>>> dhcp/arp, and things work. It learns that one ip/mac, and disallows any >>>>>>>>>>> other mac. No security, nat, nothing, just real dumb dhcp + default >>>>>>>>>>> routing with a public ip. Routers/firewalls try to NAT you, thus double >>>>>>>>>>> NAT if using a router behind it. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> CL sells you a dsl modem/router that does your local security >>>>>>>>>>> whether you want it or not, full router/nat/firewall, and probably >>>>>>>>>>> spyware. Making it a modem is possible, but takes work, and your firewall >>>>>>>>>>> has to support PPPoE (not all can/do). Last time I touched a combo Cox >>>>>>>>>>> router/modem, I didn't see any way to do so. I told them to buy a real >>>>>>>>>>> modem, and that worked with their belkin/cisco/linksys/netgear they had. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> If your "modem" mentions wifi, it's a router/firewall, not a >>>>>>>>>>> modem. Not all are clear about this, as they dumb it down for consumers, >>>>>>>>>>> but an important point. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -mb >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:53 PM Stephen Partington via >>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I Owned a Nighthawk Router/Modem combo, The way that Netgear >>>>>>>>>>>> handled that is that the modem was hard-wired to a bridge on the router >>>>>>>>>>>> side. and technically you could see it as a separate device in the router >>>>>>>>>>>> configs if you rooted around enough. but the modem side was just a modem. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 11:03 AM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Cox modems *are* bridges first and foremost typically, unless >>>>>>>>>>>>> you get a bundled router/modem, which is only what CenturyLink sells. If >>>>>>>>>>>>> you got a "router/modem" combo, just buy a modem-only device for a dumb >>>>>>>>>>>>> bridge and simple ethernet for a public ip. I recommend staying with an >>>>>>>>>>>>> arris cable modem, originally motorola, they basically developed cable >>>>>>>>>>>>> modem docsis, and are always the best. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I moved from Cox to CL when Cox started adding a usage cap, >>>>>>>>>>>>> and that was new to me to get my Fortinet firewall online with CL and their >>>>>>>>>>>>> DSL doing PPPOE. I've seen the router/cable modem combo boxes later, but >>>>>>>>>>>>> never owned one as I always have my own router/firewall. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -mb >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 8:36 AM Donald Mac McCarthy < >>>>>>>>>>>>> mac@oscontext.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Will Cox allow for a bridge/virtual bridge mode? Xfinity >>>>>>>>>>>>>> does, which allows you to put in a firewall, and use the modem only as a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> gateway, therefore preventing a double NAT situation. Never lived in a Cox >>>>>>>>>>>>>> area before, and currently ride CL fiber. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mac >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss wrote on 5/3/20 2:00 PM: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cox modems will learn and allow only 1 mac at a time (unless >>>>>>>>>>>>>> business is set to allow more, but not on residential). If switching out >>>>>>>>>>>>>> firewalls, I 99% of time reboot the modem first and foremost. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -mb >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 12:08 PM Snyder, Alexander J via >>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I got it working. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I assigned the SFP+ port as my LAN and assigned it the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10.x.x.x/16 network. Then I had to call COX and list the WAN Mac address >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with them. Upon doing so I was able to reach external sites, and all >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> downstream devices started coming alive! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for all the suggestions and help! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alexander >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my Galaxy S10+ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, May 3, 2020, 03:14 Herminio Hernandez, Jr. via >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you login to the FW via the LAN interface? Can you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ping the FW LAN interface? Check the routing and NAT policy on the FW. All >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> outbound traffic should NAT to the FW WAN interface and there should be a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> default (0.0.0.0/0) route to the internet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 7:27 PM Seabass via PLUG-discuss < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm with Mac, I think it is not the firewall, but if you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have the ability to plug it into a display with a keyboard, you can use >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that for configuration and modify a different device at the same time. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Makes it easier to troubleshoot by giving you the ability >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to configure your pfSense ports at the same time. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Message: 2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Date: Sat, 2 May 2020 09:04:35 -0700 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Donald Mac McCarthy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: "Snyder, Alexander J via PLUG-discuss" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: pfSense + Ubiquity >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Message-ID: < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18adfa38-3e72-7b0a-e31a-1ddf175d717f@oscontext.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can help - but I am unavailable to do so until tomorrow. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Make sure there are not any thing other than default VLANs >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interfaces to start with. Ubiquiti is famous for not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> havinght eSFP+ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ports active in the default configuration, and I believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the switch has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all the ports to shutdown on default config as well. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think it is the switch not passing traffic through - no >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the firewall. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mac >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Snyder, Alexander J via PLUG-discuss wrote on 5/2/20 8:53 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> AM: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Does anyone out there have experience with pfSence and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ubiquity switches? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > I have zero with either but that didn't stop me from >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> buying both .... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > how hard could it be?! LOL. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > I bought a Negate XG-1537-1U. I bought a Unifi Pro 24 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PoE switch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > I can configure the FW immediately after >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > firstboot/restore-default-configs, but only if i set the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LAN interface >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > to be the cable that goes directly to my laptop. That's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> great, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > that does shit for the downstream switch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > I have a 10GB SFP+ Port that I want to configure as the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> downstream >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > port to ubiquity, but any configuration other than >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mentioned above >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > fails .... and I'm now on my 12th "Reset To Factory >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Defaults" ... any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > help on this would be greatly appreciated! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Alexander >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Sent from my Galaxy S10+ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > PLUG-discuss mailing list - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> settings: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Donald "Mac" McCarthy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Director, Field Operations >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Open Source Context >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1.602.584.4445 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mac@oscontext.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://oscontext.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -------------- next part -------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> URL: < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/pipermail/plug-discuss/attachments/20200502/aeab14b4/attachment-0001.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Digest Footer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> End of PLUG-discuss Digest, Vol 179, Issue 2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ******************************************** >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Donald "Mac" McCarthy >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Director, Field Operations >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Open Source Context >>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1.602.584.4445 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> mac@oscontext.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://oscontext.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent >>>>>>>>>>>> you from rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze >>>>>>>>>>>> button. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Stephen >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> Donald "Mac" McCarthy >>>>>>>>>>> Director, Field Operations >>>>>>>>>>> Open Source Context >>>>>>>>>>> +1.602.584.4445 >>>>>>>>>>> mac@oscontext.com >>>>>>>>>>> https://oscontext.com >>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you >>>>>> from rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button. >>>>>> >>>>>> Stephen >>>>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >> >> >> >> -- >> A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you from >> rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button. >> >> Stephen >> >> --------------------------------------------------- >> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss > > --------------------------------------------------- > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: > https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss