We Still Have Great Cyber Week Deals: Check out our $5 and under smartphone deals!
Get superfast AT&T Fiber internet
deteria's profile
deteria
#1 Star!
The 5th element!
Helpful 1

Mentor

 • 

14 Messages

Wed, Oct 31, 2018 4:12 AM

PACE 11.1.0.531418 DMZ Issue

I put my router behind the PACE gateway and set the router as DMZ.  The latest firmware is crapping out my fiber connection where I'm only able to get 50mbps down and 1-200 up.   I thought it was my router crapping out, but apparently when I connect any other device directly to the gateway, I'm able to pull 940mbps up and down.  I swapped an older router and placed that device in the DMZ And it starts acting up and the previous router started working normally.

 

Can someone look into this?

Scholar

 • 

117 Messages

4 years ago

I respectfully disagree.  I've had Uverse IPTV for almost 2 years now and whenever the installer came to my home I specifically asked if we could hardwire all of my receivers via the existing coax ( new home) instead of using the WAP and wireless box route.  He was more than happy to do that and agreed with me that hardwiring via coax or ethernet would be more reliable.  I have never had not one problem with my TV service yet I read posts all the time where folks have problems that use the WAP ( wireless) boxes.  Only my main DVR is connected via ethernet and I have 3 other STB's connected by the existing coax that was installed throughout my home.  I am wondering why you advise against using coax? My IPTV has been the best and most reliable TV service I've ever had.

EVlnte

Mentor

 • 

39 Messages

4 years ago

BGW210 is live, on Passthru, using my own router now = problem solved

JefferMC

ACE - Expert

 • 

30.3K Messages

4 years ago


@ukwildcat4life wrote:

I respectfully disagree.  I've had Uverse IPTV for almost 2 years now and whenever the installer came to my home I specifically asked if we could hardwire all of my receivers via the existing coax ( new home) instead of using the WAP and wireless box route.  He was more than happy to do that and agreed with me that hardwiring via coax or ethernet would be more reliable.  I have never had not one problem with my TV service yet I read posts all the time where folks have problems that use the WAP ( wireless) boxes.  Only my main DVR is connected via ethernet and I have 3 other STB's connected by the existing coax that was installed throughout my home.  I am wondering why you advise against using coax? My IPTV has been the best and most reliable TV service I've ever had.


There are a few issues with coax:

1) The newest Gateways (e.g. the BGW210) do not have a coax connector on them, so you cannot connect your TV Receivers via coax,

2) Reliably crimping connectors on Coax is harder to do than with Ethernet, meaning they are more susceptible to degrade as the cable is flexed as you move the box around to hook up new gear, or just vacuum,

3) Often you are attempting to use existing coax running through the walls of your home, which can be of dubious quality, both in the cabling and in the crimping on the connectors at the wall plate,

4) The bus topology of coax means you have to be careful to not to leave unterminated cable legs, and if you need to change splitters (to increase or decrease connections), you must use an appropriate one (which can be hard to fine) or terminate any open ports (terminators are also hard to find).

 

I eliminated several reliability issues by replacing coax legs with Ethernet.  I have no wireless TV Receivers, however, all of mine are on Ethernet.

 

For AT&T, as long as it works, installation is much quicker with wireless, an installer can do more customers in a day, so AT&T pushes wireless for every receiver except the DVR.

 

gr8sho

ACE - Professor

 • 

3.8K Messages

4 years ago

@ukwildcat4life 

I think that shot was at me so I'll add on to what @JefferMC provided.  But first to be fair and straight, I'm very much okay with staying with something that works and is reliable.

A lot can be inferred by actions when no direct communication is present.  Both residential gateways of the most recent crop, the NVG599 and the 5268AC are old designs.  They are still supported so no issues there.  The current design as was pointed out no longer supports HPNA output (coax).  If anything breaks, you're going to get used hardware for as long as inventory is around.

I've also suffered from point 3 above.  I've seen how some of the installers of coax even in new construction deal with running cable around corners effectively damaging the cable. itself, but like I said, if the picture is not pixelating, stick with it.  When my problem occurred it became necessary to either move to a wireless STB or hardwire Ethernet which is truly the preferred connection.  I went with the latter in one application and wireless in another.  Wireless delivers a solid picture but does suffer from the occasional connection drop.

It's fairly evident at this point ATT's attention is focused on DirecTV and DirectTV Now as products to compete with cable and other streaming services.

Mentor

 • 

27 Messages

4 years ago

How this day and age with the power and resources of AT&T is there not yet an updated firmware that resolves this BUG in the 11.1.0.531418 firmware?

Swerved

Mentor

 • 

31 Messages

4 years ago

I would be willing to bet there are literally thousands more customers that do not even know this problem exists due to the fact that they never have the need to run DMZ+ mode. Therefore in AT&T's eyes, it is a low-priority issue and not worth the time it takes troubleshooting, coding, and pushing out a hot fix for it. I figure it may/may not be fixed in the next upgrade of the software, whenever that is scheduled to take place. 

 

Simply put, they don't consider it a big enough problem to fix for just a few of us users that need DMZ+.

 

Scholar

 • 

117 Messages

4 years ago

I see my post explaining my situation of using coax successfully and also providing a solution to those that think that the BGW210 cannot be used for those that want to connect their IPTV via coax has been deleted.

 

Pretty pathetic when you come on here to defend yourself and try to help others and your message gets removed ( when you clearly didn't violate any rules)......

JefferMC

ACE - Expert

 • 

30.3K Messages

4 years ago


@ukwildcat4life wrote:

I see my post explaining my situation of using coax successfully and also providing a solution to those that think that the BGW210 cannot be used for those that want to connect their IPTV via coax has been deleted.

 

Pretty pathetic when you come on here to defend yourself and try to help others and your message gets removed ( when you clearly didn't violate any rules)......


The only reason such a post would be deleted would be a violation of community standards, including personal attacks, language, or documenting how to bypass AT&T security.  Or maybe the post just never made it in the first place.  Please try posting it again; I'm interested in seeing your solution.

 

Mentor

 • 

27 Messages

4 years ago

Tech was scheduled today to replace my PACE 5268AC with a NVG599. He told me there are no NVG599's in Los Angeles and suggested that I call to have one shipped. lol.

So we're back at square one and awaiting new firmware for the 5268 so we can go back to DMZ+ to use our router behind the gateway and get full speed.

This is the 429th post going on since November... Seems a bit crazy to me that we're being ignored.

Mentor

 • 

27 Messages

4 years ago

We're setup for Coax TV. It works wonderfully. The wireless setup wasn't reliable.

Since we're on Coax TV the PACE 5268AC or the NVG599 are our only options.

 

Does anyone have insights into if/when AT&T / PACE are working on a new firmware?

Not finding what you're looking for?
New to AT&T Community?
New to the AT&T Community? Start by visiting the Community How-To.
New to the AT&T Community?
Visit the Community How-To.