Will using your own router allow loopback connections?

Jeff why don't you test out NAT loopback with IP passthrough mode and report your findings?

Thinnk about that.

Because I have no NVG 589, no need for it, no need for local loopback, and no need to prove to you what is obvious if you think about it.

If your router could do local loopback, it would do local loopback.  It would recognize its WAN address as the destination and loop it back; it would not need any help from the next router up the chain.  Since this does not happen, either (a) the public WAN address has not been recieved from the NVG 589 [what I asked you to check last post], (b) the router's NAT loopback feature is not turned on, or (c) the router doesn't have a NAT loopback feature.

Otherwise, what you are looking for is for the NVG 589 to have a NAT loopback feature.  Which it doesn't.

Your point is well taken regarding IP passthrough in addition to other technical points.

However NAT loopback does not work in IP passthrough mode on the NVG589.

Encorage anyone to put up a simple webserver. Access it via the WAN IP. Press F5 to reload. And report their own findings.

---

@schnappi wrote:

The NVG589 has no true  bridge mode...

 

---

This is true

---

@schnappi wrote:

... to send the WAN IP to one's own router....

 

---

This is not true.  When in IP Passthrough mode, when the device configured behind the RG for IP Passthrough mode makes a DHCP request, the RG provides to it the public IP address.  [This may even be the source of the term "IP Passthrough."]  At this point that device is responsible for providing NAT services for the devices behind it.  

By the way, you might want to review the posts in this thread:

http://forums.att.com/t5/Setup-and-Self-Install/ASUS-RTN66U-connected-to-a-Motorola-nvg589/m-p/3979026

as he was able to get loopback working behind an NVG 589.

Jeffer, I don't see anything in that thread that indicates anyone was able to get loopback working behind the NVG589.

While in theory it should be the role of the passthrough personal router, the NVG589 has a quirky way of configuring this pseudo bridged mode, and in practice it appears that no one can get the loopback working, regardless of the model of the 2nd router.

AT&T should fix the NVG589 firmware.  This is a huge headache for me as well.

Not out to justify ATT's rude responses and denial of a issue (this is just the way ATT and every other big company is).

However got NAT loopback to work with a ASUS RT-N66U and Tomato Firmware v1.28.0505 MIPSR2Toastman-RT-N K26 USB VPN behind the NVG589.

Don't get me wrong though. The network is still wonky. For example a ipconfig command on a XP machine lists two IP's as the default gateway which is not possible (in theory).

ATT will of course blame user error, user hardware, ect. for any problem with router behind the NVG589. But wouldn't be suprised if a firmware update on the NVG589 between the first time tried NAT loopback and now being the difference maker.

A Linksys WRT54GL with Tomato Firmware 1.28 by PolarCloud could not use NAT loopback when behind a NVG589 (and is the reason started this thread).

What is your NVG589 firmware version?  Mine is 9.1.0h4d38.

---

@schnappi wrote:

Not out to justify ATT's rude responses and denial of a issue (this is just the way ATT and every other big company is).

 

 

---

Who from AT&T gave you a rude response?  

---

@schnappi wrote:

... 

Don't get me wrong though. The network is still wonky. For example a ipconfig command on a XP machine lists two IP's as the default gateway which is not possible (in theory).

 

 

---

It is possible to have two routes for the default address (0.0.0.0).  I assume this is what IPCONFIG is showing you.  Have you looked at ROUTE PRINT?

OTOH, why are you messing with Windows XP anyway?