thkala

So after trying various configurations, it seems to me that one has two options:

1) The current default for new users:

- half-broken IPv4 due to it going through Carrier-Grade NAT; no public IPv4 address, no port-forwarding, unreliable UDP and so on.

- half-working IPv6, due to the modem not supporting prefix delegation and only giving out a /64 prefix which cannot be subnetted without some painful gymnastics.

- a cable modem with minimal/non-existent support for customization, such as its insistence on having the 192.168.x.1 IP address.

2) The setup that one gets if they ask for “Bridge mode” from UPC support:

- Fully functional dynamic IPv4; which is good.

- No IPv6 at all. None. It’s just not there, period; I assume that IPv6 in the default “IPv6 router mode” is implemented using some sort of tunelling, instead of being native IPv6.

---

So, basically:

- If someone wants fully functional IPv6 (i.e. proper prefix delegation), UPC is not for them.

- If someone wants port-forwarding in IPv4 and at least _some_ IPv6 support, UPC is not for them.

Am I missing something? Are there any plans to improve the IPv6 situation in the near future?

Do we know for sure that the new firmware will fix this issue? And to what extent?

My previous router stopped working correctly and I just received the replacement. Having 192.168.x.1 forced on me was a nasty surprise and has basically broken a lot of my network configuration, including VPNs, firewall settings etc. This is the first router I’ve ever seen that was broken-by-design like this. UPC is essentially forcing me to buy another router, either to replace their box (Is that even possible?), or to at least protect my home network from its brokeness.

UPC: Your box is broken and it’s making folks’ lives difficult. Fix it.

PS: And once we get this fixed, can we also have a properly settable DHCP range?

PS2: Unmasked passwords in the router UI? Really?