NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
PCLLC-JFenn
Apr 05, 2019Tutor
XR700 Glitching games during gameplay
So I bought this router about 3 days ago. First to get to the admin page (192.168.1.1) took a very uncomfortably long time and makes you wonder if you have a bad unit. Once the setup wizard actuall...
Netduma-Fraser
Jun 25, 2019NetDuma Partner
Thanks for the heads up, I’ll pass this onto Netgear.
FURRYe38
Jun 26, 2019Guru - Experienced User
Thank you much.
- PCLLC-JFennJun 26, 2019Tutor
No need. I've spoken with the L2 team about this issue and it was resolved in the XR700 V1.0.1.10 firmware. I can say with confidence that selecting open NAT on this version does report a full cone during testing. I still feel as the .08 firmware seems a bit snappier in the gui where the .10 variant seems to be sluggish (especially on a router with a 1.7Ghz quad-core) but it does work as intended with all features. Only place I've noticed an issue (and not really an issue if you don't have the topography) is when I connected the router direct to a switch, then piggy-backed the rest of my switches off that switch to various wired devices. Instead I run wire to the individual switches where the devices are plugged in. Good thing we have 6 LAN ports as I have 6 switches in various points in the house. Anyway, keep up the good work boys.
- FURRYe38Jun 26, 2019Guru - Experienced User
Interesting, I have not been able to get FULL CONE NAT with mine, with shipping for v10 FW.
What versions of browser and Java are you using to test for NAT?
I tried a Windows 7 laptop and a Mac Book Pro 2008. Both are not reporting FULL CONE NAT.
What modem is your XR700 connected too?
PCLLC-JFenn wrote:No need. I've spoken with the L2 team about this issue and it was resolved in the XR700 V1.0.1.10 firmware. I can say with confidence that selecting open NAT on this version does report a full cone during testing. I still feel as the .08 firmware seems a bit snappier in the gui where the .10 variant seems to be sluggish (especially on a router with a 1.7Ghz quad-core) but it does work as intended with all features. Only place I've noticed an issue (and not really an issue if you don't have the topography) is when I connected the router direct to a switch, then piggy-backed the rest of my switches off that switch to various wired devices. Instead I run wire to the individual switches where the devices are plugged in. Good thing we have 6 LAN ports as I have 6 switches in various points in the house. Anyway, keep up the good work boys.
- -Donovan-Jul 03, 2019Luminary
I just did the NAT-Analyzer test with the Firefox-52.4 and the Java 1.8.0_211 on the firmware v1.0.1.10 . I got the same results on the WAN Port and SFP+ Port for the NAT Filtering: Secured "STUN Test: Address Restricted Cone NAT" and the NAT Filtering: Open "STUN Test: Full Cone NAT".
XR700-V1.0.1.10 with the SFP+ Port
NAT Filtering: Secured
STUN Test: Address Restricted Cone NAT
http://nattest.net.in.tum.de/individualResult.php?hash=b67a3f3ab7abdfa33e48a8abe552cd60
XR700-V1.0.1.10 with the SFP+ Port
NAT Filtering: Open
STUN Test: Full Cone NAT
http://nattest.net.in.tum.de/individualResult.php?hash=9ecf9a0e3bbc1b0ce3d96eec4189aeb5
XR700-V1.0.1.10 with the WAN Port
NAT Filtering: Secured
STUN Test: Address Restricted Cone NAT
http://nattest.net.in.tum.de/individualResult.php?hash=11c7f7031f2d3ef5148df47dec4603e5
XR700-V1.0.1.10 with the WAN Port
NAT Filtering: Open
STUN Test: Full Cone NAT
http://nattest.net.in.tum.de/individualResult.php?hash=565087e80010a5d874dad7f895612f72