NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
Solved
CM2000, 1000, etc firmware update needed for Spectrum IPv6
Hello, For many months all user-owned CM series Netgear cable modems are unable to retrieve IPv6 leases. They previously worked without issue. There are numerous mentions on DSL Reports and als...
HI there,
Can you help provide some more details regarding this?
1) Does the CM have IPv6 address? (Check it from 192.168.100.1 web GUI)
2) Does the router have IPv6 address? (Check it from router's web GUI)
3) Capture CM event log from GUI(192.168.100.1->ADVENCED->Administration->Event Log)
4) Describe the issue in detail.
5) Where abouts in the DSLReports forum are you seeing this issue being posted about? Please post links to these regarding the CM model modems and Spectrum.
Hello, Thank you for the reply.
1. Spectrum looks to only provision devices using IPv4 addresses.
2. My router has only IPv6 on the internal and lo interfaces. All RFC1918. This is the issue seen by everyone.
3.
| Time | Priority | Description |
| Fri Feb 17 07:03:13 2023 | (Warning (5)) | DBC-REQ Mismatch Between Calculated Value for P1.6hi Compared to CCAP Provided Value;CM-MAC=38:94:ed:09:ed:88;CMTS-MAC=00:af:1f:1e:07:21;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1; |
| Fri Feb 17 07:03:12 2023 | (Critical (3)) | SYNC Timing Synchronization failure - Loss of Sync;CM-MAC=38:94:ed:09:ed:88;CMTS-MAC=00:af:1f:1e:07:21;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1; |
| Fri Feb 17 06:51:14 2023 | (Error (4)) | SW upgrade Failed before download - File not Present |
| Fri Feb 17 06:51:14 2023 | (Notice (6)) | SW Download INIT - Via NMS |
| Fri Feb 17 06:51:04 2023 | (Warning (5)) | Dynamic Range Window violation |
| Fri Feb 17 06:51:04 2023 | (Warning (5)) | RNG-RSP CCAP Commanded Power Exceeds Value Corresponding to the Top of the DRW;CM-MAC=38:94:ed:09:ed:88;CMTS-MAC=00:af:1f:1e:07:21;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1; |
| Fri Feb 17 06:51:04 2023 | (Warning (5)) | Dynamic Range Window violation |
| Fri Feb 17 06:51:04 2023 | (Warning (5)) | RNG-RSP CCAP Commanded Power Exceeds Value Corresponding to the Top of the DRW;CM-MAC=38:94:ed:09:ed:88;CMTS-MAC=00:af:1f:1e:07:21;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1; |
| Fri Feb 17 06:51:03 2023 | (Warning (5)) | REG-RSP-MP Mismatch Between Calculated Value for P1.6hi Compared to CCAP Provided Value;CM-MAC=38:94:ed:09:ed:88;CMTS-MAC=00:af:1f:1e:07:21;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1; |
| Fri Feb 17 06:50:58 2023 | (Notice (6)) | DS profile assignment change. DS Chan ID: 32; Previous Profile: ; New Profile: 1 2.;CM-MAC=38:94:ed:09:ed:88;CMTS-MAC=00:af:1f:1e:07:21;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1; |
| Fri Feb 17 06:50:53 2023 | (Notice (6)) | TLV-11 - unrecognized OID;CM-MAC=38:94:ed:09:ed:88;CMTS-MAC=00:af:1f:1e:07:21;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1; |
| Fri Feb 17 06:50:53 2023 | (Error (4)) | Missing BP Configuration Setting TLV Type: 17.9;CM-MAC=38:94:ed:09:ed:88;CMTS-MAC=00:af:1f:1e:07:21;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1; |
| Fri Feb 17 06:50:53 2023 | (Error (4)) | Missing BP Configuration Setting TLV Type: 17.8;CM-MAC=38:94:ed:09:ed:88;CMTS-MAC=00:af:1f:1e:07:21;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1; |
| Fri Feb 17 06:50:53 2023 | (Warning (5)) | DHCP WARNING - Non-critical field invalid in response ;CM-MAC=38:94:ed:09:ed:88;CMTS-MAC=00:af:1f:1e:07:21;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1; |
| Time Not Established | (Notice (6)) | Honoring MDD; IP provisioning mode = IPv4 |
| Time Not Established | (Critical (3)) | SYNC Timing Synchronization failure - Failed to acquire QAM/QPSK symbol timing;;CM-MAC=38:94:ed:09:ed:88;CMTS-MAC=00:00:00:00:00:00;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1; |
4. Regardless of prefix request size Spectrum doesn't assign IPv6 prefixes to NG modems.
5. https://www.dslreports.com/forum/r33423803-HSI-CFL-IPV6-Issue
https://www.reddit.com/r/Spectrum/comments/uzb2up/native_ipv6_no_longer_enabled_on_spectrum_network/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Spectrum/comments/vspgc7/trouble_with_ipv6_connection/
The decision from Spectrum looks to impact TP-Link, Arris, Netgear, and others. It appears their process has been accepted by Motorola and obviously their own internal issued modems. I have no doubt this is simply a policy issue on Spectrum's part but I wanted to make some effort to secure my investment in the NG gear before giving up.
Thank for this information. I'll pass this back to NG.
What is the brand and model of the wifi router your using.
FYI, I see Errors, and Criticals and Warnings that the ISP would review and should resolve. That's on them.
Can you lost a capture of the Cable Connections status page as well please.
I've tried to post the power levels, etc, twice but the post never shows up here in the thread after a success message. Unsure why. The channels are all locked and levels good. You'll have to take my word for it.
I'm convinced this is a policy issue and not a technical issue. Spectrum has opted to do this for all customer-owned equipment with a few exceptions like Motorola for some reason. They cite some firmware validation as their reasoning though. Spectrum is a huge ISP with presumably many NG customers and I'm hoping NG can help to raise the issue and get it resolved.
Router is Ubiquiti UDP-Pro running UNIFI OS 1.12.38 Address request is a /56 using DHCPv6 and worked without issue until this policy change. The router manages a v6 tunnel from HE as well as v6 on a few VLAN without issue. I'm not a novice. I've managed global-scale networks for more than thirty years and am active in NANOG and other NetOPS communities. Again, I really don't think this is anything to do with my equipment. The issue is impacting everyone with NG (and many other brand) modems on the Spectrum network.
Please copy and past the Cable Connections page into a word doc then save off as a PDF file then attach to your next post using the Choose File button.
We'll need to see the cable connections page.
Thank you.
dmonnier wrote:
I've tried to post the power levels, etc, twice but the post never shows up here in the thread after a success message. Unsure why. The channels are all locked and levels good. You'll have to take my word for it.
I'm convinced this is a policy issue and not a technical issue. Spectrum has opted to do this for all customer-owned equipment with a few exceptions like Motorola for some reason. They cite some firmware validation as their reasoning though. Spectrum is a huge ISP with presumably many NG customers and I'm hoping NG can help to raise the issue and get it resolved.
Router is Ubiquiti UDP-Pro running UNIFI OS 1.12.38 Address request is a /56 using DHCPv6 and worked without issue until this policy change. The router manages a v6 tunnel from HE as well as v6 on a few VLAN without issue. I'm not a novice. I've managed global-scale networks for more than thirty years and am active in NANOG and other NetOPS communities. Again, I really don't think this is anything to do with my equipment. The issue is impacting everyone with NG (and many other brand) modems on the Spectrum network.
Attached.
The RF network functions without error and delivers full capacity with IPv4.
Thanks again for the attention. Any word from the NG mothership by chance?
Nothing.