NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
Nighthawk M2 MR2100 features and availability
Does MR2100 have dynamic DNS support, sorely lacking in MR1100? I'm interested in using it as a primary home internet solution and want to know if the router supports inbound connections from outside...
HI Blanca_O ,
Please remove this troll phillipmcmahon from Netgear forums. He keeps stalking me accross different threads, despite being asked more than once to leave me alone and what is more concerning - he's spreading false information. The concern and the danger here is that your product managers, who decide on Nighthawk features, may be less technical than your engineers, and therefore there is a chance they could be deceived by this troll's misinformation, such as his false claims adding dynamic DNS support to Nighthawk will not work with mobile carrier's NAT, and decide not to implement this essential feature, based on false misinformation this troll keeps spreading accross forum threads, where he's stalking me.
He must be stopped and disallowed to spread any more misinformation, and I would like to put it on record that adding dynamic DNS support to Nighthawk WILL absolutely, 100% work with carrier NAT and provide full and robust solution for connecting to Nighthawk managed networks from outside world. It has already been done with other devices, and thoroughly tested.
It is a technical forum and I have only ever responded witht technical discussion. I am not trolling but tried to engage in a technical conversation regarding the request to add DDNS as a solution to get around CG-NAT. My position is that it will only work when you are either NOT behind CG-NAT (rare) or you have a service specifically allowing services to be advertised and accessed, usually a business type contract (expensive).
There are options but none rely on DDNS and rather use VPN or proxy type solutions.
I have no issue being educated to other methods, however you have not provided any technical discussion on why you think what I have presented is not the case. You rather seem offended someone is simply disagreeing with you on a technical level.
Relax a little and engage in discussion.
See some sites all repeating the same message.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier-grade_NAT
"Disadvantages[edit]
Critics of carrier-grade NAT argue the following aspects:
- Like any form of NAT, it breaks the end-to-end principle.[5]
- It has significant security, scalability, and reliability problems, by virtue of being stateful.
- It makes it impossible to host services.
- It does not solve the IPv4 address exhaustion problem when a public IP address is needed, such as in web hosting."
https://www.donaldsimpson.co.uk/2017/01/30/using-ngrok-to-work-around-carrier-grade-nat-cgnat/
https://amoss.me/2017/05/port-forwarding-behind-a-carrier-grade-nat/
https://superuser.com/questions/1258093/set-up-a-web-server-behind-a-carrier-grade-nat
"So the only ways to set up a server behind a NAT you don't control are:
-
Make the ISP do port-forwarding...yeah, that's not gonna happen. (Even though in theory NAT-PMP was supposed to permit that.) -
Obtain your own global address from somewhere else, for example there are VPN providers which support server hosting and can give you a static address.
-
If you have IPv6, that would be globally reachable, though you'd additionally need a service which can proxy connections from IPv4-speaking clients to your IPv6-only server (e.g. CloudFlare might do the job)."
FORUM MODERATORS: Kindly, please do your damn job - see my previous post