This topic has been marked solved and closed to new posts due to inactivity. We hope you'll join the conversation by posting to an open topic or starting a new one.
This is my first nighthawk router and it arrived today. After setting it up, everything seemed to work perfectly - the internet connection is 100% fine and I can connect to Xbox Live and see my friends online etc. Problems only arise when I actually try to play a game online - whether it be Battlefield, Gears 5 or anything, I always get “Could not connect to X servers” and I cannot play online. I have never experienced this before and it’s incredibly strange as my connection to Xbox Live itself is fine.
My fibre broadband is provided by EE. I have an EE smart hub, which is wired into the ADSL. I have wired the hub (via the WAN connection) into the Nighthawk. I have googled around and (as suggested by Netgear) assigned a static IP address on the hub for the nighthawk, turned off UPNP on the EE hub, forwarded Xbox Live ports on the hub, and left UPNP turned on on the nighthawk. This did not work. I have tried all variations of UPNP on/off with both the hub and the nighthawk, to no avail.
I have also turned the wireless off on the hub, still unable to play online.
I’m a software engineer by profession and this has left me completely stumped. Can anybody explain to me why a GAMING router is blocking access to GAMING servers? The EE hub has never caused me problems with playing online so it must be the nighthawk.
Many thanks to anybody who can help me fix this strange issue - until then it looks like I’ll just have to Ethernet my Xbox into the EE hub and bypass the nighthawk entirely...
> [...] purchasing a modem and replacing the EE hub with it [...]
I have no experience with EE, and I have no idea whether any common DSL modem will work with their service.
> [...] everything (including Xbox Live) works perfectly, except > anything which requires UPnP, [...]
Getting features like port forwarding or UPnP through cascaded NAT routers is the problem. If the Smart Hub had a DMZ server option, then you might try setting that up with the R8000 (in router mode) as your DMZ server. No bets.
> [...] I have done speed tests and the download speed around the house > has doubled since I have began using the nighthawk, [...]
But your data are all still going through the Smart Hub that way, so I'd guess that your bottleneck is the wireless on the Smart Hub, and you'd avoid that by using the R8000-as-WAP.
> If I was to use the nighthawk as you described, would it no longer > deliver the increased download speeds I'm currently seeing?
I don't see why, but it should be a relatively easy experiment to
Firmware version? Connected to what? (Hint: If a device has multiple Ethernet ports, then "connected to device" is not enough detail.)
> [...] it arrived today. [...]
Why did you get it? Was there some actual problem which you were trying to solve?
> [...] I have an EE smart hub, which is wired into the ADSL. [...]
What's connected to it? Does this (unspecified) "an EE smart hub" have a maker and model number? Does it include a router? Cascading multiple routers can cause multiple problems, possibly like yours.
> [...] assigned a static IP address on the hub for the nighthawk, [...]
It sounds as if your "an EE smart hub" is/includes a router.
And that would be a "reserved" (dynamic) address, not a "static" address. A static address is configured on the device itself, not on a DHCP server (in a router).
> I have also turned the wireless off on the hub, [...]
Disabling its radios does not stop a router from being a router.
Depending on why you got the R8000 in the first place, you might want to configure it as a wireless access point. Visit http://netgear.com/support , put in your model number, and look for Documentation. Get the User Manual. Look for "Use the Router as a Wireless Access Point".
Alternatively, there might be a way to configure your (unspecified) "an EE smart hub" as a modem-only, so that you could use the R8000 as your (only) router. But, between your information-free description of that device, and my weak psychic powers, I don't know if/how that might be done.
Updated the nighthawk to latest firmware version, will update this post when I get home and can check the actual version number. Nighthawk is connected via an Ethernet cable to the WAN port of the EE Smart Hub.
I bought the nighthawk because the signal from the EE hub round the house was very poor. (Admittedly it’s FAR better with the nighthawk now, everything works fine except playing games online)
The EE smart hub is a combined modem and router.
Yes, you are correct - I assigned a dynamic address for the nighthawk on the EE hub. Apologies for the confusion, it was a Friday night when I was trying to get this to work and I’d had a few beers, lol.
Unfortunately the EE hub doesn’t have a bride/modem only mode (which is what I suspect is causing the issue) though I have tried to “fake” this by turning the wireless off and setting the subnet mask to the same as the nighthawk. (Side-note: would buying a separate modem and throwing the EE hub out be a better idea? I think so, but would like to get confirmation on this before I chuck it)
I massively appreciate your input, and whilst a simple idiot like me would have assumed that anyone who has used an ISP-supplied hub before (99% of the population?) knows that they are both a router and a modem, I agree I should have supplied the specs in the original post (despite there being only one single version of the “unspecified” EE smart hub)...) https://shop.ee.co.uk/broadband/smart-hub
Would just like to get this thing working with my consoles. If the hub had a bridge/modem-only mode, rest assured I would have already tried it...
> [...] I have tried to "fake" this by turning the wireless off and > setting the subnet mask to the same as the nighthawk. [...]
> Disabling its radios does not stop a router from being a router.
Still true. Fiddling with some IP addresses or other (in some way or other) won't change that.
> [...] (Side-note: would buying a separate modem and throwing the EE > hub out be a better idea? I think so, but would like to get confirmation > on this before I chuck it)
I found little helpful information on this gizmo. Is it some kind of DSL modem+router? Determing what else would be compatible with your EE service might be difficult.
> I bought the nighthawk because the signal from the EE hub round the > house was very poor. [...]
If better wireless coverage was your goal, then configuring the R8000 as a WAP might provide that. Leaving it in full-function router mode (as a second router) can be expected to cause problems.
Cheers for replying so quickly, I really appreciate the assistance!
I thought this would be the case, hence why I considered purchasing a modem and replacing the EE hub with it (as the hub will continue to be a router) - do you think this would be a simpler option rather than f*cking around with the EE hub? From previous experience with hub, it is not the most flexible device to use, especially since I’m trying to make it function *just* as a modem.
Likewise, I have been unable to find much information online regarding combining this hub with a separate router. I can confirm that it is a DSL router & modem - preciously I have had it simply plugged into the ADSL and all devices in the house connected to it via WPA2.
The strangest thing about this situation is that everything (including Xbox Live) works perfectly, except anything which requires UPnP, such as actually playing online via Xbox Live or using a Plex server via my PC.
I considered using the nighthawk as a “WiFi extender” as some people do, but from speaking to friends, the nighthawk is a superior device in all aspects, including routing. I have done speed tests and the download speed around the house has doubled since I have began using the nighthawk, so I’m incredibly happy with the performance. If I can get UPNP to work then it will be perfect.
If I was to use the nighthawk as you described, would it no longer deliver the increased download speeds I’m currently seeing?
> [...] purchasing a modem and replacing the EE hub with it [...]
I have no experience with EE, and I have no idea whether any common DSL modem will work with their service.
> [...] everything (including Xbox Live) works perfectly, except > anything which requires UPnP, [...]
Getting features like port forwarding or UPnP through cascaded NAT routers is the problem. If the Smart Hub had a DMZ server option, then you might try setting that up with the R8000 (in router mode) as your DMZ server. No bets.
> [...] I have done speed tests and the download speed around the house > has doubled since I have began using the nighthawk, [...]
But your data are all still going through the Smart Hub that way, so I'd guess that your bottleneck is the wireless on the Smart Hub, and you'd avoid that by using the R8000-as-WAP.
> If I was to use the nighthawk as you described, would it no longer > deliver the increased download speeds I'm currently seeing?
I don't see why, but it should be a relatively easy experiment to
I agree that the wireless on the hub is most likely the issue for the poor internet speed around the house (which the nighthawk resolves), but I don’t think the hub has any options for DMZ - I will try WAP as you mentioned and see how it goes!
Configuring the nighthawk as an access point has resolved the issues, as expected - no noticeable impact on performance either. Many thanks for the help!
I thought this would be the case, hence why I considered purchasing a modem and replacing the EE hub with it (as the hub will continue to be a router) - do you think this would be a simpler option rather than f*cking around with the EE hub?
EE, possibly the world's worst Internet service provider, competes with BT in providing dumbed down "free" hardware.
As you have found, EE, like BT, deliberately blocks any "modem only" option.
I have several BT Homehubs, one still in its shrinkwrap, and now use the relatively inexpensive Netrgear DM200 DSL modem. A bit over £30 in the usual places. There are other modems out there.
Experienced users seem to prefer separate modems and routers. Netgear puts more effort into keeping routers up to date. And you can stick with the router whichever internet technology you use. Just replace the modem.
Big plus with separate modem and router is when there is a failure. Only one box to replace, which will probably be cheaper then a combo unit. Also if you want to update/upgrade the router if separate boxes things then become easy. No searching for a combo unit which could be hard to find and maybe not have all the features you were wanting.
I am a big believer in individual boxes. Have a standalone NAS, for example, rather then using a router to also function as a NAS. When I increased my Internet speed the existing modem could not handle the increase and I had to get something else. Had I had a combo box I would have had to find something that would replace the router features I had plus support the higher speed.
> Experienced users seem to prefer separate modems and routers. [...]
> I am a big believer in individual boxes. [...]
I'm open to suggestions on how to do that when the (DSL) ISP uses PPPoA (rather than PPPoE). I failed to find a way, hence my D7000[v1]. But, where practical, individual components can offer greater flexibility.
