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.
Hello there. I'm running an RAX200 which is connected to a Sky Hub at the moment, I have FTTP from Sky in the UK. My issue is that I have double NAT because of this set up, and unfortunately Sky do not allow you to use the Sky Hub as a bridge. The good news is that, apparently, the RAX supports a direct connection to the fibre box - Sky connect using option 61 (DCHP) and I have the connection string they use, however I am not able to get things working and so I am wondering if anyone can offer any suggestions as to what I can try?
I have the most recent firmware (v1.0.10.140) on the router and the attached as the option 61 connection.
Aside from seemingly getting poor speeds when running the built in speed test on the Nighthawk, I'm getting issues streaming video content and I'm having problems with my S23 ultra and wifi6 ...
I'd troubleshoot that. But don't assume that the problems are on the router. WiFi 6 has produced much fun and games. See if there are similar reports for the S23, whatever it is.
If you had the RAX before you signed up for the new new service. I'd reset the router and set it up from scratch. Likewise do that before you try using it on its own without the Sky box.
The router picks up various settings from the ISP during setup. They apply to the service you are on. Change that and it may inherit an incompatible setting.
I'm running an RAX200 which is connected to a Sky Hub at the moment, I have FTTP from Sky in the UK. My issue is that I have double NAT because of this set up, and unfortunately Sky do not allow you to use the Sky Hub as a bridge.
Do you need the Sky Hub?
Which one do you have? (Sky has supplied various "hubs" over the years.)
Is there a way to put the Sky box behind the RAX connected to the ONT? I ask because that is what I do with a BT Hub, albeit on DSL.
Then, of course, there is the AP Mode option on the RAX.
I have the most recent firmware (v1.0.10.140) on the router and the attached as the option 61 connection.
Can anyone help?
It is really for Sky to advise. There aren't that many Sky regulars around here. Does Sky offer a user community like this?
Thanks for the reply! I don't really need the hub, so have issues in getting rid of it. It's their latest offering I think, SR203 I think.
Sky do have a community but the advice on there is non-netgear specific and basically 'update firmware, add connection string to 61' and this is what I've tried already.
I have to say that for a device I've paid £400+ for, new in January I'm pretty disappointed I am unable to actually contact Netgrear themselves directly for support 3 months later!
I have to say that for a device I've paid £400+ for, new in January I'm pretty disappointed I am unable to actually contact Netgrear themselves directly for support 3 months later!
Netgear has always had a 90-day window for free support. It is there essentially to get you through the setup stage.
This place is free and has no time limit. Not sure what you'd need from Netgear that you can't get here.
For warranty support, the limit is the usual legal stuff. Netgear says one year, but we all know that there is better warranty support outside the USA. At one time the UK had the same protection as the rest of the EU, three years or more. I haven't checked the status after the UK committed political suicide.
Sky do have a community but the advice on there is non-netgear specific and basically 'update firmware, add connection string to 61' and this is what I've tried already.
Where are you supposed to add the "61"? I see no reference to "connection string" in any Netgear manual.
Feed in your model number and check the documentation for your hardware.
Routers are routers. The settings will be the same regardless of the brand. They may differ in where you find the setting you need. For that detail, I turn to the manuals.
It all depends on what you are trying to achieve. You haven't said anything beyond getting things to work together. It would be different had you said that you wanted to use VoIP.
Thanks very much Michael, I have something else to try later. There is a section which covers connecting to an IPV6 DCHP Internet connection which is describing some things I haven't yet tried. (Attached).
Perhaps this will work, I'll give it a shot and report back.
Thanks Furrye, I will give that a look and use it as a last resort. Unfortunately the hub provided by Sky doesn't allow me to set a bridge, but from what I've read the RAX should be able to do it all so I'm hoping to get it working and to be able to ditch the Sky Hub altogether.
@b0redj0rd wrote: Thanks Furrye, I will give that a look and use it as a last resort. Unfortunately the hub provided by Sky doesn't allow me to set a bridge, but from what I've read the RAX should be able to do it all so I'm hoping to get it working and to be able to ditch the Sky Hub altogether.
I sniffed around the Virgin community and feel that you were a bit unfair to the participants. There were several conversations that explained how other users had achieved a "fake bridge mode". In reality they had found relatively simple ways of living with double NAT.
One point made there was that pretty well the only reason for sticking with the Sky thing was if you wanted to use its phone feature. Do you?
ISPs are generally cheapskates when it comes to supplying hardware. BT set the tone with is execrable HomeHub boxes. (I have three, mostly in their shrink wrap) They are worth what you pay for them. Nothing.
They are always modem/routers. (A BT techie once told me that OpenReach had told all ISPs to supply modem/routers rather than standalone modems.) ISPs like them because they gain some control over your network. BT can adjust your modem.
Thanks again for taking the time to reply! Sky's VOIP is included in the package but I don't use a house phone, so it's no bother to lose it. I did see you had to keep the hub to use this, but for me it isn't a factor really.
Aside from seemingly getting poor speeds when running the built in speed test on the Nighthawk, I'm getting issues streaming video content and I'm having problems with my S23 ultra and wifi6 and I'm wondering if they are all somehow related to this particular set up that I'm running and so am having a bash at setting the RAX as the sole connection to the outside world. If I can't get it going I'll expore the AP route.
Aside from seemingly getting poor speeds when running the built in speed test on the Nighthawk, I'm getting issues streaming video content and I'm having problems with my S23 ultra and wifi6 ...
I'd troubleshoot that. But don't assume that the problems are on the router. WiFi 6 has produced much fun and games. See if there are similar reports for the S23, whatever it is.
If you had the RAX before you signed up for the new new service. I'd reset the router and set it up from scratch. Likewise do that before you try using it on its own without the Sky box.
The router picks up various settings from the ISP during setup. They apply to the service you are on. Change that and it may inherit an incompatible setting.
Hi guys, I have some good news! Thanks to all the responders in this thread, I have managed to get the RAX to connect to the Sky fibre service!
Particularly I think the suggestion to read the manual 😀
Methodology as follows: Unplug existing Sky Hub for 30 minutes from the fibre box. Full factory reset of the RAX200, run through the usual set up - no Internet. Fill the connection 61 section, no Internet. Complete the section as found in the manual (attached) - connected!
There is one issue which is confusing me still.
One of the reasons for doing this in the first place was that the internally available 'on router' speed test was returning poor speeds, leading me to think this was because of the Sky Hub > RAX200 double nat however, when running this speed test I am seeing similarly poor speeds. I am guaranteed at least 430mbps by Sky, but the test is returning 150-200mbps. When I do this over WIFI I am seeing better results (confusing). Does anyone think this is a fault with my set up or the speed test on the router itself?
The issue with the S23 persists, but that appears to be a Samsung problem as lots of people are complaining about it online at the moment.
@b0redj0rd wrote: Hi guys, I have some good news! Thanks to all the responders in this thread, I have managed to get the RAX to connect to the Sky fibre service!
Particularly I think the suggestion to read the manual 😀
Methodology as follows: Unplug existing Sky Hub for 30 minutes from the fibre box. Full factory reset of the RAX200, run through the usual set up - no Internet. Fill the connection 61 section, no Internet. Complete the section as found in the manual (attached) - connected!
There is one issue which is confusing me still.
One of the reasons for doing this in the first place was that the internally available 'on router' speed test was returning poor speeds, leading me to think this was because of the Sky Hub > RAX200 double nat however, when running this speed test I am seeing similarly poor speeds. I am guaranteed at least 430mbps by Sky, but the test is returning 150-200mbps. When I do this over WIFI I am seeing better results (confusing). Does anyone think this is a fault with my set up or the speed test on the router itself?
The issue with the S23 persists, but that appears to be a Samsung problem as lots of people are complaining about it online at the moment.
Thanks again everyone.
Yes, the throughput capacity tests on routers are in general historically unreliable.
Another data point can be provided using the mobile application throughput capacity test on your phone. I have an older design router and the mobile application provides consistent and accurate results.
Thanks for the reply, I'm thinking the speed test is just unreliable directly on the router.
Over WiFi = 500mbps Xbox hardwired to the router = 530mbps Nvidea Shield hardwired to the router = 480mbps
I think we're all set! Thanks to everyone who took the time to respond here, I really appreciate it and wouldn't have been able to get things set up without your input.
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}