Loading Profile...
Twitter,
Facebook, or email.
Having bridged mode available in the firmware would be a good idea, especially because most people don't want to NAT their network twice. (the nat'ing on the Motorola M series modems blocks TCP protocol 41 (6in4) which is a problem for me)
I understand that bridging would disable the on-board VoIP functionality, but at least make it an option which could be removed by resetting the modem.
That or enable IPv6 on your networks :)
I’m
undecided
Push Motorola to have their firmware include bridged mode.
Promoted
Responses
-
3I signed up for Clear tonight. Full signal, five lights, 1.0+ up and 2.1+ down. I was planning use it as a backup to 35mb/35mb FiOS connection.
So far so good.
BUT, I have 800-1000 clients that need a solution like Clear in the healthcare industry. I am evaluating it for them. Since Clear apparently does not support bridge mode (option is greyed out on my modem), I cannot run IPsec without NAT-T, and NAT-T is prohibited for healthcare by U.S federal regulation.
If I cannot get bridge mode, everything will be returned less than 15 hours after bringing it home for evaluation.
Let me state this plainly to all. Tunnel mode IPsec WILL NOT WORK through NAT. The ESP protocol (protocol 50) encrypts the packet headers. NAT-T is insecure, and I would risk federal prosecution, jail time, and huge fines attempting to use it to transmit PHI (personal health information) through a public network.
End of story. -
3Has there been an update to this issue Clear? I opened this topic 2 months ago and all we have is a "were looking into it" response. This is a game killer for a huge number of people.
Thanks! -
4I dropped off my modem at UPS this morning. It is really frustrating to know that a simple option in the modem was all I needed to uncheck to make it work for me.
I was disappointed it what it took for me to cancel the service. I tried to do it online and the rep insisted that I was doing something wrong and forced me to call tech support before I could cancel. Then tech support tried to tell me that *I* was doing something wrong with my network. He didn't understand that I can't have a cheesy motorola box controlling a rather elaborate network at my house. Finally they let me talk to an account rep who tells me that I need to post my account on craigslist to have it transferred to someone elses name and he would send me a $40 gift card. Wow. That was the ultimate insult. To waste my time trying to sell something to a random stranger for $40 ? I am YOUR customer - If I wanted to be a sales rep for Clear I would send you my resume.
I had every intention of going back to Clear once this modem issue was resolved, but after spending an hour on on-line support and another 47 minutes talking to Clear just to cancel - I probably won't be back.
-
Thank you for your suggestion. This is something we have been investigating as an option with all of our Home modems.
-
-
As far as I am concerned, there is no need to NAT the network twice. If you have a wifi router all you have to do is plug the clear home modem into the LAN port instead of the WAN port and turn off DHCP on your router. Before doing that be sure and switch your wifi routers lan over to the same IP range as the clear modem/router and set it's IP to something other than what the Clear modem is using. This essentially puts your router in access point mode. This configuration should work on pretty much any router. The CLEAR modem supports port fwarding, firewall, DHCP reservation etc. Why NAT the network twice when you don't have to? My modem is hooked up to 4 Gigabit switches with a Linksys WRT610N setup as an access point for my wireless connections. DHCP is handled entirely by the Clear home modem. This way, I don't have to ensure my Linksys router is playing well with the clear home modem. If the Linksys decides it does not want to talk to the Clear home modem, the only thing that fails are my wireless connections. Luckily this has never happened but it was something that occurred frequently when I had Time Warner RR, and ATT DSL. Using a home modem like the one clear is providing is really a better solution since you have the wimax modem completely integrated with the router. U-verse does the same thing with their home gateway. Much more reliable than a ISP modem connected to a 3rd party router. Now if Clear would just integrated Wireless B\G\N on 2.4 and 5Ghz with a Gigabyte port I could sell my Linksys and eliminate another piece of hardware.- view 1 more comment
-
-
Huh????
-
-
Let's see... By using the Motorola Modem as your firewall you no have user changeable password violating PCI requirement 2.
You cannot implement direct path routing and stateful packet inspection per PCI requirement 1, etc.
You people like you who don't really know anything about network security you light up my network with bot net traffic every time you use my public wifi in my restaurants. Some of us run REAL networks and know what security is. Clear marketed a business product and then refuse to allow real network admins to run our networks. -
-
-
-
What would you do with TCP protocol 41? I googled it but I could not determine really what its used for....-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6#Tun...
I usually run dual-stack at home. (IPv4 and IPv6)
I see your point about running the modem as the router and adding a switch, but whats the fun in that? I would have to power down my awesome OpenBSD home router. -
-
-
-
-
I’m
waiting for bridged mode
2I am going to throw out another reason why Clear needs to acquire bridged mode for the Motorola modem. The modem runs NAT, so if wired to a router that runs NAT as well you end up "double NAT'd". This isn't a problem for using the internet and such. But, throw an Xbox in the mix and there is no possible way to have an open NAT for multiplayer gaming. While you can still play multiplayer games on the Xbox, joining up with friends in a party is a problem.
Clear, allow us to disable NAT on the modem or get bridge mode added.-
As a workaround I used my wireless router as an AP an put the port forwards in the modem. Not ideal but it will work for now.
-
-
I found that setting my router as the DMZ and in my router set my xbox as the DMZ. That allows my 360 to register as open.
-
-
-
-
-
1I just bought Clear today and I am returning it tomorrow :(.. Speeds were great, service worked perfect - however I simply can not have a modem with NAT enabled. Why can't I uncheck the checkbox in the config? As soon as Clear fixes this I will be back.
-
-
1I need to be able to monitor security cameras at a warehouse we use for storage. Thinking that Clear offered a great service, I added an additional modem to our account that already has two air cards. After two days of attempted configurations, I discovered the NAT issue, and I am now going to have to get another ISP to facilitate for this issue.
That makes me frustrated as not only a customer, but someone who has advocated the services provided by Clear.- view 12 more comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
No problem. I assumed (incorrectly) that you were going to use BTMM to access another computer. I understand and share your frustration with CLEAR's lack of response on this simple-to-fix issue. NeoRouter (it's free) might still work for you.
-
-
Thanks! I'll check out NeoRouter.
-
-
-
-
4I dropped off my modem at UPS this morning. It is really frustrating to know that a simple option in the modem was all I needed to uncheck to make it work for me.
I was disappointed it what it took for me to cancel the service. I tried to do it online and the rep insisted that I was doing something wrong and forced me to call tech support before I could cancel. Then tech support tried to tell me that *I* was doing something wrong with my network. He didn't understand that I can't have a cheesy motorola box controlling a rather elaborate network at my house. Finally they let me talk to an account rep who tells me that I need to post my account on craigslist to have it transferred to someone elses name and he would send me a $40 gift card. Wow. That was the ultimate insult. To waste my time trying to sell something to a random stranger for $40 ? I am YOUR customer - If I wanted to be a sales rep for Clear I would send you my resume.
I had every intention of going back to Clear once this modem issue was resolved, but after spending an hour on on-line support and another 47 minutes talking to Clear just to cancel - I probably won't be back.-
This kind of "impossible to cancel" BS is becoming far too common. I went through it with AOL, Vonage, Dish Network, and Sirius/XM. I am really sorry to hear that Clear has started doing it. I had Clear briefly, then cancelled. Later I re-sub'd and have been with them for a good while now. But if they ever jerk me around, they will never see me back. Just ask any company on the list above. Talk about short sighted - treating customers, even departing ones, like cr@p is about as dumb as it gets. But not quite. Watch out for "zombie accounts" where a few months after cancellation they magically re-instate your account and start billing your credit card again. In one case I had the card company issue me a new card number to thwart the creeps. Hopefully Clear won't stoop that low, but others have. And yes, not being able to disable NAT is just absurd.
-
-
-
-
-
This is a game killer for me. If I can't turn this off so that Back to my Mac will work through my Airport router, then CLEAR isn't the Internet choice for me... even though I think it would really be perfect in every other way.
Is there a timetable on this? -
-
-
I’m
undecided
I just moved to a new area and AT&T Offers 6mbps/768kbps max in the area, but only 3mbps/512kbps at my particular residence.
Suddenlink cable only offeres 3mbps/256kbps max in the whole area.
I am used to 12mbps/768kbps.
The 6mbps/1mbps sounded great until I came across this thread, because I need to be able to accept incoming PPTP VPN connections on my network, can the built in port forwarding in the Motorola device forward the required protocols for PPTP?-
You can have the device forward to specific ports from a myriad of different sources/protocols/etc. However, VPNs are pretty tricky and often don't like port forwarding because it's a security concern (not a hole). You'll have to try it out with the VPN settings of the network you're connecting to.
I've used Cisco's VPN client successfully and quite easily when cable-connected to the Clear modem but it took some serious effort to have it work in conjunction with my wireless router. -
-
-
-
-
Bump... is there a status update on this? Has it been sent to Motorola for them to activate the grayed-out checkbox?
-
-
1Here's something I got off dslreports.com that worked for me. Evidently, the dmz setting in the Clear modem can be flaky, working sometimes, and not others. If you are using the dmz setting in the Clear modem, clear it out and then use port forwarding to foward all tcp and udp ports to whatever device you had in the dmz before. You'll want to forward ports 1-65535 to your device IP.
I have a VoIP server running behind a Clear modem that worked fine for awhile and then just quit. Nothing I did could get it running again. After performing this set up, everything started working fine again. I also have the Clear firewall off and the UPnP off. Wooohooo!-
I have had no luck with this workaround, nor with the DMZ. You're right. It's flaky as heck.
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
frustrated, cheated.
The NAT issue is driving me nuts. I've gone through tech support, only to be told there's no solution and I'll just have to live without any service (like Teamspeak Server) that won't work. I have a solution: My contract for home, mobile and VoIP expires in 12 months and I'll be canceling all my services to go with DSL or something else. I initially signed up last summer (when I don't use the computers much) and the 30 day "Money back Guarantee" had expired by the time I contacted tech support about the NAT issue.
-
Have you tried any of the DMZ or port forwarding techniques above?
-
-
Yes, tried the DMZ thing. After 1 month or so, my (Clear) VoIP stopped working so I called tech support. They had me set everything back to their defaults (No DMZ) and said it wasn't supported.
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
furious
I was excited to get my modem. As soon as I saw the bat-winged Motorola logo, my heart sank to my shoes.
They really, really need to release this NAT problem. I run a number of telephony servers as an at-home worker and this is a serious problem.
I've been able to work around the NAT issue somewhat, but SIP invites are also getting killed because of their phone service. Apparently, I have to get another modem. Even though all ports are forwarded, there is something in the firmware killing TCP/UDP 5060 and redirecting it. And it's nothing I can control. Argh!
CLEAR needs to either trust the users more or give us a "pro-grade" version of the router firmware so that we can control things like port access and VPN connections, etc. I am furious up to this point with the service (also that I need to wait until 9am to get someone on the phone) and I feel kind of cheated that I can't control my network because of this.-
Which modem model do you have? All my dealings to date have been with the Motorola CPEi 150. I had a customer trying to run a VoIP server with the Motorola 725 and we exchanged it for a 150. We could not get the 725 to get incoming calls. I am currently running an Asterisk server behind Clear's service, which used to work with the router in the dmz but now requires port forwarding instead. Can't say that each and every Clear modem will work the same way. If you have a 150, you might have a chance.
-
-
-
-
-
I have the later model with the same SIP trunking carrier mentioned in this thread:
http://forums.clear.com/clearcom/topi...
I tried turning off the DMZ and doing full port forwarding. That worked some to get the inbound through, but the NAT is mangling the SDP message so I'm only getting 1-way audio. There is no SIP ALG on the WiMax unit to fix that problem, and I'm not able to turn NAT off so I'm still stuck.
The more I work with this thing, the angrier I get.-
That thread is from the person I mentioned that could not get his Asterisk box working with the Motorola 725. I put a demo 150 in there for a couple of days until he could trade out his 725. My demo, and his new 150 worked fine. He is currently using the dmz to forward to his router, but may change to the port forwarding method. My experience with the 725 to date is that it does nor work (at least in the case of an internal Asterisk box).
-
-
Just to add a bit more info...after changing to port forwarding, I tested both an internal asterisk server, and registering three different IP phones with our hosted voip server in a Dallas data center. Both worked just fine. All this after the modem quit working using dmz.
-
-
-
-
-
Yeah - the Asterisk does fine behind NAT or dealing with port forwarding because it's got the ability to discover its public IP. It's NAT-smart with regard to SIP. The telephony servers I'm working with right now are not as smart, and it's causing problems. If I could turn off the NAT, I could drop the connection into a SIP-aware ALG-based router (Edgewater EM-200) and I'd be in good shape, because then my trunks (these are non-registering trunks) would be able to get in and out. As it is right now, the "return" address I'm sending to the carrier is the private IP I'm getting from the WiMax modem. And this is what's screwing it up.
If a modem swap works, so be it.
All I need to do is turn NAT off. Right now I'm on hold with Clear. We'll see how long it takes me to get to Tier 2 and work this out. I'm not holding my breath, and I fear I will have to cancel my service.
We shall see what happens here. In my case, just getting TCP/UDP 5060 into my server isn't enough.-
Any update after your conversation with Clear?
-
-
-
-
-
3Has there been an update to this issue Clear? I opened this topic 2 months ago and all we have is a "were looking into it" response. This is a game killer for a huge number of people.
Thanks!-
Nope. Not that I have seen. But this is such a hot topic that CLEAR definitely should address it... quickly.
-
-
I really do want to see Clear succeed, their service is great. I just hate to see something Clear could fix so easily be a game killer for such a large number of people.
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
Not too thrilled.
I am interested in Clear's service and this very thread has given me the shivers just thinking about the problems I may encounter... I don't think I'm going to sign up. The sales guy was shady as it is. -
-
I’m
frustrated
I have the same problem using dyndns :(
-
-
I’m
disappointed
So I got the older modem, and while SIP traffic is coming through, I'm still double-NAT'd and stuck.
I cancelled the home service today.
There is, however, hope for y'all....
I haven't tried this with the ClearSpot yet, but you should be able to get it (or something like the Cradlepoint unit) to drop into a bridged mode. Do that, and you can at least get another device with a dumb AP mode to join it and get the same thing.
Will post here when I know what works. -
-
I still stand by the fact that this is absolutely and patently ridiculous that we have to try to work around something that we are paying for, and CLEAR refuses to address the issue.
Such a simple change for them... and a game-changer for us. -
-
2Clear should provide us a modem, a pure modem, not a router. Everyone in home has a router. Who wants to put two routers together to slow and to complicate things? I have had a COMCAST modem that is not a router for 10 years without any settings available to users, working perfectly.
-
YES. You are ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. I'm a pretty smart guy. Don't dumb it down for me.
-
-
I agree. I have a custom firmware linksys that does everything I need it to. I really don't want or need a single port router without wireless. Please just allow bridged mode
-
-
-
-
-
-
Yes. This is no longer (never was, really) about workarounds. This is about getting CLEAR to do something that should have never been an issue. This is a silly problem to have, and it is ridiculous that CLEAR won't do anything about it.
-
-
-
-
-
Notably, this is the only problem I have with an otherwise excellent service.
-
-
I have written on this subject once before, and was glad that it appeared enough people were having the same issue, and it would be rectified by Clear. Unfortunately, that is not the case. We already have two air cards and a home modem. I was planning on adding two more devices soon. However, if this issue isn't resolved, I am liable to drop all three devices.
Apparently, it is not enough of a concern for Clear to look at their forum as a means of resolving customer issues. I have dealt with the other "quirks" because I understand that it is a new technology. However, this is a sticking point for me, and obviously many other people.
The next logical step, in my opinion, would be to hammer their support team with emails and calls until it is at least acknowledged, and a time line as to when it will be resolved is given.-
From my limited experience, you will have to make it past the language barrier first. Good luck with that.
-
-
-
-
-
Thank you everyone for your posts. We are aware of the modems not being able to be bridged. We are looking into it but this process can't be pushed any faster. I apologize for the inconvenience this may be causing everyone.
Thanks again for your posts.- view 2 more comments
-
-
-
Very well said. +1
-
-
Sure looks like boneheaded management to me. The Motorola modems support bridged mode just fine; it's just disabled by Clear's customized firmware.
-
-
-
-
-
Awesome.. just might give me a 2nd look at signing up for CLEAR.
-
-
This worked for me in getting my ports forwarded correctly, thanks. Doesn't mean I don't want to get bridged mode working!
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
pissed at Clear
This is the problem with clear. I'm a manufacturer of DVR's and constantly am having to navigate around Clear's modem. This issue costs people time and money and as a result I will NEVER use clear in my personal life and anyone who has asked me about it gets a very strong endorsement to run for the hills from Clear.
I'm not posting this because it does any good, but hopefully the realization that a business loses money by opting to go with Clear will help speed this process along. Based on the fact that they're practically impossible to get a hold of, their tech support is generally read from a binder and the Craig's List/gift card story it's painfully obvious to me they don't care too much about their average end user.-
Did you try the procedures found in the link above? Really shouldn't be any different than trying to access a security camera, or sling box directly.
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
Concerned
I must say CLEAR NEEDS TO ADDRESS THIS PROBLEM AND ISSUE ALL OF US NEW ROUTERS! I stand by they have the potential to be great, just new tech has hiccups in the start. Now though they see the problems we bring to there attention, its about time they act and its not that hard!!!
-
-
1Please, PLEASE make this happen! A lot of us use routers and this silly double NAT issue SEVERELY degrades throughput. I can get up to 12Mbps with the modem directly connected to my PC but only up to 2Mbps through a router. Come on.... This CLEARly hasn't been thought out...
-
-
I’m
frustrated
1Just a few points to add:
1) If anyone at CLEAR says the issue is security, that is bunk. The CLEAR modem's have FIXED PASSWORDS. I could access ANY Clear modem out there with "motorola' or "clear123" because the user cannot secure the modem with an administrative password. So clearly clear has no interest in security whatsoever.
2) Forcing users to accept an insecure modem, a non-configurable "firewall" (I doubt it is really a firewall, but who knows since its not documented?), and NAT puts my network at risk; so I use a real hardware based firewall (which cost more than 3 years of clear service). Unfortunately, the inbound NAT makes configuring the firewall much much harder and more error prone. So even with my a great firewall, the lame Clear modems are a security risk.
3) VPN is practically impossible without IPSec support. Again, increasing security risks as users will likely need to disable whatever lame firewall is in the device.
The whole promise of 4G was open hardware. Whatever happened to that???
Disappointed. -
-
I’m
frustrated
2I just got off the phone with tech support. I informed this is unacceptable for business users. I'm running my business from my home and I can't do half the stuff I need to do because of the double nat issue. The DMZ solution doesn't really work. Looks like DSL might be my solution until Clear fixes this problem. Good thing I'm still in my 14 day trial period.
-
I'd say with clear if they could tell me a solution is on the way.
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
frustrated
1Clear: It has now been five months since this was opened and you gave us a 'We are looking into it' answer...
You are losing a large number of customers due to this issue... which could be easily fixed as the firmware already has a NAT option...
If this is not fixed, I will be getting rid of my service at the end of my contract.
http://twitpic.com/2gysiq -
-
I’m
highly annoyed
1Clear really needs to get with it. I am having trouble getting a VPN connection for reasons that appear to be related to this double NAT/non bridged connection issue. Come on, Clear get with it. With my DSL provider I have a bridged connection. I am trying to figure out whether to stay with DSL or fire them and really move to Clear. I bought my modem and signed up on a month to month plan, just so I could fire Clear if it turned out to be a bad deal.
I'm beginning to lean in the direction of dropping Clear, despite good speeds. -
-
3I signed up for Clear tonight. Full signal, five lights, 1.0+ up and 2.1+ down. I was planning use it as a backup to 35mb/35mb FiOS connection.
So far so good.
BUT, I have 800-1000 clients that need a solution like Clear in the healthcare industry. I am evaluating it for them. Since Clear apparently does not support bridge mode (option is greyed out on my modem), I cannot run IPsec without NAT-T, and NAT-T is prohibited for healthcare by U.S federal regulation.
If I cannot get bridge mode, everything will be returned less than 15 hours after bringing it home for evaluation.
Let me state this plainly to all. Tunnel mode IPsec WILL NOT WORK through NAT. The ESP protocol (protocol 50) encrypts the packet headers. NAT-T is insecure, and I would risk federal prosecution, jail time, and huge fines attempting to use it to transmit PHI (personal health information) through a public network.
End of story.- view 1 more comment
-
-
Just returned it. Service would be perfect for my application if not for the lack of bridge mode. Told them to call me if there was ever a resolution. 800+ locations would have been possible. Something like $64k/month with a static IP? Alas, now looking in a different direction
-
-
Just returned it. Service would be perfect for my application if not for the lack of bridge mode. Told them to call me if there was ever a resolution. 800+ locations would have been possible. Something like $64k/month with a static IP? Alas, now looking in a different direction
-
-
-
-
I’m
frustrated
1I will also add that calling it a modem is just plain wrong, it is a NATed router that seemingly cannot be made to be a simple modem.
-
-
I’m
frustrated and angry
I just bought clear today to test, as soon as i got it home I ran into this problem. Searching the forums for solutions brought me here. i am very frustrated with this config lockdown. I appreciate the need to protect the non-tech public but give those who know the option to disable and use as a modem! The non-tech crowd wouldnt even know how to access the config page... If you want my business, CLEAR, enable that setting for those of us who know what it's for.
Returning my CLEAR ROUTER Monday and canceling my service. -
-
CONTACT SUPPORT EVERY TIME YOU HAVE A PROBLEM, ALL DAY EVERYDAY IF NECESSARY! USE CHAT, SEND EMAILS, CALL THEIR SUPPORT (888-888-3113) SO THEY ARE BURRIED WITH THEIR GARBAGE SERVICE AND PROBLEMS!! MAYBE IT WILL SAVE OTHERS FROM GETTING INTO THE SAME PROBLEM WE ARE ALL IN.
-
-
I’m
sad
Here is a chat transcript I just had with a clear rep:
Hello Kimball. Please wait while we find a CLEAR specialist to help you.
Your question is: Set motorola modem to bridge mode?
All agents are currently busy. Please stand by.
An agent will be with you in a moment. Thank you for your patience.
The next available Agent will be with you in a moment.
You have been connected to Kara Jennings.
Kara Jennings: Hi Kimball! I'll be happy to help you today!
Kara Jennings: I'm sorry, I don't quite understand your question. Can you rephrase it for me?
Kimball: sure, I'd be happy to:
Kimball: I'm a new customer with Clear - just signed up on Tues of this week, I believe.
Kimball: I have a fairly large home network, and was told by the sales folks that I could order a static IP with my Clear service.
Kimball: So I did - ordered up the static IP and have spend the last few days testing the Clear setup to see how well it works.
Kimball: First, the good news: The signal is excellent and I have great speed - could not be happier.
Kara Jennings: Great!
Kimball: Now the bad news: the static IP is taken by the Motorola router that you guys shipped me.... I need to be able to assign this IP to one of my internal devices (specifically, I have my own router and firewall, etc). With other providers, I simply set the modem into "bridge" or "transparent bridge" or "disable nat" mode and the modem effectively becomes invisible on the network, passing everything to my router which has the public IP instead.
Kimball: It appears that this is impossible to do with Clear's Motorola modem. So, here's my question:
Kimball: Is this sort of setup possible with Clear, or do I need to cancel my service?
Kara Jennings: Unfortunately, we are unable to bridge our modems, as that would void the warranty on them.
Kimball: Are you aware that it is simply a firmware setting to bridge it? The setting even exists in the modem - it's just been disabled in the web interface....
Kimball: How about I ask it another way: When I order a static IP, is there any way to assign that IP to one of MY devices rather than the motorola router you shipped me?
Kara Jennings: No, I'm sorry.
Kara Jennings: The static IP is for the modem only.
Kimball: so, can I order more than 1 static IP?
Kara Jennings: I'm sorry, you can only order one per modem.
Kimball: so am I correct in thinking that this makes it impossible to run my own home webserver to host personal domains?
Kara Jennings: Correct. We don't support those services.
Kimball: Is there any way to make noise to your sales staff to this effect? I was assured that this was not only possible, but was encouraged - both by the sales rep I spoke with on your national number when I ordered and by the sales rep I spoke with in person at my local clear store.
Kimball: It is extremely frustrating to have wasted a lot of my time trying to make something work that now I'm told is not supported.
Kara Jennings: I'm sorry that you were misinformed, but our services don't support webhosting.
Kimball: may I ask then: why do you offer static IPs? The most common reason for customers to want that is to do things like host a personal mail or webserver.
Kimball: or for VPN access (which also won't work correctly with a NATing router like the motorola is)
Kara Jennings: I'm sorry, we offer Static IPs to our customers, but we don't offer anything like webhosting. The Static IPs are mostly for our customers who like to do online gaming, or things of that nature.
Kimball: I'm very disappointed, but I'll have to cancel my service then. I'll call in to the national number to do so later.
Kimball: Thanks for your assistance.
Kara Jennings: Is there anything else I can assist you with today, Kimball?
Kimball: I highly doubt it.
Kara Jennings: Thank you for chatting with Clear today! If you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to contact us; we are available in live WebChat 24 hours a day. Don't forget you can now get nationwide coverage with our 4GPlus service! Have a great day!
Thank you for visiting clear.com. You may now close this window.
Your session has ended. You may now close this window.
Clearly, they don't need or want my business. Too bad - I would have gladly forked over my cash each month to them. :( -
-
Why is this such a bid deal? What's their reasoning? What are they worried about. Increase in traffic? There must be a reason for the resistance.
-
-
I’m
frustrated with the whole bit.
2There's no reason to bug support about this, because (in my experience) half of the time, they don't understand your question even after multiple clarifications.
CLEAR needs to get their act together on this. This is the festering sore for me on an otherwise wonderful service. I OWN my modem; I'm not leasing. I understand that I should not have access to the radio components of the modem (though that would be really fun!), but disabling NAT falls clearly in the realm of a customer's decision.
Yes, CLEAR. Ship the modem with NAT enabled so grandma and grandpa can hook up their computer and go. BUT, do us ALL a favor and re-enable that checkbox with a simple firmware upgrade. Despite what you are saying, it's not that hard and doesn't require that much work. The box is there! It's obviously not difficult to push a firmware upgrade, because you have already done it once and changed the admin password on MY modem.
Now, I realize that some people are using a bit of hyperbole ("you have lost THOUSANDS of customers"), but you really HAVE lost customers over this. Perhaps not millions, but who cares? You need to care for and value the customers that you do have. If NAT is disabled on these modems, you will have some serious evangelists, with myself included.
Bottom line: IF you value your customers, you need to
a) FIX THIS PROBLEM.
and/or
b) give us a status update. It's been 3 MONTHS since the last official response. -
-
I’m
confused
I wonder if a lawsuit should be filed for misrepresentation on Clear's part. The website doesn't mention that the modems are really routers, and no one buys these devices knowing exactly what they are getting. It is always discovered after the customer purchases the device, and they try to set it up.
This issue is so out of hand, that something to needs to happen to wake these guys up. Clear is about to open 12 new markets, and this issue will become a firestorm when all these new customers find this out.
Anyone agree?- view 4 more comments
-
-
-
-
-
In response to Cupcake 37011:
There are a few points I'd like to bring up: For Home users, fine, don't allow me to run a server. How about for Business customers? Oh, that's right - Business customers can't run servers either. In fact, the salespeople at my local clear store admitted that there is no real difference between the Home and Business service than the price. I would happily pay for business service if it came with the ability to host my own server.
Second point: If the TOS restrict all these things, why are they only enforcing port 80? They clearly don't care if I run a mail server, a web server on port 8080 (as their support instructed I should do) VPN software to maintain a constant connection to work etc. If they are going to block any, why not block them all?
Finally, the sales guy at my local Clear store claimed that Clear does not monitor or restrict your connection in any way at all - then, leaning in and speaking in a conspiratorial manner went on to say something along the lines of "Just last month I torrented more than 150GB worth of movies - nobody knows or cares how you use your connection." Setting aside the legality of his admission in a copyright context, this was a blatant misrepresentation of the service that Clear offers. Later in the conversation I asked specifically if I could run my own servers, described that I'm a software developer and frequently need to have access to a local webserver to test various things when I'm working at home. He claimed this would be no problem whatsoever, again referring to the hands-off approach of Clear to how you use the connection.
Either their sales staff is misinformed about the capabilities of what they sell, or he was outright lying to me to make the sale. I'm trying to believe it is the former, as the latter makes it hard to believe the world is a happy place. -
-
-
-
-
I’m
disgusted.
There are several references to the semi-solution of port forwarding and to the http://austexvoip.com/clear-wimax/cle... site for how to do this.
I have a WIXB-175 modem that Clear calls Seires G. The web interface is different from the Austex site, but easy enough to follow. I entered the ports, but found that I had to leave UDP port 68, UDP port 161; and TCP port 161 unforwarded or I'd get an error message, "Port is reserved", when I clicked Apply.
Then on the Firewall page, after when I clicked Apply, again I got "Port is reserved" referring to 8080 for Web Login. (That had nothing to do with unchecking the Firewall box.)
So I had to go back to the port forwarding page and create a hole around 8080.
If my image worked, my PF looked like this:
-
-
I’m
livid
I successfully implemented router to router IPSec VPN today from behind the Clear G modem. Don't jump for joy, though.
I've got 2 days left on my trial period, so I still have my old DSL service, too.
I used a Multitech RF-830 VPN router behind the Clear G modem and a Multitech RF-560 VPN router with a bridge modem on the other service. Multitech routers have a feature called Unique Identifier String or UID. Enabling UID is a more complicated setup than a usual IPSec tunnel. It requires two additional parameters called the Local and Remote IPSec Identifiers. I worked very well.
I installed Multitech routers for years for the clients I support. The always-on VPN tunnel justified the added cost of business quality VPN routers at both ends, and Multitechs, even their SOHO line, were a little stronger product than the DLinks, Linksys, etc. models of the day, I thought.
I'd say that for the cost of a router (or two) , those of us needing IPSec VPN could keep using Clear, but Multitech got out of the router business some time ago and there are none left in the channel.
I don't know if this was a proprietary feature, but I don't see the UID feature in any of my DD-WRT routers, either Atheros or Broadcom, though I don't have a Mega build of DD-WRT to check. Nor do I remember it in the original DLink and Linksys firmwares I have abandoned. Does anyone out there know of any presently available VPN router (or firmware) that does have the UID feature?
With only 2 days left, my clock is ticking. -
-
I’m
unsatisfied.
Quite a few VPN implementations support using a unique ID. The most common is a FQDN (fully qualified domain name). That said, many implementations require the server use its internet IP address as its identifier. This is particularly true any time you have to do a cross-manufacturer (compatibility mode) IPSec VPN.
I know the Netgear FVS/FVL firewall/VPN units allow you to setup DynDNS and use that FQDN s the identifier in Netgear to Netgear VPN connections.
Not perfect but a workaround I've had to use on other ISPs too.
Still wish there was a way to just bridge the modem. That said, for those w/ longer memories, AT&T (SBC) used to make it a real PITA to bridge their DSL modems. I bricked a handful of modems along the way because of their crap software. -
-
Yes, many routers allow FQDN ,and I have Netgear FVSs and Multitechs using it. FQDN addresses the challenges that dynamic IPs present over the good old static IPs I used to insist on.
UID is an entirely different concept, and eliminates the problem of the double NAT caused by the unbridgable Clear modems plus a downstream router. At least it allows IPSec VPN to function properly. I don't know about some of the other double NAT problems people mentioned.
I know some people worried about double NATTING and VoIP, but I had my Grandstream ATA with PhonePower service running great, not DMZed and even before I forwared any ports. -
-
I’m
happy
This issue is addressed in the Clearmax toolbar. As of right now the only thing you can do to get close is to setup your modem to be more of a passthrough instead of a modem/router combo. Clearmax toolbar address is http://clearmax.ourtoolbar.com
-
-
I'm confused. How does a IE toolbar allow the Clear modem to be bridged?? I just want to be able to use Back to Mac with MobileMe and access my connected harddrive remotely....has anyone found a way to do this with the clear modem??
-
-
Surely it's some helpful fellow from "Conduit". I need another toolbar like I need another unbridgeable
Clear "Modem".
-
-
I’m
:)
ahhh sorry guys i should have explained... i put the directions for tweaks (like setting up the modem like a passthrough) in the toolbar. I found it was easier and could keep others updated better if i did it that way instead of making a web page or just a post.
-
-
I’m
concerned at how long it is taking to solve this simple problem.
As a Clear dealer, I can state that not solving this loses Clear money as it has cost me multiple sales.
The guy helping me with the tech has a workaround, but it's still not true bridge... -
-
I’m
angry
I can't believe they can't get this done.
-
-
This doesn't need to disable the VOIP functionality, it is possible to both bridge and NAT as long as there are two physical devices on the unit.
-
-
I’m
disappointed...
I remember SWBell/SBC used to make it so hard to "bridge" your modem. I would have thought problems like these for broadband equipment would have been solved half a decade ago with the explosion of adoption of high-speed internet services.
Guess this goes to show us that even to this day we still have large companies using 19th & 20th century business plans/ideas to solve/handle 21st century issues -
-
I’m
outraged
Clear is about to lose us as a customer as well over this. When we signed up the sales rep assured me that we could use our own router (with IPv6 tunneling, QoS, etc) the same way we used it with Comcast. This was a blatant lie.
After struggling with this for some time I just called their tech support and ended up with a tier 1 person insisting as acting as a translator to tier 2, having to explain in great detail what IPv6 and QoS are and why I would want to use a separate router, and was repeatedly put on hold while she went to repeat what I said to a tier 2, then come back with something out of left field. She repeatedly refused to let me speak to tier 2 support, insisting first that she could help me and later insisting that they couldn't help me either. -
-
I’m
Bewildered
My series "M" does not have VOIP capabilities (no pots ports, note in box an external adapter would be needed).
But it also dosn't have bridge mode. -
-
I’m
confident
Alls you gotta do is DMZ to(point the IP of the DMZ) a good router and use it's SPI and NAT. Disable the clear NAT altogether. And better yet, if you have an old wireless router layind around flash it with DD-WRT firmware then it seems to work easier.
-
-
I’m
frustrated
DMZ is not bridge mode and doesn't work correctly on Clear modems.
Both DMZ and port forwarding unacceptably buffers traffic and runs it through the NAT (making QoS less effective). It also fails to forward traffic outside the common layer 4 protocols (UDP and TCP), specifically many IPv6 tunneling protocols and some VPNs.
Has anyone opened one of these modems to look for the JTAG or other debug pads on the PCB? Given that Clear is basically ignoring this issue, hacking the firmware may be the last option left. Maybe even get ddwrt running on the Clear modems themselves. -
-
Good point , but the setup I'm describing is the only one I've found that makes the 'modem' I purchased do what I want it to do; not reset in such a way as to cause problems for after market hardware (routers). The fact that the disable NAT check box is grayed out Is the only problem I really have.
If someone could get Open firmware running on this thing i'd give it a try. -
-
The great thing is, ATT has greatly lowered their prices since Clear came to town which is a good thing. But I paid outright for my equipment so I would be able to quickly switch back if need be-I'm under no contracts and I'm an IT professional and I also run a home server as part of my job. If you want to sell me bandwidth fine. Don't tell me how I can use it.
-
-
I agree. I would also like the ability to set up my Clear Home Modem as a modem only and have my home router manage my network.
-
-
1Get a 4G USB modem and a Cradlepoint router, spend the extra bucks and have WAY more flexibility. use the antenna dock they have as well.
-
-
I’m
disappointed and disinterested.
1I received promotional materials from Clear in the mail today (a day after looking at a display at Best Buy, coincidentally enough). I was intrigued until I found out about this problem -- the inability to receive protocol 41 (or, alternatively, native IPv6) is a serious deal-breaker for me.
-
-
I’m
bumfuzzled
1I'm still in the trial phase. so glad I found this forum. you guys saved me many hours of trial and error and support calls.
I was told point-blank by a sales rep that it would allow me to use my home vpn server, and would behave just like any other modem when connected to my airport extreme base station.
So enthusiastically, I signed up, received the equipment, went into the admin console and ----- encountered the infamous disabled checkbox. WTF
This is just plain SILLY, Clear. COME ON! I remember a technician walking me through the simple firmware steps on a motorola dsl modem to make it operate in bridged mode -- way back in 1999. This is not a new concept, it's not a new need. There are a million legitimate reasons why I need to be able to use my own router behind your modem (operating in bridged mode).
You're minutes from losing yet another new customer because of this silly silly issue.-
It was supposed to be a seemless transition...That is why they issued New Modems. It doesn't share Towers on WiMax.
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
frustrated
When I was talking with sales, I specifically also told them I was using this for my business and would hook it up to my router. Not once did they tell me the "modem" was really a NAT router. I don't think Clear really understands that people are pretty savvy and need this basic service.
Also "voiding the warrantee" is just a bunch of bunk. It is more like "we don't want to figure out how to support people."
Not having the bridged mode really causes problems for us because it will break IPsec, it will require turning off firewall rules that block private IP addresses on our WAN ports (which will suck given that our other WAN connection is comcast). It is totally unacceptable, and just too much work.
I just signed up last week, and the "Series G" modem doesn't even have a grayed out checkbox. I suppose that was the solution they came up with...
Clear: If you're going to sell a business service, then sell a business service. Don't just sell me the home service and call it business. -
-
I guess that is why I've had so much trouble at home. I have a router, switch, VOiP and hubs attached. They work well (when I can get sufficient lights)...but the DVR and TV's don't see each other.
-
-
Even trying to sign inot this chat is hard....A new screen has to pop us, then have to allow unsecure data to be displayed. I usually hit yes on the POP UP Windows screen screen...After several tries getting to the log in screen...I hit NO and Suprise it let me reply?????
-
-
I’m
considering a different ISP
Yeah, i can't seem to get my NAT type "open" i have contacted my router manufacturer and they told my to Bridge the Modem. I purchased my Clear Modem for the Sole purpose of online gaming and because of this NAT issue i have suboptimal online expirience
-
-
I’m
pissed
A guy posted that there is an engineering firmware release that lets you turn off NAT, does anybody know where it is?
-
-
I’m
frustrated
I am also having this same problem with it the Motorola modem/router not being bridgeable.
It looks like I may have to cancel my service and find another solution. -
-
Unlock all functionality on the modem, not just NAT. By doing this, the "community" will aid Clear's growth. Closed systems become extinct.
Clear has the opportunity to set itself apart from all the other ISP's out there. -
-
I’m
shopping for a new ISP
1I think its become clear that Clear could give a rat's posterior about this issue.
There is no native IPv6 coming anytime soon, no bridge mode, its a good day when they can provide close to reliable Internet access and when they do the bandwidth is terrible. There are long periods of time, day and night, when all we get is 40kbps down with five bars on the modem.
Over the last week the Clear service has been so slow and unreliable that I get better service tethering through my Android phone with Verizon 3G service. Beyond that, IPv6 tunneling works fine on Verizon wireless. -
-
I’m
frustrated
called the tech support @ CLEAR..
and they gave me the tech support number from motorola
called.. and motorola says.. hey.. you need to call CLEAR
anyone get the feeling of getting run around? -
-
I’m
frustrated and angry....
This is not a MOTOROLA issue.
it's CLEAR's Version of the firmware that does not allow it.
The "check box" is there, but grayed out.
This needs to be fixed. I've been with clear since they came to Atlanta over a year ago... and its still an issue. -
-
This reply was removed.
see the change log -
I’m
really disappointed!!!!
I subscribed and committed to a 2 year contract in the hope that I could replace my overpriced Roadrunner service with something as good or better. The Clearwire speeds are good, but imagine my disappointment when I found out i CANNOT implement bridge mode!! I can do this with Roadrunner and Zoomtown (Cincinnati Bell FUSE). I guess I will be terminating my agreement not 6 hours into the new service. I am greatly disappointed but I guess Verizon will have a similar service real soon. Isn't there ANYTHING Clearwire can do to help us out??????
CLEARWIRE... PLEASE LISTEN TO US!!!!!! -
-
YEP! prevents people from running REAL Routers/firewalls..........
But like it was pointed out, it's CLEAR's version of software.
Motorola just built it they way they wanted it...so sad.... -
-
Wow, am I glad I just found out about this today. I am moving at the end of the month and my new building is across the street from a Clear tower. I was thinking about switching to Clear but this changes everything for me.
My boss put in a new router, a Sonicwall, at a client's office yesterday, and has been unable to get the Clear service to work properly due to the double NAT. Fortunately the client has a backup DSL line. My boss just told them to order Comcast business class internet. -
-
I’m
frustrated and leaving
I use an SSLVPN to be able to reach my home machines while at work and traveling. This is very similar to "GotoMyPC" type solutions. It doesn't work behind double NAT, and the public IP address needs to be on the SSLVPN device so that certificates work properly. When I first got Clear they said I could get a static IP and could host anything I want off it. Soon found that it wouldn't work so luckily I was able to use the DSL service I already had for this one purpose and use clear for faster browsing. Now that cable service is available Clear is going to have one less customer. Seems silly since all they would need to do is support a bridged mode on the modem and be able to keep me, and other customers.
-
HI jvanboxtel, we are very sorry for any inconvenience that not having a bridged setting may have caused. We are currently looking into providing this type of setup to our customers and we will post updates on this as they become available.
-
-
There is one option that is available. You can use a Clear USB Modem and a Cradlepoint router.
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
pissed
Any updates on this? Just bought a new mac and I can't facetime due to the double nat. I know this topic is over a year old with no results. Looks like I'll be cancelling my home service in favor of a cable modem.
-
EMPLOYEE
EMPLOYEE
CHAMP
Sadly, I have to echo many of the commenters below: forcing a NAT on the modem causes many interesting home setups to become difficult or impossible. This goes for my own home setup, too, I'm afraid. I'll have to cancel my Clear home service until it becomes possible to turn off NAT on the modem.