Is this issue on FSK only or 450 also?
Did we ever get a fix for Microcell when in NAT mode on FSK??
—
Sent from Mailbox
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 6:22 PM, Bill Prince <part15...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just confirmed with the subscriber. If their router is on the DMZ and
> routing; no worky. If it's bridging yes worky.
> BTW - It's an Asus router.
> bp
> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
> On 10/15/2015 1:29 PM, George Skorup wrote:
>> I assume you read my post? Have you ran torch on these customers to
>> see what the actual traffic is? I believe they all use an IPSEC VPN.
>> Should work through one layer of NAT (obviously does as you've seen),
>> but I don't know why not also through the SM DMZ which is really NAT,
>> not PAT. What's the term now, NAP-T or something like that is what we
>> all call "NAT" generally.
>>
>> On 10/15/2015 3:14 PM, Bill Prince wrote:
>>> BTW - this is with the SM on the 13.4 release (FSK in this particular
>>> case).
>>>
>>> bp
>>> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>>>
>>> On 10/15/2015 1:12 PM, Bill Prince wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I think we have determined that the new AT&T "WiFi calling" feature
>>>> will not work with double NAT (even when the customer's router is on
>>>> the DMZ). This is the same behavior we've seen on T-mobile. It seems
>>>> to work if the customer router is in bridge mode, or the SM is in
>>>> bridge mode.
>>>>
>>>
>>
