PumpUpVolume

If I were to take the DMZ approach, what router would you recommend understanding I have enough switching capacity with the existing switch, don't need SFP ports, don't need WiFi on the router. What is a great bare bones router?

I believe I understand the DHCP vs. double NAT - I'd need bridge mode to avoid double NAT and my gateway doesn't support bridge mode so two routers and single NAT is no go. Understanding that my switch is meeting my connection needs, what router would you recommend - where that router would have one connection to the HH3000 and one connection to the switch? i.e. I don't need a lot of ports, SFP slots, POE, WiF, etc on the router. What is a great but simple/bare-bones router that your recommend?

The Home Hub 3000 is used for both internet and IPTV. I don't believe that I can replace whatever device established the IP connection because my ISP will not share login/account credentials. I'm not entirely clear whether the login/account authentication is done by the ONT or the Gateway, but either way, the login/authentication is not accessible and when I've requested that information they refuse to provide it. There is a lot of good information on the internet about how to replace the Home Hub 3000 supplied by Bell, but my unit is supplied by Bell MTS; the two units have the same name but are quite different. The Bell HH3000 takes a SFP plugin to connect the fibre (and no ONT); the Bell MTS uses an ONT and there is standard ethernet cable between the ONT and the HH3000 - so the configurations are vastly different. Also, Bell discloses the "B1" account and Bell MTS won't disclose the authentication account.

More specific... Alcatel-Lucent ONT --> Bell MTS Home Hub 3000 gateway (internet & IPTV) --> Netgear 28PT GE POE Smart Switch (GS728TP-100NAS) --> Netgear access point (WAC720)

I have an Alcatel-Lucent ONT (fibre in and ethernet out) and a Home Hub 3000 gateway. Do you need a photo of all this? Would that help?

Bridge mode is not supported on my ISP gateway, so that is a red herring for me. The DMZ approach is the only option available to me and I'm not convinced there is benefit in bothering with it. I'm curious as to what benefit others have found from taking this approach. To the best of my knowledge, by ISP gateway is not causing me any problems.

Bridge mode is not supported in my ISP's gateway/router, so #1 is not an option. #2 is not an option in my case because the IP connection is established by the ONT. The ISP does not disclose account information and there is no information available for doing a wholesale ONT replacement. The ONT provides my phone, internet, and IPTV and I'm not about to try to figure out how to replace the ONT as that would be more pain than gain. #3 is an option with my Gateway, but if I am not mistaken, with this approach one still must choose between (i) double-NAT - both the gateway and router have DHCP active; and (ii) using the ISP gateway as the sole DHCP device. One can't achieve single NAT with only the self provided router providing DHCP with this approach. But, please correct me with an explanation if that is wrong. From your comment I understand you take the double NAT approach.

In situation two, the ISP gateway is performing DHCP - what you are you using the non-ISP router for? WiFI?

In the situations where you don't have double-NAT configuration, what do you perceive to be the benefits of adding a non-ISP router? That is, when you are still relying on the ISP provided device for DHCP, what purpose/value do you see the additional router providing? Why not just connect a high quality switch to the ISP router? Note: my ISP provides an ONT and a gateway. The ONT converts fibre to POTS (plain old telephone service) and ethernet that carries internet and IPTV to the ISP provided gateway. I have a business class POE switch connected to the ISP provided gateway. I believe I could install a self-provided router in DMZ mode; however, entirely replacing the ISP provided gateway would be difficult or possibly impossible/problematic. In my view, I don't have any issues with relying on the ISP gateway for WAN routing and the switch for L2 switching, but some people vehemently insist a self supplied router is better/important. I'm not sure that I would gain anything by adding a router, but I'm interested in learning why others are putting one in and why. Also note that I don't use the WiFi on the ISP provided equipment - all my WiFi is provided by access points that are connected to the POE switch via cat 6 ethernet.

For those of you who are using a non-ISP router instead of, or a non-ISP router in addition to the router/gateway supplied by the ISP, which of the following installation configuration methods do you use: The non-ISP router is installed behind the ISP router/gateway. Both the ISP router and the non-ISP gateway are configured to perform DHCP, resulting in a double-NAT configuration. The non-ISP router is installed in the advanced DMZ of the ISP router/gateway. DHCP is provided by the ISP router/gateway and the non-ISP router is configured to be a DHCP client The non-ISP router is installed behind the ISP router/gateway and is configured in bridge mode; DHCP is provided by the ISP provided router/gateway. The non-ISP router is installed such that it entirely replaces the ISP supplied router/gateway. A SFP termination device provided by the ISP is plugged into a media adapter or an SFP slot on a non-ISP router. The non-ISP router replaces the ISP supplied gateway, but is connected to an ISP supplied ONT Another configuration - please describe

In the interest of keeping an open mind and thinking with an engineer's curiosity... if anyone can provide instructions or a link to instructions to using a self-provided router with the Bell MTS Home Hub 3000 without using double-NAT, I will pick up a basic Edge router and give it a try. Note, however, before you send me links to the popular posts on this topic, beware that there are a couple of key differences between the "Bell Home Hub 3000" and the "Bell MTS Home Hub 3000" which renders all of the instructions I've found useless for my hardware. Every discussion of this topic that I've found online applies to the Bell HH3000 and not the Bell MTS HH3000. The "Bell Home Hub 3000" does not use an ONT, but does use a SFP adapter. The "Bell MTS Home Hub 3000" does use a ONT and does not use a SFP adapter. The other key difference is Bell will provide customers with their B1 account information; Bell MTS will not provide the equivalent. So, again, the instructions to bypass the Bell HH300 are not applicable to the Bell MTS HH3000. The moment you see a reference to a SFP adapter or B1 account, understand that the information doesn't pertain to Bell MTS. I pursued this matter in detail some months ago, but didn't want double-NAT and I couldn't get Bell MTS to provide me with the login credentials and I eventually flew a white flag on this pursuit. Also, I need to keep the Bell MTS HH3000 in play because it provides my TV service. I'm not sure, but I suspect the connection between the Aliant ONT and the Bell MTS HH3000 is proprietary. Thus, unless anyone has any brilliant insight into this situation, the only option to use one's own router with Bell MTS is to accept a double-NAT configuration. I'm entirely open to learning that I'm wrong about any of this, but do keep in mind that Bell MTS will not give out login credentials for fibre customers.

I understand the lease considerations, etc. I also know that an unmanaged switch would work the same. I use my switch - mostly - in an unmanaged way. FWIW, my switch does have the following limited L3 feature set (none of which are relevant to the NEEO issue - and I'm only using the DHCP client feature): L3 Services - DHCP • DHCP Client • DHCP Snooping L3 Services - IPv4 Routing • Static Routing • VLAN Routing I don't use most of the features of my switch - I chose this switch a decade ago because of the number of ports, the lifetime warranty, the support terms, and the POE capabilities. It had the right features at the right price with a great warranty and support - and it has served me well. The point that I was making is that the router has little to do with most traffic between the NEEO and the EA3. I think - hope - we can agree on that. As noted, I encounter problems only when switching rooms on the NEEO. That is too much of a coincidence that it caused by the router, which is largely uninvolved. Furthermore, I have done a lot of analysis that I haven't documented here, like looking at lease renewals, error logs, etc. None of the clues point to the router. All clues point to some interaction between the access point and the NEEO. Also, several other users have had the same symptoms and some of solved the problem by switching access points. One set of "clues" is the following: when the NEEO locks up, the problem can be (temporarily) resolve by rebooting the WiFi access Point OR rebooting the NEEO; conversely, rebooting the router or the switch does not resolve the NEEO issue; the NEEO will remain in a locked state until either the NEEO or the access point is rebooted. There are several other clues that I have observed over the year that I've been dealing with this problem. I've also verified that the NEEO lease is still current when it locks up, etc. I've also done various ping tests, etc. Adding another router is not only a red herring, it introduces other potential issues in my case. If I were to implement another router, it would have to be a double NAT implementation for reasons explained earlier in this thread - and I want to avoid double NAT. And, yes, I've explored the DMZ approach and there are problems with that approach with this particular gateway. The Home Hub 3000 is also what provides my TV service, which is an added complication to another router. If I thought for fleeting moment that adding a router would solve the problem and not cause other problems, I'd spend the money and time. I don't believe adding a router would solve the NEEO issues. I have every reason to believe that my issues with the NEEO are either (i) specific to the series of WiFi chip in my NEEO (discussed earlier in this thread); (ii) an incompatibility between my WiFi access point and the NEEO (I suspect it could be related to security protocols); or (iii) some issue with the C4 programming that makes room switches problematic. I have 20-30 devices (covering a wide range of devices, manufacturers, bands, speeds, etc) that work fine on my network; only one device - the NEEO - has given me no end of issues. Is it absolutely impossible the router is playing a role? It is possible, but on a likelihood scale, I judge it to be highly unlikely given all that we know about the issues. I have already made arrangements to upgrade to Halo Touch when it becomes available in my area and I expect that the issues will go away with that upgrade. I'm also planning to upgrade my access point, but I may wait a while yet simply because some of the new access points I prefer are not presently available due to supply chain issues and evolving standards. I'm not clinging to my equipment - I'm due for an upgrade to the access point.

In case anyone doubts my assertion that LAN communications between the NEEO and the C4 EA3 processor are "routed" via my switch - without passing through the gateway/router - consider this... As a test, to demonstrate the independence of the NEEO <--> C4-EA3 communications, I temporarily disconnected the Cat6 ethernet cable that connects my Netgear POE+ switch to my ISP supplied router/gateway. Once the home network was fully disconnected from the ISP router/gateway, I then tried using the NEEO to operate the home theatre system controlled by the EA3 and the NEEO was able to control the home theatre system just as it normally does (when it is working). Of course, I temporarily lost access to IP content (e.g. the Apple TV lost access to content because it depends on an ethernet connection to the router/gateway), but system control functioned normally. This works because the NEEO <--> C4-EA3 communications are on an L2 level and are handled exclusively by the switch, without passing through the router/gateway. Of course, for any process that the NEEO actually needs an internet (WAN) connection, such as a firmware update, the router/gateway would come into play. Normal use of the NEEO (as a remote control) does not send network traffic through the router - if you have the network configuration that I have.

Communications between a WiFi client and the EA3 do not flow through the router; they flow only through the switch. LAN (versus WAN) is an L2 network function handled by the switch. The router only performs DHCP and WAN. This exact matter was discussed previously in this thread.

Point taken... I took offence to the passage that started with "You're simply wrong about wifi. My credentials are..." I don't even have a "mixed environment" there are three legacy n/g devices connected to the AP.

FWIW, I will repeat something that I documented earlier in this thread. At one point I moved the NEEO to its own dedicated access point; during that test, no device other than the NEEO was connected to the NEEO dedicated AP. The same problematic behaviour continued. As I've also indicated before, I accept that there may be some incompatibility between the NEEO and the WAC720... but others have documented that they are experiencing the same symptoms with other APs, including recent Ubiquiti models.

and with those credentials you can't tell the difference between a NEEO and a Halo....

There is no firewall in the AP. [Bell MTS Home Hub 3000 (router, performing DHCP)] --> <cat6> --> [Netgear GS728TP-100NAS POE+ managed Smart Switch (layer 2 & 3)] --> <cat6> --> [Netgear WAC720 access point (not performing DHCP)]

In brief: the WiFi chip in the NEEO remote does not support 5.0 GHz WiFi (I see that you have now realized that you have a Halo, not a NEEO; yes, the new Halo does support 5.0 GHz). I'd put the NEEO on the 5.0 GHz band if the NEEO supported such. 4x4 and Wave 2 are irrelevant to the NEEO... An essay could easily be written on this topic, but for starters the NEEO's WiFi chip and antenna array doesn't support 4x4. Most client devices today don't support 4x4, but I digress.... (this is like discussing the merits of the 6 GHz band in WiFi 6E and 7 when most of us don't have any clients that support 6 GHz... and the NEEO is a n/g device (not ac, ax, or axe). The max PHY stream rate for a 20 MHz wide channel in the 2.4 GHz band is 72 Mbps per spacial stream. I'm not sure whether the NEEO supports two spacial streams, but even if it does, then the theoretical maximum PHY rate is 144 Mpbs; generally, real world rates are much lower than theoretical numbers. The NEEO cannot and will never achieve a connection rate of 200 Mbps with the world's most advanced access point. Keep in mind that streaming 4K video doesn't require anything near 200 Mbps and the NEEO is not streaming video. My NEEO is normally communicating at 52 Mbps and that should be (much) more than ample; again, the NEEO has close to nil competition on my network because most other devices connect on the 5 GHz band or are connected by ethernet. None of the ~20 client devices oresently used in my house support 4x4 spacial streams. I do plan to upgrade my WiFi network to WiFi 7 in the fairly near future, but that should be entirely relevant to the NEEO as it only supports the more basic features of WiFi 5. This may come as a surprise to some, but upgrading my Netgear WAC720 to the latest greatest access point is not going to have any meaningful impact on connection speed (I will appreciate the better security features and support for fast roaming, etc, though when I get around to that upgrade). Connection speed is a squirrel here (i.e. a distraction to the real issue). Anyone who is going to suggest that the NEEO issues are caused by a WAP configuration issue should, at the very least, suggest one or more configuration settings that could come into play - also note that I've addressed the most common settings (Channel, channel width, guard interval, SSID, etc.); no common device should require some highly specialized configuration - especially outside of those basic settings. The NEEO has a very basic WiFi chip - the last thing it needs is some highly specialized setup on a WAP. When you connect to WiFi at a hotel, friends house, business, etc, do you normally need to ask the property owner to have the network and access points reconfigured to allow your basic, low speed, WiFi device to connect? Although I am working with the largest C4 dealer in my city, the project manager at my dealer doesn't like the NEEO and has sold a total of one (1) NEEO in his career - and that NEEO was sold to me. My dealer doesn't want to get involved in resolving the NEEO issues and has chosen to take the "the problem must rest in the customer supplied equipment" position - which is not helpful. For the record, I also sought help from C4 customer advocacy.... FWIW (not much, for that matter), I also see an RSSI around -49, sometimes better; 50 Mbps would be much more than ample for the NEEO to work properly. 20-40 devices is not a large client set, even for a single AP - some of the people participating in this discussion have 100 or 200 clients on their network. I have roughly 20 other devices connected to my WAP (iPhones, iPods, iPads, Samsung phone, PS4, Nintendo switch, IOT devices, laptops, etc. - I also have many ethernet drops, so my WiFi network is relatively lightly used) and none of those other devices have issues connecting to, or staying connected to the WAP. Given that 19 out of 20 devices on the network work flawlessly, does that point to a general network configuration issue or does that point to an issue with the one device that isn't working properly? Be glad you have a Halo.

I am the Original Poster for this thread. I've noted that many of the interesting observations and learnings in this thread are now spread over seven pages. I thought a quick recap would be helpful. I have one NEEO that is used with a simple EA3-based Control4 system. My NEEO locks up frequently - often only lasting about 3 days between reboots; when it has a good run, the NEEO sometimes lasts a week before locking up. The behavior of my NEEO has evolved a bit over time, but it seems to have settled into in a constant pattern for the last 6+ weeks. The lockups always/only occur when switching "rooms" (i.e. switching between "kitchen", "Living", and "Deck"). Sometimes we can switch rooms without incident, but when the NEEO locks up, it is nearly always on a room switch. The error messages vary somewhat, but it is typically loading latest settings for the room we are switching to - all errors/lockups appear to be network connection related. When I created the post, I was of the impression that the NEEO lock up was temporarily resolved by rebooting my access point. I've since proven that the access point doesn't need to be rebooted. The NEEO lockup can be temporarily resolved (for another 3-7 days) by rebooting the NEEO. I previously thought that the NEEO remained stable for longer if I rebooted the AP, but, with more time, testing, and use, that theory appears to have been based on random coincidence. The fix for the NEEO lock up is to reboot the NEEO; rebooting the AP may also work, but is not a better temporary fix. A brief recap of my equipment: One (1) NEEO One (1) EA3 (lightly loaded) One Netgear WAC720 Access Point (there are no other active access points in the house at this time); the access point is located very close to where the NEEO is used One Netgear POE gig switch Cat 6 wiring Most of my devices normally use the 5 GHz band; there are typically only three devices using the 2.4 GHz band and they are low bandwidth devices; one of those devices is a SkyBell, but the SkyBell only uses modest bandwidth when streaming video when an event is triggered, which is only seldom most often. All this to say, there is oodles of bandwidth available to the NEEO. Setting/configuration changes I have tried/tested: Turning on "don't allow WiFi sleep" in Composer (don't allow WiFi sleep is the currently in use setting) Auto channel, and various fixed channel settings for the 2.4 GHz band Reducing the channel width for the 2.4 GHz band Reducing (fixed) power output for 2.4 GHz radio on the access point Different guard interval settings for the 2.4 GHz band on the access point Creating a unique SSID that is only used by the NEEO and only exists on the 2.4 GHz band In summary, in my environment there is no roaming complication because there is only one access point. The NEEO reports excellent RSSI. The SSID is not shared with any other device and the SSID only exists on the 2.4 GHz band. Changing the main radio configurations (channel, channel width, guard interval, power output, etc) have no effect on the NEEO lockups. The lockups consistently occur when using the NEEO to switch between C4 "rooms". None of the setting/configuration changes have solved the problems with my NEEO. Interestingly, all other devices that use my WiFi network were able to adapt just fine to any combination of the settings. That is, all devices except the NEEO remained connected to WiFi without issue regardless of the configuration settings (save for one dropped connection event with my Carrier Infinity Touch Controller - which is also a bit finicky for WiFi connectivity). The NEEO was not stable with any combination of configuration settings; all other devices were stable with all combinations.

@BY96 Please post some additional information about your situation: The model number of each of the Netgear WAPs Any configuration differences between the two WAPs, the SSIDs, etc? Do either both SSIDs have special characters in either the SSID or password? Are you using WPA2 security for both?

I've moved the NEEO to a unique SSID on the 2.4GHz band. This specially reserved SSID is enabled on the 2.4GHz band only. I am not broadcasting the SSID (that is specifically for the NEEO). I also enabled MAC address filtering (Allow by List) to ensure only the NEEO can join the special SSID. I have ensured there are no special characters in the unique NEEO SSID; I have also ensured there are no special characters in the respective passphrase. We'll see how this extra special treatment of the NEEO plays out over the next couple weeks.

It is interesting that you got the errors with the new setting so quickly. Once I reboot my WAP, I typically have about 10 days of error/issue free use use of the NEEO.

FWIW, with Issue #1 using MyMusic on the NEEO, the problem is not the metadata. The metadata is fine/correct. The problem is that the person who coded how the metadata is used, is using the Track Artist field of the metadata where they should be using the Album Artist. So, I actually need to modify the metadata to be INcorrect in order to cause the system to work as it should. I manually replace all track artist fields with the respective Album Artist field using Composer and that tricks the wrongly coded sort algorithm in to sorting the (album) artists correctly.

I don't have a Sonos system, so your primary use for Roon doesn't apply to me. The two issues that I have with the NEEO implementation of MyMusic are the following: 1) When navigating by Artist, the list of artists presented by the NEEO is based on the Track Artist metadata field instead of the Album Artist field that it should be based on. This is hugely problematic for some albums where there are unique Track Artists for several or all tracks. The NEEO erroneously presents each of the track artists as an album artist. Thus, the NEEO artist list is extremely long full of unfamiliar artists - unfamiliar because it would include an artist who is providing accompanying vocals on a single track, for example. In contrast, the list of Artists presented in the Music App on the iPhone is restricted only to the Album artists. This use of the wrong artist field added hundreds of unfamiliar artists to my music list in the NEEO. 2) When navigating music by any parameter on the NEEO you can scroll a bit and then it pauses while it loads the next part of the list. Again, contrast this with Music App on an iPhone where the scrolling is smooth and seamless. Also on the NEEO, if you scroll too fast, sometimes it goes backwards in the list. And, if you select an artist and then backup it takes you back to the beginning of the alphabetic list, not the point in the list for the artist that you entered. So, if you accidentally clicked on The Barenaked Ladies and you really wanted the The Police, when you back up from albums to artist it takes you back to Amadeus (versus taking you back to The Barenaked Ladies and The Police). I've been working around the first issue by using Composer to change all Track Artists to replicate the Album artist. It works, but it feels like a clumsy make work project. Perhaps issue #2 will be better on 5GHz with the Halo Touch? Does Roon on the NEEO suffer from either or both issue #1 and #2 above? And, does anyone know whether Plex works on the NEEO or Halo Touch?