|ZyXEL: "Routing table doesn't update when we change [to a] different remote IP"
||[Tuesday, 25 March 2008 @ 02:00]
Embarq's High Speed Internet
Embarq appears to have had some major problems with their routing a few minutes ago (started at 05:19 GMT or 01:19 EDT on the 25th); it appears that the routing problems have now been resolved, and all dhcp addresses in the network were reassigned.
The interesting part about these reassignments is that somehow they break the routing table in some revisions of the authentic modems supplied by Embarq (for example, I have RAS version : V3.40(ACZ.1) |02/13/2006, Product Model : Prestige 660R-D1), where the modem effectively stops working, until you reboot it. This is absolutely unacceptable. ZyXEL knows about this problem (
Routing table doesn’t update when we change different remote IP .(ENET ENCAP). is one of the
Known Issues in the release notes of the latest firmware for P-660R-D1 from ftp.us.zyxel.com), and Embarq better know about it, too.
Yet on multiple occasions I've had to deal with this major inconvenience, and was not able to remotely access my systems back at home at the times I needed them most.
The most irritating instance of this was when I've upgraded from the 3.0Mbps to the 5.0Mbps package back in January 2008, by calling Embarq from Canada. I was told that the upgrade would be done the next day, and I confirmed that the service would not be interrupted, yet several minutes after my call my service was stalled for many hours, until someone was there to reboot the modem. (Interestingly, the modem did update my dyndns entry with the new ip address each time this reassignment occurred, and it does appear to respond to pings, but otherwise it remains disconnected from the internet until a subsequent reboot.)
At the same time, when this stuff happened, I tried calling Embarq's technical support. In the old days, I remember that one time Sprint even changed some of my private settings in my 645 without my permission, making some parts of my local network inoperable (they've removed an alias from my local interface). On the contrast, right now the technical representatives claim that they don't even have the right to reboot the modem!
Excuse me, but if your modems stop functioning after you change their ip-addresses, and require subsequent reboots, why must I live with the consequence of not being able to access my systems due to the fact that some internal policies were previously so disrespectful of privacy that now they were made so strict as to prohibit the representatives from having a basic functionality that is needed to preserve the functioning of the end points of the network?
This experience of mine is not based on a single ten minute call. I've called multiple times, on several occasions, each time I asked to speak with a supervisor, and spoke with someone claiming to be one, yet every time they have insisted that they currently do not have a way of remotely rebooting the modems. I've had quite a lengthy chat with someone who claimed that previously they indeed had the possibility of doing remote configuration changes and reboots, but due to privacy issues, such functionality was discontinued. On other occasion, when I was already familiar with the above ZyXEL's "known issue", I've tried mentioning it to the representative, of which he was somewhat sceptical and disbelieving.
Just to make it clear -- this post is not about me losing the ip address of my box. I use dyndns services, and my address is automatically updated in the dns every time it changes. I wanted to purchase a static ip feature at the original sign up of the service from Embarq, but the representatives in the local store were not familiar with the feature. After the signup, I also considered purchasing a static ip separately, however, there were no options to purchase it electronically, so I gave up. Moreover, the static ip feature doesn't provide a custom reverse dns record, so it is even less useful considering the trouble of getting it. If there would've been an option of getting multiple static ip addresses with custom reverse dns records, all of which could be ordered online, I'd go for it. This post is not about static ips, however, but about a technical problem with employed equipment that remains very visibly ignored.