Double NAT and considering router upgrade

[crazyflower]

Last year my ISP was bought out by Xplornet. In December I switched to their LTE service and they installed a new modem. I have ended up with a double NAT something like this :

Internet-----> Modem(NAT)----->Router(NAT)-----> PCs(Wired)/ ipads,iPhones,Apple TVs,consoles(Wireless)

I called to see if the modem could be put into bridge or passthrough mode but it can't.

My current router is a D-Link DIR-655. I was wondering if an upgrade would be worthwhile. I was thinking of upgrading it as I have been needing to unplug it more frequently. Sometimes multiple times a day. I was looking around online at various sites including this one and I was thinking about the ASUS RT-AC86U. I do not get great speeds here so I was thinking this may futurepoof me a bit and last me a while. I also noticed while look at ASUS,s website that it has an option Enable NAT. What exactly does that do? Does it simply turn NAT off while keeping everything else on so it is still a router? Would this eliminate the double NAT? Could I do something like this :

Internet----->Modem(NAT)----->AC-86U(Enable NAT off)----->PCs(Wired)/iPads,iPhones,Apple TVs,consoles(Wireless)

 

[Klueless]

OK, so your new vendor replaced a modem with a modem/router that can't be "dumbed down" to act like a modem only. Doesn't the new modem/router offer wireless/WiFi? (Many do.) If so then what is the value of even keeping the ol' D-Link DIR-655 ? (It's an old single band legacy router, isn't it, that's failing anyway?) Or, for that matter, of having your own "any" router? Is there a problem with the modem/router your vendor supplies?

What you're describing with the Asus is turning it into a wired Access Point. Nothing wrong with that but it might be cheaper to simply buy a "wired access point".

Many recommend against double NAT (me included); theoretical performance hit, another layer of complexity that could go wrong yet I continue to use double NAT at one of my sites. The vendor's modem/router can't be bridged, their wireless just doesn't cut it and it doesn't have the features we needed/wanted. I could turn off NAT on my Asus like you suggested but then I've some addressing issues I'd have to fix that I'm too lazy to address (if it ain't "broke" ... )

 

[crazyflower]

Xplornet's tech support claimed just a modem when I called. My internet connection hasn't been great with Xplornet so if I might end up switching ISPs again later on and end up needing a router. I like the features and potential future-proofing of the Asus and I would have full control of it. Ideally I would like the router to function as a router without NAT, but I don't know if this is possible with some setup (I'm fine with that) or just fantasy talk. I am in a similar situation like you described.

 

[Klueless]

Xplornet's tech support claimed just a modem

If true then you don't have double NAT. (Double check by googling make/model.)

My internet connection hasn't been great

• Not getting the speeds you're paying for?
• Losing connection?
  • WiFi only or "wired" too?

I like what I've read about the Asus 86U that you mentioned. What are you liking about it?

 

[crazyflower]

I wonder if they are mistaken for a couple reasons. 1) When I do a traceroute or pathping the first two hops are both private ip addresses 2) From what I can tell from google the modem is an outdoor router by GemTek. There is something that looks quite similar to it on their website.
The main issue I've been having is packet loss and latency. Internet browsing is fine, download speed varies but is usually fine. Online gaming is where the problem comes in with rubber banding, things running in place and delays when trying to do anything.. My pc has a wired connection to the D-Link. Here is an example from WinMTR. Sometimes it is better, sometimes it is worse.

Spoiler: WinMTR

|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| WinMTR statistics |

| Host - % | Sent | Recv | Best | Avrg | Wrst | Last |

|------------------------------------------------|------|------|------|------|------|------|

| dlinkrouter - 0 | 692 | 692 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |

| 192.168.209.1 - 1 | 688 | 687 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 1 |

| xplr-74-127-230-147.xplornet.com - 3 | 622 | 604 | 35 | 208 | 725 | 202 |

| xplr-74-127-228-128.xplornet.com - 3 | 626 | 609 | 43 | 203 | 698 | 216 |

| xplr-74-127-228-132.xplornet.com - 4 | 606 | 584 | 44 | 206 | 863 | 214 |

| xplr-74-127-228-131.xplornet.com - 5 | 590 | 564 | 47 | 200 | 714 | 216 |

| xplr-74-127-228-169.xplornet.com - 2 | 665 | 658 | 38 | 237 | 699 | 177 |

| xplr-74-127-228-168.xplornet.com - 4 | 602 | 579 | 39 | 231 | 821 | 214 |

| xplr-74-127-228-130.xplornet.com - 4 | 601 | 578 | 46 | 213 | 721 | 180 |

| xplr-74-127-228-53.xplornet.com - 3 | 629 | 613 | 65 | 242 | 890 | 425 |

| xe-1-2-1.cr3-sea2.ip4.gtt.net - 3 | 629 | 613 | 71 | 251 | 728 | 200 |

| xe-11-3-2.cr2-sea2.ip4.gtt.net - 3 | 621 | 603 | 69 | 247 | 926 | 674 |

| ip4.gtt.net - 4 | 602 | 579 | 65 | 243 | 867 | 218 |

| ae1-br01-eqse2.blizzardonline.net - 3 | 621 | 603 | 64 | 250 | 771 | 198 |

|xe-0-0-0-1-br01-eqsv5.blizzardonline.net - 3 | 637 | 623 | 85 | 303 | 809 | 198 |

|xe-0-0-36-1-br02-eqla1.blizzardonline.net - 2 | 649 | 638 | 88 | 331 | 784 | 155 |

| be2-pe02-eqla1.blizzardonline.net - 4 | 605 | 583 | 95 | 291 | 962 | 451 |

| lax-eqla1-ia-bons-03.blizzardonline.net - 4 | 610 | 589 | 84 | 281 | 962 | 475 |

| 24.105.30.129 - 4 | 609 | 588 | 99 | 311 | 785 | 445 |

|________________________________________________|______|______|______|______|______|______|

WinMTR v0.92 GPL V2 by Appnor MSP - Fully Managed Hosting & Cloud Provider

I wonder if they could be overselling their towers. I also wonder if the double NAT is contributing to it somewhat.
The D-Link DIR_655 is a single band N300 so so the AC-86U would definitely be an upgrade. I imagine it would be able to handle multiple devices(most of the time at least 8) connected without issue. The AC-86U is ranked highly on this site and the review was an interesting read. It sounds like it performs well and the performance isn't affected much by QoS. At the very least I am want to future-proof if possible and not have to unplug my router all the time. Adaptive QoS sounds like it could be useful if I was playing Overwatch and someone else starting watching something on Netflix. I like having the option to be able to do something. I can't turn off NAT with the D-Link, or it isn't labeled as such, but it looks like I might be able to with the Asus. I could try it with and without and see what happens. It appears many things can be turned on or off. I like being able to experiment.

 

[Klueless]

I wonder if they are mistaken for a couple reasons. 1) When I do a traceroute or pathping the first two hops are both private ip addresses 2) From what I can tell from google the modem is an outdoor router by GemTek.

Sounds compelling ...

main issue I've been having is packet loss and latency

• 3% packet loss doesn't sound "horrible" ... but then I'm not a gamer.
• Latency sounded "high-ish" but it's probably "normal-ish" for Satellite?

If you're gaming over wireless you might want to take a moment to rule out your local WiFi.

Myself, I've been running double NAT for three years with no issues.

I like what you're saying about the 86U. If the issue is "you" it might fix it but if the issue is "them" it probably won't. QoS could very well help. Another thing I like about Asus is their builtin real time traffic monitor ... very useful for troubleshooting.

You don't mention if you're always having trouble with gaming or if it's intermittent, like good for a couple hours and then not so good for an hour or so?

 

[crazyflower]

Xplornet's LTE uses land based towers. I am not using their satellite internet. I am using a wired connection with my pc.
I usually play in the evening. At best it is playable but could be better ( between 100-200ms fluctuating quite a bit, smaller amouts of packet loss 1-10%) and at worst unplayable (300+ms, 10% or more), so I would say it is somewhat intermittent.
For example 1) it is better and I can play for a couple hours 2) it is too high or too jittery and I can't play at all 3) it is fine until the latency spikes 100+ms. It could be brief or last a while
3 could be happening when someone else goes online. Overall it is worse now than before I switched so I think it is at least partially on Xplornet's end. Before I switched my connection was better and more stable, latency around 100ms with little to no packet loss.