1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
Dismiss Notice

Welcome To SNBForums

SNBForums is a community for anyone who wants to learn about or discuss the latest in wireless routers, network storage and the ins and outs of building and maintaining a small network.

If you'd like to post a question, simply register and have at it!

While you're at it, please check out SmallNetBuilder for product reviews and our famous Router Charts, Ranker and plenty more!

NETGEAR "Stealthily" Releases the Nighthawk X6S R7960P

Discussion in 'NETGEAR AC Wireless' started by kc6108, Apr 12, 2019.

  1. kc6108

    kc6108 Regular Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    117
    Location:
    Kansas, USA
    The R7960P is now listed on Netgear's website. I was a beta tester for this router.

    https://www.netgear.com/home/products/networking/wifi-routers/R7960P.aspx

    https://www.netgear.com/support/product/R7960P.aspx

    This is a Costco exclusive, and is available for sale on their website right now.

    https://www.costco.com/NETGEAR-Nighthawk-X6S-AC3600-Tri-Band-WiFi-Router.product.100484415.html

    Highlights off the top of my head:

    • Dual-core 1.8GHz processor, with three 800MHz offload processors
    • 128 MB Flash & 512 MB RAM
    • Circle with Disney
    • LAN aggregation (LAN1 & 2 ports)
    • WAN aggregation (WAN and LAN4 ports) - aka their "multi-gig" internet speed support
    • Dynamic QoS
    • Tri-Band, AC3600 (2.4GHz - Up to 600Mbps, 5GHz - Up to 1.3Gbps, and 5GHz - Up to 1.625Gbps)
    • MU-MIMO
    • Smart Connect (2.4 & 5GHz bands)
    • Beamforming+ (aka Implicit & Explicit Beamforming)
    kc6108
     
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2019
    e38BimmerFN likes this.
  2. kc6108

    kc6108 Regular Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    117
    Location:
    Kansas, USA
    @thiggins

    PM me if you’d like to review this router. I’ll mail mine to you.
     
  3. kc6108

    kc6108 Regular Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    117
    Location:
    Kansas, USA
    Anyone have a Costco account? How much are they listing this router for?
     
  4. Sizzlechest

    Sizzlechest Regular Contributor

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2017
    Messages:
    67
    $199.99
     
  5. L&LD

    L&LD Part of the Furniture

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2013
    Messages:
    9,592
    Is this router able to do link aggregation on both WAN + LAN then, simultaneously?
     
  6. kc6108

    kc6108 Regular Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    117
    Location:
    Kansas, USA
    Yes
     
    L&LD likes this.
  7. e38BimmerFN

    e38BimmerFN Very Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    812
    Location:
    USA
    I love mine. :)Really hoping NG will fix the NAT Filter OPEN issue though. :oops:
     
  8. e38BimmerFN

    e38BimmerFN Very Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    812
    Location:
    USA
    Thats not a bad price for what this router can do. o_O

     
  9. L&LD

    L&LD Part of the Furniture

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2013
    Messages:
    9,592
    Do you have a link or further details of what that issue is?
     
  10. e38BimmerFN

    e38BimmerFN Very Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    812
    Location:
    USA
    When NAT Filter is set to OPEN, the NAT test reports Port Address Restricted NAT instead of Full Cone NAT when running this test:
    https://badmodems.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=21

    Others are reporting this with other R series model routers, 7800, 8000, and 9000 and XR series as of late...

    I found this in beta testing the CBK40 and R7960P...They fixed the CBK40 system.
     
    L&LD likes this.
  11. kc6108

    kc6108 Regular Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    117
    Location:
    Kansas, USA
    I ran that test on my R9000 running Voxel's latest firmware. FYI, I have the 'NAT Filtering' option set to 'Secured':

    Here are the results of the test:

    UPnP Test (?): found: R9000 (Gateway)
    UPnP Port mapping works



    STUN Test (?): Address Restricted Cone NAT



    UDP Binding Test (?): Endpoint independent binding, port prediction is easy
    TCP Binding Test: Endpoint independent binding, port prediction is easy



    UDP Mapping Test (?): your external IP address was different from your local one (NAT).
    Your external source ports were preserved on every connection.
    TCP Mapping Test: your external IP address was different from your local one (NAT)
    Your external source ports were preserved on every connection.



    SIP ALG (?): The initial SIP INVITE packet has been modified.
    Most probably, your NAT implements a SIP-ALG
    FTP ALG:
    The initial FTP PORT command has been modified.
    Most probably, your NAT implements a FTP-ALG



    UDP Hole Punching (?): High TTL Test was not successful
    Low TTL Test was successful
    Silent Test was not successful
    TCP Hole Punching:
    High TTL Test was not successful
    Low TTL Test was not successful
    Silent Test was not successful



    UDP Timeout (?): Your UDP timeout is approx. 60 seconds
    Your timeout is greater than 60 seconds. There should be no problems.
     
  12. kc6108

    kc6108 Regular Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    117
    Location:
    Kansas, USA
    Folks wanting to run this test will need to install Waterfox. It's the last browser being actively maintained that still supports Java.
     
  13. e38BimmerFN

    e38BimmerFN Very Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    812
    Location:
    USA
    That is the correct behavior for Secure Nat Filter. What isn't correct behavior is when the router is set for OPEN.

    Users can use a old version of FireFox to test with Java as well. v52.9 I believe is the last version of FF. Also IE11 x32 still works.
     
  14. e38BimmerFN

    e38BimmerFN Very Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    812
    Location:
    USA
    Now what are the STUN results when you set your 9000 routers NAT Filter to OPEN?
    o_O

     
  15. kc6108

    kc6108 Regular Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    117
    Location:
    Kansas, USA
    Have you tested again using the latest firmware (v1.0.1.34) on their support site?
     
  16. e38BimmerFN

    e38BimmerFN Very Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    812
    Location:
    USA
    Not yet. Just saw that this morning. Been waiting for the router release.

    Will be curious to know what your results are on the R9000 when set to OPEN...
     
  17. Gitsum

    Gitsum Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2012
    Messages:
    252
    Is the user interface any different? Any new useful info like current speeds being used?
     
  18. e38BimmerFN

    e38BimmerFN Very Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    812
    Location:
    USA
    Same UI for the R series.

    Current speeds used for?

     
  19. e38BimmerFN

    e38BimmerFN Very Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    812
    Location:
    USA
    Just checked, I already had v34 loaded. I believe that was a Auto update that was applied.
    No change to NAT Filter OPEN issue. :oops:

     
  20. kc6108

    kc6108 Regular Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    117
    Location:
    Kansas, USA
    @e38BimmerFN

    As requested, I ran that test again on my R9000 running the same version of Voxel's firmware after switching the 'NAT Filtering' option to 'Open':

    Here are the results of the test:

    UPnP Test (?): found: R9000 (Gateway)
    UPnP Port mapping works



    STUN Test (?): Full Cone NAT



    UDP Binding Test (?): Endpoint independent binding, port prediction is easy
    TCP Binding Test: Endpoint independent binding, port prediction is easy



    UDP Mapping Test (?): your external IP address was different from your local one (NAT).
    Your external source ports were preserved on every connection.
    TCP Mapping Test: your external IP address was different from your local one (NAT)
    Your external source ports were preserved on every connection.



    SIP ALG (?): The initial SIP INVITE packet has been modified.
    Most probably, your NAT implements a SIP-ALG
    FTP ALG:
    The initial FTP PORT command has been modified.
    Most probably, your NAT implements a FTP-ALG



    UDP Hole Punching (?): High TTL Test was not successful
    Low TTL Test was successful
    Silent Test was successful
    TCP Hole Punching:
    High TTL Test was not successful
    Low TTL Test was not successful
    Silent Test was not successful



    UDP Timeout (?): Your UDP timeout is approx. 60 seconds
    Your timeout is greater than 60 seconds. There should be no problems.