[TriLUG] U-Verse for us

Kevin Otte nivex at nivex.net
Fri Nov 1 15:54:48 EDT 2013


My best friend up in Ohio has UVerse and we set him up with an HE 6in4
tunnel. One day he had to bring the power down at his house to work on
the lines. When everything came back up, the 6in4 tunnel didn't work
anymore. They had pushed a firmware update out that nerfed proto 41
traffic. AT&T support was completely and utterly useless in trying to
ascertain what had happened, even going so far as to say he would have
to pay for a minimum of one year of per-incident support before they
would even talk to him about this obvious regression. His only option
was to upgrade to a higher tier service which got him a different model
modem that doesn't have this problem.

There is another fellow in the #ipv6 channel in a similar boat where the
higher tier option isn't available at all, so he's up (ahem)-creek
without a paddle.

Additional fun is their modems don't do a true bridge mode. You can do a
DMZ-ish sort of thing where all external traffic is redirected to an
internal IP, but it's clunky.

So basically, UVerse is great if all you want to do is consume the
interwebz. If you want real Internet, be ready to scream or walk.

-- Kevin

On 11/01/2013 11:28 AM, Brian McCullough wrote:
> Folks,
> 
> My AT&T store has been trying to pursuade me to change from my old DSL
> and POTS line, to U-Verse for Internet and Phone, for "less."
> 
> Well, it is less for the first year, but they forgot to include the
> static IP address that I currently have, and want to charge my $15 per
> month for that, so that will make it much more than I am currently
> paying, after the year.
> 
> In any case, the question has to do with other people's experiences with
> this service, particularly for a Linux user with servers running on the
> DSL line, and your own suggestions on this subject.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Brian
> 
> 



More information about the TriLUG mailing list