Re: Caveat emptor: avoid Inseego 5G products unless you still believe in classful routing

2023-03-28 Thread Fred Baker 
If they think classful IPv4 is the state of the art, I would not assume they have heard of IPv6.Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways...On Mar 28, 2023, at 12:45 PM, Matt Harris  wrote:Matt Harris​VP OF INFRASTRUCTUREFollow us on LinkedIn!matt.har...@netfire.net816-256-5446www.netfire.comOn Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 2:25 PM Matthew Petach  wrote:In the category of "I can't believe I still have to worry about this in 2023" comes an unfortunate discovery I made recently when setting up a network for a local non-profit.  The Inseego FX2000 5G router looked like a nice product, it supports OpenVPN out of the box, flexible firewall rules, etc.What I did *NOT* expect from a device made in 2023, and didn't think to ask about ahead of time, is whether it supported classless routing.Setting the unit up, I discovered the hard way that the developers are apparently still working from 1989 textbooks.  The only netmask the router will accept for a 10.x.x.x. subnet is 255.0.0.0.  Absolutely refuses to accept a different length netmask.Even the user manual reflects the inherent classful assumption:"IPv4 IP Address: The IP address for your FX2000, as seen from the local network. Normally, you can
use the default value. Subnet Mask: The subnet mask network setting for the FX2000. The default value 255.255.255.0
is standard for small (class "C") networks. If you change the LAN IP Address, make sure to use
the correct Subnet mask for the IP address range of the LAN IP address"So, before anyone else makes the same mistake I did, I thought I'd give the community a heads-up to avoid the Inseego line of 5G products, as they're woefully behind the times in their understanding of IPv4 subnetting as it exists in 2023.  ^_^;Thanks!MattBut how is their IPv6 support? ;)

Re: [External] Re: Caveat emptor: avoid Inseego 5G products unless you still believe in classful routing

2023-03-28 Thread Hunter Fuller via NANOG 
v6 support is good, actually! I am using it to good effect.

The classful part is very surprising. This site doesn't use a lot of v4 so
I hadn't given that much thought.

--
Hunter Fuller (they)
Router Jockey
VBH M-1C
+1 256 824 5331

Office of Information Technology
The University of Alabama in Huntsville
Network Engineering


On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 2:44 PM Matt Harris  wrote:

> Matt Harris​
> VP OF INFRASTRUCTURE
>
> *Follow us on LinkedIn!* 
> 
> *matt.har...@netfire.net* 
> *816-256-5446* <816-256-5446>
> *www.netfire.com* 
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 2:25 PM Matthew Petach 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> In the category of "I can't believe I still have to worry about this in
>> 2023"
>> comes an unfortunate discovery I made recently when setting up a network
>> for a local non-profit.  The Inseego FX2000 5G router looked like a nice
>> product, it supports OpenVPN out of the box, flexible firewall rules, etc.
>>
>> What I did *NOT* expect from a device made in 2023, and didn't think to
>> ask about ahead of time, is whether it supported classless routing.
>>
>> Setting the unit up, I discovered the hard way that the developers are
>> apparently still working from 1989 textbooks.  The only netmask the
>> router will accept for a 10.x.x.x. subnet is 255.0.0.0.  Absolutely
>> refuses
>> to accept a different length netmask.
>>
>> Even the user manual reflects the inherent classful assumption:
>>
>> "
>> IPv4
>> IP Address: The IP address for your FX2000, as seen from the local
>> network. Normally, you can use the default value.
>> Subnet Mask: The subnet mask network setting for the FX2000. The default
>> value 255.255.255.0 is standard for small (class "C") networks. If you
>> change the LAN IP Address, make sure to use the correct Subnet mask for the
>> IP address range of the LAN IP address
>> "
>>
>> So, before anyone else makes the same mistake I did, I thought I'd give
>> the
>> community a heads-up to avoid the Inseego line of 5G products, as they're
>> woefully behind the times in their understanding of IPv4 subnetting as it
>> exists in 2023.  ^_^;
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Matt
>>
>
> But how is their IPv6 support? ;)
>
>

Re: Caveat emptor: avoid Inseego 5G products unless you still believe in classful routing

2023-03-28 Thread Matt Harris 
On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 2:25 PM Matthew Petach 
wrote:

>
> In the category of "I can't believe I still have to worry about this in
> 2023"
> comes an unfortunate discovery I made recently when setting up a network
> for a local non-profit.  The Inseego FX2000 5G router looked like a nice
> product, it supports OpenVPN out of the box, flexible firewall rules, etc.
>
> What I did *NOT* expect from a device made in 2023, and didn't think to
> ask about ahead of time, is whether it supported classless routing.
>
> Setting the unit up, I discovered the hard way that the developers are
> apparently still working from 1989 textbooks.  The only netmask the
> router will accept for a 10.x.x.x. subnet is 255.0.0.0.  Absolutely
> refuses
> to accept a different length netmask.
>
> Even the user manual reflects the inherent classful assumption:
>
> "
> IPv4
> IP Address: The IP address for your FX2000, as seen from the local
> network. Normally, you can use the default value.
> Subnet Mask: The subnet mask network setting for the FX2000. The default
> value 255.255.255.0 is standard for small (class "C") networks. If you
> change the LAN IP Address, make sure to use the correct Subnet mask for the
> IP address range of the LAN IP address
> "
>
> So, before anyone else makes the same mistake I did, I thought I'd give
> the
> community a heads-up to avoid the Inseego line of 5G products, as they're
> woefully behind the times in their understanding of IPv4 subnetting as it
> exists in 2023.  ^_^;
>
> Thanks!
>
> Matt
>

But how is their IPv6 support? ;)

Matt Harris
VP OF INFRASTRUCTURE
Follow us on LinkedIn!
matt.har...@netfire.net
816-256-5446
www.netfire.com

Caveat emptor: avoid Inseego 5G products unless you still believe in classful routing

2023-03-28 Thread Matthew Petach 
In the category of "I can't believe I still have to worry about this in
2023"
comes an unfortunate discovery I made recently when setting up a network
for a local non-profit.  The Inseego FX2000 5G router looked like a nice
product, it supports OpenVPN out of the box, flexible firewall rules, etc.

What I did *NOT* expect from a device made in 2023, and didn't think to
ask about ahead of time, is whether it supported classless routing.

Setting the unit up, I discovered the hard way that the developers are
apparently still working from 1989 textbooks.  The only netmask the
router will accept for a 10.x.x.x. subnet is 255.0.0.0.  Absolutely refuses
to accept a different length netmask.

Even the user manual reflects the inherent classful assumption:

"
IPv4
IP Address: The IP address for your FX2000, as seen from the local network.
Normally, you can use the default value.
Subnet Mask: The subnet mask network setting for the FX2000. The default
value 255.255.255.0 is standard for small (class "C") networks. If you
change the LAN IP Address, make sure to use the correct Subnet mask for the
IP address range of the LAN IP address
"

So, before anyone else makes the same mistake I did, I thought I'd give the
community a heads-up to avoid the Inseego line of 5G products, as they're
woefully behind the times in their understanding of IPv4 subnetting as it
exists in 2023.  ^_^;

Thanks!

Matt