Re: [AFMUG] AT WiFi calling

I also ran a check on the latest one having trouble with the WiFi calling. Even though he said it's AT, the DST address (again 4500 UDP) is going to Ericsson. Is this something new? bp On 10/15/2015 4:38 PM, George Skorup wrote: I meant my reply to your post on

Re: [AFMUG] AT WiFi calling

I meant my reply to your post on the Cambium community. I honestly don't know how many customers we might have using these things (we have decent cell coverage). I looked through some netflow data and found quite a few customers with UDP 4500 traffic. The destinations are Verizon and AT IP

Re: [AFMUG] AT WiFi calling

BTW - this is with the SM on the 13.4 release (FSK in this particular case). bp On 10/15/2015 1:12 PM, Bill Prince wrote: I think we have determined that the new AT "WiFi calling" feature will not work with double NAT (even when the customer's router is on the

Re: [AFMUG] AT WiFi calling

I assume you read my post? Have you ran torch on these customers to see what the actual traffic is? I believe they all use an IPSEC VPN. Should work through one layer of NAT (obviously does as you've seen), but I don't know why not also through the SM DMZ which is really NAT, not PAT. What's

Re: [AFMUG] AT WiFi calling

This particular one is on FSK. No. bp On 10/15/2015 3:38 PM, Work wrote: Is this issue on FSK only or 450 also? Did we ever get a fix for Microcell when in NAT mode on FSK?? — Sent from Mailbox On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 6:22 PM,

Re: [AFMUG] AT WiFi calling

Just confirmed with the subscriber. If their router is on the DMZ and routing; no worky. If it's bridging yes worky. BTW - It's an Asus router. bp On 10/15/2015 1:29 PM, George Skorup wrote: I assume you read my post? Have you ran torch on these customers to see

Re: [AFMUG] AT WiFi calling

Is this issue on FSK only or 450 also? Did we ever get a fix for Microcell when in NAT mode on FSK?? — Sent from Mailbox On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 6:22 PM, Bill Prince wrote: > Just confirmed with the subscriber. If their router is on the DMZ and > routing; no worky.

[AFMUG] AT WiFi calling

I think we have determined that the new AT "WiFi calling" feature will not work with double NAT (even when the customer's router is on the DMZ). This is the same behavior we've seen on T-mobile. It seems to work if the customer router is in bridge mode, or the SM is in bridge mode. -- bp

Re: [AFMUG] AT WiFi calling

Not sure if I saw your post George. I did a couple of searches, but did not find anything matching. Since 13.4, we've tracked the NAT table, and the subscriber that called this in had zero entries in their NAT table until they switched their router into bridge mode. So I'm fairly certain they

[AFMUG] Cablevision’s WiFi calling service: another reason you don’t need an iPhone - SlashGear

http://www.slashgear.com/cablevisions-wifi-calling-service-another-reason-you-dont-need-an-iphone-26366213/ Jaime Solorza