Comcast residential port forwarding

[HCHTech]

What possible advantage is gained by taking the ability to enter a port forward AWAY from the web interface of their stupid gateway? For about a year now, the only way to do this was to log onto the customer's Xfinity account and do it online. This process was slow and cumbersome, and you were often met with some kind of web error, so the process couldn't complete. Now, even that has been blocked, the only way to do it is to download the Xfinity APP onto the customer's phone. Even then, you can't just give the IP address of the forward, you have to choose the device from a list of "connected" devices, which (again) inevitably is not complete and doesn't show the device you need. In that instance, assuming rebooting all of the equipment doesn't fix the list of connected devices, your only option is to place the device in the DMZ zone. Nice work, Comcast. As if your DNS hijacking weren't enough, now you're forcing a lower-security solution. Awesome.

 

[Markverhyden]

I remember when I first started running into their new "cloud controller" because of the same issues. Their "controller" did a p!zz poor job of controlling. So even with residential customers I'd tell them they need to get a real router and ignore what ever the ISP gives you.

 

[Blues]

The worst part isn't these issues the worst part is in most places I see them they are still functionally the best option for price to performance. Most residential people aren't interested in fiber as it is often too costly for a speed boost they rarely can utilize more than 30% of. I find most residential people can't really tell the difference outside of select functions between a 300MB comcast and any higher speed options. The only options comparable in price to the sub 1Gig is DSL but performance is not as good nor is stability of the service. This is what I see in my local area. I sadly continue to steer people to Comcast at this time as people lack many real usable options.

I did some quick reading and it seems that using owned equipment no longer works to utilize a preferred DNS though admittedly it is a cloudy pool for this research so I am not sure how current or accurate the details are.

 

[britechguy]

Most residential people aren't interested in fiber as it is often too costly for a speed boost they rarely can utilize more than 30% of.

Amen to that!

I now steer many residential users who are already T-Mobile customers to T-Mobile's wireless internet service. You can't beat the price for the performance you get, particularly if you happen to live very close to a tower, and having no wires other than the plug for the power is a huge plus.

 

[HCHTech]

We're lucky here to have both Comcast (up to gigabit) and FIOS (up to gigabit) in the residential markets. Both aren't everywhere, of course, but many places do have the choice. Not surprisingly, they are very similar in price. For commercial clients, if they ask, I steer them to FIOS every time since you get symmetrical speeds regardless of which speed tier you choose. For residential, I think FIOS' UX is not as good as Comcast's for television, so that is sometimes the driver. For internet, I've heard horror stories from both sides, so I think it's down to how good the infrastructure is IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD. Finding this out isn't easy unless you are friendly with all of your neighbors.

 

[Blues]

I got people who's options don't even include comcast or dsl they have dial-up or satellite services and if they are lucky they might can use cellular. I have hesitated on the cellular option for anyone who can have a standard broadband service mostly due to hearing of people switch back due to performance issues in my general region.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

I haven't seen one of those gateways yet....I don't see the residential gateways often, but I recall them being similar to the SMC or Netgear sourced ones Comcrap used before, the port forwarding was traditional.

By your description, it sounds like they're using ones made by whoever did them for SBC/Yahoo/Frontier...where you port forward to the MAC address/Host Name of an already attached computer. I forget who made those back then for SBC...but I hated them. Oh yeah..."2Wire"...that was the brand. Yuck!

 

[britechguy]

due to performance issues in my general region.

If I may ask, what is the general region of TN that you're in?

 

[Blues]

20-30 min west of Nashville.

 

[HCHTech]

I though I would dig up this thread again because I ran into yet another limitation of Comcast stupid system of port forwarding today.

This is a client where we have an onsite Synology (used as a backup target) that syncs with an offsite Synology in the owner's home. We have a firewall at the owner's house inside of their (unfortunately Comcast) ISP modem, which holds up a full-time VPN tunnel to the office. In setting up the port forwarding, you can't just specify an IP address to forward to, you must choose the forward target from the list of identified devices connected to the network. For some reason, I could not get the firewall to show up as a connected device.

After fighting with this for too long, I stumbled across the issue. If you setup an IP reservation for a device in their gateway (which I had done for the firewall), then that device will not show on the list of connected devices, and consequently, not be available as a target for a port forward.

I had to remove the IP reservation and just let it go back to DHCP before I could forward the ports. Awesome.