User comments on ISPs
  >> Hyperoptic


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.


Pages in this thread: 1 | [2] | 3 | 4 | (show all)   Print Thread
Standard User goldenarmZz
(newbie) Fri 09-Dec-16 23:44:54
Print Post

Re: Complaint about CGN


[re: blueacid] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by blueacid:
Well, I've just been moved to CGNat, despite having spoken to an agent last week who assured me that I could be moved directly to a static IP when the time came for the CGNat move.

If they had said "No, you'll be on CGNat for a while, sorry", then I could have made a plan to keep remote access to my server at home, but being told I would be moved directly to a static IP and for this to then not happen was pretty poor.


Same situation here. I'd asked about a static IP before and was told I'd been put on a list of people to go straight to a static IP when the migration happened. We'll it's happened and now I'm on a CGNAT address which is causing me problems. I've only been a customer for a month and this is a pretty poor start.

edit: To be fair to hyperoptic, this has now been sorted out within a matter of hours of sending an email to support, so fair play. Let's just chalk it up to an oversight.

Edited by goldenarmZz (Sat 10-Dec-16 01:53:10)

Standard User HurdyGurdy
(newbie) Wed 21-Dec-16 01:29:39
Print Post

Re: Complaint about CGN


[re: blueacid] [link to this post]
 
CGNAT is total disaster - think about all those devices that you want to connect to in your home like security camera's, thermostat, lighting system.

All broken in one go. I had the guys out from my security company for days to figure out why the camera's stopped being contactable.

It is only because of some post on this forum it became clear that effectively all traffic initiated from the outside to your router was going nowhere!

Normal browsing and gaming seemed ok though...
Standard User HurdyGurdy
(newbie) Wed 21-Dec-16 01:38:32
Print Post

Re: Complaint about CGN


[re: Hyperoptic_CS] [link to this post]
 
Frankly this situation is pretty unacceptable. HO should have had the decency to allow their existing customers who helped you build out your current userbase to maintain the static IP for free and you could just move your new customer base on it.

That way HO would have been open and honest about it. The initial letters sent to customers did not even mention CGNAT but only stated moves from static to public!


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.

Standard User alesarco
(regular) Sun 08-Jan-17 14:51:34
Print Post

Re: Complaint about CGN


[re: Hyperoptic_CS] [link to this post]
 
So, is it a way I can go back to access my NAS remotely?
DynDNS seems to work and renews the DNS to the external IP, but then port forwarding, as it used to work before, doesn't work anymore.
Is there any special configuration I need to add to the router, or my only option now is to pay the £5 to get back to a static IP?

--------------------------
Hyperoptic 1Gb
Administrator MrSaffron
(staff) Sun 08-Jan-17 14:59:46
Print Post

Re: Complaint about CGN


[re: alesarco] [link to this post]
 
You are using a service that needs port forwarding then static IP with its charge is the way to go now.

The author of the above post is a thinkbroadband staff member. It may not constitute an official statement on behalf of thinkbroadband.
Standard User NVB
(member) Mon 20-Feb-17 21:30:44
Print Post

Re: Complaint about CGN


[re: MrSaffron] [link to this post]
 
I was surprised after switching to Hyperoptic that a static IP which used to be free, is now going to cost me an extra £5:00 per month. My previous ISP Plusnet (fibre) only charged a £6:00 one-off fee for providing a static IP address. Why is Hyperoptic's static ip provision so expensive, it's not like I have a choice because I do need port forwarding.

.

Edited by NVB (Mon 20-Feb-17 21:37:13)

Administrator MrSaffron
(staff) Tue 21-Feb-17 10:43:43
Print Post

Re: Complaint about CGN


[re: NVB] [link to this post]
 
Because as IPv4 blocks become harder to find they are a limited resource and thus providers are actually having to buy blocks on the open market, therefore the cost gets passed on.

Hopefully once IPv6 rolls out this will be less of an issue, as many more IP addresses in IPv6

The author of the above post is a thinkbroadband staff member. It may not constitute an official statement on behalf of thinkbroadband.
Standard User neilka
(member) Tue 21-Feb-17 10:56:06
Print Post

Re: Complaint about CGN


[re: MrSaffron] [link to this post]
 
I don't think anyone is arguing it should be free, but reading around suggests that an IPv4 address costs less than £10 (a one-off cost) when bought in any kind of quantity. If you're with Hyperoptic for five years with a static address then you'll have paid £300 for it.
Administrator MrSaffron
(staff) Tue 21-Feb-17 11:55:41
Print Post

Re: Complaint about CGN


[re: neilka] [link to this post]
 
Without access to their accounts hard to say more, it may be they have a limited stock and the price is acting as a limit

The author of the above post is a thinkbroadband staff member. It may not constitute an official statement on behalf of thinkbroadband.
Standard User Michael_Chare
(fountain of knowledge) Wed 22-Feb-17 17:25:22
Print Post

Re: Complaint about CGN


[re: neilka] [link to this post]
 
It would be interesting if you could establish that by using CGN, Hyperoptic are not providing proper Internet access since you do not have a public IP address which others can use to contact you. Is this reflected in their product descriptions?

Michael Chare
Pages in this thread: 1 | [2] | 3 | 4 | (show all)   Print Thread

Jump to