Forum Discussion
It shouldn't cause any problem even if your LAN was 192.168.0.0/24 it will stay on your LAN side
- bodgeup9 months agoOn our wavelength
Sorry what my last message was to suggest was that the 2 ips even on the Same physical hub port are using separate mac addresses which is obviously yes but why would the sh4 still use the 192.168.0.1 ip I'm modem mode which also makes that additional mac address visable. Modem mode on past hubs were always 192.168.100.1 only. I'm just wondering if this is actually a firmware bug especially after reading that the original sh5's don't have a modem mode? Anyway my main point being why is this happening on the sh4 when didn't on previous models? For sure it must provide some kind of vunarability?
- bodgeup9 months agoOn our wavelength
Thanks for your replies I do appreciate them but I realise that the ips are going to be on the lan side but I'm sure this has to be a faulty SH4 as this scenario shouldn't happen, granted the 192.168.100.1 ip used for modem mode has its own mac address and again for the 192.168.0.1 ip which also has its own mac address but I've never seen on older model Super hubs respond to both local ips at the same time in modem mode? See my 3rs party firewall has before I made changes seen the 2 ips with there separate macs on the same wan port of the firewall as suspicious macs via arp tables or conflicts in its IPS module. Hence why I posted originally in the hopes someone from VM might see this post and assist with a super hub replacement?
Like I mentioned ive had most of the prior models and modem mode was always on 192.168.100.1 only and router mode was always on 192.168.0.1 and there was never any crossover it was one ip and mac per mode. Hence my initial thought that this has to be a fault or a bug with the SH4 model only, I'd be interested to know if other SH4 users see the same thing both modes local ips active and responding at the same time in either mode it's actually in?
It may be time to attempt at getting through to a helpful tech support agent via the vm app I suppose.
Thanks
Related Content
- 9 months ago
- 12 months ago
- 9 months ago