T-Mo -Please enable us to set the DHCP parameters on the home internet gateway (“trashcan”).I want to use static addresses and DNS-based content filtering for my local network.Thanks.

Please, please, please… Just give us a button to disable DHCP. There are routers that cost thousands of dollars out there and you think this Nokia piece of garbage can actually compete with that??? Its a decent/pretty much awful gateway, but I’m sure as heck not allowing it access to my internal network. I have so many Arduinos that require static IP addresses that this thing will certainly screw up, which will take me forever to fix if they get pushed a new IP address. This all in one method only works for people that are tech novices. Just give us a button to disable this DHCP control so my router can control my network without constantly fighting with this thing. I’ve seriously had to use a cell phone to connect to wifi and USB tether it to a router just to make use of this garbage can. What sucks is the settings are there somewhere. I know Nokia has firmware capable of user interaction with these settings on other devices… and the developers of this device also have to be able to set these settings!! So why is this one firmware intentionally locked out to noob mode? Its stupid and it alienates every user above the novice skillset.

Let’s all get on the same page. The options are: A - get TMO to add comprehensive DHCP features to the gatewayB - get TMO to support bridge mode for using one’s own router with existing DHCP features Personally, I think option A will take a long time to roll out because they would need a lot of firmware development and no matter how well they do, people will still demand more features. Option B sounds more logical to me because the “I need more DHCP features” moves out of TMO hands and back to the respective router makers and allows everyone to get the router that best fits their needs.

I agree with you 100%!!As a workaround, many people (including me) have asked for a bridge-mode and perhaps the first device connected via LAN port (since there’s no WAN port) gets a WAN IP address, and other devices plugged in do not receive an IP address (from TMO WAN), in a similar mode as cable modems with either two or more Ethernet interfaces or connected to an Ethernet switch.My issue is that TMO doesn’t work with UPNP, which breaks my paid PLEX service. It is irritating too to have to continue to “guess” the IP addresses (as they change) for things like my desktop when using RDC technologies (i.e., VNC). I have been using ASUS AiMesh technology on an RT-AX3000 and that works really well. The only issue is how to access the TMO management interface (for signal quality, battery level, etc.) we need a special IP address. For cable modems on some services, you can access this (i.e., QAM allocation, channels, SNR, etc.) is accessed via http://192.168.100.1 (even though the LAN can be 192.168.1.1). In other words, the cablemodem filters ARP requests for 192.168.100.1 to itself (not sending it upstream because it’s not on the LAN interface).Not sure if telnet/ssh access would help, unless we knew how to modify the routes, how to save them (from power cycles / reboots when firmware updates are applied) in NVRAM/flash… lots of deep technical questions, all of which could be eliminated if we had a bridge mode and used our own router. In the interim, the bridge mode would allow those users to support themselves and their own particular flavor. Opening up the router to other firmwares may be potentially risky and brick-making. I’m just trying to justify TMO reasoning if they don’t allow this. It’s similar to mobile carriers invalidating warranties for phones with 3rd party firmwares. There is a non-zero chance of hardware damage occurring. For instance, let’s say the power amplifier has software feedback to prevent thermal runaway, and that is somehow bypassed, now the device could be damaged or worse, it could be that its damage causes harmonics that are affecting others’ mobile services. Similar reasoning could be for the LNA, in that it could be controlled to overload the radio receiver and irreparably damage it.AT&T fiber requires using their router, and their justification is “to make sure our service is working normally” (whatever). However, they do provide a bridge-mode, and if you also turn off wifi, you can then use your own router and the WAN IP is presented to the first device connected on the LAN port. That undoes any restrictions and limitations imposed by using their router (i.e., no static DHCP, no DDNS support, etc. etc.).

Yes, Please enable DHCP settings

Thanks Rob. Yes, I’ve used DD-WRT, OpenWRT, and Tomato in the past.These days I’d like a simpler set-up, that is, if I can just use the gateway/router for wifi access that would be preferred.T-Mo please enable a DHCP web interface or allow telnet/ssh access.

Feature Request - Home Internet Gateway DHCP Settings

sjohn
Roaming Rookie
2 months ago
I know this is an old thread and as far as I know there have been no hardware or software changes to remedy the problem that you can not directly vpn into your home network, BUT there are a few workarounds depending on your resources.
Our office was running a mikrotik router which I did have access too and setup openvpn to run on that. I then setup my FreeBSD or Debian Linux box to vpn from behind the T-Mobile home internet router and I was able to access my home network from the office, going back through the vpn connection. I setup a cronjob to check every 5 minutes and restart if the connection dropped though openvpn should reconnect automatically.
My boss made some upgrades and hasn't given me access to the new router yet, but I don't need it. I switched to hub and spoke model. I have a web server which I run anyway so I setup an openvpn server on that and configured it to allow peer to peer connections and to recognize the LAN networks behind clients. Add a few routes in your client networks and bing bang boom. You can get very cheap hosting for $12 - $20 a month to run such a service with a VM running linux or freebsd. So now my T-Mobile network has a linux machine that routes home network through the vpn connected to the server in the cloud, and my office linux machine routes traffic though the vpn to the same server. I can ping the hosts in the 192.168.12.0/24 network from the office and visa versa.
The only drawback is that ping times are twice the time it takes to get to the server from 1 peer rather than just across town, but I am scp'ing only a few files once in awhile to update my web pages, so not a big deal.
USMCReed
Network Novice
2 years ago
T-Mobile really needs to make this feature request a reality as well as offering the home user a static IP. What home user would be OK with having zero control over their own home LOCAL NETWORK. If i were to connect my home printer to my T-Mobile wireless connection. the printer would go unresponsive every time things get rebooted or go offline and the printer pulls a new DHCP address, because I can’t reserve the IP address to the mac address of the printer. Pass through (Bridge Mode) would solve this by allowing me to pass the 5g connection through to my existing network that is already set up and functional. I’d simply be swapping service providers instead of allowing a service provider to take over the management of my Local Network, which I’m sure they would not troubleshoot or take responsibility of in every aspect. Why not just allow us what we should already have for paying for the service. PLEASE ADD Bridge Mode!
JohnnyC
Network Novice
2 years ago
I just switched from CenturyLink DSL to T-Mobile 5G Home Internet service and I was very disappointed at the lack of features on the Home Router. I know that probably 90% of the user base are a plug and play clientele but for the rest of us the advanced features we are looking for just aren’t there. I am a network engineer for an fortune 500 company and I have what some would call a very elaborate home network including a home automation system. Having a “bridge mode” feature added to the router would greatly improve the adaptability of the router to my system. I am contemplating either purchasing a 5G module for my Cisco Router or a Peplink 5G router to move in that direction. But why should I pay more for a feature that would be easy to add to the T-Mobile router with a software update.
Lets go for Plan B as mentioned above!
This_username_a
Roaming Rookie
2 years ago
Jam_Eye wrote:

Really, this is just a firm update that can be pushed out by the gateway manufacturer. There is already a firmware for the router with the DHCP and DNS advanced settings that comes with the gateways that are not branded by TMO.

Replying to:

Let’s all get on the same page. The options are:

A - get TMO to add comprehensive DHCP features to the gateway

B - get TMO to support bridge mode for using one’s own router with existing DHCP features

Personally, I think option A will take a long time to roll out because they would need a lot of firmware development and no matter how well they do, people will still demand more features. Option B sounds more logical to me because the “I need more DHCP features” moves out of TMO hands and back to the respective router makers and allows everyone to get the router that best fits their needs.

Yes, B makes more sense in the short term. Their excuse for not having the features (it makes it easier for users) is disingenuous at best. It can't be easier for users not to have options that they don't have to look at because they won't know about them.

It might make it easier for T-Mobile support, since users can't change settings. But if I plug in my own router without option B, I still adjust my own settings, and there's an extra unneeded translation. The only minor issue is that the ping time is about double, but I'm not likely to see a difference. But when their network is screwed up, I'll be sure to either plug directly into their device or use their WiFi (probably both) before calling them.

I'd like to see option B because it's cleaner.
Jam_Eye
Newbie Caller
2 years ago
Really, this is just a firm update that can be pushed out by the gateway manufacturer. There is already a firmware for the router with the DHCP and DNS advanced settings that comes with the gateways that are not branded by TMO.

Replying to:
Let’s all get on the same page. The options are:

A - get TMO to add comprehensive DHCP features to the gateway
B - get TMO to support bridge mode for using one’s own router with existing DHCP features

Personally, I think option A will take a long time to roll out because they would need a lot of firmware development and no matter how well they do, people will still demand more features. Option B sounds more logical to me because the “I need more DHCP features” moves out of TMO hands and back to the respective router makers and allows everyone to get the router that best fits their needs.
This_username_a
Roaming Rookie
3 years ago
I was hoping for many of the same things, and then my Nokia round gateway stopped working. It was replaced with the black one. It has no configuration options at all.

The best thing you can do is plug a router into the gateway and use that for DHCP. The T-mobile device will show one device connected and everything else will go though that one.

It won’t let me turn WifI off, and I had it on with the round gateway but limited to one user just in case I needed it. Now, you are limited to the settings in the app, which are far more limited than what you had with the gateway.
Av8rguy
Network Novice
3 years ago
The Wi-Fi Network Settings has a “Maximum Number of Clients” option. Try changing that to 1 or 0 under all the appropriate frequencies/SSIDs.

Update: Nevermind, I guess that’s just how many Wi-Fi connections it will allow and not restrict the DHCP range. Really annoying, I’m giving this thing back ASAP. Update your stuff T-Mobile!
Cali_Cat
Bandwidth Buddy
3 years ago
Let’s all get on the same page. The options are:

A - get TMO to add comprehensive DHCP features to the gateway
B - get TMO to support bridge mode for using one’s own router with existing DHCP features

Personally, I think option A will take a long time to roll out because they would need a lot of firmware development and no matter how well they do, people will still demand more features. Option B sounds more logical to me because the “I need more DHCP features” moves out of TMO hands and back to the respective router makers and allows everyone to get the router that best fits their needs.
apin
Newbie Caller
3 years ago
I just switched to xfinity, using my own cable modem. My experience has been that with this xfinity / (own) cable modem setup, my IP address didn’t change. With T-Mobile, my IP address (in the past week) changed daily, and during the day switched between two IP addresses. I had to keep white-listing new IP addresses.
bvt
Newbie Caller
3 years ago
I’m satisfied, I put a full service NetGear router, it connects to the T-Mobile device and I use all of its features while leaving the T-Mobile device to connect to the Internet.
Still working on how to do port forwarding