topic Re: Home Hub 4000 with an existing home LAN in Internet

Double NAT on Home Hub 4000 with an existing home LAN

WalterG — Fri, 24 Mar 2023 13:37:08 GMT

Is there an actual or potential double NAT issue with connecting my existing router to the 4000? Are there settings on the 4000 to avoid this while retaining TV and phone connections?

I intend to use my existing wifi setup on my LAN. Can I switch off the 4000 transmitter?

*Updated title & added Labels

Re: Home Hub 4000 with an existing home LAN

ZaneP — Sat, 02 Oct 2021 16:46:49 GMT

For starters, you'll need to connect your own router's WAN port to a LAN port on the HH4000, and configure your router to use PPPoE. This should ensure no double NAT.

But the big-picture question: what will be the overall benefit to using your own router? What are your "must-haves"? You may find that your existing devices will get along well with the HH4000's wifi. So when you get the 4000 installed, I think you should test-drive it for a while to see if if meets your needs.

Re: Home Hub 4000 with an existing home LAN

JD — Fri, 03 Oct 2025 17:56:04 GMT

I agree with @ZaneP - Check the modem capabilities without added routers, you might be surprised at the performance. I got rid of my older router setup when I upgraded my modem. For extra coverage I use WiFi mesh system.

Re: Home Hub 4000 with an existing home LAN

WalterG — Sun, 03 Oct 2021 13:10:09 GMT

thank you both for you quick responses. I should perhaps explained better in my post, but I thought it best to keep it short. I presently have a Bell 2-wire modem/hub and run a LAN behind it through a router. the router is setup to use static ip addressing (MAC addresses) with DHCP disabled for all devices; and, at the time I needed to run two separate networks. I am now planning to upgrade to a fully Fibe connection which will come with a 4000 hub. Essentially, I don't want the hassle of having to reconfigure and am unsure that the 4000 hub would allow me to replicate my current set up. It would be a lot easier if I could just plug the modem into the 4000 and connect it with the router's WAN side ip address.

My concern about double NAT came from some problems I have had in the past and internet searches on the 4000 - always a bid dodgy in sorting out the wheat from the chaff - but I came across a detailed Bell-Aliant document on the 3000 hub (How to use your own router with Bell Fibe/FiberOP internet by enabling Advanced DMZ — Cormang.com). It states:

"In cases where customer owned routers are deployed, there is a chance that placing them behind Network Address
Translation (NAT) on the Actiontec LAN can result in problematic behavior of some protocols."

but then goes on to say that it is preferred that "Advanced DMZ mode" is preferred to bridging to avoid those problems.

As that advice was from Bell-Aliant on the East coast and was specific to the 3000, I though it best to ask a question on this site about the 4000 and the possibility of double NAT issues with running my route behind it.

With apologies for the long reply, WalterG

Re: Home Hub 4000 with an existing home LAN

WalterG — Mon, 04 Oct 2021 14:35:45 GMT

thanks again ZaneP. Advanced DMZ is what the Bell document I referenced recommended for the 3000, so good to know it is available on the 4000. But it is not my existing Bell modem that I am retaining, it is the Cisco router that I run behind the Bell router on which I manage my LAN.

Regards, WalterG

Re: Home Hub 4000 with an existing home LAN

navderek — Mon, 11 Oct 2021 17:04:08 GMT

Although this does help...the Bell HH4000 should really have a bridge mode that can be enabled. I mean you said it yourself on the forum here that it is an advanced router. That statement doesn't hold a lot of water if it has only the very basic features. One other major annoyance is that the WiFi re-enables itself each time the modem is rebooted, even if it was specifically set to disabled by the administrator. This is not good behavior and should be corrected in future firmware release.

Regards,

-Derek

Re: Home Hub 4000 with an existing home LAN

ZaneP — Mon, 11 Oct 2021 21:13:33 GMT

Hi Derek. Actually, what I wrote is that the HH4000 is an advanced modem. Its router side firmware seems a bit dumbed-down: No MAC addressing, no firewall, no obvious way to put separate SSIDs on the different transmitters.

It's my understanding that true bridge mode may not be workable with the HH4K, except with configuring via Advanced DMZ. PPPoE will provide pass-through. I've not connected my ASUS router to the HH4K yet. How's your experience been, when connecting your own router to it? You wrote about the WiFi annoyance (It's a firmware bug, btw). Any thing else?

ZaneP

Re: Home Hub 4000 with an existing home LAN

navderek — Mon, 11 Oct 2021 23:40:40 GMT

Well I tried the advanced DMZ + PPPoE setup on my side but the speeds were very slow. By slow I mean the best speed I could get running a speed test directly on the Google Node (wired facing WAN) was about 400Mbps down and 300Mbps up. That is quite slow compared the the 1.6Gbps down and 1Gbps up I can achieve with a direct wired connection to the HH4k (over a 2.5Gbps ethernet link).

So I instead went back to a double NAT configuration which is a bit of a pain but my speeds are a lot better at around 700Mbps down and 500Mbps up for anything connected through the Google side...that's ok for all the Wifi users in the home and since I have the HH4k in my office I am utilising the 10G link directly from HH4k for my office PC and get the full speed (1.6Gpbs down and 1Gbps up). It's not an ideal setup but I guess it can work. There will be issues sharing a printer on a double NAT setup..maybe I'll just buy a second printer for the office.

Overall it's aceptable but a real step backwards in terms of user experience. Home networks are a lot more complex these days and Bell really should wake up to that fact and give a better firmware to cover all the different use cases.

Re: Home Hub 4000 with an existing home LAN

WalterG — Wed, 13 Oct 2021 13:09:35 GMT

As I seem to have started this, I thought some of you might be interested in my experience now that I have had fibre and a 4000 modem installed in place of my previous copper connection with a really old Bell modem. I have a single LAN connected to the 4000 through a Cisco router. But I do not use the 4000 wifi as all my devices are (CAT 5 or 6) wire connected and I have two existing wireless access points on the LAN.

I changed the 4000's connection to my router to DMZ but not the advanced option, at least not yet. So far I have not had any double NAT issues.

Speeds are around 230 Mbps down and 160 Mbps up whether connected through the router or directly to the 400 - the former being higher than the 150 package I signed up for.

I have two TV receivers (the originals that came with my copper connection) and, unexpectedly, the picture on both TVs is noticeably better.

WalterG

Re: Home Hub 4000 with an existing home LAN

BellDRock — Tue, 22 Nov 2022 13:05:10 GMT

Hey community! Great conversation.

For a bridge mode setting; the DMZ / Advanced DMZ in the Advanced Tool section of the GUI should provide the necessary functionalities needed.

Depending on the scenario you want to achieve, in your 3rd party device that should be connected on a LAN port you may also need to do some or all the following configuration tasks:

Turn off Whole Home Wi-Fi and Primary Wi-Fi network on the HH4K / Enable Wi-Fi on device
Turn off DHCP in the HH4K / Enable DHCP on your device
Configure PPPoE settings on your device by either inputting your Bell b1 and password [Bell Internet user ID (e.g., b1xxxxxx)] - (under the internet tab on the top page of the GUI) or inputting other credentials you may want to use. This will circumvent the HH4K NAT.

Re: Home Hub 4000 with an existing home LAN

Zaba — Thu, 10 Feb 2022 17:32:17 GMT

I have read the complete thread and appreciate everyone's contribution but frankly I am a little confused.

My network to modem connection speeds are 1.73Gb down and 1.05Gb up. The HomeHub 4000 is connected to an eero Pro 6 router using a Cat 6 cable. In my office is another eero Pro 6 router which is connected to a Dlink GO-SW-5G (5 port Gigabit unmanaged switch) which in turn is connected to the Dell G500 computer (Gigabit ethernet connection) with a Cat 6 cable. The computer is set up to bridge the Ethernet connection and the WiFi 6 connection). My connection speeds at the computer are 464-561Gb down and 285-687 Up. I am unaware of any issues, other than perhaps speed, which have arisen because I am running a Double NAT configuration (eero support site says that a Double NAT setup can reduce speeds). I should add that the HomeHub 4000 also services two TVs using the HomeHub 4000 WiFi network.

I have been very happy with the coverage provided by my 3 eero routers (The house is a fairly large split) and do not want to dump them and rent I do not know how many Bell extenders.) I read in the thread that enabling Advanced DMZ does not improve the speed (my problem) but does eliminate Double NAT issues (which I do not have).

Any suggestions on how to improve my modem to device speed will be greatly appreciated.

3 Gbps FTTH - Double NAT?

adamadamadam — Thu, 05 Jan 2023 03:07:16 GMT

Just got Bell 3 Gbps symmetrical fibre with the Giga Hub 4000. Very nice 😀

Tracert looks like it's doing double NAT. Is this second hop normal? Same thing when using PPPoE passthrough to another router. GH has the latest firmware (1.15.1).

tracert 1.1.1.1 Tracing route to one.one.one.one [1.1.1.1] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.2.1 2 2 ms 1 ms 1 ms 10.11.35.81 3 * * * Request timed out. 4 * * * Request timed out. 5 5 ms 6 ms 6 ms glphon2248w_lag63.net.bell.ca [142.124.126.214] 6 * * * Request timed out. 7 4 ms 4 ms 4 ms cr02-toroonxnhrz_bundle-ether10.net.bell.ca [142.124.127.39] 8 * 5 ms 5 ms 108.162.239.32 9 5 ms 4 ms 5 ms one.one.one.one [1.1.1.1] Trace complete.

Cheers!

Re: 3 Gbps FTTH - Double NAT?

adamadamadam — Thu, 02 Mar 2023 13:10:42 GMT

I'm curious to see others' traces if you see that second hop private address too.

Re: 3 Gbps FTTH - Double NAT?

dks — Mon, 03 Apr 2023 00:00:24 GMT

Tracing route to one.one.one.one [1.1.1.1]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 265 ms 1 ms <1 ms mynetwork.home [192.168.2.1]
2 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 10.11.5.33
3 * * * Request timed out.
4 * * * Request timed out.
5 10 ms 9 ms 9 ms glphon2248w_lag62.net.bell.ca [142.124.126.212]
6 * * * Request timed out.
7 10 ms 9 ms 8 ms cr01-toroonxnhe9_bundle-ether10.net.bell.ca [142.124.127.37]
8 9 ms 8 ms 9 ms 108.162.239.32
9 10 ms 9 ms 9 ms one.one.one.one [1.1.1.1]

Firmware is 1.16

HH4000 Advanced DMZ No longer Working

Maniac911 — Wed, 19 Apr 2023 23:16:31 GMT

Good evening

Been with Bell for quite a bit of time with no issues. About 8 months ago (rough guess) I upgraded from an HH3000 to an HH4000. Setup has been with an advanced DMZ with a PPPOE connection to my firewall. As of 7am today it appears advanced DMZ has stopped working all together. I temporarily worked around it by disabling the ADMZ but this is causing double NAT issues. Seems firmware was upgraded to 1.7.8.1 this morning which I believe is causing the issue. Spoke to a Bell tech earlier today who mentioned this is a known issue.
Is there any proper update to this? Firmware rollback? Or some work in progress that’s addressing this issue?

Re: Home Hub 4000 with an existing home LAN

networkadminwanabe — Wed, 19 Jul 2023 10:41:16 GMT

I followed the above instructions to connect my Ubiquiti EdgeOS router and while the internet worked fine, the TVs stopped working. I rebooted them hoping that they would reconnect but they would not. So I turned the HH4K DHCP back on and the TVs reconnected with no impact on the internet connection. I'm not sure if this is the correct configuration but it's working.

If there is a way to connect the TVs without the DHCP let me know.

Re: Home Hub 4000 with an existing home LAN

dks — Fri, 03 Oct 2025 17:58:30 GMT

@networkadminwanabe wrote:

I followed the above instructions to connect my Ubiquiti EdgeOS router and while the internet worked fine, the TVs stopped working. I rebooted them hoping that they would reconnect but they would not. So I turned the HH4K DHCP back on and the TVs reconnected with no impact on the internet connection. I'm not sure if this is the correct configuration but it's working.

If there is a way to connect the TVs without the DHCP let me know.

Is it possible the TV's are connecting wirelessly?

Re: Home Hub 4000 with an existing home LAN

FumbleJ — Tue, 15 Aug 2023 14:49:05 GMT

Here are the potential pitfalls and why some people NEED to be able to have advanced features on the Bell (Sagecom) modems enabled.

Some of us do not want TV from Bell or any other provider. So keeping the WIFI for TV enabled despite disabling HH Wifi causes some interference and potential range issues.
Some of us do want a faster router to take advantage of local LAN at >1Gbps. The CPU on Sagecom router handling SFP+, Routing, Switching AND wifi gets bogged down. We need to be able to route from an upstream router to leave SFP job to the HHx000
4 1Gbps ETH ports on a device is not sufficient or ports are not fast enough for local LAN for some people. Switching via a multi-port multi-speed switch is desirable. Some also need POE which adds to the issue on the HHx000
Despite having WIFI6e, the HH4000 needs to be in an area with high visibility to provide proper WIFI. Sometimes (read most times) this is not possible nor desirable. Mesh WIFI in my experience has been poor so again, some of us need to rely on separate AP to cover WIFI properly. This compounds the switching problem, the port availability problem and the load on HHx000 problem. Also, getting a POE injection to power an external AP if you rely on the HHx000 means you will have one more device to tangle with.
SFP+ being hardwired in the HH4000 is a seriously bad idea. I understand why Bell asks Sagecom to do this for them but... there are 0 advantages for the end user, only disadvantages. Sometimes, all we need is to get the fiber IN and pay the bill. We don't really need tech services unless the fiber goes down.
All routers/modems have a bridge mode. This is simply obfuscated in the custom firmware Sagecom makes for Bell. True bridge mode CAN be enabled on the HH4000 but it is not exposed at Bell's requirement. to give you an idea, you CAN get the same Fibe service backend via EBOX for example without the HHx000. They provide a Nokia ONT and a router (that you can elect not to use) and route + connect through a router box like OPNSense or PfSense. Yeah, if a client cannot figure it out on how to configure this kind of setup, Bell Support will not be able to help... but that's the price some of us are able to pay. Support for customers that do not know what to do or how to do it should be RESET MODEM SETTINGS and that's it.

So, @BellDRock if you want to bring some comments back up, that would be a "power user" wishlist. Bell can both enable ease of use to neophytes and non-tech people but can also enable powerful features for more serious and adventurous users. All I want to do is secure my network, block ads and telemetry, have the fastest ping possible and the best up/down bandwidth I pay for. All of this without restricting my LAN to 1Gbps or WIFI speeds or possibility to LAGG connections internally. See why we ask for these?

Home networks are more and more looking like business networks with more limited number of users and required uptime. But we still need to be able to give ourselves some way to protect our personal data AND corporate accesses.

Care to look at what you offer and help your clients?

Re: Home Hub 4000 with an existing home LAN

FumbleJ — Tue, 15 Aug 2023 18:24:25 GMT

I'm a regular lurker on the DSLReport website (since 1999 if my memory serves me well). My goal is to try and point Bell in the right direction 🙂 ... I know I will have a sympathetic ear on DSLReports... However this will not move the needle.

Advanced features are available on the sagecom modems but are hidden. If Bell just has a remote trigger to enable the features BUT no support unless you get the 6$/month service pack, I would be quite content... not that I would necessarily need the support but it would be nice if I ever need it to activate it....

There's always two ways to do business...

Lock every door and throw away the key, put what you have outside and sell that
Open the door, show what is available and serve what is needed. It may not be on the shelf when someone is in the store but.. it is available in the backstore for "connaisseurs"

Re: Home Hub 4000 with an existing home LAN

dks — Tue, 15 Aug 2023 18:57:55 GMT

If you are a lurker on DSLR, you already know the answer to your wish list. I have been there since 2000. Bell is in business. They will not "move the needle" for a small number of enthusiasts, as it is not good business and creates more support issues. The Bell Direct forum, where you have direct access to Bell technicians, is the best we will get. Bell, like all other ISP's, wants a standard platform that can be easily supported for 99% of the population. Even the standard platform can have complex issues. Like it or not, that's reality.