Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    ATT Uverse RG Bypass (0.2 BTC)

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Bounties
    555 Posts 80 Posters 1.2m Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • B
      bk150 @bigjohns97
      last edited by

      @bigjohns97

      We have a discord that most of the folks from DSLreports have migrated to regarding discussion about AT&T specific bypass methods. There is a working GPON and XGS-PON bypass method. I can't speak much to the GPON method as I have XGS-PON but the XGS-PON method entails simply buying an Azores WAG-D20 and setting a handful of values on it. Once the device gets O5.1 status to the upstream OLT, you can send a DHCP request with the use of Netgraph on pfsense 2.7/23.01.

      Hopefully it's not against the rules to post a link to the Discord (dm me if it gets removed): https://discord.gg/6TwFBquMTT

      B T 3 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 2
      • B
        bigjohns97 @bk150
        last edited by

        @bk150 Let me check out the gpon method and see if it works for me, currently my ONT is terminated in the garage and I have a copper base NIC on my pfsense box so I would require a separate ONT to be able to work with current hardware.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • T
          t41k2m3 @bigjohns97
          last edited by

          @bigjohns97 @stephenw10
          thank you for your replies. in this use case (as it seems may be true for others), the old pfatt script with both netgraph and wpa_supplicant for auth continue to work in 23.01.

          The question as @bigjohns97 indicated is if and how it may work without netgraph (running wpa auth directly on WAN with no other devices involved). Unless the VLAN 0 new feature does not actually work as initially described, in which case that would be good to clarify.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • T
            t41k2m3 @bk150
            last edited by

            @bk150 discord link says invite expired, is there another way to join?

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • C
              ccope @bigjohns97
              last edited by ccope

              @bigjohns97
              Hey. Sorry for the confusion over the redmine post. I was mainly confirming the VLAN 0 was working. The bits to get ATT in particular working aren't tied into the GUI yet. There is work being done on that.

              I am currently running a custom patch that hard codes some of the values for testing purposes, so it requires manual editing for each setup and isn't production ready yet.

              B 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 3
              • B
                bigjohns97 @ccope
                last edited by

                @ccope Thanks, if you ever need someone to test a possible implementation of this let me know :)

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                • N
                  nedyah700 Rebel Alliance
                  last edited by

                  Hey All!

                  Just wanted to clear up some confusion I'm seeing in these last few posts.

                  1. AT&T is definitely not removing the need for 802.1X. There just happens to be another workaround that, for some, has eliminated the need.

                  2. We definitely still need the script for 802.1X, but the desire is to remove the netgraph portions that previously enabled VLAN 0 communication, and use the new native methods. This is the piece a few of us are struggling with.

                  Hope it helps!

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 3
                  • B
                    bigjohns97 @bk150
                    last edited by

                    @bk150 said in ATT Uverse RG Bypass (0.2 BTC):

                    @bigjohns97

                    We have a discord that most of the folks from DSLreports have migrated to regarding discussion about AT&T specific bypass methods. There is a working GPON and XGS-PON bypass method. I can't speak much to the GPON method as I have XGS-PON but the XGS-PON method entails simply buying an Azores WAG-D20 and setting a handful of values on it. Once the device gets O5.1 status to the upstream OLT, you can send a DHCP request with the use of Netgraph on pfsense 2.7/23.01.

                    Hopefully it's not against the rules to post a link to the Discord (dm me if it gets removed): https://discord.gg/6TwFBquMTT

                    Did some research on this and this doesn't help me as I don't have XGS-PON nor do I have a newer 320 Att supplied RG. If I should ever upgrade to multi-gig service which would require a 320 based integration ONT/RG then I would have to do these GPON stick tricks and upgrade my NIC hardware on my PfSense box to accommodate. Even after that I would still be left having to send wpa_supplicant based authentication over VLAN 0.

                    At the end of the day we still have to send 802.1x over VLAN 0 which is what historically netgraph has been used for and what we are trying to get away from if possible with this new 2.7 PfSense implementation.

                    U 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • U
                      untamedgorilla @bigjohns97
                      last edited by

                      @bigjohns97 with the 2.7 devel you don't have to use netgraph anymore. The supplicant is completely unnecessary. The only part you need is the netgraph if you choose not to use 2.7

                      U 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • U
                        untamedgorilla @untamedgorilla
                        last edited by untamedgorilla

                        I have the azore wagd20, there are no certs needed. Netgraph is only for vlan0 detection. Once you clone your device to your router. There is not authentication necessary except for AT&t verifying the MAC address

                        B 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • B
                          bigjohns97 @untamedgorilla
                          last edited by

                          @untamedgorilla

                          https://www.balticnetworks.com/products/azores-1x-10gbe-1x-2-5gbe-intel-based-xgspon-ont

                          This shows xgspon which to my understanding is not compatible with old gpon installs.

                          U 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • U
                            untamedgorilla @bigjohns97
                            last edited by untamedgorilla

                            @bigjohns97 Yes, that's correct for the xgspon, for regular gpon, all you need is a device with a sfp+ and to change the fiber connected at the ont.

                            N 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • U
                              untamedgorilla @bigjohns97
                              last edited by

                              @bigjohns97 Help me decide on this product: 2.5GBase-T SFP RJ45 Copper Module, Wiitek 2.5Gb Gigabit SFP to RJ45 Transceivers 100m, Compatible for Cisco SFP-2.5G-T, TP-Link Switch (Have to Pluginto The 2.5G SFP Port) https://a.co/d/j9k53Mscolored text

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • N
                                nedyah700 Rebel Alliance @untamedgorilla
                                last edited by

                                @untamedgorilla @bigjohns97 .. Just a reminder some people using the GPON SFP are still needing to do 802.1X auth, which requires a script still.

                                U 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • U
                                  untamedgorilla @nedyah700
                                  last edited by untamedgorilla

                                  @nedyah700 it no longer requires authentication. That's what they have found. Certs are completely unnecessary now. What it was is that some connectors didn't connect at the 2.5gig that the ont uses. But people found out which connectors actually can work and the one I posted earlier is one of the ones that can work. You can literally plug it straight into your PF sense if you have 2.7 and it will get a wan IP. If you don't use 2.7 you have to use net graph to get it to get the vlan0 ip

                                  S N 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • S
                                    sgc Rebel Alliance @untamedgorilla
                                    last edited by

                                    @untamedgorilla said in ATT Uverse RG Bypass (0.2 BTC):

                                    @nedyah700 it no longer requires authentication. That's what they have found. Certs are completely unnecessary now. What it was is that some connectors didn't connect at the 2.5gig that the ont uses. But people found out which connectors actually can work and the one I posted earlier is one of the ones that can work. You can literally plug it straight into your PF sense if you have 2.7 and it will get a wan IP. If you don't use 2.7 you have to use net graph to get it to get the vlan0 ip

                                    So if I am understanding what you are saying if I plug in my fiber from the wall right in to my pf router this will work with 23.01. Has anyone tested this yet?

                                    B 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • B
                                      bigjohns97 @sgc
                                      last edited by

                                      @sgc said in ATT Uverse RG Bypass (0.2 BTC):

                                      @untamedgorilla said in ATT Uverse RG Bypass (0.2 BTC):

                                      @nedyah700 it no longer requires authentication. That's what they have found. Certs are completely unnecessary now. What it was is that some connectors didn't connect at the 2.5gig that the ont uses. But people found out which connectors actually can work and the one I posted earlier is one of the ones that can work. You can literally plug it straight into your PF sense if you have 2.7 and it will get a wan IP. If you don't use 2.7 you have to use net graph to get it to get the vlan0 ip

                                      So if I am understanding what you are saying if I plug in my fiber from the wall right in to my pf router this will work with 23.01. Has anyone tested this yet?

                                      Everything I have read so far still states you have to run certificates through WPA on VLAN 0.

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • N
                                        nedyah700 Rebel Alliance @untamedgorilla
                                        last edited by

                                        @untamedgorilla I am and following the discord chat. It's working for me, no certs needed. But, there were at least two people on GPON, who I think were using Lantiq based modules, still needed certs. Maybe they resolved it and I missed it.

                                        B 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                        • B
                                          bigjohns97 @nedyah700
                                          last edited by

                                          @nedyah700 Check the pinned messages under the USA #gpon channel and you can see that everyone there says you still have to use the wpa_supp on VLAN 0.

                                          U 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • U
                                            untamedgorilla @bigjohns97
                                            last edited by

                                            This post is deleted!
                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post
                                            Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.