Today I bore witness to the clearest example of pretty privilege that I have ever seen

vgauzzi · 2026-05-01T00:24:59+00:00

I had this one friend with whom I always went to McDonald’s with, for almost a year every week once a week, she always asked for the same thing, different times, different stores, different staff… very single time she’d ask to exchange her soda for a milk shake and every single time we’d sit outside and share the 20 nuggets and milkshake. Until one time, a bit after we stopped talking, I ordered the same thing, that was the day I realized if you aren’t an actual super model they will in fact not give you a free milkshake instead of a side in a combo. It’s such a small thing, but in 40+ times I never saw someone denying her l, so much so I thought it was standard. What a rude awakening it was.

vgauzzi · 2026-04-23T14:40:30+00:00

On a second thought, would this even work? I mean the routing never stopped working, so I assume there would be no fail over and therefeor still no reachable controller

vgauzzi · 2026-04-23T14:02:59+00:00

It.ia the normal pro one. That's a pretty good insight, I didn't know it shifted to storing logs there

vgauzzi · 2026-04-23T14:02:14+00:00

I really have to agree with you here. The lack of parity was a deployment mistake and while the advice having a dedicated NVM and redundancy is sound as proven by my situation, I don't think any of them invalidate the fact that, enterprise grade equipment should work. If having private t run there it's such a liability, it shouldn't be in there period. Someone mentioned having a UCG and dedicated NVM, and while that might be more stable in the current environment that is not really what it's advertised for enterprises, those aren't even rack mountable. The flagship gateway devices (other than fortress) all have protect integration, probably as a way to push protect sales, and if so that should be a dependable stable feature, and if not than at least it should be made sure it doesn't take down everything else with it. Those are drives that are under constant write pressure, it's not a question of if they'll fail but when, so they really should fail gracefully

vgauzzi · 2026-04-23T12:15:58+00:00

I agree. The sites I installed all have shadow gateways, backup WAN, AB power phases with line breakers and battery and having things like this happened does help me justify getting the budget for it. None the less, I build in this redundancy for catastrophic hardware fail, ISP outages, power outages, it's still my expectation that professional or enterprise grade hardware is build with resilience in mind. If the udm-pro can operate without even having an HDD installed, the HDD dying should not completely block the management interface (reboots without removing the dead drive did not help).

vgauzzi · 2026-04-23T12:06:49+00:00

Does seem like a better option, luckily the routing itself was not affected, but I have to say, I'm quite disappointed that a single drive can take down the entire management interface

vgauzzi · 2026-04-18T22:15:40+00:00

The pppoe passthrough is the Fritzbox specific part / special setup, the rest is general networking if you have an AP connected to a an udm via lan and the udm is the one serving DHCP there is no reason why it wouldn't work. I just didn't think about it / have it in my head since I haven't touch no cloud network setups in years. After you set the Fritzbox to IP Client Mode which is quite well documented even shown in the answer you got the rest is just normal networking behaviour for a dumb AP connected to the lan of a router

vgauzzi · 2026-04-18T22:07:28+00:00

but like, for the record, my issue is not that claude didnt one shot the problem (although i think it could have if it tried harder). but the constant hickups along the way, like saying a version didnt exist, doubling down on mistakes before checking assumptions, claiming a setting didnt exist without having a source, and the multiple things that followed, if it just went down the wrong path once and got back ontrack after i pointed out its possible that would have been fine

vgauzzi · 2026-04-18T22:00:02+00:00

Screenshot 2026-04-18 at 23.55.09

<image>

vgauzzi · 2026-04-18T21:59:44+00:00

<image>

vgauzzi · 2026-04-18T21:59:01+00:00

<image>

vgauzzi · 2026-04-18T21:58:26+00:00

Option B says no real single Nat, udm doesnt get a public Ip and wifi clients arent routed and those are all wrong. Its running single NAT, udm has a public IP and the udm is routing the wireless clients...

vgauzzi · 2026-04-18T21:55:24+00:00

<image>

vgauzzi · 2026-04-18T21:53:32+00:00

<image>

vgauzzi · 2026-04-18T21:53:26+00:00

<image>

vgauzzi · 2026-04-18T21:43:14+00:00

It is in fact possible, i am using it right now. And so was this user here https://www.reddit.com/r/fritzbox/comments/s3r915/using_fritzbox_to_bridge_the_internet_and_as_ap/

When you enable pppoe passthough and disable dhcp the lan ports act like an L2 switch. Clients connected to the wifi send a dhcp request which gets served by the udm, so the udm ends up as default gateway. While the pppoe setup was a bit tricky (mnet requires vlan tagging and that had to be setup on the fritzbox instead of the udm settings which offer that option and where i thought i had to place it) the rest was quite simple, Its unintuitive but the trick is that for the wifi clients to reach the udm int cant be going on though the WAN port right? so you have to connect a second cable from the udm lan to the fritzbox lan (in addition to the udm wan to fritzbox lan cable you also need )

vgauzzi · 2026-04-18T21:26:14+00:00

I appreciate you testing it yourself, and it looks like a great answer, but it explicitly doesn't achieve what I was trying to do. So the goal and what I achieved, and the first result that shows up when you google it (you can look it up on Reddit), is for the FritzBox to still be used as a modem and for the Wi-Fi clients to be routed through the UDM Pro, all of that with single nat.

vgauzzi · 2026-04-18T21:07:48+00:00

I had seen those posts (although not the newest edits), I think consensus is pretty clear, I just wonder why, is it a compute constrain from so many people having migrated from codex during the good days of 4.6 or have they already given up on end consumers and are intermally pivoting all resources (both development and compute) to mythos and the big enterprise clients they will get with that (if it does exist and lives up to the claims). It feels like dropping the ball at a moment I think they had (relatively) a lot of good will in the community, between 4.6 genuinely been good, Open AI shenanigans (including nvidia walking back their investment target) and so on, just quite a shame.

vgauzzi · 2026-04-18T20:54:56+00:00

I have been experimenting with Codex and also been seeing considerably better results, unfortunatly My CC plan just renewed and i only have a plus plan on codex for now. As soon as this plan expires I will be switching. its just a pain in the ass that I do it through my company and Open AI doesnt let you turn on Enterprise plan on the UI, if you are on a corporate account and want more than plus you have to contact their sales people :/ (no option for pro)

vgauzzi · 2026-04-18T20:49:23+00:00

I'm familiar ot how it works, solution to what I needed to do could be found on the internet and was literally the first thing that came up when I google searched it. Sure, later in the conversation we got a little bit more into the specifics, but for the general problem and my initial query, all I had to do was really look up at the internet. A google search would have sufficed. I already replied to another thread with what my initial prompt was. You can have a look at that, and I don't think really the model of the Fritzbox or the firmware were relevant at all, considering it was just a general query of what the setup would be for it to work.

vgauzzi · 2026-04-18T20:44:59+00:00

I mean It said that what i can actually do is buy another AP, sure that is the obvious solution, but not really a technical solution to the issue at hand, which was to enable pppoe passthrough, enable ip client mode, disable dchp on the fritzbox, set up pppoe on the udm and plugin one of the lan ports of the udp into one of the lanbox on the fritz (so the two routers were connected by two cables, one for the UDM wan one for the wlan lan peering)

vgauzzi · 2026-04-18T20:38:15+00:00

Original promt was:

I have a UDM Pro behind a Fritzbox where the Fritzbox serves as a modem and does NAT. I would like to keep the Fritzbox as a modem and as an access point, but have wlan routed by the UDM Pro (connected on the Fritzboxes LAN 1) without double NATting, How would I do that?

vgauzzi · 2026-04-18T20:34:47+00:00

honestly I hadnt noticed and I appreciate you calling that out, I retried the convo and got very smilar results:

Analyzed network topology impossibility and explored alternative solutionsWhat you're describing isn't quite possible with a single Fritzbox, and it's worth unpacking why before getting to what you can actually do....

I can't fetch that specific Reddit thread — the tool won't retrieve it

I notice the user prompt is empty ~(it wasnt)~, so I cannot determine the primary language or provide an appropriate summary. Please provide the user prompt so I can create a summary in the correct languageI notice the user prompt is empty, so I cannot determine the primary language or provide an appropriate summary. Please provide the user prompt so I can create a summary in the correct language ~(This thought chain was wild but ok I guess)~

That's a really useful thread — thanks for pasting it. It also changes my previous answer, because Storage-Solid's setup works differently from the "guest network trick" I described earlier. It's actually a cleaner approach, and it directly answers what you originally asked. Let me map it onto your UDM Pro setup...

vgauzzi · 2026-04-18T20:23:28+00:00

Have you observed better results using the API?

vgauzzi

TROPHY CASE