# not so temporary failure in name resolution

## grosmano

Hello,

For several days now i cannot connect to the internet anymore from my personal computer. It is not clear to me what could have happened since it was working fine for months but some day after starting the computer it did not work anymore, though i don't think i changed anything in the configuration. Or at least not purposely.

I don't have an ethernet cable, i am sharing the connection from my phone and using NetworkManager, version 1.8.4. Since it stopped working, it is still possible to activate a connection but no website can be accessed. Trying to ping a website returns "temporary failure in name resolution". Following this recent thread, i tried to add 8.8.8.8 at the end of /etc/resolv.conf , but the only effect is that it takes much longer to get the error message. I also tried to ping directly 8.8.8.8 , which leads to 100 % packet loss (all transmitted, 0 received). However, if i ping the default address generated by NetworkManager (i mean the first and initially only nameserver in resolv.conf), all of the packets are received.

Would someone have any idea to solve this issue?Last edited by grosmano on Thu Nov 15, 2018 12:50 pm; edited 2 times in total

----------

## NeddySeagoon

grosmano,

My understanding is

a) your phone can reach the internet correctly

b) you use the phone internet connection with your PC somehow.

How?

Ethernet over USB and Wifi hotspot both come to mind. The former allows you to charge your phone. 

Nameservers are tried in the order that they appear in /etc/resolv.conf so you need to add new ones at the start.

What IP address does your PC get?

```
ifconfig
```

What is in the PC routing table?

```
route -n
```

----------

## grosmano

 *NeddySeagoon wrote:*   

> grosmano,
> 
> My understanding is
> 
> a) your phone can reach the internet correctly
> ...

 

Exactly.

 *Quote:*   

> 
> 
> b) you use the phone internet connection with your PC somehow.
> 
> How?
> ...

 

Most of the times i use Wifi hotspot, but i also tried Ethernet over USB, which lead to the same result. I ran the following commands with Wifi hotspot connection:

```
$ ifconfig

enp3s0: flags=4099<UP,BROADCAST,MULTICAST>  mtu 1500

        ether c8:60:00:39:9f:ce  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)

        RX packets 0  bytes 0 (0.0 B)

        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0

        TX packets 0  bytes 0 (0.0 B)

        TX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0

lo: flags=73<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING>  mtu 65536

        inet 127.0.0.1  netmask 255.0.0.0

        inet6 ::1  prefixlen 128  scopeid 0x10<host>

        loop  txqueuelen 0  (Boucle locale)

        RX packets 12  bytes 876 (876.0 B)

        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0

        TX packets 12  bytes 876 (876.0 B)

        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0

wlp2s0: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST>  mtu 1500

        inet 192.168.43.241  netmask 255.255.255.0  broadcast 192.168.43.255

        inet6 fe80::8687:77b7:36bd:d56b  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20<link>

        ether 00:08:ca:cd:93:9d  txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet)

        RX packets 5  bytes 1026 (1.0 KiB)

        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0

        TX packets 13  bytes 1858 (1.8 KiB)

        TX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0

$ route -n

Table de routage IP du noyau

Destination     Passerelle      Genmask         Indic Metric Ref    Use Iface

0.0.0.0         192.168.43.1    0.0.0.0         UG    600    0        0 wlp2s0

192.168.43.0    0.0.0.0         255.255.255.0   U     0      0        0 wlp2s0

192.168.43.0    0.0.0.0         255.255.255.0   U     600    0        0 wlp2s0

```

 *Quote:*   

> Nameservers are tried in the order that they appear in /etc/resolv.conf so you need to add new ones at the start.

 

Thank you for this information, i was not aware of this. Accordingly i tried to switch the two nameservers in /etc/resolv.conf but name resolution still fails.

----------

## NeddySeagoon

grosmano,

Lets try some network tests.

Can your PC do

```
ping -4 192.168.43.1
```

or whatever your gateway is now?

This tests reaching your gateway, or the next hop toward the internet.

If that works try 

```
ping -4 216.58.206.78
```

That's google.com. This tests your gateway and beyond.

Until this works, nameservers can't.

Using IP addresses avoids the use of a nameserver. Its OK for testing but not a long term solution.

The -4 says to use IPv4.  IPv6 is preferred if you have it.  

Normally, routers run a caching nameserver. Your router is your phone.

```
nameserver <IP_Of_Gateway>
```

is worth trying in /etc/resolv.conf

Your phone should have set up  /etc/resolv.conf when it handed out the IP address to your system.

Mobile phone carriers are well known for giving as little as possible. Some deliberately make tethering difficult.

e.g. They can block any nameserver except their own, so 8.8.8.8 won't work.

----------

## grosmano

So, 

```
ping -4 192.168.43.1
```

 works fine, but

```
ping -4 216.58.206.78
```

doesn't (100% packet loss).

 *Quote:*   

> Using IP addresses avoids the use of a nameserver. Its OK for testing but not a long term solution.
> 
> The -4 says to use IPv4.  IPv6 is preferred if you have it.

 

ipv6 use flag is set by default, but i never checked whether further configuration was needed to actually use it. I just tried 

```
ping -6 216.58.206.78
```

 which returned "Address family for hostname not supported". I suspect it might be because the argument is an ipv4 address, or should it be dealt with anyway?

 *Quote:*   

> Normally, routers run a caching nameserver. Your router is your phone.
> 
> ```
> nameserver <IP_Of_Gateway>
> ```
> ...

 

That is actually the default configuration generated by NetwokManager.

----------

## eccerr0r

Correct, 216.58.206.78 is a IPv4 address, using that as an IPv6 address doesn't make sense.

Can you ping 204.187.15.12?  I'd guess the answer is no, and you probably have a routing problem on your router, and in this case it would be your phone since you can ping your phone's address.  Do you have other devices to test your phone to rule out one or the other? 

Can you reboot your phone to see if it helps?

----------

## grosmano

Indeed, i cannot ping 204.187.15.12 either. Neither does it work after rebooting the phone. It did a little difference though, in the sense that an error message from the gateway appeared for the first four attempts:

```
 $ ping -4 204.187.15.12

PING 204.187.15.12 (204.187.15.12) 56(84) bytes of data.

From 192.168.43.1 icmp_seq=1 Destination Net Unreachable

From 192.168.43.1 icmp_seq=2 Destination Net Unreachable

From 192.168.43.1 icmp_seq=3 Destination Net Unreachable

From 192.168.43.1 icmp_seq=4 Destination Net Unreachable

^C

--- 204.187.15.12 ping statistics ---

17 packets transmitted, 0 received, +4 errors, 100% packet loss, time 16007 ms

```

Unfortunately i don't have other devices that can readily be used to test the phone. I could try to install NetworkManager on my desktop at work though, so as to check Ethernet over USB.

----------

## NeddySeagoon

grosmano,

It looks like your router (phone) isn't routing.

DNS traffic is only normal network traffic, so until ping works, DNS can't.

----------

## Ralphred

This feels a bit out of place on the Gentoo forum, but, you sure you have hotspot data left, carriers can and do distinguish between the phone and "not the phone".

Note: Feeling slightly better about the low tier question as eccerr0r already asked "Have you tried turning it off and on again?"

----------

## eccerr0r

Probably not worth trying another untested configuration (i.e. another fresh install of networkmanager).

Is this an android? ifone?  what carrier?  Tried rebooting the phone?  If android, you could see the routing tables on it, though you need root privileges to change them...

----------

## NeddySeagoon

Ralphred,

I was getting there ... you beat me to it :)

Rule 1. Assume nothing.

----------

## eccerr0r

Not going to mince words here but phones tend to be crap and need reboots, and the other fact that people don't typically "reboot" phones as they treat them like appliances that...well...when did your washing machine and oven need to be "rebooted"?

Unless they frequently get a free reboot by draining the battery all the way :)

Speaking of "phone and not the phone" anyone figure out how it's done?  Silly stuff like user-agent is only for HTTP, and https doesn't work, but it seems some phones open a second channel for "not phone" use... Hmmm.

----------

## toralf

 *grosmano wrote:*   

> For several days now i cannot connect to the internet anymore from my personal computer.

 By any chance could this be related to the DNSSEC root key change?

----------

## grosmano

 *eccerr0r wrote:*   

> Probably not worth trying another untested configuration (i.e. another fresh install of networkmanager).

 

Ok, so i'll forget it for now.

 *Quote:*   

> Is this an android? ifone?  what carrier?  Tried rebooting the phone?  If android, you could see the routing tables on it, though you need root privileges to change them...

 

It is Android, the carrier is Vodafone. Yes, i tried to reboot the phone, which did not change anything except for the four error messages reported above.

 *Ralphred wrote:*   

> This feels a bit out of place on the Gentoo forum, but, you sure you have hotspot data left, carriers can and do distinguish between the phone and "not the phone".

 

I don't know how to make sure of it, but it was working until recently. I also have a second sim card meant to share data from the same account with other devices, so it wouldn't make much sense not to allow anything except the phone to access the internet. But yes, i realize that writing this does not fully comply with NeddySeagoon's rule 1...  :Smile: 

I also tried to put the second card in the phone instead of the main one but couldn't see any difference. I was actually planning to get a usb gsm modem to use with this second card, but this recent failure made me postpone it. Since things tend to point at the phone as the source of trouble, maybe the easiest and fastest would be to give it a try anyway even though that's also "another untested configuration". Would there be anything that can be tried first to ensure that the carrier allows hotspot data?

----------

## grosmano

 *toralf wrote:*   

>  *grosmano wrote:*   For several days now i cannot connect to the internet anymore from my personal computer. By any chance could this be related to the DNSSEC root key change?

 

Thank you for your suggestion. I'm afraid this notion is far beyond my understanding of networking protocols but i'm starting to read about it. I see it works with a set of public and private keys, does it mean one of such keys could need to be updated on my system?

----------

## NeddySeagoon

grosmano,

DNS of any sort requires a working network connection.

Using ping by IP address, we have established that you don't have that.

We can't rule out the DNSSEC root key change being a problem but its not the immediate problem.

Maybe call Vodafone to ask about your tethering data allowance.

Some contracts prohibit (and enforce it) tethering.

----------

## grosmano

Thank you for the clarification.

I stopped at the Vodafone store and got confirmation that there should be no such limitation from the carrier's

----------

## grosmano

Hello,

I made further trials but still did not reach the happy ending. Since everything seemed to point at the phone as a source of trouble, i got a little USB modem into which i plugged the second sim card. That card is "linked" to the same account but meant only for sharing data with another device, so exactly what i want to do with the modem. As i had been told by the Vodafone staff, i first placed it in my phone to enter the pin code and changed the parameters to "not asking for pin code at startup" (i see that wvdial gives the option to send a pin code at connection so maybe i'd better set it back later, when things will be working...). I followed this wiki page to configure the modem and recompiled net-dialup/ppp with dhcp use flag on following the indications in this old thread. 

The device appears to be manufactured by Huawei:

```

~ $ lsusb 

Bus 002 Device 001: ID 1d6b:0003 Linux Foundation 3.0 root hub

Bus 001 Device 003: ID 03f0:164a Hewlett-Packard 

Bus 001 Device 002: ID 03f0:134a Hewlett-Packard Optical Mouse

Bus 001 Device 006: ID 12d1:1001 Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. E161/E169/E620/E800 HSDPA Modem

Bus 001 Device 001: ID 1d6b:0002 Linux Foundation 2.0 root hub

```

Things went as expected from the wiki, but after connecting wvdial aborted with an error message, the meaning of which is not obvious to me:

```

# wvdial vodafone

--> WvDial: Internet dialer version 1.61

--> Initializing modem.

--> Sending: ATZ

ATZ

OK

--> Sending: ATQ0 V1 E1 S0=0 &C1 &D2 +FCLASS=0

OK

--> Sending: AT+CGDCONT=1,"ip","ac.vodafone.es"

AT+CGDCONT=1,"ip","ac.vodafone.es"

OK

--> Modem initialized.

--> Sending: ATDT*99#

--> Waiting for carrier.

ATDT*99#

CONNECT

--> Carrier detected.  Starting PPP immediately.

--> Starting pppd at Mon Nov 12 16:04:02 2018

--> Pid of pppd: 2650

wvdial: utils/wvtask.cc:304: static int WvTaskMan::yield(int): Assertion `*current_task->stack_magic == WVTASK_MAGIC' failed.

Abortado

```

Still the modem is blinking as if it was connected, and ppp0 can be seen with ifconfig. I tried then 

```

# dhcpcd ppp0

sending commands to master dhcpcd process

```

The output is rather laconic. At this point i still have the same "Temporary failure in name resolution" when i try to ping some random site, so back to the beginning. Following the same step as above in this thread, i tried:

```
# route -n

Kernel IP routing table

Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref    Use Iface

0.0.0.0         10.64.64.64     0.0.0.0         UG    0      0        0 ppp0

10.64.64.64     0.0.0.0         255.255.255.255 UH    0      0        0 ppp0

```

And then 

```

ping -4 10.64.64.64

```

, which once again lead to 100% packet loss. Probably not so surprising given the error with wvdial. Could this be easier to diagnose and solve than the connection shared by the phone?

----------

## NeddySeagoon

[grosmano,

I have one of those :) it was on vodafone in the UK, on a never expires plan until vodafone expired it one day.

They didn't even give me my money back for the unused data. I was robbed! I've had other bad experiences with vodafone too.

Anyway, This is my /etc/wvdial.conf that worked with vodafone in the UK.

```
[Dialer defaults]

Modem = /dev/ttyUSB0

Baud = 115200

Phone = *99#

Username = *

Password = *

#Init4 = AT+CMEE=2 

New PPPD = yes

#Auto DNS = 1

Stupid Mode = 1

FlowControl=Hardware(CRTSCTS)
```

Once the PPP session is up, wvdial exits.

----------

## grosmano

Thank you NeddySeagoon! I just tried with your wvdial.conf, unfortunately the result is exactly the same as before: same routing table and still no name resolution or even response to the ping from the gateway. Actually, it doesn't work either from a computer with working ethernet connection, but i don't know whether i am supposed to be able to ping another gateway than the one in the routing table.

Mmmh, your experience with Vodafone is not so encouraging...

----------

## NeddySeagoon

grosmano,

Your problem is networking and/or routing, not name resolution.

Name resolution requires that networking and routing both work.

Trying the 3G dongle on a system with working wired internet may produce misleading results.

At the very least, you would need to stop the wired interface before you started the USB dongle.

Then check the routing table to be sure you had exactly one default route.

----------

## grosmano

Indeed, i had stopped the wired connection (using ifconfig) after plugging the dongle and setting the connection with wvdial.

To avoid any ambiguity i tried after rebooting with the cable physically disconnected. The result is still the same.

```

$ ifconfig ppp0

ppp0: flags=4305<UP,POINTOPOINT,RUNNING,NOARP,MULTICAST>  mtu 1500

        inet 172.19.175.87  netmask 255.255.255.255  destination 10.64.64.64

        ppp  txqueuelen 3  (Point-to-Point Protocol)

        RX packets 7  bytes 118 (118.0 B)

        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0

        TX packets 18  bytes 297 (297.0 B)

        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0

# route -n

Kernel IP routing table

Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref    Use Iface

0.0.0.0         10.64.64.64     0.0.0.0         UG    0      0        0 ppp0

10.64.64.64     0.0.0.0         255.255.255.255 UH    0      0        0 ppp0

```

The second line in the routing table shows an 'H' flag, which would be "Host name—Route is to a host rather than to a network, where the destination address is a complete address". Seems like it is literally telling that i am not connected to any network. The wired connection does not show this flag, only the 'U'. Could this give any clue?

 *NeddySeagoon wrote:*   

> 
> 
> Your problem is networking and/or routing, not name resolution.
> 
> Name resolution requires that networking and routing both work.
> ...

 

Hopefully i will start to understand this point! It seems to imply that trying to ping an external server is not the most relevant diagnostic for now. Maybe the focus should be on having the gateway responding to the ping at this stage?

----------

## krinn

 *grosmano wrote:*   

> Thank you for the clarification.
> 
> I stopped at the Vodafone store and got confirmation that there should be no such limitation from the carrier's

 

 *NeddySeagoon wrote:*   

> Rule 1. Assume nothing.

 

Dunno in UK, but vendors in France would lie happily to you.

If i goes to any phone store and say "it was working before", the vendor will assume it's true and then assume wrongly it's all ok (while the company might have change the rule and he is not aware of).

If i were you, i would go to the store "again" and ask to see where it is written it's "still" allow, to make sure they didn't change their rules and prohibit what was tolerate, permit, or worst "doable" (not tolerate but they didn't think to limit it first).

But maybe UK do better than France there, but i wouldn't be surprise if vodafone has change their rules without notice, nor i would be surprise a vendor's store is incompetent or a lier (yep my faith in humanity is not going well, but i think my pragmatism is doing all well)

----------

## grosmano

You are right krinn, this point still had to be ascertained. So i went back the store and was attended by another guy who confirmed that both my sim cards and data sharing should be active, according to his database. Since i was still not convinced, he took a brand new phone from its box, placed the sim card from my usb dongle inside and shared the connection through wifi hotspot. I could navigate using this wifi connection from my own phone after having removed the sim card in it. To me it looked like a strong sign that Vodafone should not be blamed in the present case.

Back at home i gave another try, in case the guy would have fixed something but did not want to openly blame his colleagues (you never know...) or just did not even realize it himself. There was no change when i tried to share the connection from my phone using wifi hotspot. Then i tried with the usb modem and got some good surprise. I need to precise that it was the first attempt on this computer since until then it did not have the source code for wvdial and usb_modest, that i brought yesterday on a usb drive. I installed the software, stopped NetworkManager, plugged the usb dongle, and started wvdial with the configuration file given by NeddySeagoon above. The output is different, showing IPs and DNS addresses, and the program does not exit after connecting:

```

# wvdial

--> WvDial: Internet dialer version 1.61

--> Initializing modem.

--> Sending: ATZ

OK

--> Modem initialized.

--> Sending: ATDT*99#

--> Waiting for carrier.

CONNECT

--> Carrier detected.  Starting PPP immediately.

--> Starting pppd at Tue Nov 13 21:36:01 2018

--> Pid of pppd: 2045

--> Using interface ppp0

--> local  IP address 172.19.162.106

--> remote IP address 10.64.64.64

--> primary   DNS address 212.166.210.6

--> secondary DNS address 212.73.32.67

```

And that's it, with these few steps i can ping an external server, dns works, everything looks functional! The connection is terribly slow though, i suppose it could be because i am not properly registering at connection and the next trial will be with the parameters listed in this page (i am actually in Spain).

Of course i wanted to check whether there was any change on my computer at work, on which i ran the first tests with the usb modem. It appears nothing has changed. After starting the ppd wvdial still aborts with the following message: "wvdial: utils/wvtask.cc:304: static int WvTaskMan::yield(int): Assertion `*current_task->stack_magic == WVTASK_MAGIC' failed." I observed one difference is that netmount was stopped on my home computer after i stopped NetworkManager and it doesn't have dhcpcd, whereas both netmount and dhcpcd are started on my work computer after booting with the ethernet cable unpplugged. So i gave another try by rebooting and stopping both dhcpcd and netmount before plugging the dongle, but it did not make any difference.

I consider the connection problem is solved, since i don't need to use the usb modem on a desktop computer that has ethernet connection. There would be no problem with doing some more tests on that computer in the future though, if it can be any useful to someone to try to understand the origin of the error message returned by wvdial. Or maybe it is just obvious now, but at least not to me. Thanks to all for the help!

----------

## NeddySeagoon

grosmano,

```
Kernel IP routing table

Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref    Use Iface

0.0.0.0         10.64.64.64     0.0.0.0         UG    0      0        0 ppp0

10.64.64.64     0.0.0.0         255.255.255.255 UH    0      0        0 ppp0 
```

is correct for a Point-to-Point link.

Everything is sent to the gateway and the gateway knows how to get to the rest of the internet.

I'm with krinn. Vodafone in the UK are clueless and will tell you what you want to hear. I'm not sure if its deliberate or not.

We still don't know what changed or why it works.

Does the LED in the dongle flash green or blue?

If its green, its going to be slow. Blue indicates 3G. Green is the older, slower data rate (9600 baud?)

Mobile carriers mostly oversell their data bandwidth by a huge margin, so when its busy its slow.

----------

## grosmano

 *NeddySeagoon wrote:*   

> We still don't know what changed or why it works.

 

Sure. Actually i don't even see evidence that anything has changed since the opening of this thread, apart from the acquisition of the dongle.

 *Quote:*   

> Does the LED in the dongle flash green or blue?
> 
> If its green, its going to be slow. Blue indicates 3G. Green is the older, slower data rate (9600 baud?)
> 
> Mobile carriers mostly oversell their data bandwidth by a huge margin, so when its busy its slow.

 

It flashes blue, but still the connection feels very slow, much slower than from the phone. I guess it takes some numbers rather than feelings and i see some websites offer speed tests. I will try from home to connect to such a site from the phone and then from the computer with the usb dongle for better comparison.

----------

## grosmano

Here are some numbers according to dslreports.com:

- from the computer with the usb dongle: 55.8 kilobit/s down, 62.6 kilobit/s up;

- from the phone: 2.57 megabit/s down, 2.43 megabit/s up.

"feels slower"

----------

## NeddySeagoon

grosmano,

If it were a real serial port 

```
Baud = 115200 
```

sets the bit rate on the interface.

Try commenting that line out in the wvdial.conf file but I suspect that its ignored anyway.

----------

## grosmano

Yes, looks like it is ignored: no significant effect on the speed that remains in the order of 10s of kbit/s (67 down, 61 up).

It just made me think of another thing to check: as i plug the dongle, there is in dmesg "new full speed USB device number 6 using uhci_hcd", which apparently would be usb 1.0. Could this be the bottleneck? On the other hand when i plug my external hdd, which is reasonably fast, it says it is using ehci-pci.

----------

## NeddySeagoon

grosmano,

USB 1.0 is 12Mbit/sec. That should support 10Mbit/sec download, so its not that.

----------

## grosmano

Ok, thanks.

I guess at this point i'd better try to be in direct contact with some technical service from vodafone. Hopefully they don't just tell me to double check the dongle is plugged in an usb port and not the ethernet port.

----------

## NeddySeagoon

grosmano,

They will say

Have you restarted Windows?

We don't support Linux.

----------

## grosmano

A simple test i should have done much earlier   :Embarassed:  : with the sim card from my phone in the dongle it is 40x faster than with the secondary card. I will get the latter changed...

----------

## grosmano

Hello,

Some feedback with this usb gsm modem after several months of irregular use on two computers: a 7 years old netbook and a recent desktop computer. In the beginning the behaviour seemed rather chaotic, until i realized that i need to wait for the dongle's light to blink slowly (~once per second) before starting wvdial, which might take several minutes after plugging the dongle. Initially the light is still and the time it takes to start blinking is poorly repeatable. Since i'm being more patient after plugging the dongle it works fine on the netbook. On the desktop wvdial sometimes exits with the following message, but not always:

```

# wvdial vodafone

--> WvDial: Internet dialer version 1.61

--> Initializing modem.

--> Sending: ATZ

OK

--> Sending: ATQ0 V1 E1 S0=0 &C1 &D2 +FCLASS=0

OK

--> Sending: AT+CGDCONT=1,"IP","ac.vodafone.es"

AT+CGDCONT=1,"IP","ac.vodafone.es"

OK

--> Modem initialized.

--> Sending: ATDT*99***1#

--> Waiting for carrier.

ATDT*99***1#

CONNECT

--> Carrier detected.  Starting PPP immediately.

--> Starting pppd at Mon Jul 22 21:08:30 2019

--> Pid of pppd: 3599

wvdial: utils/wvtask.cc:304: static int WvTaskMan::yield(int): Assertion `*current_task->stack_magic == WVTASK_MAGIC' failed.

Abandon

```

So far it seems to happen randomly and not have much to do with the connection status, since the modem flashes and the connection actually works despite the error. Quite ofen the connection is eventually lost and i need to kill the pppd process and restart wvdial.

Overall, for now this thing looks mostly useful to me as a fallback in absence of wifi when travelling. My initial purpose was to use it as a default connection at home but i'm afraid i have to revise my expectation.

----------

