I was kind of wondering about a PiP feature myself. Maybe its not offered because it would require a second stream and more bandwidth, or possibly it will be offered in a future update. Who knows.
Who's ready for some science? So, since I have an enterprise firewall, I'm able to turn on IPv6 without having to reboot any devices on my network. In fact, as soon as I enabled DHCP delegation, the Xi6-a were able to fetch IPv6 addresses. And surprisingly, the devices are working without issue. Which makes me wonder if there's actually an activation process on boot/connect that may be blocking the connection. I say this because not everything has flipped to IPv6.
Note that there are 2 IP addresses that do not have a RDNS entry.
So I'm going to science to verify if YouTube and Netflix works and then I'll do a reboot of the Xi6. Last time I did a reboot, the device would not come online.
Back again. So, YouTube and Netflix worked without issue before I did the reboot.
"Sorry, we're having some trouble.
Please try playing this program again. Still having trouble? You may need to choose another program. XRE-03090"
The guide works. The sports app gives live data (was able to get info from the Blue Jays game).
If I ask for a show like "The Newsroom" it'll give me cover art and show information. Attempt to play a video and it doesn't work.
Just for testing, I did publicly publish the IPv6 to the firewall for anything to connect in (I double this would be the case) but no luck.
Well, I did a PCAP on the IP address. I have no idea what to look for. Most of it is encrypted until it starts transmitting the TV data. I don't think I'll be able to do anything with this PCAP unless Rogers/Comcast examines it.
Well I'm done sciencing for tonight. Just going to disable the internal IPv6 DHCP server and call it a night.
I think that those people who want to run complex enterprise networks at home will have to get and pay for a separate business internet connection that they can do all thier internet stuff on for thier network and then for thier tv viewing they will have the rogers IPTV. Its clear that Rogers made some decisions on how they provide internet and integrate it with their TV service. Look at the analytics connections it makes for example. Having two separate connections is how small businesses have to do it for tax purposes anyways.
What I want is hardly complex. I want the rogers gateway bridged and use my own ASUS router and be able to enable IPv6. Pretty simple actually. It all works with IPv4 only but enabling IPv6 breaks it.
1) We're not necessarily talking about "complex enterprise networks" here. All we are talking about is using our own equipment as firewall/IPv4 NAT/etc rather than equipment with a record of mediocrity controlled by someone else.
2) Rogers has also made the decision to continue providing a bridge mode. As much as people love to fault Rogers for providing only gateways, etc., Rogers has offered a bridge option on every D3 gateway and continues to do so with this thing. I note that other cable companies do not offer user-enabled bridge modes; let's not talk about bridge modes at Bell (funny thing is, you can bridge a HH1000 if you're a business customer just fine; if you're a residential customer, I'll let you google the details). I live in a building where Beanfield is available; they strike me as a very techie-friendly fiber company, yet until very recently, even they insisted that you run their NAT box.
3) This is all very new stuff. This is not how this works in Comcastland - in Comcastland, the Xi6 is a client for a 'server' box inside the home. Rogers has the Xi6 running standalone connecting to a server farm at Rogers and/or Comcast. I think a lot of bugs will get sorted out eventually.
4) I think the vision behind this Ignite TV offering will get tweaked as time goes on. Right now, it's very simple - must get home phone, one gateway available, one TV box, two Internet packages to choose from, etc - and there is a clear vision of a very wifi home. They're already inching away from that vision by charging for the mesh hardware. There will be more changes and more widening of the offering over time.
5) Your 'two networks' thing ignores some of the physical realities. It would be UGLY from an interference perspective to have the Rogers mesh wifi network for TV, and a separate 'enterprise-grade' network for everything else. The beauty of this Ignite TV, architecturally, is that it does NOT require running separate VLANs, SSIDs, etc. for the TV. In many ways, it's actually a dream for a bridge-mode client running 'enterprise-grade' hardware - but for these bugs, they can just place the Xi6 boxes wherever they want in their network and it should just work.
Let's not forget that Rogers is a bit behind the 8-ball in the competitive market offering IPTV since Bell had it for years. One of those reasons they are behind was that Rogers was trying to develop this technology on their own. For one reason or another, they couldn't come out with a product well fit for it's customer base for several years. This is why they went with Comcast's version of it.
With this new offering, I believe they only had it for a handful of months and the only testers were (mostly) Rogers Employee's who were willing to make the switch. I wouldn't be too surprised if Rogers' current stance is "This is super stable using our own equipment. We are behind the times. Let's get this out to the market and get as many early adopters as we can before we think about tinkering/fixing minor/edge case bugs. Let's get the big kinks out of the system first."
And lets face it, this new system is night and day compared to their traditional offering where there's a lot of "cord cutting" going on. Since this integrates with cloud based apps such as Netflix, Sports and YouTube, I wouldn't be too surprised they will be making a hard push to those cord cutters with "please come back, we have something that you would love!"
I wouldn't be too surprised if this is why Rogers is mostly silent on whether they will help investigate this problem right now. Even if they did give a response, it'll more than likely be a canned "currently, we do not support IPTV with our cable modem in bridge mode." It doesn't stop us early adopters and experienced users to experiment and play around to see if we can loosely figure out what the source of the problem is when it comes to using their modem in bridge mode. As long as we don't interfere with other users experience that is.
We will just have to wait until things settle down before Rogers will take a look. I think it would be helpful to us as more and more people comes onboard with IPTV that our group gets larger with "we want to bridge our modems" that we make enough noise that Rogers will say "okay, we will look into this now". This is mostly a time game.
So, get your friends onboard. This shows Rogers that they have a product that we want. Then have your friends complain to the forums so they know "we want to bridge our modems!" I'm sure if we help Rogers grow their market, they will pay attention to our requests.