Why do a lot of Altnets require that you use their router?

I sort of get it from a support perspective, but if you have a savvy user, why won't they let you just replace it.

By replace it, I mean replace it, not just put their router into bridge mode, leaving you with 2 devices.

Sometimes it's the physical media is not ethernet - so think Docsis coax or single mode fibre running wave division multiplexing.

Sometimes it's to support their authentication method (although it's usually PPPoE or IPoE now).

Sometimes it's just to make their support teams lives easier, as you say!

It is usually the support approach. How can one small support team offer guaranteed support for all the different combinations and variations of Router out there.

ISP lead connection monitoring is another.

It's possible for some altnets that the fibre terminates directly on their device, i.e. it's a combined router/ONT.

Effectively then you'd be swapping the ONT, which Openreach don't allow either. It breaks the ONT registration - unless your new device is spoofing the original ONT serial number.

It also puts the whole PON at risk, if some badly-designed ONT module is used that could interfere with other users on the same splitter.

Probably because they can. I don't think the TBB community is typical of users in general - the majority are probably quite happy to use whatever kit their ISP supplies "free".

But IMHO the practice offends Net Neutrality principle that end-users have the right to use terminal equipment of their choice. This is enshrined in Ofcom docs, but Ofcom doesn't show much interest in enforcing it.

I get about support problems for small ISPs, and I think it would be reasonable for them to say they will only support their own router. But for them actually to prohibit other equipment from being connected at the user's risk, as some do, is for me going too far.

In reply to a post by Thaumaturge:

But IMHO the practice offends Net Neutrality principle that end-users have the right to use terminal equipment of their choice. This is enshrined in Ofcom docs

Have you got a reference for that?

In the business world, having leased lines that terminate in an NTE which you are not allowed to interfere with or replace is perfectly standard practice - often the router as well. The same applies to the ONT which Openreach supplies for FTTP.

In reply to a post by Thaumaturge:

for them actually to prohibit other equipment from being connected at the user's risk, as some do, is for me going too far

"Prohibit" as in "forbid in the terms and conditions", or as in "make it unreasonably difficult to do so"?

If an ISP chooses not to sell a wires-only product, I don't see why it should be required to.

One reason we have a fairly competitive marketplace and a fairly high degree of altnet investment (at least in some areas) is that regulation is relatively light-touch.

In reply to a post by candlerb:

In the business world, having leased lines that terminate in an NTE which you are not allowed to interfere with or replace is perfectly standard practice - often the router as well. The same applies to the ONT which Openreach supplies for FTTP.

At least in the business world you get to define if you have a NAT or routed connection, even if the provided NTE is a full router product.

In consumer broadband, FTTC/VDSL and onwards, as PSTN shuts down, more and more people are going to be pushed into using the ISPs provided device, at best with a DMZ mode. Those that use one device as ONT and router is more complex of course.

Virgin Media’s “modem mode” software approach should be copied by all these big ISPs (BT, Vodafone, etc). Would be a sensible solution, so obviously won’t happen!!

In reply to a post by jchamier:

In consumer broadband, FTTC/VDSL and onwards, as PSTN shuts down, more and more people are going to be pushed into using the ISPs provided device, at best with a DMZ mode.

95% of people neither know nor care what that means. They just want a service that works, and is cheap. The other 5% have market choices to select a more sophisticated service.

Of course, on this forum, the 95% and 5% are probably reversed

In reply to a post by jchamier:

Virgin Media’s “modem mode” software approach should be copied by all these big ISPs (BT, Vodafone, etc).

BT sell only Openreach, and Openreach already provides you with a modem that you're free to connect your own router to, and handle your own NAT or whatever - so I see no issue there.

The problem only comes with the bundled telephony: if you remove the BT-supplied router, you lose the BT-supplied voice. That's a different question entirely, and again, for the 5% who care, the voice is trivially unbundled.

As for service from Altnets: soon I would expect there is very little of the country that's covered by an Altnet which is not also covered by Openreach FTTP. So the more sophisticated users always have that as a choice, even if it's a bit more expensive.

It seems reasonable to me to have the Altnets concentrate on the "value" end of the market. They need volume to get return on their investment, and they'll only get the volume if they sell cheap and simple.

In reply to a post by candlerb:

In reply to a post by Thaumaturge:

But IMHO the practice offends Net Neutrality principle that end-users have the right to use terminal equipment of their choice. This is enshrined in Ofcom docs

Have you got a reference for that?

See here, Section 3 A bit old now (2017) and references EU stuff which may or may not have been adopted into UK law, I don't know. It's still available from the Ofcom website.

Whether or not it's still technically UK law, the principle remains sound.

In reply to a post by candlerb:

"Prohibit" as in "forbid in the terms and conditions", or as in "make it unreasonably difficult to do so"?

Purely as an example, I'm not singling them out in any way, see the Trooli Ts and Cs Section 5.1 bullet 2.

Edited by Thaumaturge (Thu 03-Mar-22 09:11:13)