Get superfast AT&T Fiber internet
Gnommon's profile

Teacher

 • 

5 Messages

Sun, Aug 18, 2019 1:28 AM

Petition: allow customer-owned gateways for fiber

Hi,

 

could At&t consider allowing replacing the arris bgw210-700 with a customer-owned router/gateway. The condition would be: If you replace the ATT provided gateway there will be absolutely no support by ATT. Att Support will only respond if the arris router is in place.

 

A lot of us who opted for Att fiber have much better routers and gateways at home with intricate configs (dnsmasq, pfsense). With the arris gateway, even with bypass, bridge these dont work properly.

 

Im sure a few folks on this forum would agree with me. I also think allowing personal gateways would be a big sales argument and a lot of folks would switch to Att.

 

thank you

chris

 

tonydi

ACE - Guru

 • 

6K Messages

3年前

@my thoughts    He's just making a civilized request and your first answer was a valid one.  Then you pulled out the legal stuff and essentially told him if he didn't like the way it is, leave. That was just rude and uncalled for.

 

And speaking of the TOS, can you cite where it says that what he is proposing is against the TOS?  I certainly can't find it but then again, IANAL.

Teacher

 • 

5 Messages

3年前

That’s a very sad answer. Why does Comcast have such a bad rep again?

 

It's also a bit short-sighted. If you would allow us enthusiasts/pros to directly connect pfsense we would be thrilled and be loyal customers for years to come. We are also often the first to recommend IT related stuff to parents, friends, co-workers. That could be ATT.

 

While you could have a bunch of us recommending how awesome ATT fiber is to all kinds of people, with your response you have achieved that we will be watching for the first similar service to show up in the neighborhood and jump ship just to get away from ATT, be it comcast, sonic or whoever. 

vikinggeek

Mentor

 • 

44 Messages

3年前

I would also like to know where in the TOS it says you cannot connect your own equipment.  I agree with OP that AT&T should have a process for connecting your own modem/router.  Comcast residential allows this configuration, Comcast Business does not. Cable ISPs also does not offer the symmetrical speed found on Fiber.

Swerved

Mentor

 • 

31 Messages

3年前

If the restrictions are not acceptable, you can cancel your service and choose a different provider... 

Refer to the ATT Internet Terms Of Service (TOS) agreement, you accepted this agreement when allowing the service to be installed.

 

 

What a d*ck! You aren't the first AT&T employee that has been arrogant and rude with your "if you don't like it you can leave" attitude. This is EXACTLY what is wrong with AT&T. The connection is great, but the customer "service" is abysmal. It's service much in the same respect a bull "services" a cow. You guys could be SO much better than the competition if you could just get past your cranial-rectal inversion syndrome. Might I suggest a glass bellybutton so you all could look out and see what the real world is up to every once in a while and try to keep up?

timbuk2okc

Scholar

 • 

395 Messages

3年前

Does that include the speed restrictions that is obviously being implemented on my system?  Paying for 1000, getting 250.

vikinggeek

Mentor

 • 

44 Messages

3年前

With better hardware you should be able to really take advantage of the 1000mb/s connection, it sounds like you have another technical problem (ONT, Modem, Wiring).  I would call support for that and get a technician to come out.

timbuk2okc

Scholar

 • 

395 Messages

3年前

Troubleshooted everything, got over 900 Mbps for over 8 months, but only one machine was able to get up to 800 lately, most around 250 to 300. Technician was out twice and said they were baffled. I researched for weeks and tried everything I could find short of reformatting my computers.  Lowered my plan to the 300 Mbps and now I get more than that and am satisfied.

Teacher

 • 

5 Messages

3年前

It seems we are not done here yet.

tldr;

As per below if we push here AT&T might have to open the ONT to our hardware.

There are FCC Rules as of August 26, 2019 that specifically allow consumers to hook up their own modem to the endpoint.

 

If you think this is a good idea, maybe worth writing an email to AT&T and Ars Technica.

 

There is precedence where the ISP cannot dictate consumers to use the ISPs hardware; 

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/02/one-mans-losing-fight-to-use-his-own-cable-modem/

§76.1201   Rights of subscribers to use or attach navigation devices.

No multichannel video programming distributor shall prevent the connection or use of navigation devices to or with its multichannel video programming system, except in those circumstances where electronic or physical harm would be caused by the attachment or operation of such devices or such devices may be used to assist or are intended or designed to assist in the unauthorized receipt of service.

-> https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=de0ee827bf53c33bd7190687b81a35fb&mc=true&node=se47.4.76_11201&rgn=div8)

 

SEC. 629. COMPETITIVE AVAILABILITY OF NAVIGATION DEVICES.

(a) Commercial Consumer Availability of Equipment Used To Access Services Provided by Multichannel Video Programming Distributors: The Commission shall, in consultation with appropriate industry standard-setting organizations, adopt regulations to assure the commercial availability, to consumers of multichannel video programming and other services offered over multichannel video programming systems, of converter boxes, interactive communications equipment, and other equipment used by consumers to access multichannel video programming and other services offered over multichannel video programming systems, from manufacturers, retailers, and other vendors not affiliated with any multichannel video programming distributor. Such regulations shall not prohibit any multichannel video programming distributor from also offering converter boxes, interactive communications equipment, and other equipment used by consumers to access multichannel video programming and other services offered over multichannel video programming systems, to consumers, if the system operator's charges to consumers for such devices and equipment are separately stated and not subsidized by charges for any such service.

 

-> http://www.techlawjournal.com/telecom/47usc629.htm

New Member

 • 

11 Messages

As for me, I don't care about the legalities. I honestly don't care if they require a modem -- I can understand their need to control authentication and DHCP on their fiber network.

What I care about is:

  1. AT&T is requiring me to use it as a router/modem/firewall into my home network and making it virtually impossible for me to control my own NAT/Firewall coming in/out of my home. Before any AT&T employee uses the words "DMZ+" or points me to a URL that gives instructions on how to "pass-thru" to my router, please don't waste your time. Why? See #2.

  2. In DMZ+ mode, the modem (in my case -- Pace) does not allow all traffic to pass through to my router. It blocks specific TCP and UDP ports as well as a chunk of port ranges (see https://about.att.com/sites/broadband/network). I've spent man-days of my time tinkering with the two devices to figure out what's going on. Most of these are essential ports that I need for my day-to-day use. According to the documentation, they do this to save us from ourselves. I know it's hard for them to grasp but, believe it or not, there are people in the world that possibly know as much or more about networking than most of AT&T's techies. It may not be me, but there are people out there.

  3. Most importantly, in my opinion, AT&T has no right whatsoever to prevent me from accessing anything and everything I wish to access on the internet -- especially since it was not disclosed in plain sight when I purchased the service (I've had it for about 60 days now)! I explicitly asked questions to the AT&T sales and technical people if the modem would cause me any problems in DMZ+ or Pass-thru mode. I came from Spectrum and they didn't block anything.

If I seem brash, it's because I'm sitting here (right now) on the phone with AT&T technical support. I've been on it with them for 1 1/2 hours so far. The problem is that I didn't use the DMZ+ route to allow traffic into my home. I explicitly opened up ALL UDP and TCP ports that the modem would allow me to do under it's normal firewall settings. I didn't break any rules. The modem allows me to open up these ports. This is now preventing me from using their U-Verse digital phone service that runs off the same fiber network into the modem. They are trying to tell me that I will have to close the ports that I have opened if I want to use my AT&T digital phone. I'm telling the "heck no". I need the ports open so that my home-office VOIP phone will work (this isn't part of AT&T's). I also need the ports open because some of the VPN protocols that I'm using are non-functional. We are now at a stalemate and a standoff and I'm ticked off.

Now...

If anyone would like to debate me on this matter, I will be more than happy to discuss. Feel free to chime in.

Need help?
New to AT&T Community?
New to the AT&T Community? Start by visiting the Community How-To.
New to the AT&T Community?
Visit the Community How-To.