
Teacher
•
5 Messages
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
•
9.9K Messages
4 years ago
@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.
0
Gnommon
Teacher
•
5 Messages
4 years ago
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.
0
vikinggeek
Mentor
•
44 Messages
4 years ago
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.
0
Swerved
Mentor
•
31 Messages
4 years ago
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?
0
timbuk2okc
Scholar
•
409 Messages
4 years ago
Does that include the speed restrictions that is obviously being implemented on my system? Paying for 1000, getting 250.
0
0
vikinggeek
Mentor
•
44 Messages
4 years ago
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.
0
0
timbuk2okc
Scholar
•
409 Messages
4 years ago
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.
0
0
Gnommon
Teacher
•
5 Messages
4 years ago
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
1