5 ms·

I think it's vital that you can run your own modem but I'm not convinced that it's a good idea to force a custom ONT. An ONT is about as dumb as it gets and it

I think it's vital that you can run your own modem but I'm not convinced that it's a good idea to force a custom ONT. An ONT is about as dumb as it gets and it's entirely transparent on the stack. The benefit with an ONT (or even DOCSIS dumb modem) managed by the ISP is that they can do fleet upgrades much quicker as they don't have to keep all old protocols running. For instance the GPON -> XGSPON upgrade that some ISPs are running right now (or DOCSIS 3 upgrade) really only works well if you can turn off the old protocol which requires swapping out all ONTs/DOCSIS modems. If customers bring their own stuff then you're stuck with these things for much longer.

cillian64 2y ago
In some places it sounds like the ONT is integrated with the router (like with DOCSIS), and being forced to use the ISP’s router is a problem. But in cases where the ONT just looks like a media converter and you have a separate router I really can’t see any reason for the customer to provide their own ONT. Especially given PON is a shared medium so a misbehaving ONT can affect other customers.
- the_mitsuhiko 2y ago
  > In some places it sounds like the ONT is integrated with the router (like with DOCSIS), and being forced to use the ISP’s router is a problem. I agree, and that is a problem. The rules and regulations are different in different countries. In Austria for instance the ISP can force you to use a specific DOCSIS modem or ONT but they have to provide you with a transparent way to connect to it (bridge mode etc.). Which from where I'm standing is a good tradeoff because it gives the ISP the flexibility to do mass migrations without having to consider very old deployed infrastructure. With PON I think it doesn't matter all _that_ much but for instance people running ancient DOCSIS modems and limited frequency availability has been a massive pain for people stuck with DOCSIS infrastructure that want more upstream and can't.
  - Rinzler89 2y ago
    >but they have to provide you with a transparent way to connect to it Can you provide the source for that? Because the Wifi 6 enabled Modem from Magenta doesn't support bridge mode.
    - the_mitsuhiko 2y ago
      > Can you provide the source for that? There has not been an official ruling, but that was not necessary because there is a soft commitment by ISPs to provide bridge mode which was enough for the RTR: https://www.rtr.at/TKP/was_wir_tun/telekommunikation/konsumentenservice/information/informationen_fuer_konsumenten/nap.de.html https://www.rtr.at/TKP/was_wir_tun/telekommunikation/konsume... But they are very explicit: > Gleichzeitig gibt es eine gesetzlich garantierte Endgerätefreiheit (Art. 3 Abs. 1 TSM-VO). Auf Grund dieser haben alle Nutzer:innen das Recht, einen Router ihrer Wahl zu verwenden. Stellt der Anbieter einen Router mit integriertem Modem zur Verfügung, muss es möglich sein, diesen Router in den sogenannten "Brigde-Modus" zu schalten. > Because the Wifi 6 enabled Modem from Magenta doesn't support bridge mode. It does. Call customer support and they enable it for you. It turns into a dumb modem afterwards behind which you need to put your own infrastructure. It's also mentioned on their FAQ: https://www.magenta.at/faq/entry/~technische-anfrage~kabelinternet~installation/~routerwahl~master https://www.magenta.at/faq/entry/~technische-anfrage~kabelin...
  - kilburn 2y ago
    This is the same in Spain: ISP-provided ont/router combos are fine but they must have a bridge mode (you may have to call support to enable it).
  - abofh 2y ago
    So at least in Portugal, my ISP gives me their device, it has a bridge mode, but it also serves as their wifi access point network (think Xfinity wifi) -- which I don't object to except that their wifi can't be disabled and their signal interferes with my wifi access points. I want a dumb gpon sfp not because they won't give me a bridge, but because their bridge makes too much noise.
- Aaron2222 2y ago
  > But in cases where the ONT just looks like a media converter and you have a separate router That's how it works in New Zealand, but we take it a step further. The GPON/XGS-PON fibre network is run by a separate company[0] from the ISPs (and the company running the fibre network is prohibited from providing internet services[1]). So the ONT just functions as a media converter[2], and all our ISPs deliver internet over the same fibre network. This decoupling between the fibre network provider and ISP means you can change ISPs without any swapping of ONTs or repatching of fibre[3][4] (in fact, the process can be entirely automated, switching to some ISPs can take effect within an hour or two of placing the order). That and most ISPs allow bringing your own router (as there's no monopoly in the ISP space). [0]: The NZ Government contracted four companies to build, own, and run fibre networks (three being new companies co-owned by local lines companies and the government to serving their local area, with the rest of the country being served by Chorus, the company that owns the country's copper network). These fibre companies are heavily regulated (including how much they can charge ISPs). [1]: In fact, this requirement resulted in Telecom (the company that owned our copper network and who was one of the companies that provided phone and internet service to consumers) being split up, with Chorus being spun off, owning the copper network and owning the fibre network for the majority of the country. [2]: Chorus did start deploying ONTs with a built-in router/AP a while back. They did offer this to ISPs to use, but uptake was very low, so it's since been discontinued. [3]: I don't know how it works over in European countries where ISPs run their own fibre networks when switching ISPs, I assume they have to either install their own fibre line into the premises or the existing fibre is repatched to their network? [4]: The fibre companies are required to offer use of their fibre network directly to ISPs, with the ISPs PON network running in parallel to the fibre company's, with the ISP providing their own fibre splitters and ONTs (which would be run on a second fibre line that each premises already has) and running their own OLTs. I believe this requirement still exists, but no-one ever took them up on it.
  - ensignavenger 2y ago
    I am curious about this model. How well is this working in practice? How many ISPs do you have to choose from, and how do they differentiate? How close to wholesale are the retail prices?
- jeroenhd 2y ago
  In theory the ONT can act like a listening device. They're also often Linux or BSD devices that can get hacked. If you're paranoid, you may want to run an ONT that you control, just in case. I doubt it's something that matters to a lot of people, but even if it only matters to some, it shouldn't be made impossible for those that want to. RE: misbehaving hardware: the same is very much true for cable internet and there are plenty of countries where people hook up their own modem without any trouble. If someone wanted to mess with the fiber network they could just disconnect the ONT and shine a laser pointer down there. All off-the-shelf devices are built to just work and follow the necessary standards, because there's nothing to be gained by messing with the PON network like that.
  - the_mitsuhiko 2y ago
    > In theory the ONT can act like a listening device Sure, but so can the other endpoint. Even many AON installations these days are just hidden XPS-PON and similar, you just never see the ONT. (See a lot of ISPs in Switzerland)
    - bobmcnamara 2y ago
      And so can all the other endpoints if they're not encrypting downstream traffic
  - worewood 2y ago
    In the year 2024 it is prudent to think of everything that leaves the premises as potentially listened upon. That's why we've got HTTPS an DoT/DoH so widespread these days
    - lxgr 2y ago
      There’s still a huge privacy impact if anyone can listen to your traffic (since hostnames are almost always plaintext due to SNI).
- woodrowbarlow 2y ago
  as long as the ISP isn't charging a rental fee for the ONT.
- bobmcnamara 2y ago
  I replaced my Google fiber ONT by cloning the network parameters into a cheap SFP one because the Google supplied one only supports gigabit Ethernet but uses 2.5/1.25gbit optics. The upgrade reduced latency a small, but measurable amount, and improved my NTP jitter.
- cmsj 2y ago
  Definitely agree. The smart place to demarcate the connection is the point at which a device does DHCP/SLAAC to get whatever IPs the ISP assigns the customer.
pbasista 2y ago
> If customers bring their own stuff then you're stuck Why? There is nothing preventing an ISP from saying that from date X, only protocols A, B and C are supported. If you want to use your own device, make sure it supports these protocols. In other words, the requirement to allow customers to use their own devices does not mean that they can choose all available protocols. The allowed protocols can still be controlled by the ISPs.
- appendix-rock 2y ago
  Hahahaha! Have you ever done any customer support!? This is not how it works.
  - tuetuopay 2y ago
    Well this is about allowing customer supplied ONT, not supporting them. As in, you have to follow upgrade procedures announced X days in advance, etc.
    - the_mitsuhiko 2y ago
      In theory yes. In practice that might work that way if ~5% of your users are in that situation. If ~50% of your user base is running on a legacy protocol and you're running into Churn risks, the company is going to re-evaluate if they want to retire the old protocol. There _is_ a reason even legacy cable TV and ancient DOCSIS channels are still being available in many countries because actually retiring a lot of old modems has shown to be risky to the business.
    - iphoneisbetter 2y ago
      [flagged]
  - beerandt 2y ago
    I mean you're right in general- but we're talking about a subset of customers that want to mess with their own fiber connection. That's either a horde that understands the issue, or is an even smaller subset that is going to be a pita anyway.
zokier 2y ago
> I think it's vital that you can run your own modem but I'm not convinced that it's a good idea to force a custom ONT. Did you mean "router" instead of "modem" here?
teeray 2y ago
That’s all great and wonderful, but I shouldn’t have to pay to rent a device that really only benefits the ISP. I would rather have a slick ONU SFP+ module in my router, than yet another plastic block on my telecom panel I need to find space and power for. “This makes our network easier to manage” AND “we make extra money doing this” is double-dipping.
NoMoreNicksLeft 2y ago
If ISPS weren't cheapskate assholes, then they'd offer the ONT SFP module, so I didn't have some shitty plastic doodad hanging from my router because there's no place to put a mounting bracket for it and get it in the panel. I'm sure you'll tell me why the black bakelight rotary telephones were the only telephones I really needed, and I was just making trouble for little ole AT&T when I wanted something more.
neelc 2y ago
When I had CenturyLink, I replaced the ONT via a JTAG cable on the new ONT. The stock CL ONT (Calix 716GE-I R2) had a 16384 connection limit, which prevented me from running high-bandwidth Tor relays. The new ONT (Calix 803G) did not. Calix for some reason makes it easy to clone some models. I have a post on this: https://www.neelc.org/posts/clone-calix-ont/ https://www.neelc.org/posts/clone-calix-ont/ Now I'm in NYC with Verizon Fios where I don't need a cloned ONT. Woo! The Verizon ONT is big and has a huge power brick, presumably because of RFoG alongside GPON.
- ImSorryButWho 2y ago
  That's very cool, but just to point out: that's not JTAG, it's serial (UART). JTAG is a much lower level protocol, typically used for hardware or low-level software debugging. Serial/UART gives you a command-line interface to the software that's running. Using a JTAG interface is a lot more complicated. If you're interested in playing with it, check out OpenOCD.
- muppetman 2y ago
  How is the ONT, a Layer2/Ethernet device, involved in L3 sessions? Was it also the default gateway/router all rolled up into one?
  - neelc 2y ago
    There is a mis-feature on the ONT called "Broadcom Packet Flow Cache". It apparently speeds up TCP sessions but at the expense of allowing a large amount of then. Lumen fortunately moved off these ONTs. However, the new Smart NIDs have their fair share of issues from what I heard. I moved out of Lumen territory so have no experience with them.
- bauruine 2y ago
  Consumer routers are all extremely limited when it comes to many connections. Even an Ubiquiti UDM Pro only allows 65536 by default.
bcrl 2y ago
You can actually run GPON and XGSPON simultaneously over the same PON segment as they use different wavelengths of light, so there is no reason to rip out all the GPON nodes at the same time. This allows deferring the truck roll and ONT costs until the customer upgrades to higher speeds. With DOCSIS there is much more pressure to upgrade all CPE as any given chunk of RF spectrum can only run one version of DOCSIS. One 6MHz channel of RF spectrum on coax has a puny amount of bandwidth compared to a single lambda on fibre.

cillian64 2y ago

In some places it sounds like the ONT is integrated with the router (like with DOCSIS), and being forced to use the ISP’s router is a problem. But in cases where the ONT just looks like a media converter and you have a separate router I really can’t see any reason for the customer to provide their own ONT. Especially given PON is a shared medium so a misbehaving ONT can affect other customers.

the_mitsuhiko 2y ago
> In some places it sounds like the ONT is integrated with the router (like with DOCSIS), and being forced to use the ISP’s router is a problem. I agree, and that is a problem. The rules and regulations are different in different countries. In Austria for instance the ISP can force you to use a specific DOCSIS modem or ONT but they have to provide you with a transparent way to connect to it (bridge mode etc.). Which from where I'm standing is a good tradeoff because it gives the ISP the flexibility to do mass migrations without having to consider very old deployed infrastructure. With PON I think it doesn't matter all _that_ much but for instance people running ancient DOCSIS modems and limited frequency availability has been a massive pain for people stuck with DOCSIS infrastructure that want more upstream and can't.
- Rinzler89 2y ago
  >but they have to provide you with a transparent way to connect to it Can you provide the source for that? Because the Wifi 6 enabled Modem from Magenta doesn't support bridge mode.
  - the_mitsuhiko 2y ago
    > Can you provide the source for that? There has not been an official ruling, but that was not necessary because there is a soft commitment by ISPs to provide bridge mode which was enough for the RTR: https://www.rtr.at/TKP/was_wir_tun/telekommunikation/konsumentenservice/information/informationen_fuer_konsumenten/nap.de.html https://www.rtr.at/TKP/was_wir_tun/telekommunikation/konsume... But they are very explicit: > Gleichzeitig gibt es eine gesetzlich garantierte Endgerätefreiheit (Art. 3 Abs. 1 TSM-VO). Auf Grund dieser haben alle Nutzer:innen das Recht, einen Router ihrer Wahl zu verwenden. Stellt der Anbieter einen Router mit integriertem Modem zur Verfügung, muss es möglich sein, diesen Router in den sogenannten "Brigde-Modus" zu schalten. > Because the Wifi 6 enabled Modem from Magenta doesn't support bridge mode. It does. Call customer support and they enable it for you. It turns into a dumb modem afterwards behind which you need to put your own infrastructure. It's also mentioned on their FAQ: https://www.magenta.at/faq/entry/~technische-anfrage~kabelinternet~installation/~routerwahl~master https://www.magenta.at/faq/entry/~technische-anfrage~kabelin...
- kilburn 2y ago
  This is the same in Spain: ISP-provided ont/router combos are fine but they must have a bridge mode (you may have to call support to enable it).
- abofh 2y ago
  So at least in Portugal, my ISP gives me their device, it has a bridge mode, but it also serves as their wifi access point network (think Xfinity wifi) -- which I don't object to except that their wifi can't be disabled and their signal interferes with my wifi access points. I want a dumb gpon sfp not because they won't give me a bridge, but because their bridge makes too much noise.
Aaron2222 2y ago
> But in cases where the ONT just looks like a media converter and you have a separate router That's how it works in New Zealand, but we take it a step further. The GPON/XGS-PON fibre network is run by a separate company[0] from the ISPs (and the company running the fibre network is prohibited from providing internet services[1]). So the ONT just functions as a media converter[2], and all our ISPs deliver internet over the same fibre network. This decoupling between the fibre network provider and ISP means you can change ISPs without any swapping of ONTs or repatching of fibre[3][4] (in fact, the process can be entirely automated, switching to some ISPs can take effect within an hour or two of placing the order). That and most ISPs allow bringing your own router (as there's no monopoly in the ISP space). [0]: The NZ Government contracted four companies to build, own, and run fibre networks (three being new companies co-owned by local lines companies and the government to serving their local area, with the rest of the country being served by Chorus, the company that owns the country's copper network). These fibre companies are heavily regulated (including how much they can charge ISPs). [1]: In fact, this requirement resulted in Telecom (the company that owned our copper network and who was one of the companies that provided phone and internet service to consumers) being split up, with Chorus being spun off, owning the copper network and owning the fibre network for the majority of the country. [2]: Chorus did start deploying ONTs with a built-in router/AP a while back. They did offer this to ISPs to use, but uptake was very low, so it's since been discontinued. [3]: I don't know how it works over in European countries where ISPs run their own fibre networks when switching ISPs, I assume they have to either install their own fibre line into the premises or the existing fibre is repatched to their network? [4]: The fibre companies are required to offer use of their fibre network directly to ISPs, with the ISPs PON network running in parallel to the fibre company's, with the ISP providing their own fibre splitters and ONTs (which would be run on a second fibre line that each premises already has) and running their own OLTs. I believe this requirement still exists, but no-one ever took them up on it.
- ensignavenger 2y ago
  I am curious about this model. How well is this working in practice? How many ISPs do you have to choose from, and how do they differentiate? How close to wholesale are the retail prices?
jeroenhd 2y ago
In theory the ONT can act like a listening device. They're also often Linux or BSD devices that can get hacked. If you're paranoid, you may want to run an ONT that you control, just in case. I doubt it's something that matters to a lot of people, but even if it only matters to some, it shouldn't be made impossible for those that want to. RE: misbehaving hardware: the same is very much true for cable internet and there are plenty of countries where people hook up their own modem without any trouble. If someone wanted to mess with the fiber network they could just disconnect the ONT and shine a laser pointer down there. All off-the-shelf devices are built to just work and follow the necessary standards, because there's nothing to be gained by messing with the PON network like that.
- the_mitsuhiko 2y ago
  > In theory the ONT can act like a listening device Sure, but so can the other endpoint. Even many AON installations these days are just hidden XPS-PON and similar, you just never see the ONT. (See a lot of ISPs in Switzerland)
  - bobmcnamara 2y ago
    And so can all the other endpoints if they're not encrypting downstream traffic
- worewood 2y ago
  In the year 2024 it is prudent to think of everything that leaves the premises as potentially listened upon. That's why we've got HTTPS an DoT/DoH so widespread these days
  - lxgr 2y ago
    There’s still a huge privacy impact if anyone can listen to your traffic (since hostnames are almost always plaintext due to SNI).
woodrowbarlow 2y ago
as long as the ISP isn't charging a rental fee for the ONT.
bobmcnamara 2y ago
I replaced my Google fiber ONT by cloning the network parameters into a cheap SFP one because the Google supplied one only supports gigabit Ethernet but uses 2.5/1.25gbit optics. The upgrade reduced latency a small, but measurable amount, and improved my NTP jitter.
cmsj 2y ago
Definitely agree. The smart place to demarcate the connection is the point at which a device does DHCP/SLAAC to get whatever IPs the ISP assigns the customer.

pbasista 2y ago

> If customers bring their own stuff then you're stuck Why? There is nothing preventing an ISP from saying that from date X, only protocols A, B and C are supported. If you want to use your own device, make sure it supports these protocols. In other words, the requirement to allow customers to use their own devices does not mean that they can choose all available protocols. The allowed protocols can still be controlled by the ISPs.

appendix-rock 2y ago
Hahahaha! Have you ever done any customer support!? This is not how it works.
- tuetuopay 2y ago
  Well this is about allowing customer supplied ONT, not supporting them. As in, you have to follow upgrade procedures announced X days in advance, etc.
  - the_mitsuhiko 2y ago
    In theory yes. In practice that might work that way if ~5% of your users are in that situation. If ~50% of your user base is running on a legacy protocol and you're running into Churn risks, the company is going to re-evaluate if they want to retire the old protocol. There _is_ a reason even legacy cable TV and ancient DOCSIS channels are still being available in many countries because actually retiring a lot of old modems has shown to be risky to the business.
  - iphoneisbetter 2y ago
    [flagged]
- beerandt 2y ago
  I mean you're right in general- but we're talking about a subset of customers that want to mess with their own fiber connection. That's either a horde that understands the issue, or is an even smaller subset that is going to be a pita anyway.

zokier 2y ago

> I think it's vital that you can run your own modem but I'm not convinced that it's a good idea to force a custom ONT. Did you mean "router" instead of "modem" here?

teeray 2y ago

That’s all great and wonderful, but I shouldn’t have to pay to rent a device that really only benefits the ISP. I would rather have a slick ONU SFP+ module in my router, than yet another plastic block on my telecom panel I need to find space and power for. “This makes our network easier to manage” AND “we make extra money doing this” is double-dipping.

NoMoreNicksLeft 2y ago

If ISPS weren't cheapskate assholes, then they'd offer the ONT SFP module, so I didn't have some shitty plastic doodad hanging from my router because there's no place to put a mounting bracket for it and get it in the panel. I'm sure you'll tell me why the black bakelight rotary telephones were the only telephones I really needed, and I was just making trouble for little ole AT&T when I wanted something more.

neelc 2y ago

When I had CenturyLink, I replaced the ONT via a JTAG cable on the new ONT. The stock CL ONT (Calix 716GE-I R2) had a 16384 connection limit, which prevented me from running high-bandwidth Tor relays. The new ONT (Calix 803G) did not. Calix for some reason makes it easy to clone some models. I have a post on this: https://www.neelc.org/posts/clone-calix-ont/ https://www.neelc.org/posts/clone-calix-ont/ Now I'm in NYC with Verizon Fios where I don't need a cloned ONT. Woo! The Verizon ONT is big and has a huge power brick, presumably because of RFoG alongside GPON.

ImSorryButWho 2y ago
That's very cool, but just to point out: that's not JTAG, it's serial (UART). JTAG is a much lower level protocol, typically used for hardware or low-level software debugging. Serial/UART gives you a command-line interface to the software that's running. Using a JTAG interface is a lot more complicated. If you're interested in playing with it, check out OpenOCD.
muppetman 2y ago
How is the ONT, a Layer2/Ethernet device, involved in L3 sessions? Was it also the default gateway/router all rolled up into one?
- neelc 2y ago
  There is a mis-feature on the ONT called "Broadcom Packet Flow Cache". It apparently speeds up TCP sessions but at the expense of allowing a large amount of then. Lumen fortunately moved off these ONTs. However, the new Smart NIDs have their fair share of issues from what I heard. I moved out of Lumen territory so have no experience with them.
bauruine 2y ago
Consumer routers are all extremely limited when it comes to many connections. Even an Ubiquiti UDM Pro only allows 65536 by default.

bcrl 2y ago

You can actually run GPON and XGSPON simultaneously over the same PON segment as they use different wavelengths of light, so there is no reason to rip out all the GPON nodes at the same time. This allows deferring the truck roll and ONT costs until the customer upgrades to higher speeds. With DOCSIS there is much more pressure to upgrade all CPE as any given chunk of RF spectrum can only run one version of DOCSIS. One 6MHz channel of RF spectrum on coax has a puny amount of bandwidth compared to a single lambda on fibre.