Digital Voice with different Router

[S_G]

Frankly speaking I do. It's not the first time that big corporation would (deliberately or not) break the law.

Article 3(1) or the Open Internet rules:

End-users shall have the right to access and distribute information and content, use and provide applications and services, and use terminal equipment of their choice, irrespective of the end-user’s or provider’s location or the location, origin or destination of the information, content, application or service, via their internet access service.

[ChunkyTheCurmudgeon]

102 Views

Message 137 of 152

Re: Digital Voice with different Router

I wonder if you would be willing to pay the thousands it would take for BT (& other providers) to properly support all handsets etc instead of providing a solution that they own & maintain

garybs29,

That's just more sophism, it's a irrelevance.

At present I have a copper line with an NTE5 socket on the wall.  I can connect all sorts of internal wired stuff to it.  If there's a problem, the first thing BT tell me to do is to unplug the face plate and plug a phone directly into the master jack.

It's exactly the same for digital voice and FTTP broadband.  I have a legal right to use whatever hardware I want for my broadband and no-one else needs to support it.  If there's a problem, the first thing I'm going to do is plug in the SH2 before I ring BT.

SH2 plugged in, problem still there, support it.  No need for BT or any other ISP to spend an extra penny to support me because I've taken a more sophisticated route to communicating with t'interweb thingy.

And many thanks to S-G for digging out the relevant rule.

[S_G]

Indeed. Well, I kind of (incorrectly) assumed that everyone takes responsibility for their devices (BT/OpenReach are responsible only until the cable enters the property).
The only thing I'd expect is for BT to provide basic configuration settings and if it doesn't work I'd troubleshoot myself with the alternative hardware manufacturer.

[Confused52]

In the world of All IP Networks voice is a specialised service. However there is supposed to be a Network Test and Termination Point at which the responsibility for a service (in this case voice) ends. That point cannot be earlier than a BS6312 socket in practice because no testing is possible until that point. Because BT insist the PSTN service is within  the SH2 then that must contain the NTTP and an Network Test and Termination Apparatus ( what used to be in the Master socket or equivalent). That in turn means that maintenance of the SH2 is up to BT. You cannot do anything at the fibre level because it is not safe to do so. For internet services the NTTP is at the Ethernet port on the ONT but Openreach have withdrawn the PSTN NTTP on the newer Huawei 0+1 ONTs.

A fundamental problem is that BT will not provide the voice service without the SH2 but the SH2 is incompatible with the provision of other specialised services using alternative equipment as a secondary or primary router. In practice that means that BT is refusing to supply a voice service if you use a router of your choice as is your right. At the same time BT continues to have a universal service obligation for voice and an agreement to provide that over the Essential IP voice connections. Other operators have designs that offer a modem mode which solves this conundrum. When Openreach offered a 1+1 ONT and offered wholesale Voice this issue did not occur even with All IP. BT now has a mismatched set of products which are not fit for purpose.

The situation is made worse because the RTTE directive was watered down to remove even the essential network requirements for fixed networks by the EU. This means that the compulsion to publish Suppliers Information Notes has been removed so Openreach still publish them for PSTN services but it is unclear whether they apply to the PSTN port on the SH2 since that is owned by BT not Openreach and BT no longer publish SINs. 

Ofcom have powers to direct BT to fix this but there is no evidence that they have yet done so.

[ChunkyTheCurmudgeon]

Thank you. I wish I could have summed it up so well.

[manchego]

Thanks for the insightful reply. You mentioned that other operators allow a modem mode. Do you know which ones?

[Confused52]

Virgin Media have a specific mode and others like Zen who use a separate Analogue Terminal Adaptor which permits use of any primary router.

[licquorice]

---

@manchego wrote:

Thanks for the insightful reply. You mentioned that other operators allow a modem mode. Do you know which ones?

---

The problem doesn't exist with other operators. It is only a problem with BT because of 2 factors. BT have implemented a proprietary version of VOIP which requires the use of the SH2 and the SH2 doesn't have a modem only mode which makes it awkward (but far from impossible) to use a third party router with Digital Voice.

[S_G]

There was a solution in the form of Fibre Voice Access by OpenReach, but it was withdrawn.

I have raised a formal complaint with BT raising the point of Net Neutrality. Let's see what their response is (I'm not holding my breath but worth trying).

[Confused52]

In truth BT have chosen to do some things with VOIP which rely on a particular combination of functions. Whether they use the VOIP services specified in the NICC All IP standards is not clear since they have not published anything describing their service. The assertion that it is not impossible to use a third party router in addition to the SH2 is not provable because the assumptions they make are unknown. The law permits me to choose any router, I chose an ASUS DSL-55U that I had used on a PPoE service via an Openreach engineer installed modem for many years. When the SH2 does its periodic TR69 checking if there are open threads on the ASUS it resets the secondary router and will not recover without manual intervention. Using alarm system over IP in this configuration would not be practicable. Being only able to use a router which is compatible with SH2's unpublished foibles is not permitting one to use any router.