Petition: allow customer-owned gateways for fiber

@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.

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. 

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.

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?

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

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.

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.

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