This is one of the reasons why I'm not planning to host my own e-mail server. It's not that I can't do it, but I don't want to sink time into investigating and working around/solving things like that.

I'll give you an insider info: There's no guy! Your response would be filtered away by the profanity filter and nobody working in Telekom will ever read any of it.

Hell, I can even say, likely, nobody will ever read it, regardless of how you answer.

Those companies only respond to lawyers.

You don't want a tier 1 carrier as your ISP because they are severely limited in connectivity — they only connect to paying customers and other tier 1s. They are to be used as a last resort by the tier 2 ISPs, who provide good packet routing by selecting the best routes from among several backbones.

Never thought I'd see this play out in practice, especially with a consumer ISP. Normally this comes up with server hosting, not consumer ISPs.

Whether or not I have a sane reason to use port 25 is none of their business.

I'm not sure you read the OP's comment in full. They are talking about inbound traffic from the Internet. It's certainly a lot more common a case to self-host an MX than running an open DNS resolver or authorative name server.

I've been told there's a law that my mobile phone operator has to turn off all firewalling on my connection if I ask.

You say "why should I have to pay", but they really haven't said or suggested anything about how they'd rather you paid for anything. They're talking about having an option to supply one's own device, not about requiring so.

The common rationale behind this I'm aware of is that an ONT device is technically a computer with persistence, hosting arbitrary code and data that you cannot (or at least not supposed to) audit or alter, despite being on your premises, operated on your cost (electricity, cooling, storage), and specifically deployed for your use. These properties hold for SFP modules too in general, not just SFP ONTs (they're all computers with persistence).

The catch is that this is further true for all of these kinds of modems.

The counter-catch is that despite that, for DSL specifically, you could absolutely bring your own modem, hw and sw both.

The counter-counter-catch is that with DSL, you were not connecting to a shared media, but point-to-point. This is unlike DOCSIS and GPON, where a misconfigured endpoint can disrupt service for other people, and possibly damage their or the provider's devices and lines.

That's all the lore I'm aware of at least.

The "glass fiber modem" is an inherent part of the GPON network. These are complicated. The "P" stands for "passive". Yours and and up to 127 other houses are all on the same "light domain" i.e. the downstream is passively split, and the upstream is passively combined, in optical boxes that don't even have electrical parts.

This needs crazy accurate timing for the upstream. The head end needs to know the exact delay to your particular box to give it a "grant" to transmit at exactly the right time so transmit bandwidth is not wasted by idle time or multiple boxes transmitting at the same time and corrupting each other.

You don't want brand X modems with dodgy configurations in this. Of course as a consumer you'd want "as little modem as possible" i.e. just give me an ethernet port running DHCP or PPPOE and let me do the rest.

I don't know if it's the case in Germany, but here in France consumer FTTH networks are of the GPON persuasion. These need to handle encryption and be able to properly register on the tree, so I'm not completely shocked they require some form of ISP-provided device to terminate the fiber connection.

There's also a EU law which says that users should be able to bring their own modems / routers, so AFAIK providers say that this particular terminal device is still "on their side of the network".

I've seen such devices come in two varieties.

One is a separate device which plugs on the optical network, does the encryption and stuff, and then exposes an ethernet port which is connected to the actual router which does wifi, etc. With SFR and Bouygues, it was trivial [0] to replace the ISP-provided router with one of your choosing. You get the normal external IPs and you do your thing. The ISP router sleeps in its box in storage. This was my setup up until a few years ago, with both these providers. Now SFR has moved to CGNAT, but the setup is the same, so I expect users to still be able to switch routers (but I haven't tested, since I'm not a client anymore).

Then there's Free, who provides a single device that connects to the fiber, does routing, wifi, etc. In this case, it's possible to flip a switch in its settings for it to act as a bridge (don't know how wifi behaves in this case, if it stays on). It then only accepts a single downstream client, which gets the external IP. SFR had a similar setup for DOCSIS.

I'm not familiar with how Orange, the biggest operator, functions. But I understand they have a general tendency to be a PITA so YMMV with them.

---

[0] For Bouygues, this device only talked on a tagged VLAN100 for some reason. On the SFR, the network expected you to send a client id in the DHCP request.

Yes, with right kind of PON SFP stick this is possible.

Most kinds of PON sticks are still in the $150-300 range though for XGS-PON

(I use an XGS-PON stick with AT&T instead of their modem)

You’d need to be able to replicate whatever configuration the ISP provided device has, and they won’t give you that.

FTTH here in Australia is the same, you’re stuck using the network providers device, which just provides an Ethernet port, and a POTS port if you’re in to that sort of thing, with your LAN device connected behind it.

There was fierce lobbying back in the day (shout out to Simon Hackett / Internode) for our national broadband network to be simple dark fibre and that ISPs could build on top of that to provide innovation and differentiation.

Instead what we got was a bunch of ISPs that resell the National Broadband Network’s expensive wholesale plans with little in the way of either differentiation or innovation.

Edit to add: what the sibling comments said too.

They most likely use GPON so the optic is going to see return traffic for your neighbors. So they make it hard (but not impossible) to bring your own optic or media converter.

If I recall, for something like GPON or XGS-PON, you end up having to clone the various attributes of the original for it to work properly. This typically includes serial number, hardware id, firmware identifiers, etc.

I don’t have fiber access, but at least for cable, my provider (formerly Kabel Deutschland, now Vodafone) allows me to put the modem/router into "modem only" mode, which then allows me to use my own router. Outside of Fritzbox (which is again a whole integrated thing; with questionable features) there aren’t many DOCSIS modems freely available, and the no-name china devices don’t seem much better than my Vodafone Box.

In the U.K. you get a PON which gives you a cat5 gig or mgig port, you then connect your router and pppoe to your ISP. Most ISPs offer a managed router but the ISPs I’ve chosen have always allowed the pppoe option.

Faraday fabric is inexpensive, you can use ethernet to your own router and wrap the isp's in it.

Seems like urine trouble.

Regulating peering within the EU would already be a win.

The providers are then free to either move out of the EU market, or let their non-EU traffic flow via the (then likely larger) unrestricted pipes at DECIX and AMSIX. If they think that routing everything via EU is cheaper instead of just peering better in the other parts of the world to deliver traffic locally, then be it, that is their own economic freedom to decide so.

But they will realistically not do that. Also, SDNs will likely never go back to serving content in Europe from e.g. the US. Good connectivity is just generally the economically better option.

That being said, T1 companies like Deutsche Telekom who also serve a large consumer base via broadband and mobile and not just other large business networks are probably more vulnerable to such legislation than an exclusive transit provider.

Peering just means that two AS physically connect to each other directly. Whether this peering is paid or not is independent from the technical implementation.

Just nearly everybody except Telekom is doing this on a liberal and informal not-even-handshake basis. On ISP scale, you either invest in infrastructure, or pay rent for network ports or cross-links, and you generally want your traffic usage to be smooth without spikes, and also go to the destination without going through your expensive ports more than once. So general connectivity is more important than any kind of traffic metering.

> he behaviour of Telekom is the problem. That must change. The state has to ensure fairness rather than allow monopolies to milk The People.

The state is the monopoly here.

Telekom is still partially state-owned (~27%), since they were, back in the 90s, privatized from the former total monopoly "Deutsche Bundespost" and the related ministry "Bundespostministerium". Nowadays, the parts of the ministry that were back then regulating EM spectrum, allowable phones (basically phone police, you had to rent from Bundespost or go to jail) and generally being corrupt (relations of the former ministry to copper manufacturers is why they botched the first fibre rollouts in '95 and then ignored the topic for 20 years). Nowadays, the "Regulierungsbehoerde", staffed with the same people, is supposed to regulate their former colleagues at Telekom. Telekom got all the networks and was never split up, so it still has a (~85%?) monopoly on everything copper basically, as well as on customers, using this monopoly to bully other ISPs as well as it's own customers and extending this monopoly into future tech. And the state has a financial interest in this regulation being as lax as possible. So you can imagine how this goes...

The best solution here would probably be the EU launching its own internet constellation. China and the US both have them. How is this any different than the issues surrounding GPS?

Well, you have a point but on the other side since about 20 years the Telekom does not even think about improving the internet connection in the place I live. At some point you're just fed up. To me it seems like they just do not care about providing a good service and even if they would now provide a good service I would be more willing to give my money someone else.

are all starlink connections routed through the US?

don't they do local downlinks? at least for countries they have an agreement with or where the infrastructure is available?

Not an alternative anymore. Vodafone started doing the same shit with their peering at the end of last year.

Both throttle in my area unless we vpn so I just share a vpn with a friend to fix it.

Vodafone seems also terrible, but maybe better than DT?

Not true.

https://www.lwlhome.de/

Telefonica enters the chat.w

With ADSL: broken waterproofing somewhere along the line, water gets into the cables or connections == broken while it's raining.

Then you call their customer support, tech comes out, it's not raining anymore and everything works, and the problem doesn't get fixed.

The bright side of this is that there is at least some sort of competition, since they operate on very different infrastucture. This is the free market premise on how quality and price should improve. Reality is often different though, because most customers are not really comparing and/or voting with their feet.

Meh, the threat vector to me as a resident of Germany is the German government - not some dude at the other end of the world. What is Musk going to do? Ban me from Twitter? Not sell me a Tesla?

That's nothing compared to what German authorities can do to me. Germany is a country where you get police searching your home for torrenting movies or making stupid jokes on Facebook. So yeah.

Also about enshittification - one could argue that our local ISPs never left that phase to begin with.

This person just wants internet that doesn't frequently cut out.

Don't blame them for their choices. Blame Telekom and its shareholders for not being able to reliably supply broadband internet in 2026. Blame the government for not having consumer protection regarding right to internet access. But don't blame this person for just doing what is necessary for having basic internet access.

Excuse me, I remember when DSL was the latest and greatest, it can't possibly be this old. :')

>Why does 2.2.0 come after 2.3?

Ask the paper how many 'r's in strawberry

That's only a very vague description.

Do 1&1 customers get CGNAT or a native v4 address? I have had issues with the AFTR's port mapping tables running full when I was on Unitymedia coax.

I'll bite (I'm not German but I'm close culturally):

* Old Androids are not repairable because they're shit, not because a megacorp works hard to make repair impossible

* Old Androids may be hacked by a pegasus-like software (just like most new smartphones anyway), but at least the operating system does not lock you into its own closed ecosystem.

You may disagree, and correctly, because it's in part irrational, but many Europeans just dislike Apple and consider Android a more open/free ecosystem.

>unpatched rotten old Android

Based.

Fsk Apple. Soy aah

my impression is that other countries like Italy or France are much more consistent in what they are bad or good at.

But it's possible it's just my personal bias.

I believe Germany's is much more interconnected while France's mostly goes from Paris to other places. Mesh versus star topology.

Yes, as a German I can agree.

However, I remember the anecdote of how France has two different companies for the trains and trainstations. The first ordered trains which were a little bit to wide for the trainstations, due to a miss communication.

When I read about this, I thought „this could have been Germany too.“

In fact German ICEs are limited in speed in Germany because of the rails, when they cross to France go faster.

We have many BGP workarounds to avoid interconnection points with some of our tier 1 providers and DT because as our providers tell us, discussions with DT to add capacity are a non-starter. We've been relatively stable through a tier 2 provider through Lumen to DT though... for now. Very similar to Cogent in some regions.

please. I don't understand how the fuck we still don't have p2p social networks and private sharing groups. The amount of possibilities to f* up any kind of control are massive - it's just that we end up writing some convoluted distributed mainframe when all people need is p2prss.