Neil Watson, Entanets Head of Service, said:
“A further point of concern for us comes with the key phrase “BT approved and Openreach compatible modem/routing device”. What this actually means is that any device supplied needs to support VDSL2+ technology and have passed Openreach’s Modem Conformance Test (MCT). While Entanet partners are able to identify approved devices through our partner portal (synergi), consumers are largely clueless about this requirement and indeed what constitutes an approved device.
And here once again, the onus falls on the reseller to educate consumers on what could happen if they choose to use a device that supports VDSL2+ but that hasn’t passed the MCT. Should a problem occur that requires BTs involvement to achieve a resolution, they will easily identify unapproved equipment through loopback testing. If unauthorised equipment is detected, BT can:
* Request that the device is disconnected
* Limit or disconnect the FTTC service
* Refuse to fix problems
* Levy charges for either an abortive visit as well as any special faults investigation charge.”
Just a couple of thoughts on this.
Would it be beneficial if router manufacturers applied for MCT direct and stamped in their boxes or whatever which are sold in the likes of PCWorld.
I agree that the list of approved routers isnt easy for the consumer to find. The last list I saw was from the ISPforum, which indicates that all the ISPs should be fully aware of what modems have been tested.
The other point - would Openreach really refuse to fix a problem because of the type of modem used?
I thought thats why Openreach carried test gear, so they should be able to see if when they plug in their JDSU or whatever if there is a problem.
Hasnt it always been the practice back to the days when they used to carry an old frog modem. I dunno but is the rule in place in case the EU has some real unworthy & crappy modem on the line. I don't foresee any engineer who once he puts his jdsu on and spots a problem with the physical line suddenly refuse to fix it just because the EU is using say a TP-link VR900. If that was ever the case then I would imagine any EU/SP would have serious cause for complaint.