Unlike many we still have a BT landline phone - Panasonic DECT.
Ever since we have had it, if a call with number withheld called, then
it just showed 'Withheld' on the CLI.
This last week we have had two calls:-
one said "Private?" and there was no number attached;
the second said "Nuisance?" but there was a number - apparently Barnsley
but looks to be issued by a VoIP provider in Belgium. A further check
showed it was indeed a nuisance/scam call.
Has anyone else encountered this change in operation or been advised by
that BT are/were doing it?
Woody wrote:
Unlike many we still have a BT landline phone - Panasonic DECT.
Ever since we have had it, if a call with number withheld called, then
it just showed 'Withheld' on the CLI.
This last week we have had two calls:-
one said "Private?" and there was no number attached;
the second said "Nuisance?" but there was a number - apparently
Barnsley but looks to be issued by a VoIP provider in Belgium. A
further check showed it was indeed a nuisance/scam call.
Has anyone else encountered this change in operation or been advised
by that BT are/were doing it?
Do you use "BT Call Protect", apparently that can display "nuisance?"
<https://www.bt.com/help/landline/digital-voice-calling-features-/bt- call-protect-for-digital-voice>
That page is in relation to Digital Voice, but it wouldn't surprise me
if they push analogue calls through the same system ...
we are not on DV AFAIK
On Sat 04/07/2026 12:56, Andy Burns wrote:
Woody wrote:
Unlike many we still have a BT landline phone - Panasonic DECT.
Ever since we have had it, if a call with number withheld called,
then it just showed 'Withheld' on the CLI.
This last week we have had two calls:-
one said "Private?" and there was no number attached;
the second said "Nuisance?" but there was a number - apparently
Barnsley but looks to be issued by a VoIP provider in Belgium. A
further check showed it was indeed a nuisance/scam call.
Has anyone else encountered this change in operation or been advised
by that BT are/were doing it?
Do you use "BT Call Protect", apparently that can display "nuisance?"
<https://www.bt.com/help/landline/digital-voice-calling-features-/bt-
call-protect-for-digital-voice>
That page is in relation to Digital Voice, but it wouldn't surprise me
if they push analogue calls through the same system ...
Ah, well, you see, there may be something in that, except that we are
not on DV AFAIK.
Having said that a month or two ago we had to start dialling the full
area code as well as number even for local calls. When I asked why I was told that because I don't have B/B from BT but am over pension age they
are interfacing me to (what I assume is) VoIP (DV) at the exchange. I suspect that this is about BT not being able to meet the HMG digital
targets so they are sidestepping some customers like me so they can
change us to digital ops in their own time (how many years?) after the
end of January 2027 and otherwise meet the HMG target. In other words a fiddle. So much for the 'need' to change everyone to fibre and remove
all of the copper/aluminium cabling!
For the record my B/B provider is VM which includes a phone service but
is so expensive for daily needs that it is only used if I need to ring
them for faults or support, calls to which are free, plus it is cabled
so still works if the mains fails.
PoI: I do note that since the changeover that now requires me to dial
the area code, call set-up is in many cases significantly slower. If I
ring a friend at the other end of the country I get ringtone almost the instant I finish dialling; if I ring a local number even on the same physical exchange as me it can be 6-8 seconds sometimes more before I
get ringtone.
who use VM, the call will divert to voicemail after about 15 secs of
ring no answer but the first I hear is the answer message - no ringing.
If however I call the same number from my mobile (on GiffGaff) I get ringtone within a second of finishing dialling. How stupid is that?!
On 04/07/2026 20:34, Woody wrote:
On Sat 04/07/2026 12:56, Andy Burns wrote:
Woody wrote:
Unlike many we still have a BT landline phone - Panasonic DECT.
Ever since we have had it, if a call with number withheld called,
then it just showed 'Withheld' on the CLI.
This last week we have had two calls:-
one said "Private?" and there was no number attached;
the second said "Nuisance?" but there was a number - apparently
Barnsley but looks to be issued by a VoIP provider in Belgium. A
further check showed it was indeed a nuisance/scam call.
Has anyone else encountered this change in operation or been advised
by that BT are/were doing it?
Do you use "BT Call Protect", apparently that can display "nuisance?"
<https://www.bt.com/help/landline/digital-voice-calling-features-/bt-
call-protect-for-digital-voice>
That page is in relation to Digital Voice, but it wouldn't surprise
me if they push analogue calls through the same system ...
Ah, well, you see, there may be something in that, except that we are
not on DV AFAIK.
Having said that a month or two ago we had to start dialling the full
area code as well as number even for local calls. When I asked why I
was told that because I don't have B/B from BT but am over pension age
they are interfacing me to (what I assume is) VoIP (DV) at the
exchange. I suspect that this is about BT not being able to meet the
HMG digital targets so they are sidestepping some customers like me so
they can change us to digital ops in their own time (how many years?)
after the end of January 2027 and otherwise meet the HMG target. In
other words a fiddle. So much for the 'need' to change everyone to
fibre and remove all of the copper/aluminium cabling!
I don't believe there are any HMG targets. BT have targets because the exchanges are leased and the leases end in 2030 and they want to close
the exchanges.
To enable this there are two migrations in progress. One is the move to fibre, and the other is the removal of the old Public Switched Telephone Network, or PSTN and converting all users to VOIP allowing the old
analogue exchanges to be de-commissioned
So you have been put on the "pre digital phone line" product which as
you suspect puts the voip conversion in the exchange. It allows the
analogue exchange kit to be removed without putting fibre into your
house. It is intended to be a "transitional" service, so at some point before 2030 you will be switched to fibre.
For the record my B/B provider is VM which includes a phone service
but is so expensive for daily needs that it is only used if I need to
ring them for faults or support, calls to which are free, plus it is
cabled so still works if the mains fails.
Are you sure it works in a power cut?
PoI: I do note that since the changeover that now requires me to dial
the area code, call set-up is in many cases significantly slower. If I
ring a friend at the other end of the country I get ringtone almost
the instant I finish dialling; if I ring a local number even on the
same physical exchange as me it can be 6-8 seconds sometimes more
before I get ringtone.
You are not connected to a physical exchange as such, which I suspect
may be why "local" calls are slow, as if there are any real lines left
the system has to figure out if it needs to route the call out to the
old exchange equipment. I would expect this will improve when all lines
in your exchange are removed. Should be 31st Jan 2027.
The worst is if I ring a DDI number at the local hospital
who use VM, the call will divert to voicemail after about 15 secs of
ring no answer but the first I hear is the answer message - no
ringing. If however I call the same number from my mobile (on
GiffGaff) I get ringtone within a second of finishing dialling. How
stupid is that?!
A bit strange, but I wonder if the hospital is still connected to the
old exchange kit. Why calls from giffgaff are slow I don't know...
Dave
Woody wrote:
we are not on DV AFAIK
Sounds like you may secretly be on a disguised form of Digital Voice?
What do you get if you dial 17070
we are not on DV AFAIK.
On Sat 04/07/2026 21:44, David Wade wrote:
On 04/07/2026 20:34, Woody wrote:Read again. Calls to local number via GG are almost instant.The
On Sat 04/07/2026 12:56, Andy Burns wrote:
Woody wrote:
Unlike many we still have a BT landline phone - Panasonic DECT.
Ever since we have had it, if a call with number withheld called,
then it just showed 'Withheld' on the CLI.
This last week we have had two calls:-
one said "Private?" and there was no number attached;
the second said "Nuisance?" but there was a number - apparently
Barnsley but looks to be issued by a VoIP provider in Belgium. A
further check showed it was indeed a nuisance/scam call.
Has anyone else encountered this change in operation or been
advised by that BT are/were doing it?
Do you use "BT Call Protect", apparently that can display "nuisance?"
<https://www.bt.com/help/landline/digital-voice-calling-features-/bt- call-protect-for-digital-voice>
That page is in relation to Digital Voice, but it wouldn't surprise
me if they push analogue calls through the same system ...
Ah, well, you see, there may be something in that, except that we are
not on DV AFAIK.
Having said that a month or two ago we had to start dialling the full
area code as well as number even for local calls. When I asked why I
was told that because I don't have B/B from BT but am over pension
age they are interfacing me to (what I assume is) VoIP (DV) at the
exchange. I suspect that this is about BT not being able to meet the
HMG digital targets so they are sidestepping some customers like me
so they can change us to digital ops in their own time (how many
years?) after the end of January 2027 and otherwise meet the HMG
target. In other words a fiddle. So much for the 'need' to change
everyone to fibre and remove all of the copper/aluminium cabling!
I don't believe there are any HMG targets. BT have targets because the
exchanges are leased and the leases end in 2030 and they want to close
the exchanges.
To enable this there are two migrations in progress. One is the move
to fibre, and the other is the removal of the old Public Switched
Telephone Network, or PSTN and converting all users to VOIP allowing
the old analogue exchanges to be de-commissioned
So you have been put on the "pre digital phone line" product which as
you suspect puts the voip conversion in the exchange. It allows the
analogue exchange kit to be removed without putting fibre into your
house. It is intended to be a "transitional" service, so at some point
before 2030 you will be switched to fibre.
For the record my B/B provider is VM which includes a phone service
but is so expensive for daily needs that it is only used if I need to
ring them for faults or support, calls to which are free, plus it is
cabled so still works if the mains fails.
Are you sure it works in a power cut?
PoI: I do note that since the changeover that now requires me to dial
the area code, call set-up is in many cases significantly slower. If
I ring a friend at the other end of the country I get ringtone almost
the instant I finish dialling; if I ring a local number even on the
same physical exchange as me it can be 6-8 seconds sometimes more
before I get ringtone.
You are not connected to a physical exchange as such, which I suspect
may be why "local" calls are slow, as if there are any real lines left
the system has to figure out if it needs to route the call out to the
old exchange equipment. I would expect this will improve when all
lines in your exchange are removed. Should be 31st Jan 2027.
The worst is if I ring a DDI number at the local hospital
who use VM, the call will divert to voicemail after about 15 secs of
ring no answer but the first I hear is the answer message - no
ringing. If however I call the same number from my mobile (on
GiffGaff) I get ringtone within a second of finishing dialling. How
stupid is that?!
A bit strange, but I wonder if the hospital is still connected to the
old exchange kit. Why calls from giffgaff are slow I don't know...
Dave
concentrator has a gas powered generator on site as it handles all local
B/B as well. Having said that the power failed a couple of weeks ago and
it seems the genny didn't start which meant B/B was down for about 2
hours until Northern Power got their act together. It affected about -+
of the town.
VM phone is twisted pair to the local concentrator AFAIK as the original install in this area was done by Bell Cablemedia who had a reputation
for reliability and quality workmanship.
Woody wrote:
we are not on DV AFAIK.
You could try to use one of the features that is _NOT_ available on DV > (alarm call, ringback etc) n.b. they will be chargeable if they do
somehow work
There's a list of what is/isn't supported in the FAQ
<https://www.bt.com/bt-plc/assets/documents/special-services/pdpl-wholesale-faq.pdf>
Andy Burns wrote:
There's a list of what is/isn't supported in the FAQ
<https://www.bt.com/bt-plc/assets/documents/special-services/pdpl-wholesale-faq.pdf>
Is that list supplier-independent? I know on POTS/PSTN some things do vary.
J. P. Gilliver wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
There's a list of what is/isn't supported in the FAQ
<https://www.bt.com/bt-plc/assets/documents/special-services/pdpl-wholesale-faq.pdf>
Is that list supplier-independent? I know on POTS/PSTN some things do
vary.
I would say it applies to any supplier who re-sells Digital Voice (e.g
BT, EE, Zen) but not relevant for other VoIP suppliers (A&A, voipfone etc).
The ZEN product is provisioned via the SIP support in the Fritz!BoxMaybe Zen have at various times resold DV, and other times their own
router, so if its "BT Digital Voice" being resold does that mean BT is
using standard protocols?
does that mean BT is using standard protocols?
So you have been put on the "pre digital phone line" product which as
you suspect puts the voip conversion in the exchange. It allows the
analogue exchange kit to be removed without putting fibre into your
house. It is intended to be a "transitional" service, so at some point before 2030 you will be switched to fibre.
BT are using SIP, but over a different VPN, for the PPP over Ethernet,
from that used for any broadband, on the same line.-a They also don't provide you with credentials necessary to bypass their hub.
on a different VLAN?
So you have been put on the "pre digital phone line" product
which as you suspect puts the voip conversion in the exchange.
I think the conversion is done in the cabinet.
A different VPN, or on a different VLAN?
On 04/07/2026 21:44, David Wade wrote:
So you have been put on the "pre digital phone line" product which as
you suspect puts the voip conversion in the exchange. It allows the
analogue exchange kit to be removed without putting fibre into your
house. It is intended to be a "transitional" service, so at some point
before 2030 you will be switched to fibre.
I think the conversion is done in the cabinet.
involvement is with regard to avoiding confusing users who depend on the landline for emergencies and won't understand concepts like UPS's, or
the need to provide power for a hub, and find space for it.-a It is a service for over 70's and vulnerable users.
Just beware if you get broadband via Openreach, but not from a BT owned ISP.-a Their propaganda didn't mention that they were going to cease my broadband when they switched me over.
on a different VLAN?
Apparently not ...
<https://forums.thinkbroadband.com/fibre/4664092-bt-fttp-with-digital- voice-alternative-to-smart-hub-2.html?fpart=2#Post4666538>
Broadband is on tagged VLAN 101, on FTTC
and some sources say that
Digital Voice is untagged.
The situation is a bit more confusing for
FTTP, which I don't-a have
but is probably done but hidden in the ONT.
_Who_ does it cost that much? (And why so much?)So you have been put on the "pre digital phone line" product
which as you suspect puts the voip conversion in the exchange.
I think the conversion is done in the cabinet.
Pre-Digital Phone Line (PDPL) Media Gateway equipment is being installed at most telephone exchanges, not cabinets, to provide an emulation of the PSTN service using BT Wholesale VoIP.
It it totally separate to all existing services, but will cease within a few years and the exchange buildings close.
PDPL costs +U53/month per line.
Angus
On 2026/7/5 19:18:0, Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd wrote:
_Who_ does it cost that much? (And why so much?)So you have been put on the "pre digital phone line" product
which as you suspect puts the voip conversion in the exchange.
I think the conversion is done in the cabinet.
Pre-Digital Phone Line (PDPL) Media Gateway equipment is being installed at >> most telephone exchanges, not cabinets, to provide an emulation of the PSTN >> service using BT Wholesale VoIP.
It it totally separate to all existing services, but will cease within a few >> years and the exchange buildings close.
PDPL costs +U53/month per line.
Angus
David Wade wrote:
The ZEN product is provisioned via the SIP support in the Fritz!BoxMaybe Zen have at various times resold DV, and other times their own
router, so if its "BT Digital Voice" being resold does that mean BT is
using standard protocols?
VoIP, I do remember customers talking about it being DV
I imagine everyone uses standard protocols, why wouldn't they?
On Sun, 5 Jul 2026 14:33:21 +0100, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk>
wrote:
David Wade wrote:
The ZEN product is provisioned via the SIP support in the Fritz!Box
router, so if its "BT Digital Voice" being resold does that mean BT
is using standard protocols? >>Maybe Zen have at various times
resold DV, and other times their own >>VoIP, I do remember customers
talking about it being DV
I imagine everyone uses standard protocols, why wouldn't they?
I attended meetings at BT in about 2000. At one time BT had submitted
1000 change requests to SIP and related protocols as they planned for
what is now DV.
Trolleybus <ken@birchanger.com> writes:
On Sun, 5 Jul 2026 14:33:21 +0100, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk>
wrote:
David Wade wrote:
The ZEN product is provisioned via the SIP support in the Fritz!Box
router, so if its "BT Digital Voice" being resold does that mean BT
is using standard protocols? >>Maybe Zen have at various times
resold DV, and other times their own >>VoIP, I do remember customers
talking about it being DV
I imagine everyone uses standard protocols, why wouldn't they?
I attended meetings at BT in about 2000. At one time BT had submitted
1000 change requests to SIP and related protocols as they planned for
what is now DV.
They use their own protocols to hide what they are doing and lock you
into their hardware. Let's call it the Amazon model.
PDPL costs u53/month per line._Who_ does it cost that much? (And why so much?)
Nobody has shown any evidence of BT using their own protocols.
AFAICS
they're using standards like SIP, PPPoE, VLANs, TR-069, maybe TR-104.
However increasingly ISPs consider the CPE to be part of their network -
they manage it, they provide security updates, they send you a new one if it breaks. Given how poorly managed some third party routers are (lack of security updates from the vendor, insecure settings, sometimes included malware), there's an argument that this is the way of least harm to both their network and their customers.
Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
Nobody has shown any evidence of BT using their own protocols.
How do you know that nobody has?
AFAICS
How far can you see? What is in the realm beyond that which you can see?
they're using standards like SIP, PPPoE, VLANs, TR-069, maybe TR-104.
Maybe, but they then conceal it and call it BT DV or whatever.
Can you use any equipment with BT? or do you have to use their
equipment?
I was really impressed by the way AAISP handles security updates to the router. What I thought might be a daunting task, and might leave me with
a brick, actually happened without me even noticing.
We may see much more need for security updates to routers with people pointing AI at them.
(I snipped things to avoid clutter, not for any other reason).
I have also reverse engineered Sky's implementation (which is standard SIP with TR-104); I have never had a BT connection to try their version.
How much reverse engineering have you done?
That's a different point to using proprietary standards. I can offer an email service use bog standard IMAP but if you don't have the password you can't use it. BT are just not giving customers the information needed to
use their service, because they have decided not to.
I think for most people the position is best where the ISP is in charge of updating their CPE.
Nobody has shown any evidence of BT using their own protocols. AFAICS they're using standards like SIP, PPPoE, VLANs, TR-069, maybe TR-104. For one thing, their own protocols would require their own software loaded on routers, which would have to be commissioned from the router manufacturers. While routers often have a bit of UI personalisation, they're typically pretty standard underneath.
On 2026/7/6 13:52:41, Theo wrote:
[]
Nobody has shown any evidence of BT using their own protocols. AFAICS they're using standards like SIP, PPPoE, VLANs, TR-069, maybe TR-104. For one thing, their own protocols would require their own software loaded on routers, which would have to be commissioned from the router manufacturers. While routers often have a bit of UI personalisation, they're typically pretty standard underneath.
I suppose disabling could be described as "personalisation"; PlusNet
supply (so I'm told) a standard BT "router", but with the ATA that's
already in it disabled. which seems very dog-in-the-manger.
[]
So changing from provisioning the ATA to not provisioning it is just a flip of a config switch. They could also save a bit of hardware cost by not provisioning the analogue phone components, but that's not a massive saving and perhaps outweighed by just producing the same board in greater volumes. Then flash it with the appropriate firmware image and stick it in a BT or EE or PN branded plastic case to match.
Now you or I might balk at this transfer of power to the ISP, but I think it's the right thing for 90+% of people. And it's not like we don't have options if we want to do our own thing. (As soon as they start blocking our options, then is the time for the pitchforks)It is a great dilemma.
The original question which I was trying to answer was why would BT not
use the open standards? (Andy Burns). My answer is to tie people into hardware. If they use open standards behind closed doors then that
amounts to the same thing, I think.
On 06/07/2026 13:52, Theo wrote:
Now you or I might balk at this transfer of power to the ISP, but I thinkIt is a great dilemma.
it's the right thing for 90+% of people.-a And it's not like we don't have >> options if we want to do our own thing.-a (As soon as they start
blocking our
options, then is the time for the pitchforks)
Look at the current furore over John Deere farm equipment.
"You are too stupid to fix it"
"Then I'll buy something slightly more expensive that I CAN fix. From Germany"
PDPL is a business line, designed for strange locations like lift emergency phones, currently business line rental is +U48/month (plus VAT) so PDPL is only
a little more. No connection fee.
PDPL is an Openreach product, so always a B2B sale.
On 06/07/2026 13:52, Theo wrote:
Now you or I might balk at this transfer of power to the ISP, but I think it's the right thing for 90+% of people. And it's not like we don't have options if we want to do our own thing. (As soon as they start blocking ourIt is a great dilemma.
options, then is the time for the pitchforks)
Look at the current furore over John Deere farm equipment.
"You are too stupid to fix it"
"Then I'll buy something slightly more expensive that I CAN fix. From Germany"
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 06/07/2026 13:52, Theo wrote:
Now you or I might balk at this transfer of power to the ISP, but I think >>> it's the right thing for 90+% of people. And it's not like we don't have >>> options if we want to do our own thing. (As soon as they start blocking ourIt is a great dilemma.
options, then is the time for the pitchforks)
Look at the current furore over John Deere farm equipment.
"You are too stupid to fix it"
"Then I'll buy something slightly more expensive that I CAN fix. From
Germany"
That's a bit different. Your $500k combine harvester sits down in the
middle of the prairie saying 'error 42, call service'. Service is three states away and is booked up for weeks. Meanwhile everyone is frantically trying to get the harvest in before the thunderclouds break.
It's a strong argument for DIY because you simply can't 'get a man in' under those conditions, irrespective of home much you'd be willing to pay for it. The only person able to fix the problem before losing the harvest is you.
Here you're buying a service and the ISP is in the best position to deliver it to you if they also provide the router.
I suspect another part of this is that, with increasing FTTP speeds, people complain that 'they can't get the advertised speed' when actually it's the wifi between their device and the router that's the weak point rather than the FTTP speed. Like it or not complaints (eg on review sites) are often about wifi not fibre. By the ISP providing the wifi hardware it means they have some control over its wifi performance. Conveniently (for them), it also enables them to upsell mesh solutions, often on a rental basis...
Theo
On 06/07/2026 22:49, Theo wrote:
So changing from provisioning the ATA to not provisioning it is just a flip >> of a config switch. They could also save a bit of hardware cost by not
provisioning the analogue phone components, but that's not a massive saving >> and perhaps outweighed by just producing the same board in greater volumes. >> Then flash it with the appropriate firmware image and stick it in a BT or EE >> or PN branded plastic case to match.
My daughter#s Plusnet FTTP install came with an EE Smart Hub 6 with the blue '8' logo on the front and SSID of EE...
On 2026/7/6 23:35:4, Nick Finnigan wrote:
On 06/07/2026 22:49, Theo wrote:
So changing from provisioning the ATA to not provisioning it is just a flip
of a config switch. They could also save a bit of hardware cost by not
provisioning the analogue phone components, but that's not a massive saving
and perhaps outweighed by just producing the same board in greater volumes.
Then flash it with the appropriate firmware image and stick it in a BT or EE
or PN branded plastic case to match.
My daughter#s Plusnet FTTP install came with an EE Smart Hub 6 with the blue '8' logo on the front and SSID of EE...
If you/she connect to its web interface, does it appear to be (logos
etc.) a PlusNet or an EE device?
If the latter, I wonder if the ATA in it _can_ be accessed (since AIUI
EE _do_ do VoIP)!
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/7/6 23:35:4, Nick Finnigan wrote:
On 06/07/2026 22:49, Theo wrote:If you/she connect to its web interface, does it appear to be (logos
So changing from provisioning the ATA to not provisioning it is just a flip
of a config switch. They could also save a bit of hardware cost by not >>>> provisioning the analogue phone components, but that's not a massive saving
and perhaps outweighed by just producing the same board in greater volumes.
Then flash it with the appropriate firmware image and stick it in a BT or EE
or PN branded plastic case to match.
My daughter#s Plusnet FTTP install came with an EE Smart Hub 6 with the >>> blue '8' logo on the front and SSID of EE...
etc.) a PlusNet or an EE device?
If the latter, I wonder if the ATA in it _can_ be accessed (since AIUI
EE _do_ do VoIP)!
I would not be surprised if they can reflash routers with BT or EE or PN firmware remotely, based on the customer they are being used by. ie router connects to provisioning server (typically via TR-069), server identifies it's on a PN connection, says 'hey, I have a firmware update for you', the router installs it and reboots into the PN firmware.
Perhaps it was originally running EE firmware out of the box but as soon as it connected they 'updated' it to the PN firmware?
Theo
we are not on DV AFAIK.
Having said that a month or two ago we had to start dialling the full
area code as well as number even for local calls.
Woody wrote:
we are not on DV AFAIK.
Having said that a month or two ago we had to start dialling the full
area code as well as number even for local calls.
So have you concluded tat you *are* on DV (via a PDPL)?
Were you on some form of priority register that would have prompted BT
to move you to that product?
On 2026/7/7 23:3:39, Theo wrote:
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/7/6 23:35:4, Nick Finnigan wrote:
On 06/07/2026 22:49, Theo wrote:If you/she connect to its web interface, does it appear to be (logos
So changing from provisioning the ATA to not provisioning it is just a flip
of a config switch. They could also save a bit of hardware cost by not >>>>> provisioning the analogue phone components, but that's not a massive saving
and perhaps outweighed by just producing the same board in greater volumes.
Then flash it with the appropriate firmware image and stick it in a BT or EE
or PN branded plastic case to match.
My daughter#s Plusnet FTTP install came with an EE Smart Hub 6 with the >>>> blue '8' logo on the front and SSID of EE...
etc.) a PlusNet or an EE device?
If the latter, I wonder if the ATA in it _can_ be accessed (since AIUI
EE _do_ do VoIP)!
I would not be surprised if they can reflash routers with BT or EE or PN
firmware remotely, based on the customer they are being used by. ie router >> connects to provisioning server (typically via TR-069), server identifies
it's on a PN connection, says 'hey, I have a firmware update for you', the >> router installs it and reboots into the PN firmware.
Perhaps it was originally running EE firmware out of the box but as soon as >> it connected they 'updated' it to the PN firmware?
Over to you, Nick!
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 74 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 01:59:35 |
| Calls: | 1,102 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 1,339 |
| Messages: | 276,958 |