From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband


My broadband went down last night due it seems to a slightly careless
digger driver, back on this morning.

I'm with Plusnet, it's FTTC and I have a Plusnet Hub Two modem router
which provides DHCP to the network. I use fixed IP addresses for the two
main PCs and the NAS.

I discovered a week or so ago that the inbuilt cache of IP addresses in
the modem/router is held even through a power off which threw me a bit (I
was swapping roles of two PCs and kept ending up at the wrong one).

I discovered last night that the Internet being down meant I could not see
any of the other machines on my home network. I had power, it was just broadband that was down.

Is this expected behaviour or another oddity of this modem/router?

If I use my own router (which I would have to buy) could I keep the home network up in these circumstances but just lose Internet access?

Many thanks.
--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
If you ever find something you like buy a lifetime supply because they
will stop making it
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

On Thu 14/08/2025 17:21, Jeff Gaines wrote:

My broadband went down last night due it seems to a slightly careless
digger driver, back on this morning.

I'm with Plusnet, it's FTTC and I have a Plusnet Hub Two modem router
which provides DHCP to the network. I use fixed IP addresses for the two main PCs and the NAS.

I discovered a week or so ago that the inbuilt cache of IP addresses in
the modem/router is held even through a power off which threw me a bit
(I was swapping roles of two PCs and kept ending up at the wrong one).

I discovered last night that the Internet being down meant I could not
see any of the other machines on my home network. I had power, it was
just broadband that was down.

Is this expected behaviour or another oddity of this modem/router?

If I use my own router (which I would have to buy) could I keep the home network up in these circumstances but just lose Internet access?

Many thanks.

Do what I do albeit on VM. Set your ISP router to modem mode and put
your own router as it destination. Then you can handle your addressing
as you wish.
I prefer (and have used for ages) TP-Link routers which I find to be
very reliable. If you get a wifi6 version you get MUCH more on board
memory giving you more flexibility for addressing.
Also, if you write the IP address etc into the device (PC or whatever)
setup and make that IP address outside the router DHCP range the address
of so configured devices never changes.


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

Jeff Gaines <jgnewsid@outlook.com> wrote:

My broadband went down last night due it seems to a slightly careless
digger driver, back on this morning.

I'm with Plusnet, it's FTTC and I have a Plusnet Hub Two modem router
which provides DHCP to the network. I use fixed IP addresses for the two main PCs and the NAS.

I discovered a week or so ago that the inbuilt cache of IP addresses in
the modem/router is held even through a power off which threw me a bit (I was swapping roles of two PCs and kept ending up at the wrong one).

I discovered last night that the Internet being down meant I could not see any of the other machines on my home network. I had power, it was just broadband that was down.

Is this expected behaviour or another oddity of this modem/router?

If I use my own router (which I would have to buy) could I keep the home network up in these circumstances but just lose Internet access?

Many thanks.

Try using <machine name>.local
mDNS - multicast DNS.

May or may not helprCa.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

Jeff Gaines <jgnewsid@outlook.com> wrote:

I discovered last night that the Internet being down meant I could not see any of the other machines on my home network. I had power, it was just broadband that was down.

Is this expected behaviour or another oddity of this modem/router?

What does 'could not see' mean?

Couldn't ping them by IP, ie 192.168.1.99
Couldn't ping by DNS name, ie my-pc
Couldn't ping by mDNS name, ie my-pc.local

Some version of the above with SSH/HTTP/SMB/whatever?

If I use my own router (which I would have to buy) could I keep the home network up in these circumstances but just lose Internet access?

Yes, but I'm surprised it doesn't stay up anyhow. Something sounds wrong,
but I've never used that router.

Some routers try to be clever, eg if my DSL goes down my ISP's router tries
to catch outbound HTTP requests and redirect to http://vodafone.broadband/
for support information but it falls over because that router isn't the DNS server in my setup so that domain doesn't resolve. It then causes wifi connections to announce 'login required' because they sense they're being redirected to what they expect to be a captive login page.

Theo
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

Jeff Gaines wrote:

My broadband went down last night due it seems to a slightly careless
digger driver, back on this morning.

I'm with Plusnet, it's FTTC and I have a Plusnet Hub Two modem router
which provides DHCP to the network. I use fixed IP addresses for the two main PCs and the NAS.

Where did you fix these IP addresses? In the router - using the "bind" function (whatever your router calls it)? Or in each of the PCs?

I discovered a week or so ago that the inbuilt cache of IP addresses in
the modem/router is held even through a power off which threw me a bit
(I was swapping roles of two PCs and kept ending up at the wrong one).

Some routers do this, others don't. Some allow you to specify what IP
address to issue to a given MAC address.

If you fix the IP address in the PC you should choose one which is
outside the DHCP scope (terminology may vary from one router to another)
of your router

I discovered last night that the Internet being down meant I could not
see any of the other machines on my home network. I had power, it was
just broadband that was down >
Is this expected behaviour or another oddity of this modem/router?

No, this is not the expected behaviour. You should always be able to
connect one PC (configured to use DHCP) to the router and see the
router's status page. This is how you would diagnose the nature of the broadband fault e.g. lack of authentication, or lack of DSL sync. And
if you can connect one PC you can connect several, and each should
communicate with all the others (subject to their firewall rules of
course). If all your devices have static IP addresses (and you know
what they are) then you don't need a router at all, a simple network
switch will suffice to connect them all together

Having said that, some routers (notably those provided by your ISP) may
take many minutes to respond on the LAN if there is no WAN connection,
or only respond during the first minute after power-up. (Technicolor
routers come to mind.) Routers connecting to a cable or wireless
service may give out strange addresses if they don't have a WAN connection.

If I use my own router (which I would have to buy) could I keep the home network up in these circumstances but just lose Internet access?

Owning your own router gives you flexibility as to function and
performance, and you can learn to become completely familiar with it.
It can also provide features not present on your ISP's router: better firewall, VPN support, better WiFi, reporting to syslog, remote
management, etc.

But it is worth retaining the ISP's router so that when there is a fault
that you need to ring them about you don't confuse the issue by using a
router that the ISP doesn't know about.
--
Graham J
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

On 14/08/2025 in message <107l4b2$jvse$1@dont-email.me> Woody wrote:

If I use my own router (which I would have to buy) could I keep the home >>network up in these circumstances but just lose Internet access?

Many thanks.

Do what I do albeit on VM. Set your ISP router to modem mode and put your >own router as it destination. Then you can handle your addressing as you >wish.
I prefer (and have used for ages) TP-Link routers which I find to be very >reliable. If you get a wifi6 version you get MUCH more on board memory >giving you more flexibility for addressing.
Also, if you write the IP address etc into the device (PC or whatever)
setup and make that IP address outside the router DHCP range the address
of so configured devices never changes.

Can I be cheeky and ask if you have a/any TP-Link routers in mind?

I tried to follow their choose a router page but it it too technical for me.

I was thinking router with DHCP server, SIM fall back,WiFi and ability to
take a connection from Plusnet's modem so its normal mode would be to use
that and fall back on the SIM if that goes down, 0.1G a bonus round here!
--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
The facts, although interesting, are irrelevant
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

Jeff Gaines wrote:

[snip]


Woody may be able to answer your questions.

Can I be cheeky and ask if you have a/any TP-Link routers in mind?

No.

I tried to follow their choose a router page but it it too technical for
me.

I was thinking router with DHCP server,

All routers have this ...

SIM fall back,

Very few have this ...

WiFi

Most entry level routers have this. More sophisticated routers usually
offer a cheaper version without WiFi, which is useful when you want to
use your own WiFi equipment such as a mesh system.

and ability to take a connection from Plusnet's modem

Many have either a dedicated WAN2 Ethernet port, or can be configured so
that a specific LAN port functions as a WAN port.

so its normal mode would be to
use that and fall back on the SIM if that goes down, 0.1G a bonus round here!

My recommendation would be one from the Draytek Vigor range. For
example the V2865Lac. But not cheap!
--
Graham J
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

On Fri, 15 Aug 2025 15:42:19 +0100, Graham J wrote:

Jeff Gaines wrote:

[snip]

Woody may be able to answer your questions.

Can I be cheeky and ask if you have a/any TP-Link routers in mind?

No.

I tried to follow their choose a router page but it it too technical
for me.

I was thinking router with DHCP server,

All routers have this ...

SIM fall back,

Very few have this ...

WiFi

Most entry level routers have this. More sophisticated routers usually
offer a cheaper version without WiFi, which is useful when you want to
use your own WiFi equipment such as a mesh system.

and ability to take a connection from Plusnet's modem

Many have either a dedicated WAN2 Ethernet port, or can be configured so
that a specific LAN port functions as a WAN port.

so its normal mode would be to use that and fall back on the SIM if
that goes down, 0.1G a bonus round here!

My recommendation would be one from the Draytek Vigor range. For
example the V2865Lac. But not cheap!

That's what I did. Years ago I got a Vigor 2860, later upgraded to a 2866
when I got fast FTTP.

Current arrangement is ethernet cable from the ONT to the WAN2 port on the 2866. One of the LAN ports is then linked to the dedicated firewall
machine, hence to the internal network. I have a USB wireless dongle
plugged into a USB port on the 2866 for fallback. Another LAN port has a dedicated cable to a system for maintenance. I don't have the wireless
version of the 2866 as (a) it is buried in a steel rack and (b) I want the wireless access inside the firewall. I have a mesh with four Draytek
AP903s (the house is old, with thick walls).

Yes, I could have used the Draytek firewall, but I already had mine long before the 2860 even, and when I did get the 2860 they were still
developing their firewall.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote:

Do what I do albeit on VM. Set your ISP router to modem mode and put
your own router as it destination. Then you can handle your addressing
as you wish.

Most ISP's DSL routers don't have a 'modem mode'. You have to use them in
full NAT router mode and then put your own router behind them, with double
NAT. I do this, it's not ideal but works fine.

You can buy a separate DSL modem but they're rare and expensive.

(I've also found ISP modems typically get the best DSL link rate compared
with third party hardware, although I haven't tried a standalone DSL modem)

Theo
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

On Fri 15/08/2025 14:41, Jeff Gaines wrote:

On 14/08/2025 in message <107l4b2$jvse$1@dont-email.me> Woody wrote:

If I use my own router (which I would have to buy) could I keep the
home network up in these circumstances but just lose Internet access?

Many thanks.

Do what I do albeit on VM. Set your ISP router to modem mode and put
your own router as it destination. Then you can handle your addressing
as you wish.
I prefer (and have used for ages) TP-Link routers which I find to be
very reliable. If you get a wifi6 version you get MUCH more on board
memory giving you more flexibility for addressing.
Also, if you write the IP address etc into the device (PC or whatever)
setup and make that IP address outside the router DHCP range the
address of so configured devices never changes.

Can I be cheeky and ask if you have a/any TP-Link routers in mind?

I tried to follow their choose a router page but it it too technical for
me.

I was thinking router with DHCP server, SIM fall back,WiFi and ability
to take a connection from Plusnet's modem so its normal mode would be to
use that and fall back on the SIM if that goes down, 0.1G a bonus round here!

For a start have a look at TPL routers in general. This one https://www.tp-link.com/uk/service-provider/lte-router/nx510v/
looks to have all you need, working as a gigabit cable router presumably
in your case as normal, but with the capability of being changed to 5G operation if your EE feed expires.

I would agree with Graham and Bob that Draytek routers are very capable
and from what I hear reliable BUT they can be very difficult to program
unless your are well into router programming AND, as already said, they
are not cheap - north of 2 ton is quite normal whereas most suitable TPL
units are in the order of half that or so. I have a Draytek in the
cupboard (can't remember the model number) and although I've only had
two goes at it I have yet to crack how to make it do what I want!!

My current router - that I have been using for maybe over a decade - is
a TP-L Archer D2 and it would take quite a bit to make me replace it!


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

Graham J wrote:

My recommendation would be one from the Draytek Vigor range.-a For
example the V2865Lac.-a But not cheap!

I'm another Vigor user (after many years of rolling my own with openWRT)
the Drayteks are good, though not outstanding, they have annoying
quirks, and don't quite deliver all they promise, but they're certainly
good enough to recommend.


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

On 15/08/2025 16:59, Theo wrote:

Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote:

Do what I do albeit on VM. Set your ISP router to modem mode and put
your own router as it destination. Then you can handle your addressing
as you wish.

Most ISP's DSL routers don't have a 'modem mode'. You have to use them in full NAT router mode and then put your own router behind them, with double NAT. I do this, it's not ideal but works fine.

You can buy a separate DSL modem but they're rare and expensive.

But no use on modern FTTP connections which have an Ethernet connection.

(I've also found ISP modems typically get the best DSL link rate compared with third party hardware, although I haven't tried a standalone DSL modem)

When I had FTTC I found the modem in my DrayTek "problematic"...
.. whilst for historical reasons I do have a double NAT setup, I don't
believe it improves security significantly....

.. and whilst in some ways it has lower functionality to my DrayTek the Fritz!Box VPN is much faster

Theo

Dave
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

On 15/08/2025 20:15, David Wade wrote:

You can buy a separate DSL modem but they're rare and expensive.

But no use on modern FTTP connections which have an Ethernet connection.

In that case you'd use a "pure" router to take the WAN traffic and hide
it behind NAT for LAN Ethernet and wifi connections. A lot of routers
nowadays have two inputs: an ADSL/VDSL input to the modem, and an
Ethernet input from a separate modem or an FTTP fibre-to-Ethernet
converter (I'm ashamed to say that I don't actually know the technical
term for a fibre-to-Ethernet translation box).

If we ever get FTTP, I will make sure that I label the WAN Ethernet
cable very clearly to avoid it accidentally getting plugged into a LAN
socket on the router or into an Ethernet hub, because that would expose
PCs to the WAN with no NAT and firewall.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

I used to be a Draytek fan but I eventually got fed up with their
quirky and difficult to use interface.

I now use Asus routers with asuswrt-merlin, excellent!
--
Chris Green
-+
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

On 15/08/2025 21:48, NY wrote:

On 15/08/2025 20:15, David Wade wrote:

You can buy a separate DSL modem but they're rare and expensive.

But no use on modern FTTP connections which have an Ethernet connection.

In that case you'd use a "pure" router to take the WAN traffic and hide
it behind NAT for LAN Ethernet and wifi connections. A lot of routers nowadays have two inputs: an ADSL/VDSL input to the modem, and an
Ethernet input from a separate modem or an FTTP fibre-to-Ethernet
converter (I'm ashamed to say that I don't actually know the technical
term for a fibre-to-Ethernet translation box).

Its an Optical Network Terminator or ONT. It handles the encryption of
the traffic so its hard, but not impossible for those on the same fibre segment to sniff your traffic.

If we ever get FTTP, I will make sure that I label the WAN Ethernet
cable very clearly to avoid it accidentally getting plugged into a LAN socket on the router or into an Ethernet hub, because that would expose
PCs to the WAN with no NAT and firewall.

Usually not true. Most of the alt-net FTTP providers use CGNAT so your
IP is not externally visible. Then to prevent random connections they typically use PPP over Ethernet so unless you plug it into the router
port you don't get a connection.

Dave
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> wrote:

On 15/08/2025 21:48, NY wrote:

On 15/08/2025 20:15, David Wade wrote:

You can buy a separate DSL modem but they're rare and expensive.

But no use on modern FTTP connections which have an Ethernet connection.

In that case you'd use a "pure" router to take the WAN traffic and hide
it behind NAT for LAN Ethernet and wifi connections. A lot of routers
nowadays have two inputs: an ADSL/VDSL input to the modem, and an
Ethernet input from a separate modem or an FTTP fibre-to-Ethernet
converter (I'm ashamed to say that I don't actually know the technical
term for a fibre-to-Ethernet translation box).

Its an Optical Network Terminator or ONT. It handles the encryption of
the traffic so its hard, but not impossible for those on the same fibre segment to sniff your traffic.

If we ever get FTTP, I will make sure that I label the WAN Ethernet
cable very clearly to avoid it accidentally getting plugged into a LAN
socket on the router or into an Ethernet hub, because that would expose
PCs to the WAN with no NAT and firewall.

Usually not true. Most of the alt-net FTTP providers use CGNAT so your
IP is not externally visible. Then to prevent random connections they typically use PPP over Ethernet so unless you plug it into the router
port you don't get a connection.

Dave

Just a minor niggle: if your FTTP comes via CityFibre whether or not you
get CGNAT depends on which isp you sign up to. I donrCOt suffer from it on my IDnet service.

But yes, if you donrCOt connect via the routerrCOs WAN port the connection wonrCOt be authenticated. Well at least with CF. IrCOm assuming that altnets that use their own in-house isp also require authentication from the
router.

As far as I can tell werCOve basically got two types of FTTP service:
Open Reach or City Fibre, where you have a choice of isp
Altnet with in-house isp with no choice of isp

The latter seems unfortunate, as they have you over a barrel in terms of
future price hikes (see VM), especially if Open Reach fibre isnrCOt also available.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

On 14/08/2025 in message <xn0p9jh628s4aj000@news.individual.net> Jeff
Gaines wrote:

If I use my own router (which I would have to buy) could I keep the home >network up in these circumstances but just lose Internet access?

I have found my TWP-Link Archer VCR2100 which I used before moving to my
ISP's device, must be a few years ago now.

It has a dedicated socket for DSL input and says "the LAN4/WAN port is
used for connecting to a Cable/FTTH/VDSL/ADSL device".

I can't remember when I last used it but it seems to me I can plug a cable from the splitter in my Openreach box to it - it's FTTC so is that VDSL,
the WAN port?

I am being extremely cautious, it's a small village, I don't want to be
the bloke who blew the Internet up!
--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
We chose to do this not because it is easy but because we thought it would
be easy.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

Jeff Gaines wrote:

On 14/08/2025 in message <xn0p9jh628s4aj000@news.individual.net> Jeff
Gaines wrote:

If I use my own router (which I would have to buy) could I keep the
home network up in these circumstances but just lose Internet access?

I have found my TWP-Link Archer VCR2100 which I used before moving to my ISP's device, must be a few years ago now.

It has a dedicated socket for DSL input and says "the LAN4/WAN port is
used for connecting to a Cable/FTTH/VDSL/ADSL device".

What this means is an Ethernet connection to a modem which in turn
connects to "Cable/FTTH/VDSL/ADSL" service. This is what they mean by "device". Probably you have to reconfigure the VCR2100 to use its LAN4
port for the WAN service, and reboot. Then it will give you access to a
page where you provide the PPPoE login and password for your ISP's
connection. These credentials are sent out of the LAN4/WAN port through
the modem to your ISP.

I can't remember when I last used it but it seems to me I can plug a
cable from the splitter

What do you mean by "splitter"?

in my Openreach box to it - it's FTTC so is that
VDSL, the WAN port?

FTTC is indeed VDSL. But you would need a VDSL modem to connect to the
socket in the Openreach box.

But your Archer VCR2100 already contains a VDSL modem! It uses the grey socket on the back marked "DSL". So you only need a suitable cable to
connect the DSL socket to the Openreach box. Then you need to provide
your ISP's login credentials in the settings for the VDSL connection in
your Archer VCR2100.

I am being extremely cautious, it's a small village, I don't want to be
the bloke who blew the Internet up!

No chance of that!
--
Graham J
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

On 16/08/2025 in message <107pk58$1kmeq$1@dont-email.me> Graham J wrote:

Jeff Gaines wrote:

On 14/08/2025 in message <xn0p9jh628s4aj000@news.individual.net> Jeff >>Gaines wrote:

If I use my own router (which I would have to buy) could I keep the home >>>network up in these circumstances but just lose Internet access?

I have found my TWP-Link Archer VCR2100 which I used before moving to my >>ISP's device, must be a few years ago now.

It has a dedicated socket for DSL input and says "the LAN4/WAN port is >>used for connecting to a Cable/FTTH/VDSL/ADSL device".

What this means is an Ethernet connection to a modem which in turn
connects to "Cable/FTTH/VDSL/ADSL" service. This is what they mean by >"device". Probably you have to reconfigure the VCR2100 to use its LAN4
port for the WAN service, and reboot. Then it will give you access to a >page where you provide the PPPoE login and password for your ISP's >connection. These credentials are sent out of the LAN4/WAN port through
the modem to your ISP.

I can't remember when I last used it but it seems to me I can plug a >>cable from the splitter

What do you mean by "splitter"?

in my Openreach box to it - it's FTTC so is that VDSL, the WAN port?

FTTC is indeed VDSL. But you would need a VDSL modem to connect to the >socket in the Openreach box.

But your Archer VCR2100 already contains a VDSL modem! It uses the grey >socket on the back marked "DSL". So you only need a suitable cable to >connect the DSL socket to the Openreach box. Then you need to provide
your ISP's login credentials in the settings for the VDSL connection in
your Archer VCR2100.

I am being extremely cautious, it's a small village, I don't want to be >>the bloke who blew the Internet up!

No chance of that!

Many thanks :-)

When I had broadband fitted here Openreach used a single socket box with a splitter hanging from it rather than a box with individual
'phone/broadband outputs.
--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
Have you ever noticed that all the instruments searching for intelligent
life are pointing away from Earth?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

Jeff Gaines wrote:

[snip]

When I had broadband fitted here Openreach used a single socket box with
a splitter hanging from it rather than a box with individual 'phone/broadband outputs.

The "splitter" is also described as a "microfilter". It has two
outputs: RJ11 for the cable to your router, and a socket for the BT
standard type 431A phone plug. The RJ11 socket is wired straight
through so connects to the Openreach master socket which means that it
carries the full bandwidth. The 431A socket is fed via the filter so
that the high frequencies used for ADSL and more recently for VDSL do
not reach the telephone. This removes any strange noises you might hear
when making a phone call, and reduces any interference with the
broadband signal that might be caused by the phone.

So it provides two functions: the correct connector for your router,
and prevention of audio/telephone interference with the broadband signal.

---

A master socket with individual 'phone/broadband outputs contains the
filter components, and can allow connection of an extension phone line
after the filter (wired through the backplate that mounts it on the
wall). The socket for your router connection will accept a RJ45 plug so
a standard Ethernet (Cat 5 or CAT 6) cable can be used to provide a RJ45 socket at another location into which you can plug the RJ11 cable from a router. So having the router in a more sensible location isn't
difficult apart from the potential for an unsightly cable.
--
Graham J
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> wrote:

On 15/08/2025 21:48, NY wrote:

On 15/08/2025 20:15, David Wade wrote:

You can buy a separate DSL modem but they're rare and expensive.

But no use on modern FTTP connections which have an Ethernet connection.

In that case you'd use a "pure" router to take the WAN traffic and hide
it behind NAT for LAN Ethernet and wifi connections. A lot of routers nowadays have two inputs: an ADSL/VDSL input to the modem, and an
Ethernet input from a separate modem or an FTTP fibre-to-Ethernet converter (I'm ashamed to say that I don't actually know the technical term for a fibre-to-Ethernet translation box).

Its an Optical Network Terminator or ONT. It handles the encryption of
the traffic so its hard, but not impossible for those on the same fibre segment to sniff your traffic.

Some altnets provide the ONT and router in one box, in which case you would have to look for a feature equivalent to 'modem mode' that allows you to
bypass the router functionality.

If we ever get FTTP, I will make sure that I label the WAN Ethernet
cable very clearly to avoid it accidentally getting plugged into a LAN socket on the router or into an Ethernet hub, because that would expose PCs to the WAN with no NAT and firewall.

Usually not true. Most of the alt-net FTTP providers use CGNAT so your
IP is not externally visible. Then to prevent random connections they typically use PPP over Ethernet so unless you plug it into the router
port you don't get a connection.

Some do CGNAT, some don't: https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2024/04/ipv6-and-cgnat-support-survey-of-uk-altnet-fttp-broadband-isps.html

Often you can pay for a 'static IP' package that gets you a public IPv4.
They may or may not offer you a public IPv6 range on their default package.
.
For some ISPs there are guides as to how to set up your router for their version of PPPoE.

Theo
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote:

I would agree with Graham and Bob that Draytek routers are very capable
and from what I hear reliable BUT they can be very difficult to program unless your are well into router programming AND, as already said, they
are not cheap - north of 2 ton is quite normal whereas most suitable TPL units are in the order of half that or so. I have a Draytek in the
cupboard (can't remember the model number) and although I've only had
two goes at it I have yet to crack how to make it do what I want!!

If you want a capable router it's also worth looking at installing OpenWRT
on a router. Gets you the configurability on less expensive hardware. I'm running it on an ex-Zen Fritzbox 7530 (not AX) which was about -u40 second
hand and it works well (I haven't tested the DSL part, which OpenWRT does support).

(Avoid GL.iNet who sell routers with 'OpenWRT preinstalled' - they're just a Chinese closed source fork. Some of them can run vanilla OpenWRT but others have closed source drivers which aren't available)

My current router - that I have been using for maybe over a decade - is
a TP-L Archer D2 and it would take quite a bit to make me replace it!

A lot of TP-Links can run OpenWRT too. Routers with DSL support are a bit rarer though.

Theo
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

On Sat, 16 Aug 2025 10:48:17 +0100
Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:

I am being extremely cautious, it's a small village, I don't want
to be the bloke who blew the Internet up!

No chance of that!

That sounds like another way of saying "What could possibly go wrong?"

When I was a student, we three blokes who shared a house would have a
cheap very used TV set. One summer, I had taken the set home, to use in
my room. One evening, it suddenly let all the smoke out, and died spectacularly. The next day, everyone in the street was talking about
what could possibly have caused a temporary TV blackout, at exactly the
time that my set had self-combusted. I remained quiet......
--
Davey.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2