topic Re: Requiring the EE router for DV is outrageous and against competition laws in Broadband & Landline

Requiring the EE router for DV is outrageous and against competition laws

Windrunner — Sun, 10 May 2026 09:56:15 GMT

My FTTC/VDSL service was recently switched over to the new digital voice service. In my home i have a custom setup with 2 internet connections (One EE VDSL, the other ethernet wan into a third party load balancing router and 3 WiFi APs).

I was shocked to discover BT/EE in their infinite wisdom MANDATE using the EE router/modem connected to the copper line as the first device, and DV will not work any other way. This is ridiculous. They could easily have built in the necessary software stack to the phone line adapters that the phone plugs into and connects to the router via wifi. They could easily have allowed the router to be a node on the network (fixed ip, dhcp server off, wifi off), phone connected to router. Instead neither option works. In either configuration, the phone will not connect because *the VDSL cable is not plugged in to the EE router* which is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT as the EE router or phone line adapter HAS AN INTERNET CONNECTION FROM THE EXISTING NETWORK.

I believe this is frankly anti-competative and breaks UK consumer law. There is no technical reason for this mandatory configuration. Forcing users to use the EE router with no other option for a service they are paying for, working one day, then disabled the next is outrageous. Now my only option is to either source a dual ethernet WAN load balancing router (expensive) or move my home phone number over to a third party VOIP company with an adapter the actually works properly.

Shame on BT/EE

Re: Requiring the EE router for DV is outrageous and against competition laws

XRaySpeX — Sun, 10 May 2026 09:45:04 GMT

@Windrunner wrote:
it complains there is no internet connection because the VDSL is not plugged in to the EE router

It shouldn't do if you set up the master router & EE router correctly. The master router should be set up with the PPPoE settings needed for VDSL, Using & Configuring a Third Party Router , & the EE router set up as Ethernet'ed.

I can't see how it can be against competition laws. Each ISP provides their routers that are necessary to implement their service. Just look at VM which provides modems & routers that are not compatible with most other ISPs.

Re: Requiring the EE router for DV is outrageous and against competition laws

Windrunner — Sun, 10 May 2026 10:02:25 GMT

Sorry but your reply is not remotely helpful and you didn't read the post properly. The internet connection works fine and always has done. Only the new DV phone service doesn't work in any configuration. The only requirment for any VOIP/DV service is an internet connection. Look at the device Grandstream HT801. There is no reason the EE phone line adapter could not work in the same way.

Third party routers have always existed and will always exist. Also since this change over was forced (Since BT are disabling all copper phone line connections) this represents a fundamental change of service not provisioned in the user contract. I used to have a phone line service. I no longer have a phone line service i can access, and all for a stupid SOFTWARE LOCK. They could release a router firmware upgrade tomorrow to allow the phone to work without the EE router as modem lock. Its doing a software flag check (is the modem connected) before enabling the DV phone service, despite the fact the modem is irrelevant, only the internet connection matters.

Re: Requiring the EE router for DV is outrageous and against competition laws

XRaySpeX — Sun, 10 May 2026 10:13:24 GMT

Sorry, but your reply does not address my point. I did read your OP & I accept your point that EE DV mandates the use of the EE supplied router as the 1st router downstream of the BB supply. I was only taking issue with your statement that there is no internet connection when the VDSL BB is not plugged in directly to the EE router but instead to a router in between the EE router & the VDSL supply.

OIC that you have now edited your statement (presumably based on my objection) to make more sense. Therefore my reply did have some effect!