List of compatible modems for Fusion X2 pair bonded service

[dane]

For FTTN, AT&T provides the modem which is custom-configured for your circuit, as part of the installation process. An off-the-shelf modem will not work unless an AT&T tech touches it as part of the installation process.

Yes, this is correct. For Fusion FTTN X1 & X2, which use the AT&T UVerse Fiber-to-the-node network, AT&T supplies our members with equipment which utilizes certificate-based authentication. There is an equipment fee of $6.50 to $9.50 monthly. This also covers replacement, wire plan/technician visits, etc.

(I have seen one example where someone put the AT&T device behind their own router to pass through the authentication, but that's super-duper tricky stuff, and it doesn't avoid the equipment fee anyway, because he still needed the AT&T gear to respond to the authentication request.)

[Guest]

As I am in the process of getting FTTN, I feel the need to debunk.
For FTTN, AT&T provides the modem which is custom-configured for your circuit, as part of the installation process. An off-the-shelf modem will not work unless an AT&T tech touches it as part of the installation process.

I don't think "custom-configured" is the right term. The requirement as I've read on the 'net is the authentication to get on the U-verse network is certificate-based and it is this AT&T certificate which makes the hardware "custom." I'm pretty sure there is just one certificate and if it could be extracted out of the modem and installed into another that can perform cert-based authentication things would work. But AT&T is not sharing it therefore U-verse customers are forced to use AT&T-provided CPE. The variable part of the circuit should be taken care of by the modem's/VRAD's retraining algorithms.

[forest]

For your reference, Sonic Fusion X2 uses either ADSL2, ADSL2+ or VDSL2 technology up to profile 17a, and either ATM or PTM transport, and either G.Bond or PTM bonding. The specific config depends upon distance, CO capability and allocated port inventory and capabilities.

Our Pace 5168 modem handles all of these technologies seamlessly, and also integrates with our support systems for troubleshooting and remote update.

Thanks for posting that, Dane. I always appreciate it when you keep us informed so we can make our own tech / equipment decisions.

[Duncan]

Yes, this is correct. For Fusion FTTN X1 & X2, which use the AT&T UVerse Fiber-to-the-node network, AT&T supplies our members with equipment which utilizes certificate-based authentication.

Just curious - what modem model(s) does AT&T supply for Sonic for UVerse service?

[dane]

Yes, this is correct. For Fusion FTTN X1 & X2, which use the AT&T UVerse Fiber-to-the-node network, AT&T supplies our members with equipment which utilizes certificate-based authentication.

Just curious - what modem model(s) does AT&T supply for Sonic for UVerse service?

It varies, based upon the technology used to deliver the service. There is a variety of Motorola, Netgear and Pace equipment used, depending upon region and circuit technology. The service may be ADSL2+, VDSL2, VDSL2 with bonding, or even FTTH PON. Each has different equipment.

[Duncan]

It varies, based upon the technology used to deliver the service. There is a variety of Motorola, Netgear and Pace equipment used, depending upon region and circuit technology. The service may be ADSL2+, VDSL2, VDSL2 with bonding, or even FTTH PON. Each has different equipment.

So much for resource and support consolidation...

(You'd think that a company of AT&T's size, and their Bell Labs history, would be able to design and deploy One Modem To Rule Them All, but this ain't your grandfather's AT&T. Pretty far from it, actually.)

[dane]

It varies, based upon the technology used to deliver the service. There is a variety of Motorola, Netgear and Pace equipment used, depending upon region and circuit technology. The service may be ADSL2+, VDSL2, VDSL2 with bonding, or even FTTH PON. Each has different equipment.

So much for resource and support consolidation...

(You'd think that a company of AT&T's size, and their Bell Labs history, would be able to design and deploy One Modem To Rule Them All, but this ain't your grandfather's AT&T. Pretty far from it, actually.)

I'd guess it's a cost optimization choice. For one site you might deploy a single line ADSL2+, for another a bonding VDSL2, and for yet another with PON, a device with an Ethernet WAN. Putting all of that in one box means buying the most expensive modem (hundreds of dollars) for even the most basic type of connection.

[fmc]

(You'd think that a company of AT&T's size, and their Bell Labs history, would be able to design and deploy One Modem To Rule Them All, but this ain't your grandfather's AT&T. Pretty far from it, actually.)

Indeed, this ain't your grandfather's AT&T. This is Southwestern Bell. Bell Labs is somewhere else (Alcatel-Lucent).

I'm thinking DSL modems owe a lot to technology that came from outside of AT&T in those early post-divestiture years of the 1980s. In particular I'm thinking of the Telebit Trailblazer and its PEP technology. I don't know enough about VDSL technology as yet though.

[Duncan]

I'd guess it's a cost optimization choice. For one site you might deploy a single line ADSL2+, for another a bonding VDSL2, and for yet another with PON, a device with an Ethernet WAN. Putting all of that in one box means buying the most expensive modem (hundreds of dollars) for even the most basic type of connection.

I'm sure that's part of it, but that approach could be just as much a compromise as spending a little more for an all-in-one modem. Given that the cost is recouped through the modem rental policy (and let's not get side-tracked on that topic here) the tradeoff of hardware cost savings vs. support/inventory/customer-confusion/non-economy of scale might be negligible. Or what about the same basic box but with, say, a changeable WAN interface module?

When you think about earlier 'super modems' such as the USR Currier or Zyxel or today's highly-adaptable WiFi hardware that supports all sorts of protocols and radio combinations, it shouldn't be that much of an economic stretch to support all the DSL technologies in one box. And to my knowledge, DSL technology is less volatile than what's happening in WiFi, for instance. (I might be wrong about that, though, in which case obsolescence is a greater risk.) Nonetheless, I see DSL at the same stage as when analog modems were at the end of their reign, namely at a point of diminishing returns when fiber is poised to eclipse it. That would suggest a consolidation of SKUs.


Sorry for the off-topic rant, but I've gotten to the stage where I resent companies who practice lazy design and engineering through a 'slap it together and ship it' strategy that simply clutters up catalogs, inventory, and support obligations because they didn't have the skill or fortitude to save the customer hassles instead of their own engineers and marketing departments. <looks at enormous collection of similar-but-different USB cables and power adapters and cries>

[dane]

Yep, the DSL chipsets have reached a point where a "universal DSL" or UDSL is possible. Our Pace 5168 is a UDSL modem. This means it supports VDSL2 up to profile 17a, ATM or PTM, G.bond or PTM bonding, and all prior versions of DSL from ADSL2 forward to VDSL2. Vectoring is also possible.

But WiFi is also a factor, and it's moving much more quickly than DSL technology. Today we ship equipment with 802.11N with 2.4ghz and 400mw, and 2x2 antenna diversity. In future we will move to 802.11AC, 5ghz, and at least 4x4 antennas. No doubt that'll continue to evolve, we expect to see 8x8 on the 5ghz and 4x4 on the 2.4ghz. The innovation cycle for the wireless is faster than for the DSL.