192

Feature Request: Add support for PPPoE

many ISPs, including CenturyLink require PPPoE. Without this support, eero cannot be used as a router and only as a bridge. 

224replies Oldest first
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Active threads
  • Popular
  • Eero is now available in UK, right? Majority of their potential customers would need PPPoE due to UK ISP being primarily on PPPoE. Hopefully, they will now consider this.

    Like 1
  • I created an account just to post this. I was looking at Eero to compare against the TP-Link Deco devices but I live in the UK and 80%+ of our ISP connections run on Openreach VDSL which requires PPPoE to connect. 
     

    so without this capability the market for eero in the UK is tiny, relying on selling to virgin media customers (DOCSIS) or maybe hyperoptic which only a few homes have access to.

     

    Eero is a paperweight here in the UK until PPPoE gets added.

    Like
  • I just bought an Eero Pro triple from the Apple Store a week ago, as it's now official in the UK.

    Stuck it in bridge mode to start with as it was the easy option until I had the time to play with it and then the potential rebuild of my homekit system.

    Last night I sat down and thought right, let's ditch the EE router and plug my modem in.

    To discover, the Eero doesn't support PPPoE.

    The UK RUNS on PPPoE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!         (unless you're a virgin customer)

    Come on Eero, if you want to sell this product to us in the UK, we need this option.

    Like
  • I’ve just purchased a pair of eero’s from Amazon UK and I’m shocked they are sold in a market where most ISPs require PPPoE. Please implement PPPoE because double NAT or bridge mode both have limitations.

    Like 1
  • Am another UK customer that didn't find out until setting up that this was an issue. Not sure whether this sits with eero or amazon here in the UK, but had another quick look over the amazon site and it doesn't state the restriction for UK customers. 

    Bit naughty really, as you are hobbling the system by bridging and not getting half the stuff you bought it for and Double Nat'ing isn't really a solution for some with PS4's and Xbox's.

    I've managed to get round it using a DMZ on my modem/router, but id say there will be alot of people who would be scared off by doing this, I didn't have a clue how to do it until after a few days trial and error googling the question.

    It might be worth an update on the erro website on how to do this???? so at lest people can give it a try if they want too. that being said am told DMZ'ing isn't a true solution and can still cause the odd problem.

    For me am happy to go this route until "hopefully" eero add PPPOE ……… like Google have done on their system..... just saying.....

    Like 2
      • TheKasif
      • TheKasif
      • 4 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      messenger  I hope they add support soon for PPPoE, I'm currently using bridge mode but losing a lot of the eero features. :(

      Like
      • messenger
      • messenger
      • 4 mths ago
      • 1
      • Reported - view

      TheKasif I have found that putting the main eero ( connected to router/modem combi ) into a DMZ does help and have been able to keep my system “not” bridged and working well. If you fancy giving it a go I can explain what I did.

      Like 1
      • marklemac
      • marklemac
      • 4 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      messenger please do explain 😊

      Like
  • Ok so am not an I.T expert by any stretch of the imagination so please excuse any terms i get completely wrong !


    First note down the external IP Address your modem/router has give your eero. It’s found under >settings >advanced in the Eero app. This is the IP address you are going to put into the DMZ within your modem/routers settings.

    Then you need to log into your modem/router settings, can’t help you here as this will be different for most. Quick google should help here.

    Once logged in you need to find the DMZ setting , most modem/routers have it, my setting (tp-link router) was under >forwarding in advanced settings.

    There should only be a few settings here , enable/disable and a box to enter in the IP address you noted from the eero.

    Enter the IP and save! You then may need to reset the modem/router. 
     

    That should be it. From what I’ve read this basically lets everything flow through the modem/router untouched to the eero via that IP address and lets the eero sort the nat’ing.

    Like
      • jerrylion
      • jerrylion
      • 2 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      messenger thanks for your explanation, is really good. One question, when it comes to DHCP both the modem/router and the eero keep it enabled? and if yes, is the IP address range the same or must be different on the eero? (assuming eero is in the DMZ and has a static IP address from the modem and modem wifi is OFF and nothing else is connected to it) thanks in advance.

      Like
      • messenger
      • messenger
      • 2 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      jerrylion yes both are enabled for DHCP on modem/router & eero, but from what I understand, by having the gateway eeros IP in the DMZ (what’s been assigned to it by the modem/router), the modem/routers DHCP process is bypassed and the eero takes the load. Yes I have WiFi off on the modem/router but due to its location have 2 PCs hardwired in to 2 spare ports and all seems to work fine. I haven’t fixed a static IP for the main eero so I do check to make sure the modem/router, if restarted for any reason, hasn’t given the main eero a new IP, then that wouldn’t match what’s in the DMZ. I hope that makes sense , as said am not an IT expert by any stretch of the imagination! I’ll have another go at answering if I’ve missed what you meant :) the litmus test for me was I have 2 PS4s in the house and with this set up have no issues with online gaming 👍

      Like
      • jerrylion
      • jerrylion
      • 2 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      messenger thank you so much for your response. I haven't get the eero yet (order it's been processed), but I went ahead and tested this with an Airport extreme router. What I did:

      -Disabled wifi in modem/router

      -Disabled DHCP in modem/router

      -Disconnected all physical (ethernet) devices from modem/router

      -Added static IP on the router (Airport/eero)

      -Enabled DHCP/NAT on the router (Airport/eero) IP range HAD to be different from modem/router:

      So modem/router is now: Public IP and Private IP 192.168.1.1

      Router (Airport/eero) is now: Private IP 192.168.1.2 (first IP assigned by modem/router) and distributes IPs from 192.168.2.2 to 192.168.2.200 (note the last bits starts from 2.X as opposed to 1.X)

      -Added the Airport/eero IP (192.168.1.2) to the DMZ in the modem/router

       

      Everything seems to work well, but I don't have any gaming to test issues with double NATing, Airport extreme gives me a warning though that it is double NATing and should rather be in bridge mode.

      I can see both the modem/router at 192.168.1.1 and devices on segment 192.168.2.X I would assume if modem/router had the WIFI enabled or any other devices connected physically I would be able to also see them from the network created by Airport.

      I am not technical either so apologies if my language is incorrect :)

      Can't wait for my eero to arrive and experience this for real and see a big improvement in my network and WIFI.

      Another question I have in mind (a bit off topic) is if I will be able to subscribe to Secure Plus as I am located in Australia, contact support told me is not available in my Country but I wonder how can they prevent/stop me from purchasing and if I manage to purchase (US phone/address, etc), would it work or not? anyone know? are there any IP location controls and if yes, can they be bypassed?  :)

      thanks once again.

      Like
      • messenger
      • messenger
      • 2 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      jerrylion hi, sorry for late reply works been manic, but shouldn't really complain in current climate!! tbh it sounds like you have more knowledge then me, as I didn't do any of the above that you are describing other then place the assigned IP into the DMZ, which then allows my eero to work as if stand alone and not behind another router. I noticed when catching up on the thread jhollington also explains a similar set up below.

      Like
  • I too wish that Eero would support PPPoE. I decided to install a mesh system in the home and after researching the options on line and on Youtube concluded that Eero Pro was the system for me. This is what the Amazon UK site has to say: 

    • Works with your internet service provider: eero Pro connects with your modem to bring your existing internet connection to every corner of your home.
    • Set up in minutes: the eero app walks you through setup and allows you to manage and control your network from anywhere.

    I noticed on the Youtube videos however that they did not mention the need to sign in to the ISP to gain access to the internet, so I looked more closely and found the lack of support for DSL ISP systems. Then I found this thread. I am not very technically confident and know nothing of PPPoE, DMZ, Bridges or Double NAT and have little desire to try to find out more, especially since the solutions suggested above may result in a lack of some functions of the Eero system. 

    It seems that Eero may have the support under review as they seem to have for the past 3 years. It may be because the Eero firmware cannot easily be adapted, or some other reason but Eero presumably know that DSL ISPs are common across the world so by not supporting these identification needs they must be missing out on a large market worldwide. Is is not possible for Eero to work with Modem manufacturers to tweak an existing stand alone Modem to enable it to carry out this function? As most Modem manufacturers also make Modem Router combos they presumably already have this technology.

    My research has also suggested that the Eero may not be the only mesh system with this issue. Until the issue is resolved there is no point me purchasing the Eero Pro until it really is plug and play and can be set up in minutes.

    Like
  • My ISP here in Illinois also uses PPPOE, so I have to double NAT to get all of EERO's features.  
    It's obvious that EERO will never implement PPPOE, even though every other router/mesh system does. 
    It used to be that EERO was the only workable mesh system out there, but there are lots of them now.  Return them and try Google's or TP Link's mesh.
    I just wish EERO would be forthcoming in their product placements and clearly state that the will never do PPPOE before people drop their hard earned money on them. 

    Like 1
  • Same here, with Bell Gigabit Fibre. And PPPoE would be highly appreciated as the ISP modem/router don't have a bridge mode.

    Like 1
    • UnBip Actually, if you're using the Bell Home Hub 3000, you can set it to "Advanced DMZ" mode, which is basically a bridge mode for all intents and purposes (there are technically some differences, but those aren't things that are likely to matter to 99% of normal home users). 

      The Advanced DMZ mode allows you to assign the public IP address of the HH3000 to a specific device on your LAN, based on its MAC address. This will allow your Eero to basically act like a normal router rather than being stuck in bridge mode or having to suffer with double NAT.

      To set this up, you simply need to log into your HH3000, go to "Advanced tools and settings" and then "DMZ" and check the box marked "Advanced DMZ" and either type in or paste in the MAC address of your Eero. Make sure you leave DHCP enabled on your HH3000 as well, as this needs to be on for the Eero to pick up the public IP address automatically. 

      Like
      • jerrylion
      • jerrylion
      • 2 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      jhollington are you sure the eero would get a public IP address or the one provided by the HDCP server on the modem, which cannot be public.

      Like
    • jerrylion Definitely. I'm waiting for my Eero Pro system to arrive later this week, but I just tested the configuration with my existing router earlier today (a Netgear RAX80), and it's running on the public IP address.

      In fact, if you go to the DMZ settings, you'll actually see this explained under the "Advanced DMZ" section, with your public IP address shown right in the description.

      There's some jiggery-pokery that the HH3000 is doing to accomplish this, as the internal IP address of the HH3000 still shows up in ICMP traces, and the public IP still exists on the HH3000 WAN interface as well, and it continues working as a NAT router in its own fashion, but for all intents and purposes, it works just fine for most typical use cases, including passing traffic back to services running behind the internal router via port forwarding, and even inbound VPN connections (I've seen some older reports that it doesn't pass ESP properly for pure IPSec, but OpenVPN appears to work just fine).

      Like
      • Oully
      • Oully
      • 2 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      jhollington were you able to get the Eero to connect with the advanced DMZ?  I can see the correct IP in the Eero app, but it will not connect to the internet. Thanks in advance!

      Like
    • Oully My Eero Pro finally arrived, and did seem to be a little bit temperamental compared to setting it up with my RAX80, but I managed to get it working in the end.

      The critical factor in my case seemed to be getting the latest Eero updates installed first, before I enabled the advanced DMZ feature. I don't know if there was a compatibility problem in the firmware that shipped with the Eero Pro (I didn't check which version it was originally), but I was more or less having the same issue as you were when I first set it up — the Eero Pro got the public IP address from the Home Hub 3000 just fine, but couldn't actually reach the internet. 

      However, after I disabled advanced DMZ and let the Eero Pro install the latest firmware update (basically letting it just lease an internal private IP address from the Home Hub 3000 like any other device would), I was then able to get it working after I turned the advanced DMZ back on — although it did require a couple of reboots of both the Home Hub 3000 and the Eero Pro before it decided to give up its old private IP address and pick up the public address from the Home Hub 3000 instead.

      When configuring the advanced DMZ, also make sure that you're using the correct MAC address, as each of the two Ethernet ports on the Eero Pro has a different one (they appear to be one digit off in my case, which is probably the norm for all units). If you assign the MAC address that the Home Hub 3000 actually "sees" for the Eero you should be fine (you should see "Eero" on the list of devices in the DMZ screen), but once you've done that you have to make sure you always leave it plugged into the same Ethernet port. 

      Like
      • Oully
      • Oully
      • 2 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      jhollington Thank you so much, truly appreciate it!  When I think about it, I did try prior to installing the firmware update.  I will give it a try tonight

      Like
      • Oully
      • Oully
      • 2 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      jhollington I was able to get it to work right away.  That said, I had to unplug the gateway to move it and I just can't get it to connect anymore.  It either won't give up the internal private IP or won't connect to internet if it sees the public one.  Unfortunately, it seems to be impacting my wireless speedtests.  Have you had any issues since? Thanks

      Like
    • Oully I've had the same problem... It's very persnickety if you try to reconnect it, or even sometimes if it reboots after a software update, and it's hard to figure out what's going on exactly... it seems that once it's "offline" it's impossible to actually manage it from the app, even when you're connected directly to its Wi-Fi. I can't reboot it when it's offline, and in fact I can't even change it to use a static IP, as it refuses to save any settings at all — it's like the app is showing the last known settings but not actually communicating with the Eero, so it's extremely frustrating. 

      I think this may be why it still seems to be showing the old IP address, simply because the Eero app isn't actually reading the new settings — I rebooted my Bell Home Hub, and of course it got a new public IP, and according to its DHCP settings, it's even assigned it to the Eero, but the Eero refuses to connect to the Internet, and the app still shows the old static IP address, so it's hard to tell whether it's the app not showing the new settings or the Eero not actually updating itself with the new DHCP-assigned IP address that the HH3000 handed out. My guess is that it's the first scenario, since I can't save any changes to the configuration either — It seems as though the Eero app doesn't actually want to communicate directly with the Eero over Wi-Fi, but rather expects to work through Eero's cloud servers, so when Eero isn't connected, the app can't actually communicate with it properly. 

      In the end, going through the following steps seems to fix it whenever this does happen:

      1. On the Home Hub 3000, disable Advanced DMZ (you can leave the DMZ on, but uncheck the "Advanced DMZ" on the bottom. Be sure to click "Save" to confirm the change.
      2. Soft Reset the Eero Gateway by pressing the reset button until the LED turns yellow and then releasing it.
      3. When the Eero Gateway comes back, in should get an internal IP on whatever subnet the HH3K is configured to use.
      4. Re-enable "Advanced DMZ" on the HH3K.
      5. Reboot the HH3K (under Advanced->Resets->Restart)
      6. Soft Reset the Eero Gateway again (hold reset until LED turns yellow and release)

      In some cases, simply toggling advanced DMZ off and back on and then soft resetting the Eero makes it come back okay, but not always. The soft reset seems to force the Eero to pick up a new IP address, but it may need to pick up a different one (e.g. step #3) before it can come back to the original public IP. 

      It's a convoluted process, and I have no idea why the Eero needs to go through this, but there's obviously an incompatibility with how the HH3K implements Advanced DMZ and what the Eero gateway wants to see. It's definitely a problem Eero needs to solve, however, as I've used at least five other routers from different brands with the Advanced DMZ feature on the HH3K and never had a problem with any of those.

      One of these days when I have some time to kill, I may do a packet trace on the wire between the Eero Gateway and the HH3K to see if I can figure out what it is that the Eero is looking for in order to formally establish a connection, because it's obviously looking for something that no other router seems to care about.

      As for speed tests, the Eero definitely hampers my download speeds — I get around 600Mbps maximum on my Gigabit Fibe connection — but what's weird is that upload speeds are actually fine at just under 1Gbps (which is what I'd expect considering it's only got a Gigabit Ethernet port). For my purposes, I don't really care as my Wi-Fi speeds aren't going to be any better than that on 802.11ac anyway — even with my 802.11ax Netgear router, only my Wi-Fi 6 capable devices (iPhone 11 Pro Max and 2020 iPad Pro) even got close to those speeds, and that's when they were sitting right next to the router. I've dual-homed my MacBook, with my Wi-Fi connected to the Eero and my Ethernet connection going directly to the Home Hub 3000 so I can ensure maximum download speeds. 

      Like
  • PPPoE is really needed. Bridge mode is lacking all the eero plus features we paid extra for! Had I known this from the beginning I never would have bought a (3) eero pros. As it is it, eero is way overpriced, and nearly useless for a high speed connection. $500 for 98 Mbps wireless?! May sound fast, but 1/10 of the speed capable?

    Like 1
  • Whilst I appreciate  that the UK is a smaller  market than the US, it still has some 30 million households with an internet connection and just 20% of those are with Virgin Media (Cable TV and Broadband) so something like 25 million are likely on a DSL connection requiring support for PPPoE. Why would Eero consciously rule themselves out of such a large market? How they ever developed the firmware that rules out PPPoE is a mystery, but, those of you with a technical bent, would my idea of a Modem + (that is a standalone modem with the additional capability of handling the ISP ID process) work? It seems so simple and would presumably not need major work on the Eero firmware.

    I do also think that Amazon should be more upfront on their UK website, arguably their description might fall foul of our Trades Description laws. If so how embarrassing would that be for what is now their own product?

    Like
  • seems like without PPPoE my latest investment on eero Pro trio will be a bit of a waste of money since my ISP requires PPPoE connection and I don't want to bridge eero as I understand that would mean to loose a big part of it.

    Can someone please shed some light and help me get the best out of it? my internet is VDSL2 and I have a modem/router combo that can do the PPPoE but then act as a router or I can put this into bridge mode but a separate client most establish the PPPoE connection (that would have to be eero, but yep, it can't).

    I also have an airport extreme, that can do the PPPoE connection, but that would mean cheap modem (in bridge mode) -> Airport Extreme (acting as router 1) and then -> eero (either bridged or double NAT?)

    can someone explain what this double NAT means and what is the issue with it? 

    is the DMZ option a good way to get the best out of eero? (in an scenario with an exiting router)

    can I use my cheap modem as PPPoE client and router and then connect to it the eero (to eliminate the airport extreme out of the picture). Would this result in double NAT "issue?" 

    I am very confused as you can tell, any advice will be appreciated. thanks all.

    Like
    • jerrylion NAT, or Network Address Translation, is what allows multiple devices inside your network to share a single public IP address. In essence, everything on your home network has a different IP — usually something like 192.168.1.x — however your router has one public IP address that the rest of the internet sees. NAT basically translates those internal addresses to the single external address, while keeping an internal table of which addresses are going where so the return traffic from the internet can be mapped back to the proper internal IP addresses. 

      It's a slightly convoluted examples, but you can think of it like the mail room in a large office. When you send out mail from a company, you only put the company's address on it, and it goes out through the mail room, which keeps a log of which pieces of mail went out. When somebody sends a reply, it arrives at the mail room, and they know which desk to deliver it to internally. 

      Double NAT basically just means that this is happening twice. Since the Eero doesn't support PPPoE, it can't get its own public IP address from your DSL router, so it gets a private IP just like any other computer would have gotten directly from that router before you put in the Eero. However, now if you have devices connected to the Eero instead of your main DSL router, they're going to get yet another private IP address, so the Eero has to translate that to its "public" address (which is still a private address on the outer network), and then your DSL router has to translate that again to the real public IP address.

      In practical terms, this adds a small amount of network latency (which is negligible for most people's needs — it's something you'd likely only care about if you're a serious online gamer), but it also makes it harder for certain services to work across both routers. Making VPN connections is probably one of the big challenges with double NAT, but some online games can have issues as well, and it's much more difficult to open ports into your internal network when you want to do things like sharing remote access to your computers. However, for everyday browsing and surfing, it should make no difference at all.

      If you do need to share internal services, you can mitigate some of this by using the standard "DMZ" feature on your main DSL router and pointing it to the IP address of the Eero. This has the effect of taking all inbound traffic and sending it to the Eero. You'll still be using two layers of NAT, so it won't eliminate all of the challenges, but it does mean that things like VoIP services and online games that want to open ports into your network via things like UPnP should be able to work properly, plus if you want to share something like a file server or media server with the outside world, you'll only need to configure the port forwarding on the Eero itself, rather than having to set up port forwarding in both places. 

      Like
  • There are only two options: you can either double NAT or Bridge the Eero router. Im not sure why they will not implement this feature because you can only sign up for the the security+ service if the router is not on bridge mode. Which means they are missing out on the opportunity to make the product more profitable. This has got to be a hardware restriction of sorts otherwise they would have implemented it already as it makes sense financially, or maybe they already have enough cash.. no need to make more.

    Like
  • I would really like to see direct PPPoE support as well, as I think it would make things much easier. However, in the absence of this, Eero should really work with major DSL ISPs that rely on PPPoE, like CenturyLink and Bell Fibe to provide customers with detailed instructions for how their various routers and gateways can be optimally configured to work with Eero without PPPoE.

    I realize that Eero can't necessarily cover every possible ISP, but there are some pretty big ones around the world that still use PPPoE, and it would be a big help if customers knew that they had alternatives to the much more limited bridge mode. It appears from this thread that CL offers an advanced DMZ mode, and I know from personal experience that Bell Fibe does the same, as least with their latest Home Hub models. However, these are not things that most Eero customers should be expected to need to figure out for themselves, especially considering that Eero is targeted at customers who want a simple plug-and-play solution. 

    Step-by-step guides for configuring Eero with major PPPoE ISPs would go a long way to making those users more comfortable purchasing and configuring the product without being left scratching their heads or facing the limitations of bridge mode or double-NAT.

    Like 2
  • When Google nest implemented PPPoE on their system was it via a software update or did it come via a hardware update?

    Like
      • Alan
      • Alan
      • 2 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      messenger 

      I do not have the definitive answer for you but my search on the Google Support pages shows that PPPoE is supported on both Google Wifi and its successor Nest. There are queries over the implementation of IPv6 working with PPPoE and Google's response is to say that the issue was fixed by their firmware update in August 2018. The PPPoE setting is available in their apps WAN settings page. It seems that support for PPPoE has been there for some years if not from the outset. 

      However there is some evidence that users have struggled to use IPv6 and PPPoE together, perhaps there are some settings issues on the users' set up. 

      Like
  • Any new update on this request?  I see it’s been logged for quite sometime now and this would be very beneficial. I am considering a switch for this feature alone. I’ve loved my Eero but it limits my setup.

    Like
      • Alan
      • Alan
      • 2 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      Toddyfunk 

      About a year ago eero support posted this on the thread above: Since PPPoE requires a fundamentally different firmware structure, there are a lot of challenges implementing it into a system like eero. 

      Perhaps they  are still looking at their options but it does not seem a priority for them. Maybe a major firmware update might mean that it would not be backwards compatible. Why they designed the product in this way is a question for the original designers I guess.

      Like
      • sjeffries
      • sjeffries
      • 2 mths ago
      • 1
      • Reported - view

      Alan 
      I must disagree. The firmware structure does not need to change. The firmware needs the ability to send PPPoE authentication at interval. This standard is rather old and well documented. The only challenge is the willingness to implement the feature. 

      Like 1
      • Alan
      • Alan
      • 2 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      sjeffries 

      I was only copying and pasting eero's earlier response. I do not know who is right or who is telling us the whole story. All I do know is that, without PPPoE authentication support, set up seems too difficult for the average user and possibly some of eero's features would be lost. So I will not be buying the eero as I wanted (unless of course they do implement the necessary support!).

      Like
      • sjeffries
      • sjeffries
      • 2 mths ago
      • 1
      • Reported - view

      Alan I agree completely. I am also rather frustrated by lack of support for PPPoE. This has complicated my home solution and made it slow and less reliable. It would be nice if the telephone companies would modernize their authentication infrastructure and deprecate PPPoE, but I that I fear would take an act of God. There are too many telco's around the globe that still require the protocol.

      Like 1
      • Toddyfunk
      • Toddyfunk
      • 2 mths ago
      • 1
      • Reported - view

      Alan honestly. I am not looking for a response from a member. I'm looking for a response from Eero or at the very least add my name to the long list of users looking for this functionality. But it's looking like I just need to migrate to a different router as I doubt anything comes from this old topic...

      Like 1
  • Eero pro 6 is out, does it support PPPoE?

    Like
      • soeun
      • soeun
      • 2 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      PPFS I hope so.  Can someone confirm? I will preorder right away if so.

      Like
  • well i have centurylink fiber and this would be great.. but as i see another top 5 three year old request brushed along

    Like 1
  • I am based in the UK where PPPoE is widely used, I recently purchased an Eero setup assuming it would be supported (maybe I should have checked first, but it is supported by almost all competitors and most people are surprised Eero launched in the UK without it).

    I have to run my Eero in bridge mode as a result of this which is a great shame, PPPoE would make a huge different to me, and many other UK customers.

    I'm surprised this still hasn't been implemented 3 years after this feature request was made, I am considering whether or not I should return my Eero as a result.

    Like 2
  • I estimate that about 80% of UK broadband users may connect to an ISP that requires PPPoE identification process. As far as I have been unable to ascertain all mainstream broadband routers support PPPoE with one exception, eero. I still believe that eero made a conscious decision not to support PPPoE, but it is odd that they seem not to want to address this issue (and my hopes that a new model ready for Christmas 2020 would support it have seemingly been dashed). If the eero6 did support PPPoE I feel sure that they would have said so by now.

    I think that Amazon are complicit in this as on some products the webpage has a section "We want you to know", for example on the Echo Studio speaker it says that 3D music is only available with their Music HD service. As they do not seem to have anything similar on the eero products maybe you have a case for a refund.

    Like 2
  • Having lots of problems running Eero in front of my ISP-provided router, and given the international rollout I'm surprised this continues to be ignored by Eero. I'd like nothing more than to buy a modem with a PPPoE bridge and run the Eero seamlessly, but at the moment it really takes the shine of the product for me, which is a shame as in every other respect it's one of the best such setups I've used.

    Like 1
  • +1

    Incredibly frustrating how much of a blind eye eero is taking with this, no replies in over a year. Probably going to return this for another mesh system.

    Like
  • +1 I just signed up to vote for this request, It is an important request that is leaving many people behind. I just bought the new eero Pro 6(3 Pack) and I will probably return it as it doesn't have PPPoE support and the alternative solutions provided by eero is either going to cost me the advanced features or cause network issues due to double NATing. Just a shame eero is ignoring this request for 3 years now as everything else in the eero pro looks promising! 

    Like 1
  • weaves Can you give us any updates regarding this feature? It has been 3 years since it was requested and you just released a new eero that have the same issue. If you are not planning to added please let us know so we can go ahead and get another router that works for us.

    Thanks in advance :)

    Like 1
  • I just switched to CenturyLink fiber (super fast, much better than xfinity). Very surprised that Eero doesn't support vlan + pppoe so I can remove the century link modem. My upload/download speeds are impacted by having to route through the centurylink provided modem.

     

    At minimum, it would be helpful to have ISP-specific advice on how to configure the ISP-provided router to eliminate speed impact as much as possible.

    Like 1
Vote192 Follow
  • Status Under Consideration
  • 192 Votes
  • 13 days agoLast active
  • 224Replies
  • 6932Views
  • 135 Following

Need Help? We're here for you!

We're big on support, and we want to make sure you always have the best eero experience possible. Here are several resources you can use if you ever need our help!


Quick links

Community Guidelines

Help Center

Contact eero support

@eerosupport

eero.com