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.
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.
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.
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.....
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.
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.
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.
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?
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
+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!
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.