Denash97227 I’ve tried that. NAT Loopback/Hairpin NAT doesn’t work with this setup. If you don’t need it then you’re golden.  But it’s a requirement for me. 

a.j.singh Good luck, my friend. For me, it allowed me to finally run the Eero's the way they want to run and w/o buying add'tl hardware.  

Denash97227 I can't stand the CL routers, my last one kept losing its connection. I could probably setup a DMZ with my third-party router but I'd need to figure out how.

ttnicky I'm happy to say my CL fiber service has been rock solid for 3 years - up until yesterday, of course 🤣

Denash97227 lol, I am out of town for vacation so I don't know if I was affected or not. I checked the app once I saw the headlines and it reported I was online, but ...?

a.j.singh Can I ask was is the reason you use NAT loopback/Hairpin?  Routing is still new to me and I still don't know why most folks want to get rid of their Bridge or NAT setup.  Is the eero's gateway hub speed or range being bottled neck in any of these modes?

Jun I get 950+ Mbps up and down through my Asus AC68U.  I have VLAN tagging enabled so I don’t need to use my ISP-supplied modem.  And of course I have my Eero system (6 2nd Gen eero pro’s) bridged.  If your router needs to be rebooted that often you may want to look for another router or perhaps put a cooling fan on your current router to see if that improves stability.  But of course you’re right it’s a shame Eero doesn’t support PPPoE. I don’t expect they ever will.  Life is too short to wait for them to get to it. Just expect to need a stable wired router and use Eero in bridged mode. 

a.j.singh Problem is that my fiber line plugs into a NTT ONU box which is configured by the ISP for PPPoE so I cannot replace the converter/modem.  Therefore, I need something that can be PPPoE configured such as my TP-Link router and bridge my eero to through it. My TP-Link router has been dumbed down into a switch since I turned off the antenas and other features. I'm begining to wonder if my problem is my ISP but can't say for sure since PPPoE is not supported.

As mentioned, I swapped out my family's ISP supplied modem (D-Link Wireless AC Smartbeam 1750) which was only outputting 60mps with a 2nd Gen eeros and 2 beacons. This resulted in 200-250mbps on average.  I was sold on it's drastic improvement so decided to go back into BBuy and get one for myself since they don't sell eeros out here in Japan. My shock when figured out the hard way that PPPoE was not supported. I've spent that last two days thinkering with both Bridged and NAT'ing.  Some devices connect to the beacons but get no internet access and sometimes the bridge falls apart and I need to reboot my TP-Link router.

Jun Many routers can't handle the simultaneous 1Gb throughout and so output much less (300-600 Mbps). Even though your provider is not CL, you can see descriptions of this problem if you look at forums geared to replacing CL modem for CL fiber (that's where I stumbled on the info). Many people have reported success with the wired mikrotik hex router. If you Google "CenturyLink fiber Mikrotik" you should find the relevant information. I don't have a Gb plan, but went through the same setup: fiber to ISP-supplied ONT gateway box, cat5e to Mikrotik router to handle the vlan tagging and PPPoE, to eero in bridge mode. People do report full Gb speeds with this setup (like I said, I don't have a Gb plan so can't personally confirm).

Thanks for reaching out yonathan55 , we appreciate your interest in this feature. Since PPPoE requires a fundamentally different firmware structure, there are a lot of challenges implementing it into a system like eero. That said, I'm happy to confirm that it's something we're still actively considering, and we'll be sure to announce any new developments on that front. Until then, we appreciate all the great feedback y'all have been giving us!

Kindly,
Drew, eero Community Team

Bunny they deserv this but you know Amazon jut bought eero few months ago :) so probably next version Alexa mesh will have !

garretblack I switched to CL after I bought these and learned the hard way about PPPoE and VLAN tagging. It used to really bother me and I wished I'd had a competitor's product that did it all in one (e.g., Google WiFi). Now though, I don't even think about it. The biggest pain point for me was having to use CL's crappy hardware in tandem with eero, but once I figured out a reliable alternative to CL hardware I don't really think about it anymore. My system runs pretty smooth and I have just gotten used to not having the network control I used to have when eero ran standalone. I don't think Bridge Mode is worth the $500 I paid for the eero's, but aside from the cost (which I swallowed 3 years ago), my network runs fine. Would I purchase the product today? Absolutely not. But, I did purchase it and the cost is paid and it works, albeit not how I wanted it to. For the first year or two I had hope eero would address this, but after 3 years and no movement, and the sale to Amazon, I think it's pretty unlikely I'll ever see that functionality in my current eero's. My recommendation is to think twice before buying if someone has CL/PPPoE. There are other products at similar price points that will work with that setup. Will there be issues? Sure, but with Eero you have Bridge Mode and extra hardware with limited functionality. So which is better? That's a personal decision.

garretblack Edit: I see, like me, you already have Eero so it's not an issue of whether to buy or not, just what to do if you make the switch to CL. My rant still stands, but may not be of interest to you ;)

ttnicky did you try putting your eero in the dmz aka double bat? Leaves the Cl hardware there but allows normal eero functions.  People report it works well.  I’m switching on wed so I’ll find out.