Fiber optics: Industry groups oppose regulation on network termination point

The dispute over the freedom of choice of terminal equipment for passive fiber optic networks, which has been enshrined in the Telecommunications Act (TKG) since 2026, is entering the next round. The broadband associations Anga, Breko, Buglas and VATM have lodged an appeal against the Federal Network Agency's decision in January, according to which the free choice of terminal equipment at the network termination point also applies to fiber optic networks. This was announced by the associations of network operators on Saturday.

In mid-2023, the associations had applied to the regulatory authority to define the modem installed by the operators as the network termination point for the passive optical fiber networks commonly used in Germany. This would allow users to install their own hardware behind the modem.

The applicants justified this with the fact that addressing the end customer is only "possible at the Ethernet interface of the Optical Network Termination (ONT) –, i.e. the fiber optic modem –, and cannot take place upstream". In addition, incompatible devices could interfere not only with the customer's own connection, but also with numerous other connections. Providers could take recourse against those responsible if necessary.

Problems not proven

In its decision, however, the Federal Network Agency doubted that the providers were also concerned with user interests. According to the Agency, the applicants have not substantiated the "alleged interoperability and security problems caused by access at the passive network termination point".

According to their posting, the associations calling for a re-examination "view the regulation on freedom of choice of terminal equipment at the network termination point (ONT) with concern". Their concerns were never aimed at abolishing router freedom, they reiterate. "The aim was and is to ensure maximum reliability and fast fault clearance."

"What is important for the best possible customer service is the provider's definition of the ONT, not the router," explain the industry representatives. In its current decision, the authority has disregarded, among other things, "that even with combined devices (router and ONT in one housing) provided by the provider, the end user can continue to use their ONT and/or router within the scope of the specified interface descriptions".

Security gaps also in operator devices

The Association of Telecommunications Terminal Equipment Manufacturers (VTKE), on the other hand, described the regulator's decision as a "necessary positive signal for digitization in Germany". "Fiber optics is the future," explained this association. Consumers will continue to need the right to "choose and use energy-efficient, high-quality end devices that meet their needs".

Advocates of free software still see a need for action at European level, even after the Federal Network Agency's announcement against mandatory routers. "Since router freedom represents the hardware level of net neutrality, it is an important political demand", the Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) recently emphasized. Unlike in Germany, router freedom is not yet a reality in several EU countries. The past has also shown "that even the proprietary devices of operators have security vulnerabilities". Furthermore, in the nine years since the law came into force in Germany, no significant number of security incidents have been identified.

(olb)