That's mostly the Digital Region area, plus a couple of bits of Rutland Telecom, right?

Certainly SLU and Vectoring would appear to be contra-indicated, so it is interesting to watch whether the players (Ofcom included) will push the technology (and speed) advance over the desire for competition or vice-versa. And to watch how the competing attitudes change over time.

In Digital Region definite overlaps and there may be in Rutland.
I think there is a scattering of the odd cab here and there elsewhere that I've forgot details of

At Essendine (Rutland telecom) Openreach didn't put in a duplicate cab, though they did beat Rutland Telecom to it at nearby Ryhall.

Non-vectored lines in a vectored bundle impairs vectoring, AIUI, but doesn't affect standard VDSL2 ? So at worst a non-vectoring co-sited cabinet would deny access to the higher speeds.

In reply to a post by yarwell:

Non-vectored lines in a vectored bundle impairs vectoring, AIUI, but doesn't affect standard VDSL2 ? So at worst a non-vectoring co-sited cabinet would deny access to the higher speeds.

That's my understanding too.

In the end, it would depend on whether your most significant disturbers happen to be on the same SLU cabinet, or a different one.

Search for MR-257 from the Broadband Forum. It's a reasonable summary of the state of vectoring, 6 months old.

yes there is 3 different categories.

vectored
vector friendly - this stops impairing vectored lines but doesnt benefit itself from vectoring, the link yarwell posted with proposed low cost solutions to providers would allow all lines to become vector friendly without CPE upgrades but of course still requires cabinet equipment to be upgraded be it via firmware or hardware.
legacy - where we are now

personally I think if in situations where openreach has 2 cabinets it probably wont be a huge problem, the bigger risk from where I sit is if somehow SLU takes off, also as well if hg and eci cannot develop a solution to allow lines to become vector friendly without CPE replacements.

I wonder if the current modems already are vectoring-capable. IIRC the SIN specification for lines-only kit to be used specify it.

exactly the point I mentioned, glad someone else noticed

Thanks for the replies, information and to wombat, roberto others as well.

The reason I asked the question was, because of what PN told me. I originally called PN to ask them to turn off DLM on my line. It should of been or be as, easy as, asking for interleave to be turned on or off but it's not.

At first PN seemed sure it could be done but then they told me, that it is not possible to turn DLM off, on Fibre but can be done on ADSL. I then questioned why such a ridiculous restriction in place, to be told, that it's because Ofcom requires them to.

In my view DLM should only be used in the first ten day training period or when absolutely necessary. It should be changed.

Oh well. Anyway I will let you all and Mr saffron continue, as it's getting a bit above my head now. Lol

Edited by deleted (Sat 05-Jan-13 17:59:08)

ofcom dont require them to, its a business decision made by openreach to supply it with DLM always on to plusnet, and unless plusnet do SLU they have to supply it that way to you.

One of the problems seems to be that some people (unfortunately including some ISP support staff) incorrectly refer to the VDSL2 modem as a router.

They don't all seem to have got into the habit yet of distinguishing between the two for VDSL2 services.

It may be prudent to always ask if support staff actually mean the modem when they mention the router.

Another issue is that the modem can resync very quickly on the fly to allow DLM to take action in either increasing or decreasing sync speed, adjusting Interleaving up or down accordingly.

ISPs don't always see these resyncs as they are too quick to need to initiate a new PPP session.
In those cases, they believe a line is stable as those types of resync do not register in their logs/graphs.

That was the problem I had before unlocking my HG612 modem & developing the monitoring/graphing tool when I had to "argue" with Plusnet that my connection was very unstable when they claimed it was perfectly stable.

For a while, my connection resynced many times per hour, yet not one drop was seen by Plusnet.

No doubt BT could see the resyncs, but Plusnet would not contact them because as far as they were concerned, the connection remained stable.

This also has a side effect of resyncs not always triggering a Plusnet Line Speed profile adjustment, so users can end up stuck on a low Plusnet profile with high sync speed and low throughput or conversely still have a high Plusnet Line Speed profile despite the modem being in sync at a much lower speed.

This all makes any fault diagnosis incredibly difficult without access to an unlocked modem (preferably the HG612 as we can easily see, log and graph changing connection conditions).

This issue is not exclusive to Plusnet.