In reply to a post by BatBoy:

Plusnet is highly unlikely to ever use WBC, nor do BT Consumer use WBC. This is a myth I see again and again on other forums that really needs to be put to bed.

Why on earth would a BT owned company use a third party (eg Murphx) for backhaul transit when BT own what is supposedly one of the best CORE networks with the most redundancy. It would be like British airways flying all their passengers on Virgin Planes

Please give credit to where you lifted most of that from (i.e. Kitz)!

In reference to forum.kitz.co.uk/index.php/topic,16711.msg308130.html#msg308130:

Plusnet is highly unlikely to ever use WBC, nor do BT retail use WBC. This is a myth I see again and again on other forums that really needs to be put to bed.

Why on earth would a BT owned company use a third party (eg Murphx) for backhaul transit when BT own what is supposedly one of the best CORE networks with the most redundancy. As Ive said elsewhere, it would be akin to British airways flying all their paying passengers on Virgin Planes. They'd be paying their competitor for transit when they own their own perfectly good routing. :no:

Edited by jelv (Thu 07-Jan-16 09:42:22)

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

... it seems very likely this is a move to WBC dedicated (which is still BTw core network but not the shared MSIL's).

WBMC, not WBC.

ok boss, edited.

Not sure if I should be happy with this or not. At the moment things are fine, but it is when they start mucking around with things that they normally go belly up.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

I agree in the light of stuff I have seen since that they aren't going to WBC, but what has Murphx got to do with it?

I have no idea sorry,

Now you've just made yourself look foolish by copy/pasting someone else's post with out understanding it (or as you should have done making it clear you were quoting).

If they had of been going to WBC (as some others had suggested was a possibility) that means using a network other than BT's for the back haul. Murphx would then be one of the options.

Edit: I've just seen that you've edited your post to give appropriate credit.

Edited by jelv (Thu 07-Jan-16 14:22:21)

It wasn't showing as a quote at the time I asked . I assumed it was a comment from yourself, as I hadn't read the relevant kitz thread.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

It wasn't showing as a quote at the time I asked . I assumed it was a comment from yourself, as I hadn't read the relevant kitz thread.

Does that change the question though?

In reply to a post by jelv:

[insults ignored]
If they had of been going to WBC (as some others had suggested was a possibility) that means using a network other than BT's for the back haul. Murphx would then be one of the options.

According to this, BT is responsible for the backhaul, hence my response

In reference to www.kitz.co.uk/adsl/wbc_wbmc.htm#WBC_WBMC_difference:

WBC is intended as a replacement for DataStream which is when a service provider rented a Virtual Path from the DSLAM backhaul to the ISPs PoP. Often the amount of VP bandwidth rented on each DSLAM was insufficient and congestion would be common. With WBC, BTw is still responsible for backhaul routing

In reply to a post by jelv:

If they had of been going to WBC (as some others had suggested was a possibility) that means using a network other than BT's for the back haul. Murphx would then one of the options.

Why?

I don't believe that. Which is why I queried what turns out to be kitz's opinion.

WBC goes from the exchange to the 20 BT Wholesale nodes, using WBC backhaul. It leaves the BTW core via the MSILs. What happens after that requires further rented fibre from someone, with BTW or Openreach or other dark fibre available.

I'm not too happy with kitz's description of the difference between shared and dedicated WBMC wrt onward from the MSILs, unless with WBMC the ISP can only take BTW onward backhaul from the node, but need to do more research to make sure. It could just be a lack of clarity. Particularly this summary:-

WBC, Dedicated WBMC & Shared WBMC in a nutshell

At this point if you are still wondering what is the difference is between Shared WMBC, Dedicated WBMC and WBC? In simple terms the answer is:-
� WBC is when the ISP connects via their own or third party network from each of the core locations.
�Dedicated WBMC uses BTw's core 21CN network to transport traffic from each of the core locations to the ISP's location(s) of choice. This still allows the ISP to have control of bandwidth traffic at the regional core locations.
�Shared WBMC is when BTw manage bandwidth between multiple ISPs over the whole 21CN network presenting the ISP with a single host link.

For starters, on all WBMC, I believe the ISP receives traffic from specific BTW nodes, as we used to see with the utilisation graphs Plusnet used to publish - with nodes and host links at them being added as the customer base rose.

The main difference simply seems to be that the MSIL bandwidth at each node is guaranteed.