Where has my speed gone?

past few weeks my connection has been useless.

Sync speed is in my sig and I'm getting no errors at all.

But my throughput and everyone else in my area are getting poor service

Current speed.



Download speedachieved during the test was - 2.02 Mbps
For your connection, the acceptable range of speeds is 16 Mbps-0 Mbps.
IP Profile for your line is - 77.43 Mbps


Upload speed achieved during the test was - 17.5Mbps
Additional Information:
Upstream Rate IP profile on your line is - 20 Mbps

current stats

Attainable rate (kbit/s) 94144 32975
SNR margin (dB) 9.5 15.1
Line attenuation (dB) 0 0
Output power (dBmV) 13.1 2



Line rate (kbit/s) 79999 20000
CRC errors 0 0 0
FEC errors 0 0 0
HEC errors 0 0 0

Why should I even pay for this?

So what has the response to your fault report been?

Is the phone OK by the way?

yeah phone fine.

I don't believe this fault lies on my Dside or cab tbh.

So what has the response to your fault report been?

An engineer is coming out on the 10th of January, but I don't think It will solve anything, this is a much wider issue.

That should make it easier to find.

It will slowly start getting better after midnight and be back to normal by 1 to 2am, then back to rubbish around 5pm onwards

Which exchange?

Swadlincote.

No problem showing here . Looks a bit like BT Retail given those times.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

Looks a bit like BT Retail given those times.

Given the lack of data I'm pretty sure nobody knows yet. Unless we have some other WBC and non WBC users with FTTC on the same exchange on this forum, we won't know.

I have run some tests on my friends connection different cab but same exchange, my parents and brothers connections who are on the next exchange and a all experiencing the same issue as me.

But my other brother is on Sky FTTC is not getting the issue, so leads me to believe it's a BT congestion issue.

Sounds like there is a problem with one of the fibre lines going in/out of the metro node

If you don't know what a metro node is see attached pic below. Several exchanges uses each metro node.

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/ispnews/data/upimages/sub...

Edited by robertcrowther (Wed 02-Jan-13 12:35:20)

Apart from the Sky LLU, are the others all BT Retail, or various BT Wholesale?

I think there is two, one located in Nottingham and other is Leicester

BT infinty (BT retail)

Hi lockyatlrg,

Let us know on this thread how you get on with the engineer visit, if you still have problems after the appointment we can take a closer look at your connection if you want.

Thanks,

Stephanie

In reply to a post by lockyatlrg:

I have run some tests on my friends connection different cab but same exchange, my parents and brothers connections who are on the next exchange and a all experiencing the same issue as me.

But my other brother is on Sky FTTC is not getting the issue, so leads me to believe it's a BT congestion issue.

Good tests - sounds like a WBC issue for that exchange - probably the PlusNet site not yet updated or some other issue. Sky & TalkTalk only FTTC ISPs that don't use WBC.

What does tracert show ?

Had a similar issue a year or so ago, whinged bitterly to BT Retail, who prevaricated, said nowt was wrong, but eventually fixed it, still claiming it was an issue with the router ...... clearly though it's virtual path had changed, hence the return of my speed.

Your diagnosis sounds correct, so I doubt there will be much the engineer can do, they don't really look at through put speed issues tbh.

there is no node in leics for BTw, one is in peterborough tho.

Try reconnecting to ppp as there is various gateways and nodes supplying each exchange.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

there is no node in leics for BTw, .

Yes there is.

From that diagram there are metro nodes, (the type of node in question), between all exchanges and the BT Cloud. Are you thinking of the WBC interconnect nodes the other side of the cloud where the handover to ISPs takes place?

I am yes, so there is 2 nodes involved then?

But incidently I am in leics as well and I dont have the speed issues the OP has so if leics does have a metro node thats not the problem.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

there is no node in leics for BTw, one is in peterborough tho.

Try reconnecting to ppp as there is various gateways and nodes supplying each exchange.

Yeah there is one at Nottingham and Leicester BT op already confirmed that when I was talking to them.

I have tried reconnecting loads of times getting different paths, when the throughput drops the ping to first hop increases from 4-5ms to 40 to 50ms.

Edited by lockyatlrg (Fri 04-Jan-13 15:51:28)

Day1

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/share/3a816e60ce2...

Day 2

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/share/348b023149c...

Day 3

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/share/5ed0d1eb6b4...

Edited by lockyatlrg (Fri 04-Jan-13 15:57:31)

do traceroutes so we can see where the jitter starts.

here is mine from leics.

My Broadband Ping

When the connection is fine (early morning and day) my ping to first hop is 5ms when the connection is bad it increases 10fold.

I would just like to add that I did post on BT fourms about this, but it got into a heated argument with the tool ratty and hes a openreach eng.

http://community.bt.com/t5/BT-Infinity/76mb-yeah-rig...

Edited by lockyatlrg (Sat 05-Jan-13 20:15:05)

Other posters in that thread seem unimpressed by his claims. I don't think he's an openreach eng somehow.

Any problems tonight? Looks OK to me.

Edited by deleted (Sat 05-Jan-13 22:05:23)

The connection is terrible max is 4mbs down and 18up

He is an Openreach eng I asked one of the mods.

Well, they only think that because he says he is. His knowledge doesn't seem up to it.

What's a tracert look like to say, the Beeb?

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms READYSHARE [192.168.1.1]
2 7 ms 5 ms 5 ms 217.32.144.162
3 106 ms 96 ms 111 ms 217.32.144.190
4 8 ms 8 ms 8 ms 213.120.181.58
5 8 ms 9 ms 9 ms 217.41.169.147
6 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 217.41.169.109
7 7 ms 7 ms 7 ms acc2-10GigE-9-3-0.sf.21cn-ipp.bt.net [109.159.25
.223]
8 19 ms 16 ms 15 ms core1-te0-2-2-0.ilford.ukcore.bt.net [109.159.25
.145]
9 15 ms 13 ms 15 ms peer2-xe3-3-0.telehouse.ukcore.bt.net [109.159.2
4.231]
10 20 ms 20 ms 18 ms 194.74.65.42
11 * * * Request timed out.
12 20 ms 17 ms 17 ms ae0.er01.cwwtf.bbc.co.uk [132.185.254.93]
13 16 ms 19 ms 16 ms 132.185.255.165
14 19 ms 19 ms 22 ms bbc-vip012.cwwtf.bbc.co.uk [212.58.246.91]

It's starting to recover now, speedtest up to 30mbs.

Wow, what's hop 3 all about?

lol at his replies I only read the first 2-3 pages but they were unreal.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

Wow, what's hop 3 all about?

Well it's BT, and so early in the routing could be the metro node mentioned earlier?

According to RIPE, it's a POP.
And it's still under stress.

Well it's pretty much the first Hop too that goes tits up, the ping just gets higher and higher and the throughput tails off with it.

Bt want to send an engineer to my house to test the line, but I feel this will achieve nothing.

It's part of the fault-finding process, so you may as well humour them.
Is your tracert still the same? I think they need to reboot the odd server...

you still havent posted a useful tracert, post one when your tbb graph is messed up or when you seeing slow speeds.

a intermediate hop with high pings that dont follow through just ignore, you looking for the pings to be higher sustained.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

a intermediate hop with high pings that dont follow through just ignore, you looking for the pings to be higher sustained.

Not many people know how to read a traceroute

Jeez, just read that thread you linked to, what a plonker !

Pity the thread is locked - unless it continues elsewhere.

I would have loved to see Ratty tell us what happens to the FTTC when it reaches the user's exchange, and where and how it is handed over to the ISPs.

The poster called Deathtrap3000 seems very knowledgeable though.

He's all over the forum like a rash.

Do you reckon he is an Openreach engineer, from posts elsewhere from that thread? Scary if he is, though I don't suppose it really affects his job.

He was probably a GABL, WSAS, WOPR or DCLN! Certaily not one of the old TO, STech or even TOIT group!


Zarjaz will know what I mean.

You forgot "DORK".

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

You forgot "DORK".

No, they were normally DCLNs!

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

Pity the thread is locked - unless it continues elsewhere.

I would have loved to see Ratty tell us what happens to the FTTC when it reaches the user's exchange, and where and how it is handed over to the ISPs.

Why are you bitching about people instead of solving the problem.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

He's all over the forum like a rash.

From what I have been told, he's there from Openreach because there is so much misinformation and bitching on the forums.

With the Issue I am having, it seems more widespread with more and more threads popping up on BT's forums about the exact same issue I'm having.

Open-reach will be hear tomorrow - but we all know this will be a complete waste of time, but I have to play the game at least once and humour them.

But I will be getting a call from executive level complaints and I will point him to the threads on BT and my own findings with BBQM and pathping results.

I'm hopeful this will be resolved, but what concerns me in the exact timing of the issue. 6pm to 1:30am, it's like clockwork and might point to throttling on the network.

In reply to a post by lockyatlrg:

With the Issue I am having, it seems more widespread with more and more threads popping up on BT's forums about the exact same issue I'm having.

Open-reach will be hear tomorrow - but we all know this will be a complete waste of time, but I have to play the game at least once and humour them.

But I will be getting a call from executive level complaints and I will point him to the threads on BT and my own findings with BBQM and pathping results.

I'm hopeful this will be resolved, but what concerns me in the exact timing of the issue. 6pm to 1:30am, it's like clockwork and might point to throttling on the network.

If there is a problem with one or more of the fibre lines at the metro node then it could be that Openreach or BT are throttling the network.

If they are, they are throttling to a point that's unusable and I have to resort to tethering my three connection (I get 12mb on that) last night I was getting 50kb/s download speed and 18mb upload speed.

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

He's all over the forum like a rash.

From what I have been told, he's there from Openreach because there is so much misinformation and bitching on the forums.

And

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

Why are you bitching about people instead of solving the problem.

Have you read Ratty's posts in the thread we are talking about?

1 - If you haven't, then

2 - shaddupda da face !!!

3 - If you have, and can't see what arrant nonsense and incorrect information he is posting, then "goto 2".

Have you read any other of my or BatBoy's posts in this thread, or ever?

There is no way he is officially there from Openreach. He is the cause of all the bitching I saw in that thread, because he is so utterly wrong it beggars belief!

Edited by RobertoS (Wed 09-Jan-13 14:07:40)

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

He's all over the forum like a rash.

From what I have been told, he's there from Openreach because there is so much misinformation and bitching on the forums.

And

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

Why are you bitching about people instead of solving the problem.

Have you read Ratty's posts in the thread we are talking about?

1 - If you haven't, then

2 - shaddupda da face !!!

3 - If you have, and can't see what arrant nonsense and incorrect information he is posting, then "goto 2".

Have you read any other of my or BatBoy's posts in this thread, or ever?

There is no way he is officially there from Openreach. He is the cause of all the bitching I saw in that thread, because he is so utterly wrong it beggars belief!

I have read some of your posts on this thread and to be honest I don't think the advice of looking at the VP's using this link very helpful http://usertools.plus.net/exchanges/?exchange=Swadli...

You may ask why? Those VP's are not used with FTTC. This is the problem here, there are two forums where people are giving wrong information and bitching about people from another forum.

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

I have read some of your posts on this thread and to be honest I don't think the advice of looking at the VP's using this link very helpful http://usertools.plus.net/exchanges/?exchange=Swadli...

You may ask why? Those VP's are not used with FTTC.

Ooops!
You have a good point if that's correct. I've never seen that mentioned before, so I'll take your word for it.

Are they used for WBC?

This is the problem here, there are two forums where people are giving wrong information and bitching about people from another forum.

The bitching about Ratty was basically to give belated support to the OP here, as he was rightly quite critical there of the advice Ratty was giving to him.

Your earlier post here about the metro nodes was useful. It looks likely to be the issue for the OP. Your point I have just dealt with here is also useful. Thank you.

Your "bitching" reply to me earlier, (there is no other word to describe it), was totally out of order and unnecessary.

I think I already posted its probably not metro nodes.

I think its a local exchange issue.

But since he is yet to post a useful traceroute we are just guessing.

Also I am curious why people think WBC nodes arent used for BTw FTTC.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

Also I am curious why people think WBC nodes arent used for BTw FTTC.

I don't think anyone has said they think that in this thread. Have I missed something?

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

Also I am curious why people think WBC nodes arent used for BTw FTTC.

I think the point made was the Virtual Path's (listed on the PlusNet User Tools page) might not be used for WBC.

Which is a good question - anyone read the appropriate SIN or know the number?

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

I think I already posted its probably not metro nodes.

I think its a local exchange issue.

But since he is yet to post a useful traceroute we are just guessing.

Also I am curious why people think WBC nodes arent used for BTw FTTC.

All I know is that the VP paths are not used in the GEA network.

Edited by robertcrowther (Wed 09-Jan-13 18:33:16)

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

I don't think WBC nodes are used in the NGA network.

Two separate things. The NGA access network is the Openreach bit between the home and the exchange, either full fibre end to end (FTTP/FTTH), or the hybrid fibre and VDSL (FTTC).

Once you get to the exchange Openreach hand over to the wholesale provider of choice, the Openreach product is called GEA - and the wholesale provider can be BT Wholesale's WBC, Sky's platform, or TalkTalk's wholesale platform. (I wonder if anyone else will join this trio).

I would be very surprised if BT Wholesale's WBC has been redesigned. Pretty sure Sky won't have redesigned their backhaul network, neither TalkTalk wholesale.

In reply to a post by jchamier:

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

I don't think WBC nodes are used in the NGA network.

Two separate things. The NGA access network is the Openreach bit between the home and the exchange, either full fibre end to end (FTTP/FTTH), or the hybrid fibre and VDSL (FTTC).

Once you get to the exchange Openreach hand over to the wholesale provider of choice, the Openreach product is called GEA - and the wholesale provider can be BT Wholesale's WBC, Sky's platform, or TalkTalk's wholesale platform. (I wonder if anyone else will join this trio).

Sorry I did a typo

I would be very surprised if BT Wholesale's WBC has been redesigned. Pretty sure Sky won't have redesigned their backhaul network, neither TalkTalk wholesale.

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

All I know is that the VP paths are not used in the GEA network.

Ah!

So you have no idea whether or not they are used in WBC? And other than Sky and TalkTalk, all FTTC is BT Wholesale, i.e.WBC.

I think it's time you stopped being ratty about bitching and misinformation.

Edited by RobertoS (Wed 09-Jan-13 18:38:36)

I don't think it's an exchange issue as other people in different parts of the country (all be it northerners) have the exact same issue as me at the exact same time.

Like now I'm at 30mbs, but as evening wears on my speed decreases to unusable levels, once It's at it's worse I will do a pathping for you.

And another typo. You've typed your saying you had done one inside the quote. A bit confusing.

http://community.bt.com/t5/BT-Infinity/BT-Infinity-s...

I think we hit a nerve with him

Ratty we love you really.

yes, my point is billion's spent on 21CN and then it isnt used for FTTC, makes no sense.

Leics doesnt have a WBC node, the nearest ones used are birmingham and peterborough, the metro node still confuses me but since I am in Leics anyway and dont have the issue the OP has I dont think thats his issue.

not a pathping a traceroute, and if northerners are getting the same issue then it may point to a bad route inside the BT network rather than a local node problem.

Tracing route to bbc.co.uk [212.58.241.131]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms home.gateway [192.168.1.253]
2 4 ms 4 ms 4 ms bt.internal [217.32.144.166]
3 5 ms 4 ms 5 ms bt.internal [217.32.144.206]
4 7 ms 6 ms 7 ms bt.internal [213.120.181.58]
5 7 ms 7 ms 6 ms bt.internal [217.41.169.95]
6 7 ms 6 ms 6 ms bt.internal [217.41.169.109]
7 6 ms 6 ms 6 ms bt.internal [109.159.251.211]
8 19 ms 18 ms 15 ms core1-te0-2-4-0.ilford.ukcore.bt.net [109.159.25
1.141]
9 13 ms 13 ms 13 ms peer2-xe10-0-0.telehouse.ukcore.bt.net [109.159.
254.128]
10 15 ms 15 ms 15 ms 194.74.65.42
11 * * * Request timed out.
12 18 ms 16 ms 14 ms ae1.er01.rbsov.bbc.co.uk [132.185.254.46]
13 16 ms 19 ms 16 ms 132.185.255.60
14 13 ms 13 ms 13 ms 212.58.241.131

Edited by Chrysalis (Thu 10-Jan-13 05:50:18)

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

yes, my point is billion's spent on 21CN and then it isnt used for FTTC, makes no sense.

It does use it.

Leics doesnt have a WBC node, the nearest ones used are birmingham and peterborough, the metro node still confuses me but since I am in Leics anyway and dont have the issue the OP has I dont think thats his issue.

Leicestershire doesn't have a WBC node, agreed. The proximity of the others is not always relevant acccording to the MSAN <<->> WBC node map once produced by ADSL24 and presumably suppressed by BTW.

You say you are in Leics. but it is unclear whether you mean the city or the county. Unless you are on the same exchange as the OP it is irrelevant. The metro nodes appear to be concentrator points for exchanges before their traffic feeds into or back from the BTW cloud. As I tried to explain, the WBC nodes are the ISP side of that cloud - not the exchange side. Maybe you didn't see where I said that.

On FTTC for BTW connections WBC/WBMC takes control at the exchange. As opposed to ADSLx where it is in control all the way to the user's modem, except when the user tweaks the modem settings.

Well my house is on the border of South Derbyshire/Leicestershire so hes not a million miles away.

I know WBC is used, but some were suggesting it isnt.

I am in the city of leicester.

How many metro nodes would you suggest might be in any given area? one per exchange? one per county? one per city?

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

I know WBC is used, but some were suggesting it isnt.

http://forums.thinkbroadband.com/bt/t/4197789-where-...

PM following.

How many metro nodes would you suggest might be in any given area? one per exchange? one per county? one per city?

No idea, but certainly not one per exchange, given the original description/diagram link by robertcrowther.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

I know WBC is used, but some were suggesting it isnt.

I am in the city of leicester.

How many metro nodes would you suggest might be in any given area? one per exchange? one per county? one per city?

There is only 20 Metro nodes in the UK

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

There is only 20 Metro nodes in the UK

Now you really show how idiotic many of your posts are.

Your link to the IsPreview about diagram showing the metro node positioning was very useful. But now I wonder how you came by it, as you clearly don't understand the diagram. (Which incidentally I explained earlier in the thread to Chrysalis).

There are 85 metro nodes listed by Kitz. Which seems reasonable, or even low, given the number of exchanges.

The twenty you mention is the number of WBC nodes. A completely different thing altogether from a metro node. As explained earlier to Chrysalis.

You really are a veritable waterfall of misinformation!

Edit, I just spotted the Kitz table header - "A list of some of the BT 21CN Metro Nodes". So more than 85 is expected.

Edited by RobertoS (Thu 10-Jan-13 12:28:37)

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

There is only 20 Metro nodes in the UK

Now you really show how idiotic many of your posts are.

Your link to the IsPreview about diagram showing the metro node positioning was very useful. But now I wonder how you came by it, as you clearly don't understand the diagram. (Which incidentally I explained earlier in the thread to Chrysalis).

There are 85 metro nodes listed by Kitz. Which seems reasonable, or even low, given the number of exchanges.

The twenty you mention is the number of WBC nodes. A completely different thing altogether from a metro node. As explained earlier to Chrysalis.

You really are a veritable waterfall of misinformation!

Edit, I just spotted the Kitz table header - "A list of some of the BT 21CN Metro Nodes". So more than 85 is expected.

I'm sure it has been pointed out to you, but FTTC does not use the 21CN Network. FTTC connections only use 20 metro nodes. Please next time you want to quote sources, please make sure you use up-todate sites.

Birmingham ,,,,,, London North West
Bristol ,,,,,,, Manchester
Cardiff ,,,,,,,, Milton Keynes
City of London ,,,,, Newcastle
Clyde Valley ,,,,, Peterborough
Derby ,,,,, Preston
Docklands ,,,,, Sheffield
Glasgow ,,,,, Slough
Guildford ,,,,, Southbank
Leeds ,,,,, Wolverhampton

Edited by robertcrowther (Thu 10-Jan-13 12:51:10)

I shall leave it to others to demolish you permanently on that, as my whole brain is reeling about consumed by whole-body laughter. You have absolutely no idea whatsever you are talking about!

Time for a new nick Mr Crowther. Your existing one will never have any credibility on these forums for anyone who has an inkling about how anything at all to do with broadband works.

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

FTTC connections only use 20 metro nodes.

So is that where Sky and TalkTalk connect to it as well? (Please no-one but robertcrowther answer that).

I think Robert is Ratty from the BT forum.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

I shall leave it to others to demolish you permanently on that, as my whole brain is reeling about consumed by whole-body laughter. You have absolutely no idea whatsever you are talking about!

Time for a new nick Mr Crowther. Your existing one will never have any credibility on these forums for anyone who has an inkling about how anything at all to do with broadband works.

Having looked at your website (to be honest it looks like something from the 80's) you don't seem to have anything to do with the current industry or technology. Maybe you might be more at home at St. X

If you know anything at all then you know what that means.

In reply to a post by lockyatlrg:

I think Robert is Ratty from the BT forum.

No, god for bid that I work for BT, I would not work them for all the money in China. lol

The engineer has been and the line is perfect, he replaced the modem from a 2B to a 3B which tbh would make no different, all his tests where fine as expected.

He did say I will be charged for this, I won't be paying this charge cus I didn't ask for an engineer to come out and BT executive level complaints insisted that an engineer came out to rule out anything in the CAB and D-Side.

So how do I go about removing the charge from my account?

ok that cleared that up.

How about an answer to my question about where Sky and TalkTalk FTTC fits in? Also, do you know what WBC is?

You don't know he is right about the charge. He may just be assuming it, because he's been sent out to check your end and found no fault.

He will have raised it as a chargeable activity - he will not know who booked the appointment and HLC will have probably stated it is "no charge". If they do try then you always have the 2B to 3B change - and can ask why it was not done before. Did he change the power supply too?

Yes, he changed the power supply and modem, the 3b modem has a white psu and the my old 2b had a black psu.

I don't know the 2b has never gave me any issues and has been wall mounted since day 1 and never even gets warm.

Edited by lockyatlrg (Thu 10-Jan-13 14:26:52)

Good, the black PSU was just good enough to power the modem. On teh older 8 series profiles it would work but on 17a it could sometimes struggle. The white PSU is rated at 1A compared to 700mA.

He's utterly clueless. I wouldn't waste any energy on him. He's ratty2012 over at the BT forum (http://community.bt.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/76825), look at the post history if you want a laugh.

I had some lower performance last night, didnt show on tbb graph, there was jitter as well but not severe but was defenitly there, I got the throughput back by cycling ppp to a better gateway but that wasnt enough to ditch the jitter.

On my traceroute the problem looks between these 2 hops.

Doesnt look local to me but rather within BTs network somewhere.

5 6 ms 6 ms 6 ms bt.internal [217.41.169.207]
6 6 ms 12 ms 7 ms bt.internal [217.41.169.109]

The jitter seen in hop 7 carried on to the end. All hops before hop 5 had no jitter.

In reply to a post by Zadeks:

He's utterly clueless. I wouldn't waste any energy on him. He's ratty2012 over at the BT forum (http://community.bt.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/76825), look at the post history if you want a laugh.

For the last time, I am not ratty2012. Anyone now posts that I am will get a defamation order taken out against them. lol

Forgive us for thinking this, but the timing of you joining this forum and similar post style and information - all points to this fact.

You aren't fooling anyone. Next time, make it a little less obvious if you wish to remain incognito.

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

In reply to a post by Zadeks:

He's utterly clueless. I wouldn't waste any energy on him. He's ratty2012 over at the BT forum (http://community.bt.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/76825), look at the post history if you want a laugh.

For the last time, I am not ratty2012. Anyone now posts that I am will get a defamation order taken out against them. lol

I notice Ratty2012 hasn't denied it

In reply to a post by lockyatlrg:

Forgive us for thinking this, but the timing of you joining this forum and similar post style and information - all points to this fact.

LOL, I joined this forum on the Wed 18-Aug-2004. People have to bear in mind on this forum, BT only give out about 10% of the information to the public and it's down to this why there is so much misinformation on this forum.

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

BT only give out about 10% of the information to the public and it's down to this why there is so much misinformation on this forum.

I guess Openreach have asked you to post here to counter this misinformation?

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

LOL, I joined this forum on the Wed 18-Aug-2004.

Indeed; what I think people are getting at is you're normally so quiet on here (52 posts in 8 1/2 years, and 27 of those have been in the last 3 weeks, and nothing in between 31st Jan 2012 and 22nd December 2012).

You have to admit the timing is excellent (between Ratty2012 being largely ignored on the BT forums and your reappearance on here).
Now I'm not saying you are Ratty2012, but you have to admit the timing is almost perfect and you both have a tendency to post claims which are different to others, refusing to support those claims, and then resorting to insults.

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

BT only give out about 10% of the information to the public

As much as that?
I'd say BT only give out the minimum they're required to (by Ofcom) plus anything they think makes them look good, or will sell more product.

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

this why there is so much misinformation on this forum.

What there is [on this, and any other forum] are a bunch of people who put "facts" forward (or rubbish other people's claims). The misinformation bit comes when these people refuse, point-blank, to corroborate their claims/view/understanding with any documentary evidence (Ratty2012 also does this on the BT forums).
You've noticed others (e.g. Bob and Andrew) posting excerpts from, or links to, documents supporting their claims.
You'd do yourself a huge favour if you did the same (nobody is going to take any notice if you just continue with this "Plusnet told me" argument).

EDIT: Typo ("You'd do")

Edited by adebov (Sun 13-Jan-13 11:01:58)

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

BT only give out about 10% of the information to the public and it's down to this why there is so much misinformation on this forum.

I guess Openreach have asked you to post here to counter this misinformation?

I don't work for BT or Openreach.

I was meant to say the timing of posts are a little suspect.

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

BT only give out about 10% of the information to the public and it's down to this why there is so much misinformation on this forum.

I guess Openreach have asked you to post here to counter this misinformation?

I don't work for BT or Openreach.

Who mentioned BT?

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

I don't work for BT or Openreach.

Cue the obvious punchline...
...Nobody "works" for BT or Openreach...
Boom-tisch

In reply to a post by adebov:

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

LOL, I joined this forum on the Wed 18-Aug-2004.

Indeed; what I think people are getting at is you're normally so quiet on here (52 posts in 8 1/2 years, and 27 of those have been in the last 3 weeks, and nothing in between 31st Jan 2012 and 22nd December 2012).

You have to admit the timing is excellent (between Ratty2012 being largely ignored on the BT forums and your reappearance on here).
Now I'm not saying you are Ratty2012, but you have to admit the timing is almost perfect and you both have a tendency to post claims which are different to others, refusing to support those claims, and then resorting to insults.

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

BT only give out about 10% of the information to the public

As much as that?
I'd say BT only give out the minimum they're required to (by Ofcom) plus anything they think makes them look good, or will sell more product.

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

this why there is so much misinformation on this forum.

What there is [on this, and any other forum] are a bunch of people who put "facts" forward (or rubbish other people's claims). The misinformation bit comes when these people refuse, point-blank, to corroborate their claims/view/understanding with any documentary evidence (Ratty2012 also does this on the BT forums).
You've noticed others (e.g. Bob and Andrew) posting excerpts from, or links to, documents supporting their claims.
You'd do yourself a huge favour if you did the same (nobody is going to take any notice if you just continue with this "Plusnet told me" argument).

EDIT: Typo ("You'd do")

I know it may look a bit fishy, but I can assure you that it's just coincidence that I joined in with the forum posts again. My reason for doing so is; I'm a computer engineer who fixes peoples computers and I have got fed up of my customers saying once I have fixed their computer "that's not what I was told on the forums". This has been caused by people giving out misinformation and as a result people are having to pay for people to fix there computers, when sometimes it just needs a simple adjustment either hardware or most of the time software.

Most of the documents that are posted here do not include 100% of the information. This is one of the reasons why I don't post links to documents. This is where most of the misinformation is coming from, because people are taking the information from the documents and making it gospel, when in fact it is not.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

... nested quotes trimmed ...

I guess Openreach have asked you to post here to counter this misinformation?

I don't work for BT or Openreach.

Who mentioned BT?

I said it just in case somebody then posted, oh he works for BT then.

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

Who mentioned BT?

I said it just in case somebody then posted, oh he works for BT then.

Really? That's interesting.

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

Most of the documents that are posted here do not include 100% of the information. This is one of the reasons why I don't post links to documents.

Oh I see; so documents which may be missing some information are far worse than no documents and no information whatsoever. And we're supposed to just accept what one person says (when that person refuses to state how he's qualified to make these claims or to post any documentation proving those claims) over and above several people (with different viewpoints) who are prepared to post documentation.
You see what I'm getting at

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

I said it just in case somebody then posted, oh he works for BT then.

OK then... he must work for Plusnet or another BT group company

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

I know it may look a bit fishy, but I can assure you that it's just coincidence that I joined in with the forum posts again. My reason for doing so is; I'm a computer engineer who fixes peoples computers and I have got fed up of my customers saying once I have fixed their computer "that's not what I was told on the forums". This has been caused by people giving out misinformation and as a result people are having to pay for people to fix there computers, when sometimes it just needs a simple adjustment either hardware or most of the time software.

Most of the documents that are posted here do not include 100% of the information. This is one of the reasons why I don't post links to documents. This is where most of the misinformation is coming from, because people are taking the information from the documents and making it gospel, when in fact it is not.

If you don't post links backing up what you claim are "facts", they remain as your opinion and just add to the misinformation you seem concerned about.

In reply to a post by adebov:

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

I said it just in case somebody then posted, oh he works for BT then.

OK then... he must work for Plusnet or another BT group company

lol, No I don't work for Plusnet either and I don't live near Sheffield.

In reply to a post by adebov:

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

Most of the documents that are posted here do not include 100% of the information. This is one of the reasons why I don't post links to documents.

Oh I see; so documents which may be missing some information are far worse than no documents and no information whatsoever. And we're supposed to just accept what one person says (when that person refuses to state how he's qualified to make these claims or to post any documentation proving those claims) over and above several people (with different viewpoints) who are prepared to post documentation.
You see what I'm getting at

Here is a question that might answer your question.

If you had to change a light bulb who would you trust more? A qualified electrician or a document on the internet.

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

Here is a question that might answer your question.

If you had to change a light bulb who would you trust more? A qualified electrician or a document on the internet.

You miss the point. The point is, how do you know the electrician is qualified?

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

Here is a question that might answer your question.

If you had to change a light bulb who would you trust more? A qualified electrician or a document on the internet.

You miss the point. The point is, how do you know the electrician is qualified?

For a start off, the a qualified electrician will have City and Guilds certificates in "being an electrician" (City & Guilds 2330 or 233 or 2360 or 236). Second, I take it from your question that you have never employed an electrician?

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

You miss the point. The point is, how do you know the electrician is qualified?

For a start off, the a qualified electrician will have City and Guilds certificates in "being an electrician" (City & Guilds 2330 or 233 or 2360 or 236).

So you check the supplied documentation.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

You miss the point. The point is, how do you know the electrician is qualified?

For a start off, the a qualified electrician will have City and Guilds certificates in "being an electrician" (City & Guilds 2330 or 233 or 2360 or 236).

So you check the supplied documentation.

"Supplied" is the key word, If somebody would like to scan documents from BT and post them, then that would be supplied, otherwise it's just posted.

You can't have it both ways, either you trust what is posted on the internet or you don't, please make your mind up.

Edited by robertcrowther (Sun 13-Jan-13 12:12:43)

I wonder where he sourced the information from?

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=3...

Edited by Zadeks (Sun 13-Jan-13 12:11:19)

In reply to a post by Zadeks:

I wonder where he sourced the information from?

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=3...

That's common knowledge lol

You should try living in the real world instead of the internet world.

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

"Supplied" is the key word

Not really, "Supplied" by the electrician who claims to be qualified. Or supplied by the poster who claims to be a computer engineer.

If it were common knowledge, you wouldn't have had to copy and paste it from a random forum. Hypocrite much.

In reply to a post by Zadeks:

If it were common knowledge, you wouldn't have had to copy and paste it from a random forum. Hypocrite much.

I didn't lol

I like the way you slag off Ratty for throwing insults, but at the same time you dish them out at a dozen a time.

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

I don't work for BT or Openreach.

That isn't surprising.

Yeah, you just happened to type a word-for-word identical post.

Keep the lies coming, Ratty2012 AKA robertcrowther. They're spectacular.

No, cus I'm qualified my self

In reply to a post by lockyatlrg:

No, cus I'm qualified my self

Have you hacked your modem yet, Locky?

In reply to a post by Zadeks:

Yeah, you just happened to type a word-for-word identical post.

Keep the lies coming, Ratty2012 AKA robertcrowther. They're spectacular.

Why don't you just go and ask Ratty2012 to join this forum? And people wonder why I don't post much in this forum. (Too many cats and dogs)

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

In reply to a post by Zadeks:

Yeah, you just happened to type a word-for-word identical post.

Keep the lies coming, Ratty2012 AKA robertcrowther. They're spectacular.

And people wonder why I don't post much in this forum.

Is it because you can't find links to back up what you post?

Talking about yourself in the third person! Nice.

Ratty2012 AKA robertcrowther should stick to misleading people on the BT forum. thinkbroadband is too good for Ratty2012 AKA robertcrowther.

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

are you ratty from bt care forum? as he/she was spreading the same rubbish on that site also.

DLM is openreach on FTTC. They manage the cabinet equipment not BTw.

No I'm not Ratty, I don't work for BT, but I do know a lot of people who do (approx 100 people), due to the fact I live about 200 meters from one of BT's major sites.

So all these people who work for BT are wrong are they?

I don't work for the Royal Navy, but I know a lot of people who do (approx 100 people), due to the fact I live about 200 meters from one of the RN's major sites.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

I don't work for BT or Openreach.

That isn't surprising.

You say that you have been in the computing industry since 1966. First you have not learnt anything in that time and second you act like a 5 year old, grow up.

The 3b one that was replace on Thursday?

If so yes, I showed the engineer how to do it

Did you turn off CWMP?

I didn't know you had to turn it off, but I don't think it was enabled to start with?

Is BTAgent running?

Maybe it is when you change to Router rather than Bridged mode.

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

If you had to change a light bulb who would you trust more? A qualified electrician or a document on the internet.

Awkward question...
Considering I regularly deal with qualified electricians (and a good chunk of my job involves me diagnosing and fixing what the "electricians" have screwed up) I'd rather my Mother change the light bulb

Of course; the qualified electrician, but it's rather a weak analogy.
If you're trying to compare your "facts" (only in quotes as we don't yet know they're facts, as you still refuse to corroborate them) with stuff posted on the internet (and that you're the "qualified electrician" and the "document on the internet" is a document released by BT group, as required by Ofcom, there are a few problems: -
1. You haven't yet stated how you're qualified to make these claims (to the point we should take your statements over and above those in BT documentation).
2. All you've told us is you're a "computer engineer who fixes people's computers". That means nothing. I, along with hundreds on these forums, can "fix" computers, that means nothing. Being able to build or fix computers no more qualifies me to make wild or accurate claims about how BT group companies operate their xDSL networks than if I were a qualified lion-tamer.
3. Now if you were to tell us you're a senior systems or development engineer at BT's research facility near Ipswich, that would be a different matter. For now the only thing you've told us qualifies you to make claims refuting those made by Andrew (etc.) is that you're a "computer engineer who fixes people's computers".
4. I know several people who "fix computers" and not one of them knows the first thing about xDSL (other than what I've told them - and I'm no more qualified than the next person).
And lastly;
5. You expect us to believe the BT documentation is somehow flawed or misses out great big chunks of information. Are BT that devious (or incompetent) that they should deliberately publish erroneous documentation?

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

No I don't work for Plusnet either and I don't live near Sheffield.

See folks; he has at least two redeeming characteristics

I deactivated that. I think I covered all the tips and tweaks in the modem it's self. He did leave the old 2b here (which is fine) so I do have a spare.

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

"Supplied" is the key word, If somebody would like to scan documents from BT and post them, then that would be supplied, otherwise it's just posted.

I suppose it depends on whether the links (and many of them do) point to BT documents hosted on BT's web-servers.
If it's a BT document, and it's hosted by BT, I'd think it to be fairly trustworthy and factual (unless you subscribe to the theory BT are deliberately publishing erroneous documentation).

Do you use the HH3?

In reply to a post by adebov:

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

"Supplied" is the key word, If somebody would like to scan documents from BT and post them, then that would be supplied, otherwise it's just posted.

I suppose it depends on whether the links (and many of them do) point to BT documents hosted on BT's web-servers.
If it's a BT document, and it's hosted by BT, I'd think it to be fairly trustworthy and factual (unless you subscribe to the theory BT are deliberately publishing erroneous documentation).

Upto a point it's trustworthy, but most of the BT documents do not contain the full information and therefore can't be used as primary sources. BT are well known for not sharing information pertaining to their core network. It's just a case of people looking at these documents and saying 2 + 2 = 5 , and as we know that's wrong.

No cus it a box of fail

I have a netgear WNDR 3700, but I do use the HH3 as a wireless AP on the third floor, but I chopped his balls off before I did this

What, if any, are your qualifications to "fix" computers?

So it's just congestion then?

To stop the tit for tat battle that has developed

Bt are going to do nothing about my case, 2mbs is fine under BT's SLA as the average speed is over 12mb, so in short they are saying that my connection is working normal at peak times when it's completely unusable.

I have received my DEAD LOCK letter and now need to take it further with offcom/ombudsman (Will be done Monday morning)

Bt claim the local network ( Swadlincote & Burton 01283) is running within "scope" and nothing is wrong and it's me, despite the massive growing thread on BT's forums with people in the same area all whining about poor speeds.

I have got an Interview with the local paper, they are interested in the story and evidence I have, as Burton has had a long standing issue with is poor broadband and phone services, they will love to have a dig at BT's no1 "Infinity" product.

So after 7 weeks of [censored], BT have told me to FO.

Edited by lockyatlrg (Sat 26-Jan-13 13:58:24)

Yuck, but good that you have a deadlock letter.

It isn't "an ombudsman" by the way. It is "Ombudsman Services", or more accurately The Ombudsman Service Limited. Previously known as Otello.

Hope that helps.

you know what I mean

The guy dealing with my case has been helpful and agrees it's not right, but there is only so much he can do.

Can you please post a link to this thread as I couldnt find it, thanks.

to be honest if they have said you can leave without penalty then do just that.

If they havent said that then there is ways for you to force the issue even without the ombudsman.

they told me, because it's within spec I can't leave without penalty

Which link do you require?

In reply to a post by lockyatlrg:

Which link do you require?

In reply to a post by lockyatlrg:

despite the massive growing thread on BT's forums with people in the same area all whining about poor speeds

It was at the top of their forums not really hard to miss.

http://community.bt.com/t5/BT-Infinity/CAN-ANYTHING-...

the one with others from your area with same problem.

There is a few ways you can get out without penalty, if you signed up via the website the estimated speed quoted dont say "up to" which translates to a point of sale terms saying you will get those speeds, I expect after someone uses that successfuly against BT it will be quickly changed but hasnt been done so yet.

Then there is this in the t&c

If you use the service in any way that we consider is likely to be detrimental to the provision of the service or which may adversely affect other customer's enjoyment of the service we reserve the right to terminate your service immediately

you can be creative to kick that in?

We aim to provide a continuous, high-quality service but we do not guarantee either the quality of the service or that the service will be available at all times. From time to time faults in the service may occur and maintenance on the network may be required which causes disruption. We will repair these faults as soon as we can and perform network maintenance when the network is least busy.

This one is vague, I would suggest its a copout for BT for occasional severe congestion, but if someone has consistent severe congestion every single night, I think the regulator would side with the consumer in a legal challenge, eg. the ASA would consider that off peak isnt relevant as the average person uses it at peak so the connection would have to be of high quality when the typical person uses the connection.

I also think you have basic consumer trading laws as a way out, a FTTC connection running at 2mbit/sec cannot adequatly stream HD content eg. and for that reason it could be considered as unfit for purpose.

There is a few more ways out but there is already a few listed here.

Yeah I have read up on everything, and it seems the law is on my side.

I will see what happens when I took it further on Monday.

I am confident I will get a resolution in one form or another.

Don't get done - get Dom

Another update, The deadlock letter has been quashed and BT are looking into my case with more detail and collectively with other affected parties.

It's amazing what contacting the local paper and ofcom can do

Seems they didn't like the call from the reporter.