G.INP Compatibility Surge!

So like many I was affected by the G.INP activations and not being ready for it.

Although I had the correct HG612 Openreach modem, I think it missed the firmware update as my connection was activated very shortly before the activation of G.INP!

I managed to fix my loss of speed and increase in Latency by getting the up to date firmware installed, since I have seen many complaining of having an ECI modem on a Huawei cabinet and not being compatible with G.INP... most have gone ahead a brought compatible hardware and fixed their issues...

Now the concern I have is I've also seen a lot of people talking about they have brought G.INP capable hardware like the HG612 or other Broadcom based hardware for their connections on ECI cabinets, presumably because they think this will be the best way to be ready for G.INP when it's rolled out... But.

Isn't their a chance that ECI cabinets might not be compatible with Broadcom based chipsets... hell at the moment theres bit of speculation that ECI cabs might not even be ready for G.INP... (I doubt this) and if Openreach's comments regarding the matter recently being true regarding the chipset matching the EU's to the DSLAM then are users wasting their money on Broadcom based equipment for something that seems to have had its rollout cancelled/pushed back.

Now I know it has generally been thought that not matching the chipsets didn't matter (BT Retails certainly did) and some even said using certain mix was of benefit to the EU, but as we have now found out there was a reason to use matching chipsets after all.

Why are you concerned? Yours is working.

Why did you bother posting or looking?

To ask the question.

I did say above that my concern is with compatibility and mainly with people wasting their time and money....

Just because I'm fine, doesn't mean I don't care about anyone else... I also have some interests in the compatibilities and ongoing issues with this and wondered if anyone had any of their own views on it..

I think it's a question better left until we know what Openreach are doing with ECI cabs - replacing them with Huawei cabs or enabling them for G.INP

AIUI the problem is that neither the HG612 or ECI modems were initially G.INP capable. This capability is now a requirement stated in SIN 498 for other modems that are attached.

Before rolling out G.INP to the Huawei cabinets Openreach issued a firmware update for the HG612 to make it handle it. Fortunately the current unlocked version is based on that. OR however appear to have been under the misapprehension that engineers were not installing ECI ones on Huawei cabinet lines.

It is clear the chipsets are compatible as both modems are in use on both makes of cabinet. The firmware upgrade for the ECI sorts the G.INP problem out. There is no reason to think that a G.INP-upgraded HG612 or ECI won't work correctly on either make of cabinet, once the ECI cabinets are upgraded.

Well the bit about the ECI modem, it has been suggested that a FW update had already been pushed to it, but had somehow failed,leaving the ECI incompatible with G.inp, but alowing it to obtain a sync and connect to the internet

ECI modems that haven't been used may not even sync properly on a curcuit that has G.inp enabled ,( requiring a DLM reset to remove G.inp, so ECI can update fw,) but this doesn't make it G.inp compatible, and once g.inp is re enabled the second issue is apparent high latency and loss of some sync speed, due to eci /dlm falling back to a default heavy interleaved state, until a g.inp compatible modem is connected

Regarding matching of modem chipset to Dslam i found that the ECI modem gave a lower latency and performed better when uploading thoughput was higher, and latency whilst uploading was again lower, unlike when i use the HG612 Which may suggest that the ECI CPU was faster or better in some ways
shame BT rendered it useless

Edited by tommy45 (Wed 22-Apr-15 14:26:05)

Yes I was lead to believe that an ECI modem that had been updated would work with G.INP enabled DSLAM's but EU's would lose some speed and see an increase to their baseline latency and those that hadn't been updated wouldn't connect properly leaving the EU with no connection.

The comments regarding Openreach thinking the chipsets where being matched to the DSLAM when EU's where connected seems to be questionable and even the providers don't seem to be worrying about matching chipsets..

BT Retail sent my neighbour a HH5a and not HH5b when he was first connected and they have since sent a replacement due to WiFi issues but that is also still a Type A version...

He knows he has lost speed but not why... I don't see the point in telling him yet as I'm almost sure BT will just give out the usual rubbish we all got at the beginning ("well your within the ranges and it might be crosstalk")

I don't see how its clear the chipsets are compatible... They might work... But that don't mean they're compatible!

In reply to a post by mlmclaren:

Yes I was lead to believe that an ECI modem that had been updated would work with G.INP enabled DSLAM's but EU's would lose some speed and see an increase to their baseline latency and those that hadn't been updated wouldn't connect properly leaving the EU with no connection.

Who said the ECI modem has been updated for G.INP?

I don't think the ECI modem will ever see G.INP firmware..

'will ever' well that is wrong, since Openreach claim to have rolled it out to 9,000 test lines.

Is that on ECI cabs or Huawei cabs?

Considering TP-Link have rolled out firmware for the same chipset Lantiq VRX-268 on their VDSL router it can totally be fixed by a firmware...

http://forum.kitz.co.uk/index.php?topic=15283.0
https://community.plus.net/forum/index.php/topic,136...
http://forums.thinkbroadband.com/fibre/f/4399541-gin...

I think that fw is still beta

On eci cabs

rolling it out and working are 2 different things.

the latest openreach statement confirms both eci modems and dslams cannot do upstream retransmission. Instead they fall back to interleaving, so yes people can still use the internet but is a performance hit on latency and headline speed.