That was painless

Engineer arrived soon after 9am and was gone by 10:10, all drinks and refreshments refused!

He came here to check the site out before doing the connection at the cab so I asked him to check how many before me. Four.

He wasn't from the immediate area but has done enough installations over the last few months to have stopped counting long ago. This only the second non-Infinity one he has done!

JDSU showed 39992kb[s, attenuation 17.7dB, length 0.6km, SNRM 7.5dB.

BT speed tests wired are giving 33Mbps and 36Mbps on 38717 IP Profile. Wireless I have yet to get sorted out properly for speed tests but obviously snappier on things like the BBC website.

*cough* need to update your sig!

Matt

Damn - so I did .

Nice speeds for 600m line length, could you tell me what speed the BT checker predicted for you please.

I think I'm a similar distance from my cab, 500-600m and it only predicts 29meg. Hopefully I'll get a similar IP profile to you.

Is the 39992 figure the max the line can ever support, or just because it's capped at 40meg?

Our test also indicates that your line currently supports a fibre technology with an estimated WBC FTTC Broadband where consumers have received downstream line speed of 28.9Mbps and upstream line speed of 6.4Mbps.

Also getting the full 10000 upstream.

His m/c showed a maximum of 43nnn for the downstream.

I had paced out the distance and got around 500m, including the height of the pole, but excluding the distance between the two cabinets as the FTTC one wasn't there at the time. That distance is at least 20-30 metres cable run.

(Edit - typo).

Edited by RobertoS (Fri 18-Feb-11 16:03:03)

nice to hear it went well.

One of the cabs in my area is up and running and everytime I go by our exchange there are several vans feeding fibre into a manhole.

So not long now hopefully even though this area has been moved from March to July on the checker.

God I wish mine had gone this smoothly, I'm taking a look at IDNet now. Have you had any experience with their Cust. Serv. dept at all? If so what were they like?

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

This only the second non-Infinity one he has done!

Obviously. It's the best deal by a very wide margin.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

This only the second non-Infinity one he has done!

Yeah, and ofcom say BT is not a monopoly. Most (supposedly technical !) people in my office still believe there are only two broadband suppliers, BT and VM. They don't believe there is a difference between providers using BT's WBC, 21CN or 20CN products. Very sad. Ofcom need to advertise the competition more.

Good to know you're up and running. My cabinet isn't due to arrive until July now, although this week Openreach replaced the old PCP box with a brand new one - but its not a DSLAM box. Hopefully they've got the ground ready for the new one, maybe ducting went in to go between the two, but why replace the PCP casing?

Old PCP in this google maps link, the newer cabinet goes closer to the council bin.
http://www.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&ge...

In reply to a post by Global_Inferno:

God I wish mine had gone this smoothly, I'm taking a look at IDNet now. Have you had any experience with their Cust. Serv. dept at all? If so what were they like?

Very pleased bar one thing.

Having acknowledged receipt of the order they sort of go into silence u til something happens. In particular they don't tell you that the migration order has been submitted to BT. I got used to O2 bombarding me with texts at every stage.

But emails replying to queries have been well handled. Setup details email was adequate-to-good, gave an IP masking that I couldn't set on my router, when I tried to pre-configure, but it turned out not to matter as the router auto-configures in a minute or so once the modem was up and running.

maybe the reason infinity is the most popular just now as that is the only fttc product being mass marketed just now.

id go as far as saying no one else has yet bothered to mass market it yet at all, exc BTR.

"but why replace the PCP casing?"

so the tie cables can go in as a rule ie the old shell was full and no room for the new cables to link to the new FTTC cab

but why replace the PCP casing?

Apart from the posibility it may have been damagaed. to allow for extra space to install the copper tie cables (to an FTTC cabinet) and the termination blocks.

To be fair to BT though their deal is pretty good, but congrats none the less

My line is exactly 547m to the FTTC cab. I was predicted to get about 28.7 mbit down and 6.8 mbit up. My ip profile is 38717 kbps down and 1000 up. I find that I normally tend to get around 37 mbit down and 8 mbit up regardless of the time of day.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

Very pleased bar one thing.

Having acknowledged receipt of the order they sort of go into silence u til something happens. In particular they don't tell you that the migration order has been submitted to BT. I got used to O2 bombarding me with texts at every stage.

But emails replying to queries have been well handled. Setup details email was adequate-to-good, gave an IP masking that I couldn't set on my router, when I tried to pre-configure, but it turned out not to matter as the router auto-configures in a minute or so once the modem was up and running.

Good to know, I don't think any ISP is exactly the "messiah" of ISPs, they all have problems, but some more than others. Lying to customers is something that I cannot accept with ADSL24, and then bullying them with hefty fines unless you stay with them is unacceptable.

In reply to a post by andyboygsi:

maybe the reason infinity is the most popular just now as that is the only fttc product being mass marketed just now.
id go as far as saying no one else has yet bothered to mass market it yet at all, exc BTR.

That is a very good point! I so seldom watch TV I'd forgotten the advertising was BTR/Infinity.

Thanks to the others about the PCP replacement - makes sense it would be full, this is the original area of town, some houses in the roads around here date from when Farnborough airfield was first created as the UK home of aviation. Lots of senior staff military housing from the last century.

In reply to a post by jchamier:

Good to know you're up and running. My cabinet isn't due to arrive until July now, although this week Openreach replaced the old PCP box with a brand new one - but its not a DSLAM box. Hopefully they've got the ground ready for the new one, maybe ducting went in to go between the two, but why replace the PCP casing?

The same thing happened to my PCP, it was first replaced by a new one and then the fibre cab was added later, still not ready though.

In reply to a post by Global_Inferno:

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

Very pleased bar one thing.

Having acknowledged receipt of the order they sort of go into silence u til something happens. In particular they don't tell you that the migration order has been submitted to BT. I got used to O2 bombarding me with texts at every stage.

But emails replying to queries have been well handled. Setup details email was adequate-to-good, gave an IP masking that I couldn't set on my router, when I tried to pre-configure, but it turned out not to matter as the router auto-configures in a minute or so once the modem was up and running.

Good to know, I don't think any ISP is exactly the "messiah" of ISPs, they all have problems, but some more than others. Lying to customers is something that I cannot accept with ADSL24, and then bullying them with hefty fines unless you stay with them is unacceptable.

Well I don't know if it is normal, but I got a welcoming phone call from the owner in the middle of the afternoon!

Hellloooooooooooo, are you there Ian Livingstone?

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

In reply to a post by Global_Inferno:

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

Very pleased bar one thing.

Having acknowledged receipt of the order they sort of go into silence u til something happens. In particular they don't tell you that the migration order has been submitted to BT. I got used to O2 bombarding me with texts at every stage.

But emails replying to queries have been well handled. Setup details email was adequate-to-good, gave an IP masking that I couldn't set on my router, when I tried to pre-configure, but it turned out not to matter as the router auto-configures in a minute or so once the modem was up and running.

Good to know, I don't think any ISP is exactly the "messiah" of ISPs, they all have problems, but some more than others. Lying to customers is something that I cannot accept with ADSL24, and then bullying them with hefty fines unless you stay with them is unacceptable.

Well I don't know if it is normal, but I got a welcoming phone call from the owner in the middle of the afternoon!

Hellloooooooooooo, are you there Ian Livingstone?

Maybe normal with a diddy ISP

Literalists should be shot.

Well I don't know if it is normal, but I got a welcoming phone call from the owner in the middle of the afternoon!

I'm not surprised. The management is active on IDNet's own forum, too: http://www.idnetters.co.uk/forums

Their support is excellent - although confined to Mon-Fri..

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

I'm not surprised..

Whoops. Didn't realise I wasn't logged in to post that comment.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

Engineer arrived soon after 9am and was gone by 10:10, all drinks and refreshments refused!

He came here to check the site out before doing the connection at the cab so I asked him to check how many before me. Four.

He wasn't from the immediate area but has done enough installations over the last few months to have stopped counting long ago. This only the second non-Infinity one he has done!

JDSU showed 39992kb[s, attenuation 17.7dB, length 0.6km, SNRM 7.5dB.

BT speed tests wired are giving 33Mbps and 36Mbps on 38717 IP Profile. Wireless I have yet to get sorted out properly for speed tests but obviously snappier on things like the BBC website.
[/quote]

ahh so you took the plunge, a tbb graph possible?

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

ahh so you took the plunge, a tbb graph possible?

The huge red was a factory reset on the router which disabled pings after I had previously enabled them. Spikes before it - I was messing around a lot, see next paragraph.

The other solid reds are other router reboots etc., as I had a problem with the wireless. Cracked that just after 10pm. All subsequent latency spikes are speed tests.

BQM 10am 19 Feb.

In reply to a post by orly:

Maybe normal with a diddy ISP

Its a shame Ben Verwaayan moved on and was replaced by "old school" type. Ben V was the one who realised that "no engineer visit" would speed the take up of DSL back in 2002.

In reply to a post by jchamier:

Ben V was the one who realised that "no engineer visit" would speed the take up of DSL back in 2002.

Wouldn't help much with FTTC... granted there's nothing in the premises that an end user couldn't do, but I can't see BT letting any user into the cabinets to swap the connections over.

So you still need an appointment time.

In reply to a post by billford:

Wouldn't help much with FTTC... granted there's nothing in the premises that an end user couldn't do, but I can't see BT letting any user into the cabinets to swap the connections over.

So you still need an appointment time.

There isn't anything in the premises even the user needs to do. The VDSL faceplate is just a newer model of filtered faceplate and apparently no real difference from the previous BT one and/or ADSL Nation/Clarity versions. Or a standard NTE5A plus a dangly filter.

Perhaps the data extension if needed, or a master socket move. Can be useful. Then a test. IIRC they used to do that on 512kb early ADSL as well.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

IIRC they used to do that on 512kb early ADSL as well.

I don't go back that far... I started at 2Mbps

Actually, strictly speaking I started at 1200 baud, but we won't go into that

engineer visit is also to sort out star wiring if there is any .

yeah the reason for the redesigned faceplate is exactly so that end users can fit them in future. OR have stated they would be willing to allow CPs to provide integrated vdsl modems in their own routers rather than use the OR modem once OR / CPs agree a standard (i.e. they accept to use similar chipset etc to the current modem).

In the meantime the engineer visit ensures that early adopters get a good service and the fttc doesnt get any needless bad press from EUs with [censored] diy wiring etc..

Give it a couple of years and it will be a self install with an engineer flying around between cabs changing jumpers.

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

Give it a couple of years and it will be a self install with an engineer flying around between cabs changing jumpers.

Just think how much more efficient it would be to have the fibre connections centralised at the exchange and going all the way to the user's place. Or that, plus all pre-connected and controlled by software. FFTF? It would save billions.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

Then a test. IIRC they used to do that on 512kb early ADSL as well.

they did - I had engineer fitted 512k *business* from BT with the forced USB modem. My employed paid the bill (I wasn't going to stump up £200 for install). I had NTL's 512k ethernet offering at the time.

It wasn't until NTL's proxies finally got me down and my employer stopped paying (change of job role) that I cancelled NTL and took over the BT line myself and moved to 2mbps with the original metronet.

And Bill - 1200bps? wasn't 1200/75?, and you didn't use 300/300 ?

In reply to a post by jchamier:

And Bill - 1200bps? wasn't 1200/75?, and you didn't use 300/300 ?

I had to go and dig out my first modem to be sure what it was- I've still got it upstairs

It was a Hayes V.22bis, ie 1200/2400 baud, full duplex. The 75 baud back channel was part of V.23, which was 600/1200 baud, half duplex.

I think I was only on 1200 baud for a couple of weeks, then BT upgraded their modems to 2400. But it was a long while ago, so I could be wrong on that.

And no, I didn't use 300/300 . Though acoustic couplers were still around!

Just to be pedantic- baud is not (quite) the same as bps

moved to 2mbps with the original metronet

I started with them and did a runner when Plusnet bought them. It was that that brought me to this site, so it's all Plusnet's fault

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

OR have stated they would be willing to allow CPs to provide integrated vdsl modems in their own routers rather than use the OR modem once OR / CPs agree a standard (i.e. they accept to use similar chipset etc to the current modem).

I'm quite happy with the OR modem, it seems to do its job competently. And it gave me a wider choice of router.

I just wish they'd let me see the line stats

In reply to a post by billford:

I'm quite happy with the OR modem, it seems to do its job competently. And it gave me a wider choice of router.

To me it seems the best approach. Should a CP and OR agree to use a different device then the end user would be unable to easily replace this, if they wanted more features. Just look at the hassle VM is having with the new Hub / SuperHub products, which integrate the cable modem into a fairly basic router.

The original BT idea of ADSL to a USB plug was generally accepted as insane (USB being a troublesome software interface). Now that OR supply FTTC customers with a VDSL modem the interface is standard ethernet. Anyone know if its FastE or GigE ?

In reply to a post by jchamier:

Anyone know if its FastE or GigE ?

What's the difference ?

In reply to a post by jchamier:

Anyone know if its FastE or GigE ?

As far as I know it's gigabit.

I'm sure I saw it stated somewhere or other, but don't ask me for a link

FastE is 100Mbps.

In reply to a post by billford:

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

OR have stated they would be willing to allow CPs to provide integrated vdsl modems in their own routers rather than use the OR modem once OR / CPs agree a standard (i.e. they accept to use similar chipset etc to the current modem).

I'm quite happy with the OR modem, it seems to do its job competently. And it gave me a wider choice of router.

I just wish they'd let me see the line stats

That's the only drawback with the OR modem Bill. Not being able to monitor your line stats is a real downer

Being able to see your line stats could also possibly reduce the time taken to fix/diagnose faults.

As far as I remember it has a single GigE and 3 FastE ports.

Mine has two Lan ports. Lan2 has a sticky over it saying "Not in use".

In reply to a post by Squirrel:

What's the difference ?

900mbps But if BT is trying to future proof the network and allow in theory for 100mbps services, then a 100mbps port won't be good enough. Also the problem will be finding routers with GigE WAN ports - I think that's one reason why VM supply an all-in-one solution due to the problems of low-spec domestic kit.

I saw a topic in another forum where a gent in a Nordic country has such fast speed (80m symmetric) that all the routers he tries cause massive slowdown. His internet is delivered by fibre to a block and then shared out via copper - so essentially a modified FTTC I guess!!

I have read this somewhere on the web this afternoon but I cannot find it again

BT HH 3

1 x 1Gbps WAN
1 x 1Gbps LAN
3 x 100Mbps LAN

VDSL2 Modem

1 x 100Mbps LAN
1 x unused LAN

In reply to a post by Squirrel:

VDSL2 Modem

1 x 100Mbps LAN
1 x unused LAN

That actually fits with something I found, but it was just a blog-type page so I didn't take it as gospel. Looks like it's only 100Mbps then... which should be OK really.

After all, the modem is basically just converting from set of voltage signals to another (OK, a bit of a simplification ) so it should be able to get pretty close to the 100Mbps without trouble.

Whereas a router has rather more work to do... I know a few people have found increased speed on FTTC by switching from a router with a 10/100 WAN port to a gigabit one.

Would that be something to do with the port itself, or the likelihood that a gigabit router would have a faster processor?

In reply to a post by billford:

Whereas a router has rather more work to do... I know a few people have found increased speed on FTTC by switching from a router with a 10/100 WAN port to a gigabit one.

Would that be something to do with the port itself, or the likelihood that a gigabit router would have a faster processor?

Could be a bit of both. On busy servers the TCP/IP overhead is overloaded to the network card. Doubt that happens on home routers.

I think with speeds higher than FTTC, ie, the VM 50 and 100 services, we will see some interesting developments in home router performance - but probably at increased costs.

Shame none of these routers yet supply 4 internal GigE ports; makes copying files around LAN much quicker

In reply to a post by jchamier:

Shame none of these routers yet supply 4 internal GigE ports; makes copying files around LAN much quicker

My Airport Extreme has got three

In reply to a post by jchamier:

The original BT idea of ADSL to a USB plug was generally accepted as insane (USB being a troublesome software interface).

The 512Kb service to USB wasn't quite the "original" ADSL service. Before 512K became available, the service was at 2Mb with BT-supplied Alcatel router/modem boxes. This too was installed by BT techs, and was a similar closed box to today's VDSL2 boxes, with no ability to read any stats. IIRC they too ran pretty hot.

But otherwise, yes, the USB boxes weren't a brilliant idea, were they!

my wndr3700 has Gigabit WAN & Four Gigabit Ethernet ports + a Broadband usage meter

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

The 512Kb service to USB wasn't quite the "original" ADSL service. Before 512K became available, the service was at 2Mb with BT-supplied Alcatel router/modem boxes. This too was installed by BT techs, and was a similar closed box to today's VDSL2 boxes, with no ability to read any stats. IIRC they too ran pretty hot.

I recall you could get these Efficient Networks routers with 512k as well but it was only on business plans. This was over £80/month IIRC ?

But otherwise, yes, the USB boxes weren't a brilliant idea, were they!

The problem was that BT (before OR) specified the USB plug was the network termination point, so legally you weren't allowed to change it. Draytek made a cool box that took the USB interface into what we'd expect today as a router - but performance was always low, only worked for 512k

In reply to a post by billford:

My Airport Extreme has got three

Great!

In reply to a post by jchamier:

In reply to a post by billford:

Whereas a router has rather more work to do... I know a few people have found increased speed on FTTC by switching from a router with a 10/100 WAN port to a gigabit one.

Would that be something to do with the port itself, or the likelihood that a gigabit router would have a faster processor?

Could be a bit of both. On busy servers the TCP/IP overhead is overloaded to the network card. Doubt that happens on home routers.

I think with speeds higher than FTTC, ie, the VM 50 and 100 services, we will see some interesting developments in home router performance - but probably at increased costs.

Shame none of these routers yet supply 4 internal GigE ports; makes copying files around LAN much quicker

plenty on the market that have 4xgigE and even VM's superhub has 4 gigE ports.

BT's HH3 seems a bizarre product to have gigE mixed with 3 100 ports.

In reply to a post by jchamier:

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

The 512Kb service to USB wasn't quite the "original" ADSL service. Before 512K became available, the service was at 2Mb with BT-supplied Alcatel router/modem boxes. This too was installed by BT techs, and was a similar closed box to today's VDSL2 boxes, with no ability to read any stats. IIRC they too ran pretty hot.

I recall you could get these Efficient Networks routers with 512k as well but it was only on business plans. This was over £80/month IIRC ?

I was on Demon's trial, so it was at standard price for the duration of that, followed by around £40pm after that. I recall some aggro because it wasn't physically possible to drop to the 512k service at the end of the trial, so we got left on the 2M service. No complaints from me there...

The problem was that BT (before OR) specified the USB plug was the network termination point, so legally you weren't allowed to change it. Draytek made a cool box that took the USB interface into what we'd expect today as a router - but performance was always low, only worked for 512k

I'd forgotten about both of those aspects! It goes without saying that, when my parents finally went for ADSL, the USB box was binned without ever being opened.

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

I'd forgotten about both of those aspects! It goes without saying that, when my parents finally went for ADSL, the USB box was binned without ever being opened.

It was the main reason I went for (NTL) cable back then, and that NTL in my area offered it from August 1999, and I ordered in Sept 1999.

The legalities of not using the USB connection were discussed in the computer press a lot, and it was when BT appointed Ben Verwaayen as CEO he realised this was insane, and pushed his team to deliver the "wires only" service we are familiar with now - thus dropping the wholesale price, so the retail price dropped from £45/m to around £25.

I recall this forum (as ADSLguide) being quite overloaded during the Pipex overcommit problem in 2002

Ben Verwaayen as CEO he realised this was insane, and pushed his team to deliver the "wires only" service we are familiar with now

...and I recall spending the last 10ish years going round showing people that they have set it up wrong?

Prolonged chuckle.

In reply to a post by Zarjaz:

...and I recall spending the last 10ish years going round showing people that they have set it up wrong?

LOL, Touch� !

I believe BT plc's income in the last 10 years has been much higher (understatement) than it would have been. I suspect FTTC might still be a few years away if we were still forced to use £250/install and USB connections