Vectoring in Ireland

Starting to see evidence of vectoring being activated in Ireland.

One person seen a large jump in their max-attainable speed (from 85Mbps to 125Mbps), and another who has gone to a 100Mbps profile.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057... (and subsequent pages)

Looking good! Thanks .

Are they using any ECI cabs in Ireland?

looks good, what are openreach waiting for?

Definitely use Huawei, not 100% sure on eci.
http://www.huawei.com/en/industry/customer-voices/hw...

Love how other telecoms companies don't over analyse too much, eircom aren't limiting their fttc product to 80Mbps downstream.
Don't get me wrong though, wouldn't choose eircom over BT if I had the choice.

Possibly the fact that there are more FTTC cabinets in the UK with many users already getting good speeds; that roll out requires not only a modification to each cabinet but all modems connected to it have to be G-Vector capable for the system to work, and the simple matter of 'who pays'.

And, of course, I forgot to mention ongoing concerns about BT Wholesale's capacity.

Working right to the limits as per usual, just as well we don't have too much fttp, we'd all fall down one big svlan shaped hole.
Is it not just the eci cabinets that need hardware swopped out? Maybe I misread that.

Hell to freeze over?

To get node-level vectoring, which is probably needed, the current Huawei cabinets will need new backplanes that are capable of transferring the vectoring data between cards. That's the way I read the Huawei specs, anyway.

That means the card-cage holding the active DSLAM electronics needs to be dismantled, although it is probably more likely that a swap-out - swap-in process would be used, to minimise downtime. It is still a longer process than just adding cards, or changing connectors on the front panel.

But who knows: the trials that BT are undertaking/extending might be trials of different deployment options, to see if they can minimise the need for swapping hardware.

You are correct (taken from Kitz):


The ECI Hi-FOCuS M41 DSLAM, which is fitted in all ECI cabinets, is incapable of supporting vectoring. Each one would need to be swapped out for a V41 DSLAM (IIRC). :-X

The Huawei SmartAX MA5616 DSLAM, which is fitted in all Huawei cabinets, is capable of supporting vectoring with a configuration change. I believe a firmware change may also be required.

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

To get node-level vectoring, which is probably needed, the current Huawei cabinets will need new backplanes that are capable of transferring the vectoring data between cards. That's the way I read the Huawei specs, anyway.

FYI - http://lorennetworks.com/presentation/Embrace%20GPON...

MA5616 support vectoring in R311C01

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

To get node-level vectoring, which is probably needed, the current Huawei cabinets will need new backplanes that are capable of transferring the vectoring data between cards. That's the way I read the Huawei specs, anyway.

FYI - http://lorennetworks.com/presentation/Embrace%20GPON...

MA5616 support vectoring in R311C01

Right.

Perhaps I shouldn't have said that the Huawei cabinets all needed new backplanes. I really should have said that they needed to have the enhanced racks, rather than the standard ones, in order to support vectoring.

This was discussed in an old thread, and I don't think anyone has confirmed what variant BT had gone for, or if they have subsequently changed.

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

Right.

Perhaps I shouldn't have said that the Huawei cabinets all needed new backplanes. I really should have said that they needed to have the enhanced racks, rather than the standard ones, in order to support vectoring.

This was discussed in an old thread, and I don't think anyone has confirmed what variant BT had gone for, or if they have subsequently changed.

I would image they'll worry about node-level vectoring when they have to deploy a second chassis to a site. They aren't going to do it until they absolutely have to and will run with the 5603T's system-level until a second chassis is required.

Isn't "node-level" when the boards within one node co-operate, while "system-level" is where multiple nodes on one site co-operate. And both of them require the backplane capability.

The simplest, board-level, vectoring only works if you ensure that the significant disturbers all end up on the same board in the DSLAM, which I doubt BT can arrange. It would require services to be physically re-connected in the PCP regularly. Obviously it does work if there is only one card deployed in the cabinet. I take that to be an edge case though...

It seems to me that node-level working is the bare minimum that BT need for standard deployment, while system-level (and interconnection by fibre) becomes necessary for multiple cabinets.

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

Isn't "node-level" when the boards within one node co-operate, while "system-level" is where multiple nodes on one site co-operate. And both of them require the backplane capability.

No Sir, a system is a single DSLAM, a node is an access node comprised of a single or multiple systems.

http://pr.huawei.com/en/news/hw-093919-nlv-prototype...

MA5603T: 1.5Tbit/s backplane capacity, 48G/480G bit/s
switch capacity, 20G bit/s slot bandwidth

Haha!!! I WAS going to say this, restrained myself though.

Which dslam has the highest numbers in deployment bt wise?
The eci was the later of the two brands, I got the impression bt started favouring eci very heavily after the early revision huawei "bbq your vdsl modem" scenario?
Is it entirely crazy that a standard deployment with vectoring on the roadmap could have allowed such a major hardware substitution to be required?
I understand that it was still under development but backplane swops, that's about the most awkward part to swop.
Do we know if it's possible to go hunting for people on the trial cabinets, might BT have politely requested radio silence from them until the trial is over?

In reply to a post by lexden16:

You are correct (taken from Kitz):


The ECI Hi-FOCuS M41 DSLAM, which is fitted in all ECI cabinets, is incapable of supporting vectoring. Each one would need to be swapped out for a V41 DSLAM (IIRC). :-X

The Huawei SmartAX MA5616 DSLAM, which is fitted in all Huawei cabinets, is capable of supporting vectoring with a configuration change. I believe a firmware change may also be required.

The Huawei 288 cabinets are MA5603s as far as I know? 6 line card slots, 48 VDSL 2 ports per card?

Edited by deleted (Tue 25-Mar-14 20:08:35)

and still concerning no trials at all on ECI.

I find that rather disconcerting. Are ECI cabs still being installed?

The pattern I seem to have observed is..

early rollout huawei
mid rollout mostly eci
then first public vectoring announcement
back to huawei again

Edited by Chrysalis (Tue 25-Mar-14 22:43:22)

I've noticed that to, I saw a new cab in a village near to us and that is a Huawei, can't say I can remember any ECI's going in recently

ispreview asked BT on the subject, silence.
plusnet have said still Huawei only.
BT engineer who has access to intranet also confirmed Huawei only.

From openreach point of view they could quite easily enable vectoring on Huawei cabinets, leave it off on ECI and still market both as the same product. We already know BT is thick skinned if they did pull of such a stunt I think they wouldnt even flinch at the backlash.

Edited by Chrysalis (Wed 26-Mar-14 00:11:01)

I can see that happening, and I shall be one of the first to complain, but like you say we'll get nowhere.

agreed, some people have told me I am been paranoid, but it makes little business sense for BT to rip out M41's they have only just purchased, not only they would be ditching new kit, is also the manpower, which commercially doesnt give them much gains. The lack of ECI public trials isnt giving any hope either.

They should of used V41s, which also supports pair bonding.

They "should" do a lot of things, alas, they do not.
I'll take their old ECI's for scrap.... now I wonder could I strap one to a telegraph pole? FTTdp?

In reply to a post by R0NSKI:

They should of used V41s, which also supports pair bonding.

agreed but when are they forward thinking?

How much more expensive are you talking?

I think one problem was that the VDSL MSANs that support vectoring weren't available until 2011-2012, after which time Openreach had already begun its commercial rollout.

For them to introduce a completely new MSAN, they would have had to go through months of testing to ensure they fully worked with their network and that of their customers.

I suppose you are always going to be in this position because technology is changing so quickly. By the time Openreach introduce vectoring nationwide, other VDSL technologies like G.Fast will be commercially available.

that is openreach's problem, they are incapable of reacting quickly to changing technology, their testing is clearly excessive and they still release bodged products.

maybe they are leasing the equipment in which case the inherit costs of new hardware is less, but if its purchased its a messy situation.

if I were in charge I would likely have suspended ECI rollout pending a report of the V41's, eg. my ECI was installed in late 2012. After the release of the V41's.

Edited by Chrysalis (Wed 26-Mar-14 12:42:49)

I disagree.

What should Openreach have done? Stopped their FTTC rollout when ECI/Huawei introduced their vectoring MSANs?

They cannot just suddenly start installing completely new equipment without testing it first. It's not a simple process when you have different manufacturer's equipment in the exchange like the OLT/L2 Switch. It takes months of testing to ensure that once rolled out nationwide, there are no issues.

There is also the commercial justification - what if the new MSANs were significantly more expensive?

All the cabinets on our local exchanges are all ECI, they started installing them in February 2012.

The fact is we just do not know the terms of the contract between Openreach and ECI. However, the CEO of ECI stated (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=conewsstory&t...):

Through a future-proof network proposition, we partner with Openreach in this first-of-its-kind project to guarantee high-speed infrastructure and a viable business model. We support Openreach�s goal for cost-effective high-speed infrastructure offerings without compromising quality, security or competitiveness in such an open access environment.

This indicates to me that there will be some kind of upgrade option in the contract.

Edited by deleted (Wed 26-Mar-14 13:33:24)

In reply to a post by AndyHCZ:

This indicates to me that there will be some kind of upgrade option in the contract.

Let's hope BT were shrude enough to do that.

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

Isn't "node-level" when the boards within one node co-operate, while "system-level" is where multiple nodes on one site co-operate. And both of them require the backplane capability.

No Sir, a system is a single DSLAM, a node is an access node comprised of a single or multiple systems.

http://pr.huawei.com/en/news/hw-093919-nlv-prototype...

Well, you live & learn... ta.

However, both both system and node level vectoring still need the speedy backplane, while board level doesn't. So...

MA5603T: 1.5Tbit/s backplane capacity, 48G/480G bit/s
switch capacity, 20G bit/s slot bandwidth

...this bit confused me. I was refering to the listed use of the MA5616 DSLAM, not the MA5603T. I wondered why you mentioned the 5603.

Then I saw...

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

The Huawei 288 cabinets are MA5603s as far as I know? 6 line card slots, 48 VDSL 2 ports per card?

... and the maths certainly makes sense.

So the larger Huawei cabinets seem like they have the backplane capacity, while the smaller ones might have the capacity - and quite probably do.

Presumably, though, they might all still need a hardware change, if BT's trials determine that they need the ASIC hardware rather than the FPGA.

An interesting graph is contained in this article, showing the relative strengths of various vendors on vectoring: http://broadbandtrends.com/blog1/2012/11/30/demand-f...

That places ECI way behind.

Edit: It is an old report, though.

Edited by deleted (Wed 26-Mar-14 15:56:36)

I can't say I've seen many ECI cabinets at all. Everything seems to be a Huawei.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

From openreach point of view they could quite easily enable vectoring on Huawei cabinets, leave it off on ECI and still market both as the same product.

That assumes they market it at all.

It is quite possible it could be deployed, and the full product range left as-is.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

but it makes little business sense for BT to rip out M41's they have only just purchased,

From some of the kerfuffle on BT's public subsidy for BDUK, I recall that the useful life of the electronics within the cabinet were set at 8 years, even if the cabinet had a longer life.

That implies that BT expect to change the DSLAM anyway.

Worst case scenario that they have to replace all MSANs, I don't think they are the most expensive bits of kit in the world. You can buy the Huawei MA5616 for $2,000 from some Chinese retailers.

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

I can't say I've seen many ECI cabinets at all. Everything seems to be a Huawei.

We have around 125 ECI cabinets on my map, even towns nearby that I haven't mapped have ECI cabinets. But I did see a Huewie cabinet being installed in Wingham the other day, which is the only local one I can think of.

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

I can't say I've seen many ECI cabinets at all. Everything seems to be a Huawei.

ECI on my exchange, Whitley Bay, enabled at the start of this year. Exchange next door, North Shields, partially enabled though are Huwaei.

its not hard.

Either.

stopped ECI cabinet rollout for a couple of months whilst some testing is done (no need to test for several months), most likely the V41's have a mode where they operate like M41's anyway. Dont forget if Openreach do rollout V41's they have to do this testing anyway. The difference been if they change they now have more cabinets to swap out, thats just plain silly to carry on rolling out equipment you know you going to replace. unless of course you know it wont be replaced because is no plans to put vectoring on ECI hence my earlier comments. (except maybe at end of useful shelf life ie. 8 years).

Or used Huawei in those ECI areas whilst testing carried out so no delays in rollout.

Its hardly rocket science.

Question to you, what makes you confident they will rollout to ECI as well, what reasons?

Edited by Chrysalis (Wed 26-Mar-14 22:30:30)

In reply to a post by AndyHCZ:

I disagree.

What should Openreach have done? Stopped their FTTC rollout when ECI/Huawei introduced their vectoring MSANs?

They cannot just suddenly start installing completely new equipment without testing it first. It's not a simple process when you have different manufacturer's equipment in the exchange like the OLT/L2 Switch. It takes months of testing to ensure that once rolled out nationwide, there are no issues.

There is also the commercial justification - what if the new MSANs were significantly more expensive?

Ok so.

which is cheaper?

Buy the cheap MSAN's first and then buy the significantly more expensive soon after before end of shelf life to replace them.
Or buy the more expensive ones first.

To me #2 is cheaper, #1 is only preferable if you are an accountant who cant think past the current financial year.

There is plenty of evidence openreach cant adapt to new technology well, the bodged FTTP Rollout is a very clear sign of that for a start. Rolling out tech years after other countries do so is another sign. They just a slow moving company, it is how it is.

Complete novice so go easy.

I've read about Vectoring , are people saying Vectoring won't be implemented on ECI cabs because our exchange has just got FTTC , cabs started being installed from October 13 and everyone I've seen is a ECI 128 including the one I'm connected to.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

We already know BT is thick skinned if they did pull of such a stunt I think they wouldnt even flinch at the backlash.

I think they'd deserve a harsher backllash if they refused to roll out vectoring for Huawei cabinets just because HCI ones can't have it yet.

You may as well say they should limit all FTTC and FTTP to 512k till everyone gets ADSL faster than that. The logic is just as illogical!

if they did that I would expect a price differential as compensation. My point was BT would probably sell both as the same product.