In reply to a post by Nightglow:

Also 0xa459 here, changed on Tuesday, Wednesday this week.

Changed in the early hours of Wednesday here also.

Looks like a software change. I find it unlikely there are masses of Openreach guys working in the early hours replacing line cards nationwide.

EDIT: Some research indicates that chipset IDs were changing around G.inp rollout time too. This didn't need new line cards either. I have a strong suspicion these IDs are quite a long way from being hard coded.

Either way I can't see how it's a preparation for vectoring. There should be a change request raised against the DSLAM in question, and the vectoring programme manager at Openreach has not indicated a widespread rollout of the technology.

Much as though many would love to see vectoring I think Openreach know that VDSL doesn't have anywhere near the lifespan they were hoping it would, and their plans are centred around G.fast and FTTPoD version 2 with vectoring used to hit local authority coverage targets.

EDIT 2: Add to that that Virgin Media are expanding their coverage again, and in the not too distant future their lowest speed will be faster than FTTC, with their high end package 4 times faster. There is no mileage in spending money speeding up FTTC en masse.

Openreach went for the fastest and cheapest option to deliver higher speeds, it's been proven insufficient for the future by BT's own retail arm and their 4k TV product. Deeper fibre is needed, and/or, depending on distance from node, retrofitting of the DSLAMs or new ones built next to them for G.fast.

Edited by deleted (Sat 15-Aug-15 23:21:58)

I don't suppose it brings back upstream G.INP?

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

I don't suppose it brings back upstream G.INP?

That was a CPE caveat, not a DSLAM one?

EDIT: I guess you're wondering if software changes have been made so that the DSLAM can handle CPE that don't do upstream G.INP by just applying it to downstream and leaving upstream fast path instead of applying interleave to both?

I guess that's possible; however given that this chipset ID was seen as far back as February, way before the issues came to light, it seems unlikely.

Edited by deleted (Sat 15-Aug-15 23:25:53)

Rats!

Strangely I had G.INP on the upstream and downstream, just under a month ago.

My cabinet (Huawei) was enabled at the end of May so never had G.INP MK1 so it was very odd.

I probably would still have it if I hadn't had DLM reset on a fault...

have you asked this manager about ECI?

It seems anyone with the ability to ask these questions only cares about hauwei Since you are in a position to ask I would appreciate some answers. Thanks.

Also vectoring isnt that incapable. If they rolled it out and enabled pair bonding, then most FTTC users would be able to reach speeds like 150/50.

The problem with VM of course its all marketing, real performance with their congestion issues is usually quite a bit different.

Of course I dont disagree with you with openreach going for the cheapest option, thats in BT's DNA. I still smile about your payday loan comment as ironically it is right in how they act with investment.

Mine still unchanged DSLAM/MSAN type: BDCM:0xa44f / v0xa44f

Just rebooted my modem, still a44f on both.

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

I don't suppose it brings back upstream G.INP?

That was a CPE caveat, not a DSLAM one?

EDIT: I guess you're wondering if software changes have been made so that the DSLAM can handle CPE that don't do upstream G.INP by just applying it to downstream and leaving upstream fast path instead of applying interleave to both?

I guess that's possible; however given that this chipset ID was seen as far back as February, way before the issues came to light, it seems unlikely.

Yes that's what's happening. It just won't be applied when G.INP on the upstream isn't supported by the modem.

Yes my understanding is that AT&T use pair bonding on their VDSL2 U-Verse service in The States. Their speeds tend to be lower than ours though even with the bonding so maybe their cabinets are more spaces out.

But I'm not sure why Openreach never went for bonding also.