New G.Fast pod on my cabinet

A new G.Fast pod (which is not yet live) has recently appeared on my cabinet, hooray...However, i'm way too far from it to benefit from the very fast speeds, boo....

I hear vectoring is enabled on all G.Fast enabled cabinets by default. Would this also be active on the VDSL2 side?

I'm hoping that if it is, my speed may increase slightly as I am seemingly experiencing some crosstalk (speeds decreased as more neighbours took up FTTC).

EDIT: Forgot to mention this is the larger Huawei fibre cabinet.

Edited by deleted (Fri 03-Aug-18 09:06:59)

No.

They are completely separate DSLAM's.

Vectoring isn't compatible between the 2 technologies anyway.

How does vectoring work if you have both VDSL and G.fast on the same PCP and both are using vectoring?

Since both will be trying to cancel out noise how can they does this when they are trying to do this over the same cables when neither can know what the other is doing?

Deployments in the UK (Openreach) are using frequencies from 19-106 MHz (source). VDSL (17a, highest profile used by OR) and G.Fast do not overlap, so there is no concern for crosstalk between the two technologies. Although starting at a higher frequency is detrimental to distance, hence why G.Fast can be a lot slower than VDSL at further distances.

Edited by deleted (Sat 04-Aug-18 11:13:23)

Is have thought it unlikely to have a vectored VDSL cab and g.fast together in the openreach network.

Having vectoring enabled on VDSL is rare anyway, at least in the UK. So I imagine having vectored VDSL and G.Fast available to you is certainly almost nil... you'd probably have a better chance winning the lottery! Though there is no harm of having G.Fast and vectored VDSL in the vicinity considering they use different parts of the spectrum, though they will only benefit their own technologies.

In reply to a post by j0el:

Having vectoring enabled on VDSL is rare anyway

Not the case, there are more and more Huawei cabs having vectoring enabled for VDSL.

Perhaps you know something that I don't know. Though I am not aware of any plans from OR for a widespread vectoring rollout outside the scope to enable it on networks where deemed "beneficial". Though I imagine that "beneficial" will be on short to medium length lines where there is only 1 DSLAM per cabinet (since uncancelled crosstalk from other DSLAMs can be a detriment).

Could be wrong, but that's just how I interpreted it.

It most certainly is rare.
OpenReach haven't done ANY commercial VDSL2 Vectoring.

The only time Vectoring is deployed is on targeted BDUK funded cabinets where Vectoring will push properties over the 24Mb "Superfast" targets.

As a follow up question then...

Lets say that at 400m is where G.fast and VDSL2 equalise. Beyond that you'll be slower on G.fast than you would on VDSL2.

But (picking at random) lets say you're 500m away. So on paper you'll be faster by choosing VDSL2 and get about 60Mbps. But you've got a load of crosstalk from neighbours and consequently you're not getting 60Mbps and are more like 40-50Mbps.
Could a vectored G.fast be better than your non-vectored VDSL2? And will you be allowed to order G.fast, or will it be "No you're too far away".

The frequencies used by VDSL2 (up to 17MHz) have harmonics which interfere to some degree with G.Fast transmissions.

Could a vectored G.fast be better than your non-vectored VDSL2?

At 500m NO

G.fast has a minimum expected speed of 100 Mbps that applies to orders usually, the aim being to avoid people getting slow G.fast

What G.fast in an area may do is result in having more people leaving VDSL2 for G.fast and thus reducing the impact of VDSL2 cross talk, since there are less people on VDSL2.

So many variables to take into account. This is where "on paper" differs to real world scenarios.

G.Fast is always vectored - it is mandatory. Putting that aside, G.Fast could be faster than non-vectored VDSL in such a case, though it depends how attenuated the connection is (pair material, bridge taps, etc.).

If VDSL was provided by an ECI cabinet (which lacks 3 dB and G.INP) then perhaps it is even more likely. Though, even if G.Fast could be quicker in such a scenario, the Openreach computer will likely say "no" as, to the best of my knowledge (I could be wrong), if no estimates for the technology are over 100 Mbps then it will not show on the checker (and therefore ISPs will not offer it).

This ignores the upstream element of the connection which will probably be lower than VDSL at that distance.

Edited to fix grammar and post layout.

Edited by deleted (Tue 07-Aug-18 17:55:07)

Thanks @MrSaffron and @j0el.

Of course, enable Vectoring on VDSL2 and we wouldn't be asking the question.

There may be a cost involved, i.e. paying for the software

Seems to involve a new card in each cab, at least.

I forgot to mention that G.Fast would be comparable with VDSL in terms of speed over longer distances if existing DSL services were switched off and G.Fast could utilise the 2-106 MHz profile (as we know, rollouts by Openreach use 19-106 MHz profile currently).

VDSL, even if not vectored, should have the slight edge over much longer distances (we're talking a few kilometers here) due to the power density being higher than G.Fast. Vectoring is most effective on short to medium length lines, so those really far out generally experience no real benefit.

As far as I am aware, there is no easy way to allow such technologies to co-exist in the spectrum without consequences to either technology - I think this is the best compromise scenario in place currently.

VDSL2 vectoring can have considerable benefit at long distances.
I've seen it more than double downstream sync from 2.6Mb to 5.8Mb on an extremely long rural line.

With regards to G.Fast and VDSL2 Spectrum...

NICC have recently published ND1520 V1.1.1
Operation of G.fast below 17.7 Mhz in VDSL spectrum
http://www.niccstandards.org.uk/files/current/ND1520...

It describes various ways to increase the rate/reach of G.fast, at the expense of VDSL2 though.

Edited by j0hn83 (Wed 08-Aug-18 14:00:33)

That's a nice gain. It would be interesting to know whether there are many other VDSL2 subscribers at that distance in the same bundle of pairs.

Looks like an interesting read there. Thanks for sharing that. I imagine there's a lot in there that I won't understand. I'll be brave and hopefully not get overloaded by terminology.

I would imagine it would be a detriment to VDSL2 to attempt to increase the rate and reach of G.Fast. I do recall there were some changes to G.Fast not too long ago that increased the bits to 14 from 12, but that is only still going to help with those closer to the cabinet/pod.

In reply to a post by j0hn83:

It most certainly is rare.
OpenReach haven't done ANY commercial VDSL2 Vectoring.

The only time Vectoring is deployed is on targeted BDUK funded cabinets where Vectoring will push properties over the 24Mb "Superfast" targets.

Vectoring gets turned on as the take up increases on a cabinet, and there are plenty of them out there now.

Maybe you know better than me then and have some inside info to say that only BDUK cabs have had vectoring enabled, in which case who am i to argue.

As i mentioned before and as i'm sure we all know, these are Huawei cabs only.

In reply to a post by Westyfield2:

As a follow up question then...

Lets say that at 400m is where G.fast and VDSL2 equalise. Beyond that you'll be slower on G.fast than you would on VDSL2.

But (picking at random) lets say you're 500m away. So on paper you'll be faster by choosing VDSL2 and get about 60Mbps. But you've got a load of crosstalk from neighbours and consequently you're not getting 60Mbps and are more like 40-50Mbps.
Could a vectored G.fast be better than your non-vectored VDSL2? And will you be allowed to order G.fast, or will it be "No you're too far away".

You won't be able to order it, as it will not be an option for you. BT retail are offering a minimum 100 meg download speed guarantee on G.Fast products, so they wouldn't sell you the product if the checker says you can't get at least that speed.

It's not any inside info.
Every cabinet that we've seen with Vectoring has been a BDUK cabinet.
Simples.
On top off that OpenReach have said they have no plans to deploy VDSL2 Vectoring.

Given that the Vectoring modules and line cards cost quite a bit and OpenReach see absolutely no commercial benefit from paying for these modules it's safe to assume OpenReach aren't randomly installing these out of the goodness of their heart.

A number of BDUK areas have confirmed they are selectively using Vectoring in targeted areas.

It's all about getting the best bang for their buck with BDUK. If adding a Vectoring module to a cabinet will get another 100 properties over 24Mb and that's the cheapest way to cover those 100 properties then they will use it.

As i mentioned before and as i'm sure we all know, these are Huawei cabs only

Absolutely.
All the BDUK cabinets are Huawei anyway.
The ECI cabinets can't do system level Vectoring.

Every cabinet that we've seen with Vectoring has been a BDUK cabinet.
Simples.
On top off that OpenReach have said they have no plans to deploy VDSL2 Vectoring.

Given that the Vectoring modules and line cards cost quite a bit and OpenReach see absolutely no commercial benefit from paying for these modules it's safe to assume OpenReach aren't randomly installing these out of the goodness of their heart.

A number of BDUK areas have confirmed they are selectively using Vectoring in targeted areas.

Pretty much sums it up.

For what it's worth, we are on a long VDSL2 link (about 3km) and get a link speed of around 4mbps.

The availability checker now says we should get 1mbps via VDSL2 but it used to say 3-4 when we migrated from ADSL which we had to do via PlusNet as BT would not accept the order. No idea why it changed but I suspect we are the only ones in our village who managed to move to VDSL.

I don't suppose there is much chance of vectoring being enabled but if it was and resulted in a doubling of our bandwidth then I doubt I would bother with Gigaclear who are due on the scene some time before the end of 2019.

@andyhurley
If you mean BT Infinity (as was), then it wasn't offered to anyone with an estimate under 15Mbps. Thought to be in order to help keep their "up to 76Mbps" and "up to 38Mbps" figures that 10% could achieve, by excluding all below 15Mbps.

They did have a technically identical product called "Faster Broadband with Fibre" that you could order if you knew about it. Which of course had no effect on the Infinity statistics.

Interestingly one has turned up on my cab (Brackley cab 15) even though we're not on any official roll-out list. The old cabinet was removed and a new one installed last year so I assume it's not just an extension for more telephone lines.

Must admit I hadn't paid much attention to G.FAST so I always thought the pods were on the side of the DSLAM not the PCP.

Edited by Andrue (Fri 02-Nov-18 15:08:03)

In reply to a post by Andrue:

Interestingly one has turned up on my cab (Brackley cab 15) even though we're not on any official roll-out list. The old cabinet was removed and a new one installed last year so I assume it's not just an extension for more telephone lines.

There are a few places I am aware of that have or are in the process of getting G.fast that have not been officially announced. I could be wrong, but I have a feeling that Openreach is not announcing all places.

I can see that cabinet 17 has got G.fast. Are you sure it is a G.fast pod? They always have vents and copper extensions do not. Pods containing Huawei hardware have two vents located on the front door panel, one at the lower part and one on the upper. Nokia ones just have a vent at the lower part of the front door as far as I know.

In reply to a post by Andrue:

Must admit I hadn't paid much attention to G.FAST so I always thought the pods were on the side of the DSLAM not the PCP.

G.fast pods, in the current amendment, are always fixed to the side of the PCP. VDSL DSLAMs can sometimes have extensions on the side of them, though it is certainly unrelated to G.fast as it is a port upgrade to expand the capacity of the cabinet when there are no ports available for new subscribers.

I can see that cabinet 17 has got G.fast

Brackley #17? How interesting. Not sure where that is but it's the first I've heard of Brackley getting any upgrade.

Only cabinet 17 at present too

Are you within distance to benefit anyway, once it becomes enabled? I believe approx. 400m is where both technologies perform roughly the same - at least for downstream, some of the ranges on the BTW checker for upstream look abysmal compared to VDSL at the tail end. It won't be "available" to you anyway if you are expected to receive less than 100 Mbps (which some sources tell me is no further than around 370m).

We have loads of pods appeared here recently (EMMONT), our cab 43 was replaced a few weeks ago, and the pod was added to it a couple of weeks ago.

Can find any details of it anywhere, still nothing on the checkers etc?

We have 350Mb virgin here so it does seem to be too little too late?

In reply to a post by Philce:

We have 350Mb virgin here so it does seem to be too little too late?

Not necessarily.

1. G.Fast has up to 50Mbps upload speed, compared to Virgin 21Mbps

2. G.Fast is an OpenReach wholesale service available via multiple ISPs - choose based on price, quality of service, or whether you want features like static IP or IPv6.

In reply to a post by j0el:

Are you within distance to benefit anyway, once it becomes enabled? I believe approx. 400m is where both technologies perform roughly the same - at least for downstream, some of the ranges on the BTW checker for upstream look abysmal compared to VDSL at the tail end. It won't be "available" to you anyway if you are expected to receive less than 100 Mbps (which some sources tell me is no further than around 370m).

I probably will be. I currently sync at around 70Mb/s but when I first got FTTC my modem reported an attainable of over 90Mb/s and for the first six months I was actually synced at 799999. If the G.FAST pod is on the PCP it very likely reduces the total cable length by 20 metres. According to Google Earth it's about 320 metres to the PCP, following the pavement which has regular BT duct covers in it.

But to be honest I don't know if I'll bother signing up for it or not. I don't really need the 70/20 I have now so it'll depend on how much my inner geek can justify whatever the extra cost is

In reply to a post by Philce:

We have loads of pods appeared here recently (EMMONT), our cab 43 was replaced a few weeks ago, and the pod was added to it a couple of weeks ago.

Can find any details of it anywhere, still nothing on the checkers etc?

We have 350Mb virgin here so it does seem to be too little too late?

Drop me a PM with your address and I'll check for an estimate for you.
We're planning to be on-net in EMMONT in a few months, but can help either way

In reply to a post by Philce:

We have loads of pods appeared here recently (EMMONT), our cab 43 was replaced a few weeks ago, and the pod was added to it a couple of weeks ago.

Can find any details of it anywhere, still nothing on the checkers etc?

We have 350Mb virgin here so it does seem to be too little too late?

Details are indeed a bit scarce, at least what is publicly available until it becomes available. If you hear a gentle hum eminating from the pod then you know it is at least hooked up, but you could be waiting for cable link upgrades AFAIK. Your best bet is to check daily on the BTW checker. Don't bother enquiring on the Openreach website with their Fibre Enquires Team because you'll be wasting your time.

While the Openreach G.fast factsheet from late 2017 says "typically takes us about three months to
plan and build Gfast services in a new location", you could be in the unfortunate position like with a few pilot areas where it long exceeded that (though I do not know why, presumably cable links).

In reply to a post by candlerb:

1. G.Fast has up to 50Mbps upload speed, compared to Virgin 21Mbps

2. G.Fast is an OpenReach wholesale service available via multiple ISPs - choose based on price, quality of service, or whether you want features like static IP or IPv6.

Perhaps we're also forgetting overutilisation and latency issues in a few parts of the VM network. If you have any issues with performance, it will be a nice switch. Though maybe you implied it with number 2 on your list.