General Discussion
  >> Fibre Broadband


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.


Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | [3] | (show all)   Print Thread
Standard User noinchki
(member) Sat 23-May-20 14:28:20
Print Post

Re: Is the Universal Service Obligation a Bad Joke?


[re: MHC] [link to this post]
 
Thanks for the suggestion. I already have a second line and have a Draytek router that supports load balancing. Not quite as good as line bonding, but it does help to spread the load with multiple users. For P2P downloads I have seen speeds as high as 16 Mbps download. The combined cost of the two lines I'm paying just now is more than the USO cap of £45 /mth, so as you suggest in my case it would be possible and would allow the full bandwidth for all types of downloads. Any idea how I can get this solution via USO?
Standard User MHC
(sensei) Sat 23-May-20 15:34:58
Print Post

Re: Is the Universal Service Obligation a Bad Joke?


[re: noinchki] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by noinchki:
Any idea how I can get this solution via USO?


I don't think you can - that is why I said OR need to "think outside the box" ... maybe flag up a USO request and then put the suggestion to them.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

M H C


taurus excreta cerebrum vincit
Administrator MrSaffron
(staff) Sat 23-May-20 18:19:59
Print Post

Re: Is the Universal Service Obligation a Bad Joke?


[re: MHC] [link to this post]
 
Bonding does not exist as a USO option.

People like AAISP can do it, but the cost of the hardware at both ends makes most people wince and stick with load balancing.

The author of the above post is a thinkbroadband staff member. It may not constitute an official statement on behalf of thinkbroadband.


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.

Standard User MHC
(sensei) Sat 23-May-20 18:58:05
Print Post

Re: Is the Universal Service Obligation a Bad Joke?


[re: MrSaffron] [link to this post]
 
That is my point, they should move away for basic solutions and look multiple line and bonding - it would be way cheaper than spending thousands on other alternatives.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

M H C


taurus excreta cerebrum vincit
Standard User Swac3
(learned) Sun 24-May-20 14:15:09
Print Post

Re: Is the Universal Service Obligation a Bad Joke?


[re: MHC] [link to this post]
 
Possible in some cases maybe, but if our area is anything to go by there's no chance of channel bonding being a mass solution.

Our direct buried line surfaces at several points along the run where cores are then spliced and head off up to a property, I'd hazard a guess that's quite common.
Standard User BranH
(learned) Sun 24-May-20 17:50:44
Print Post

Re: Is the Universal Service Obligation a Bad Joke?


[re: Swac3] [link to this post]
 
Think there would be the same problem here, not enough spare working pairs to allow three lines to be bonded to reach USO speeds.
Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | [3] | (show all)   Print Thread

Jump to