Without wishing to prolong the discussion regarding different companies within the BT group, who is actually responsible for the equipment (DSLAM etc.) inside the FIBRE cabinet & any patch cables from the FIBRE cabinet to the old cabinet?

All the visiting engineers (regardless of skill set / job description / who they work for etc.) have informed me that they have no access whatsoever to the actual FIBRE cabinet.

How can potential FTTC faults be FULLY investigated if the engineers can't actually see, never mind touch part of the FTTC equipment?

e.g. What if 40Mb is just about available inside the FIBRE cabinet, or even at the other end of the patch cable, but it just doesn't have sufficient power to push it a few hundred yards without losing 10Mb to 20Mb on its way?
Who could/would investigate that?

It is equally "how it is" that BT can legitimately be said to be at fault.

I also repeat:-

The people you are talking to are fully aware of the setup. They are not in the same category as others you may perhaps legitimately address, who truly are not aware of the separate BT Group companies and the relationships between them.

The people you are talking to fully understood what the OP meant, as did you. I maintain the better term would have been BT Openreach, and see no reason we shouldn't use that term, particularly given the logo on all Openreach web pages.

If British Telecommnications plc choose to include that logo, the strong intention must be that readers associate Openreach with BT. There can be no other reason for its otherwise pointless inclusion.

On that basis alone your argument collapses.

Edited by RobertoS (Thu 19-Jan-12 13:35:50)

All the FTTC kit up until the first point of the GEA handover point (usually in a nearby phone exchange) is part of the Openreach company

The engineers won't have access as they don't have the training. There is not just one type of openreach engineer.

The sufficient power comments don't make sense? If the DSLAM does not have sufficient power via mains, this will result in it reporting an error to remote location before probably switching off. The lose of speed over the distance of copper cable is down to basic physics and how frequencies of signals are attenuated by copper.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

The sufficient power comments don't make sense? If the DSLAM does not have sufficient power via mains, this will result in it reporting an error to remote location before probably switching off. The lose of speed over the distance of copper cable is down to basic physics and how frequencies of signals are attenuated by copper.

I'll try to re-phrase my query.
I actually meant Output Power, not mains power.

I am aware that Output Power is often adjusted on a case-by-case basis to help avoid crosstalk onto nearby ADSL connections, but I have no idea by how much, or even where the adjustments are made.

If Output Power is low, either due to an intentional reduction or a fault within the FIBRE cabinet or a HR issue within its patch cable, who would deal with it?

I am clutching at straws in an attempt to understand why I achieved 33Mb actual download speeds for the first month on 8c.
My connection had various physical D-side "faults" fixed, both before & after the switch to 17a, yet my initial higher speeds have not returned.

From all the posts I can recall, users have experienced an increase in DS speeds, at the expense of a loss of some US speed since being switched to 17a.

If their attainable rates were already well in excess of 40Mb/10Mb, they won't have seen any material effect on actual download speed while speeds are still capped.

However, I have seen a number of posts confirming that users who were downloading at around 33 - 35Mb, were suddenly able to download a lot closer to the 40Mb following the switch to 17a.

Edited by deleted (Thu 19-Jan-12 13:53:37)

I believe BT Operate install and maintain the mini MSANS in the cabinets although I think the are Openreach property.

Openreach is NOT a separate company it is an operating Division of BT. Note what it says - A BT Group Business no where does it infer it is a separate company.

In 2005, BT gave legally binding Undertakings to Ofcom which resulted in the creation of an access services division – Openreach.

The CEO is appointed by the main BT board or one of the board committees and the senior management (organisational Directors) appointed by the CEO of Openreach in agreement with the main BT board committees.

It is.

In reply to a post by lee111s:

It is.

It is what?

We have clearly established it is not a UK registered company. (I previously erroneously said "listed", which implies Stock Exchange listing). For it to be a separate company it would have to be registered at Companies House, at least as a Private Company owned by BT Telecommunications plc. It isn't.

Do you think we can move on? We are all agreed that the usage of "BT" by itself to refer to Openreach is sub-optimal. You will find some or all of the contributors to this post often make a point to non-savvy visitors that this distinction matters.

However your position that the epithet "BT Openreach" is not valid is simply untenable.

This thread has a purpose. You are derailing it. If you wish to continue the argument I suggest you stop screwing up this thread and start one of your own in the appropriate form. It's nothing to do with the Openreach DLM, nor in fact anything to do with "Fibre Broadband".

Output power is usually a negotiation between MSAN and modem, with the MSAN working to cabinet wide limits, i.e. wont rob power from one line to give another more.

With Operate working on the behalf of Openreach.