In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

I am now below my new estimate, ordered a MAC of BT, will join plusnet and immediatly open fault when I start off below estimate.

How did you get out of the 18month min term contract with BT?

remember when I recontracted to turn of the traffic shaping?

that replaced my 18 month contract with a 12 month contract.

I was also given an opt-out earlier in the year but that opt-out was temporary.

If I migrate this month I will still have to pay off approximate 2 months as the recontract was done in feb.

Edited by Chrysalis (Thu 05-Dec-13 20:17:36)

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

remember when I recontracted to turn of the traffic shaping?
that replaced my 18 month contract with a 12 month contract.
I was also given an opt-out earlier in the year but that opt-out was temporary.
If I migrate this month I will still have to pay off approximate 2 months as the recontract was done in feb.

Nice, hope you get what you want at PlusNet. I'm still looking for my new ISP, when I leave BT in Feb, as I want static IP and preferably IPv6, but without the insane high cost that AAISP would be. Zen may be my destination as I fundamentally disagree with PlusNet's traffic management ideas. (that someone watching iPlayer is more important than someone watching a streamed HD movie from Apple, or downloading the move, or even installing an OS X update)

Because BT gave me a new number on existing line and got it wrong I had to do some research to even get FTTC.

Locally to me all the houses with the same postcode and house numbers (address search) and in the same sequences of numbers have the same speed based (bt wholesale checker) no's 1,3,5,7,9 might have 80Mbps, then no's 11,13,15,17,19 might be 76 Mbps.

Using phone numbers produces the same results (if people don't have FTTC ... I believe).

I observe the groups of numbers seems to correspond to Telegraph poles, all the houses going to the same telepgraph pole had the same speed prediction, new pole, further away, slower, new pole nearer faster. I believe the numbers are based on the telegraph poles, whether its measured by a test to the pole or based on distance to the cabinet (presumably BT have GIS system with pole positions) I don't know.

However when someone gets FTTC its all change...

Now I have FTTC my results change to my actual... indeed my phone number and my address but there is more....

Not just my house, but all my neighbours phone numbers and address searches, have been updated using my actual results to adjust those nearer and those further away i.e. one person getting a real speed for FTTC updates the database for many people.

I suspect someone else getting FTTC nearer than me would cause it to change those lines and address around it based on that line. How it would cope speeds being slower near, faster further away I don't know but its not just my postcode, the effect hits postcodes further down my road as well and near. I suspect BT understand how addresses correspond to the phone lines from the poles and their position along them.

So the speed is either based on a pure estimate where there is no nearby FTTC customer or where there is a nearby FTTC customer it cause the checker to refine the estimate over a geographical area (line related in some way ?). They are not testing individual lines without FTTC.

I might be wrong but that is my best guess based on my observations.

BTW The engineer who did my FTTC install implied that there weren't many FTTC installs near me and when I check phone numbers nearby I get a lot of unrecognised numbers ... Sky, Virgin, etc I believe. So my belief my FTTC install has effected 100+ properties isn't just me playing with checker before and after.

Net of this is, if you know someone nearby has FTTC, chances are the estimate is going to be close (assuming the cabinets are the same), if you don't it could be a lot different ... my estimate was 64/20 before, the engineer said 80/20 and I am seeing 77+/18+.

Hope this helps someone understand the estimates better.

Ignitionnet
I can remember reading that Openreach insisted that even unbundled pairs had a testhead under Openreach control so that they could test/fault the lines. Otherwise how would they know where faults are.

Some CPs want to remove this under the impression it will reduce the cost and there was something on the OFCOM site about this a few months ago.

If it is removed CPs will have to provide their own linetests to Openreach when there is a fault so that there is some idea where the problem is. I see that as a disaster as most ISP just want to pass the blame when something breaks not have to help fix the problem.

cja

I suspect you are correct, certainly once you have FTTC the results are much more accurate as are others around you when in a dense area.

Where there are long distances from the distribution point ( could be many poles to a house!) I think the problems arise. This is why we are seeing a few inaccurate estimates in rural areas a long way from the cab.

Rule we should be using is, " if there are many spans of wire to YOUR house the estimate may be higher than the actual when delivered" "If you are direct off a pole with many others the estimates are likely to be correct"