Yeap and was one of the things trialled in the early days of ADSL development too

In reply to a post by lee111s:

In reply to a post by mlmclaren:

In reply to a post by lee111s:

Blame Thatcher

Not quiet sure why we would blame a dead person... or how even?

I udnerstand what your trying to say, but' it's a poor excuse.

BT wanted to start a fibre roll out back in the 80's and she stopped it as she wanted more competition in the market.

In reply to a post by professor973:

http://www.techradar.com/news/world-of-tech/how-the-...

Yes, but there's no point crying 'now' over spilt milk 'back then'.... BT could still do what they wanted to then, and currently the issue is that they're holding back something that could make an improvement on current services and even improve its capabilty in some cases.

In reply to a post by gt94sss2:

I wouldn't worry so much.

It was always going to go down as new customers came online but the impact of each additional user will be less and less.

Now that the first signs of G.INP being rolled out to ECI cabinets have appeared - I suspect Openreach will turn to rollout more vectoring..

Well the latest new connection took 7Mb/s of my downstream sync, I hope something happen's soon, when the 183 apartment's next door go online and completely fill the wee little huawei 96 I'm connect too, I feel there will be quiet a few issues.

It only drops so far then stays constant. No difference here between 200 other lines and 450.

Nothing is going to happen soon by the way. The odds of an urban cabinet serving short lines in a Non-BDUK area being prioritised for vectoring are, to be generous, slim.

There are cabinets in far greater need with far more visibility.

Edited by deleted (Sun 06-Mar-16 21:29:45)

Is that becasue it only affects a certain block of tones?

At what point will it stop decreasing?

Does a cab being BDUK funded make any difference... my cab is BDUK funded....

There are only so many lines that can produce so much interference close enough to your pair to cause issues. Beyond that point there's no more possible.

Understood regarding BDUK, however unless it's taking lines above 24-30Mb it won't make any difference from BT's point of view.

The target is around that, not around how many lines hit 80Mb versus 60 if vectored.

It would actually apply to both commercial and BDUK funded cabinets in areas that have coverage contracts. If a vectoring processor can pull some lines into superfast range there's a case for putting one into a cabinet.

If everyone on a cabinet is already above 24Mb or 30Mb there's zero case for vectoring.

Edited by deleted (Sun 06-Mar-16 23:07:46)

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

"why you need to be on FTTP to fully get the 1Gbps with G.FAST"

That makes no sense since any DSL technology does not work over fibre, it requires a metallic path

That's what BT says.

Unless your copper length is 19m or less you won't get 1Gbps.

In reference to www.btplc.com/News/Articles/ShowArticle.cfm?ArticleID=1F647C20-6F61...:

During the G.FAST trials, downstream speeds of around 800Mbps were achieved over a 19m length of copper, combined with upstream speeds of more than 200Mbps. Impressive speeds of around 700/200Mbps were also achieved over longer lines of 66m, a distance that encompasses around 80 per cent of such connections. As well as delivering ultrafast speeds, the technology also offers the flexibility to tailor the allocation of the total 1Gbps speed according to a users� needs.

That doc has changed the last time I read it, it use to say that to reach the 1Gbps or faster with G.FAST requires FTTP or a copper length of 19m or less.
I also wondered what they meant by that, but just thought well BT must know what they are saying, maybe that's why its changed.

Paul

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Yeap and was one of the things trialled in the early days of ADSL development too

Home Choice worked rather well if you are referring to that, sadly that got cancelled and then got brought out.
I know it was great when we had it while it ran.

Paul

In reply to a post by PaulKirby:

That doc has changed the last time I read it, it use to say that to reach the 1Gbps or faster with G.FAST requires FTTP or a copper length of 19m or less.
I also wondered what they meant by that, but just thought well BT must know what they are saying, maybe that's why its changed.

G.Fast has configurable variation between upstream and downstream in a way that ADSL and VDSL2 doesn't.

As this article says, "any ratio between 90% down/10% up and 30% down/70% up.":
https://techzine.alcatel-lucent.com/gfast-breaks-thr...

In those 19m tests, BT could have chosen a split of 900/100, 500/500, or 300/700. All having a total of a gigabit. They tested at 800/200.

Because of this variability between upstream and downstream, the overall G.Fast capability is usually specified as a single figure: the aggregate speed - the total of both downstream and upstream.

Of course, this brings about a new source of confusion to the layman. Does the number mean a downstream speed? or an aggregate one?

2 things.

1 - you panicking too much, crosstalk happens, but it isnt guantueed to be large crosstalk, its luck based. Also even if your line goes down to e.g. 60mbit, a 60mbit FTTC line is generally way better than say a 150mbit cable line. This is coming from someone who is probably more fussy than the typical broadband end user.
2 - Vectoring I think is unlikely in the commercial FTTC foot print as BT look to have moved onto g.fast and rollouts appear to be in only BDUK areas. I think BT dont care if a line syncs at 60mbit or 80mbit, they only care about what they can market (or perhaps in BT retail case if a line can handle iptv stable).

Edited by Chrysalis (Mon 07-Mar-16 15:10:58)