The BDUK framwork

Being peripherally involved in a LA scheme, I wonder if anyone here knows HOW the BDUK 'target' for the UK - "90% at 24mb+" and the rest at "a minimum of 2mb" will be assessed?

Will it be on sync speeds or on the lowest actual MAX speed delivered at the router at peak times, and how will it be measured anyway?

It is some years since the Intercai Mondiale survey in the south undertaken for SEEDA (2008). Will the relevant providers be allowed to produce the answers unchallenged or will there be an independent survey to confirm that targets have been achieved?

There is a good reason why Ofcom is tracking speeds
http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/5578-uk-average-b...

What is lowest max speed delivered at the router? As if the user visits a website that can only push data at 10 Mbps to them, that would be a lot slower than what the connection is capable of.

As for independent checking, sites like ourselves can and do periodic checks of our results versus the ofcom ones, and if they was a major discrepancy we would be talking about it.

Also Surely which website the user is is irrelevant if we are to use sync speed?

I assume therefore that in xxx 2015 we must expect column 3 to show 0 everywhere and 4 to all be 90 plus.

Do we know how 'Superfast availability' is measured? Is it on the ridiculous 'premises passed'?

PS I had not noticed the 'change' to targets ie

almost all premises in the UK will be able to access a basic broadband service of at least 2Mbit/s

On the basis of the OfCom report, HMG could theoretically close the file and go off on holiday!

We found that 10% of all UK connections had fixed broadband speeds of less than 2Mbit/s this year, a significant improvement on the 14% recorded last year.

Sync speed is probably not going to be used, and there would be criticism if that was the sole measure.

On the almost all, we covered that I think two years ago, and is taken to mean more like 0.1% not getting it, rather than the current 10%.

If superfast availability is not measured by premises passed, how else is it measured? If it is premises connected, then that would actually be the take-up, and the 90% goal has NEVER been a take-up one. With FTTC your telephone line is not actually connected until you order, and the jumpering is then done at the PCP, and with FTTH the final 10m to 30m is not installed until you order it.

There is the 50% buying a 100 Meg service in 2020 EU Digital Agenda goal, which is pretty easy for the UK as by 2020, at least 4 million Virgin Media connections will be buying that sort of speed even if Openreach vanished.

It's defined as measurable traffic - so data passing to your PC without the overheads - if my recollection is correct. Haven't seen any consideration of congestion / contention other than in some specific LA docs where individuals have taken it on themselves to define that.

Homes passed is inevitable unless you're forcing people to buy it.

It's defined as measurable traffic - so data passing to your PC without the overheads

- measured how?

Homes passed is inevitable unless you're forcing people to buy it.

- 'Homes passed' is meaningless unless the option to connect for each subscriber is there, not just a vague 'fibre in the town/village'. ie How many connected PCPs?: How many connections on the rack in each PCP? When will the next rack be fitted if demand requires?

'Congestion / contention' is important - if the backbone does not have enough capacity and cross-talk also becomes a problem, what use is Infinity? If LAs are thinking about it, well done.

Measuring isn't specified in anything I've read, the point being it's data going onto your hard disk (or streaming) rather than ATM cell rates - free of overheads. Hence a 2M fixed speed ADSL isn't a 2M USC service as the former peaks out around 1900 kbits/s of data.

If I were writing a procurement spec I would ask for a speed testing protocol to be specified - the provider can sit a gadget on their network and test streaming rate to a laptop as a testing mode.

Homes passed - as in homes able to connect to a service if they want it - seems a practical approach. Unconnected PCPs or uncabled streets won't count. I believe the contracts will typically specify an uptake rate on which the price is based and have a clawback mechanism if this is exceeded - to minimise State Aid. So someone might bid on the basis of 20% takeup and if it's actually 30% have to make a refund.

Well the ability to be able to get the service. VM for example may pass a lot of homes but that does not mean VM will provide a service. It also depends on how you specify homes passed

I doubt anyone really knows for certain. Short of measuring the spped at everyhome I dont see how they can get an accurate figure

Availability seems to be another blackart. Many state it will be done by homes passed. THe do not define what is meant by homes past but presumably it means a line passes close of near to your home but that does not mean they will provide a service

I suspect they have not given much thought to it

In reply to a post by yarwell:

Measuring isn't specified in anything I've read, the point being it's data going onto your hard disk (or streaming) rather than ATM cell rates - free of overheads. Hence a 2M fixed speed ADSL isn't a 2M USC service as the former peaks out around 1900 kbits/s of data.

If I were writing a procurement spec I would ask for a speed testing protocol to be specified - the provider can sit a gadget on their network and test streaming rate to a laptop as a testing mode.

The Ofcom tests are actually run by SamKnows, who have a panel of end-users, each with a gadget placed on their network (they call this a Whitebox).

The Ofcom report (full PDF version) has this to say as a note against a list of sync speeds:

In reference to stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/telecoms-research/infra...:

3.37 It should be noted that the sync speed information published here is not directly
comparable with speed test data measured on an end-to-end basis by companies
such as SamKnows. In our latest report using data collected by SamKnows we
measured an average speed of 9.0Mbit/s.

They also describe (quite accurately) about the relative merits of knowing sync speed & throughput speed.

It then has an invalid footnote link onto their own website for the throughput data (May 2012). Here's the fixed link: Ofcom Broadband Speeds report - May 2012.

The SamKnows testing methodology is documented on the SamKnows website.

Homes passed - as in homes able to connect to a service if they want it - seems a practical approach. Unconnected PCPs or uncabled streets won't count.

I agree. All the government can do is to make it *available* (or at least to encourage making it available). They can't enforce anyone to actually upgrade to it - rather like they can't force someone to actually use the internet either.

I believe the contracts will typically specify an uptake rate on which the price is based and have a clawback mechanism if this is exceeded - to minimise State Aid. So someone might bid on the basis of 20% takeup and if it's actually 30% have to make a refund.

That's my understanding too.

And further than that... the clawed-back funds don't have to return to the original source either. They can, instead, be re-spent by the local council/authority to develop further coverage of SFBB.