In reply to a post by Andrue:

What you're suggesting here is that you want to punish BT for improving their service.

Noooo...

BT where the one's that said that ECI modems shouldn't of been installed for use with Huawei DSLAM's even when they where compatible with each other...

In reference to www.thinkbroadband.com/news/6921-g-inp-roll-out-receives-mixed-reac...:

Openreach did express some surprise when we pointed out that people had at times being supplied with an ECI modem in a Huawei cabinet area when engineer installs were the norm.

BT improving there service is great but now they want to remove that improvement... or at least 50% of it and that to me is not good practice.

In reply to a post by Andrue:

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

The problem is wholly down to BT. They created it, they should fix it, not fudge it.

But they have fixed it. They've disabled G.INP in the upstream.

They fudged it.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by Andrue:

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

The problem is wholly down to BT. They created it, they should fix it, not fudge it.

But they have fixed it. They've disabled G.INP in the upstream.

They fudged it.

The problem no longer exists. That's a fix. An ugly fix, but it's a fix.

In reply to a post by Andrue:

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

The problem is wholly down to BT. They created it, they should fix it, not fudge it.

But they have fixed it. They've disabled G.INP in the upstream.

That's not fixing it... it's just preventing it...

Soi what your saying is a brand new infrastructure is already at it's limit and no further upgrades can now go ahead because BT might have to put their hands up and say

"were sorry we made a boo boo, we'll fix it"

Also G.INP was a fix for noise issues... so they have replaced a problem with another problem..

Only difference is they can stand behind the first problem and say that it's out of their hands!

They turned it on and it didn't work.
The fix is to make it work.
The fudge is to turn it off.

In reply to a post by mlmclaren:

In reply to a post by Andrue:

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

The problem is wholly down to BT. They created it, they should fix it, not fudge it.

But they have fixed it. They've disabled G.INP in the upstream.

That's not fixing it... it's just preventing it...

It's making a problem go away. Now you're no worse off than you were before G,INP was rolled out. Slightly better off in fact since you still have it on the downstream where it really matters.

Soi what your saying is a brand new infrastructure is already at it's limit and no further upgrades can now go ahead because BT might have to put their hands up and say

"were sorry we made a boo boo, we'll fix it"

I think that's already pretty obvious with their apparent abandoning of vectoring. This is why I'd like to see them stop tinkering about with VDSL. It's been a useful stop gap that got the country a lot further a lot faster than the alternatives but it's time they resurrected FTTPoD and this time with a sensible pricing structure. Trouble is they are already pratting about with G,FAST (which I think will never get beyond the trial stage). Their solutions often have these kind of issues, it's a downside of the way they operate.

Unfortunately I can't see any other way they can do it other than through technology increments. I just have my doubts that G.FAST is going to be appropriate for the next increment.

Edited by Andrue (Sun 07-Jun-15 21:11:39)

In reply to a post by mlmclaren:

Also G.INP was a fix for noise issues... so they have replaced a problem with another problem..

There is no 'other problem' any longer. They've turned that feature off. They haven't been able to implement as much of an upgrade as they'd hoped. That's all.

But making VDSL more stable should be there main priority currently...

You said it yourself there is a big funding gap to fill for fibre services and as G.INP was a big help as more and more people joined the infrastructure it's is a major requirement, even with G.INP on my line I've lost 2000kbps of downstream and upstream sync due to more and more people joining the cabinet..

So I do sit concerned of much upstream will be lost once G.INP is removed from my 288 line capable cab once it get's to 50% utilised nevermind higher.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

They turned it on and it didn't work.
The fix is to make it work.
The fudge is to turn it off.

No. They turned it on and it caused a problem. They turned it off and the problem is no longer there. The upgrade was a partial failure but they have fixed the problem it caused.

Edited by Andrue (Sun 07-Jun-15 21:14:50)