Selling Village Broadband Project

Hi Everyone.

Continuing on from Cable upgrade, FTTC or community fibre?

This will now be the new thread containing updates on progress (or lack of) for the Selling Village Broadband Project.

Please see the July update from Bill Mabey of Interneal Communication Systems by clicking here

1. TKPSN = KPSN
2. The change over to KPSN happened about 2 weeks ago.
3. ICS have no technical experts (that I know of).
4. There are no known issues with the fibre backhaul through KPSN, so any issues that they have are their own.
5. There is no need to "run-in / trial" the fibre backhaul as this a 100Mbps leased line, we all know they work as advertised.
6. There was no issue with shortage of IP addresses, they had a /25 and could have a /24 if they could have proved a need. (I believe they purchased a /22 (1022 usable IP addresses).
7. bloc = block.
8. There is absolutely no reason that they couldn't be providing a phone service, this is simply a stalling tactic.
9. "Work continues in Hogben's Hill" - Simply a lie, they've done nothing in the last month.
10. It really isn't right that they still accept no responsibility for delays and continue to blame third parties in the parish magazine.

This project has been ongoing for 768 days and under 30 people have been connected. Many Selling residents have signed up to alternatives such as wireless broadband from Vfast or Satellite broadband from tooway.

***EDIT***

Adding Notice board update which is different to the one for the parish magazine for some reason.

Update for Village Notice Boards

1. The wireless backhaul was turned off after non payment and 12 days of free service.
2. Done correctly no reconfiguration would have been needed as they were just using DHCP.
3. Don't know what mgbits are. mg = milligram, that's not right!

Edited by 5km (Wed 25-Jul-12 21:46:35)

What organisation is it that stops work for 'annual holidays'?

'those customer's up and running'

"Broadband: There was no update however, the matter of the poor broadband reception
provided by BT referred to in the Perry Wood report was discussed and a member explained that
the cable has deteriorated badly thus allowing only a trickle going through but BT state that it is
sufficient to meet their legal requirements and refuse to replace the cable.
A member of the public requested the Parish Council to pressurise BT into dealing with this
matter in order to deliver a consistent and better broadband to residents of Perry Wood. The
clerk was a little concerned as to whether the Parish Council should get involved at this stage, as
the Council has a contract with another company to provide a broadband service to the village.
She felt that perhaps we should discuss this with ICS to enquire if they would have any objection
to us raising performance issues with BT"

http://www.faversham.org/upload/docs/Sel%20Mins%204t...

That's interesting, seems ICS are doing noting and residents would rather pressure BT for action regarding slow broadband...

ICS get a mention in the Faversham Times:- https://dl.dropbox.com/u/28466011/Faversham%20News%2...

Can't be long before national papers pick up on this.

Is ICS International Computer Systems or Internal Communication Systems?

The parish council are asking ICS if they can talk to BT? This shows the danger of community projects with no skills to manage.

http://intcoms.net/ - Internal Communication Systems Ltd - Registered company No. 4281502

Yes. although normally after a company is selected the council step back and the selected company delivers. It's a shame that ICS do not have the skills to manage this project correctly.

700 odd days?

sigh..

We put a 40 Mbps per customer network in over the space of 3 weeks for three villages / 350 ~properties, even then one person asked why it took so long

Why the council should wish to talk to BT when they have a contract with ICS is bewildering and as already mooted shows a scary lack of understanding of the commercial status of BT.

It is not uncommon though, the Parish we mentioned above talked to BT first and even discussed our proposal with them. Zero consideration for confidentiality and a blind idea that BT are somehow a public entity.

needless to say we declined entering into a contract with the Parish Council due to some untenable clauses and their constant attempt to circumvent our proposal with "BT" hyperbole.

797 days.

In reply to a post by 5km:

797 days.

Is that because of the difficulty of a FTTP rollout, ICS' incapability or a little bit of both?

All of the above.

... although ducting through fields to houses is easy, b4rn are doing a good job of it. Far easier than running fibre in towns where you have to dig up the road/pavement all the time.