If that is the case the user will NEVER see the 330, and there is a clear fault to report, if provider cannot escalate then am happy to for FTTP users stuck with that scenario

I don't think any ISPs even pass on the minimum thresholds to end users though.

The SLA for 330/30 GEA-FTTP within the BT Wholesale is set as a 'best efforts' of 40Mbps on standard and 70Mbps on elevated provisioning.

The other factor here is once you get to these higher ultrafast speeds, you are more likely to see congestion in the wider web that is beyond the control of your ISP.

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

When I worked for ntl there were some really bizarre sites hosting broadband routers. A converted public toilet and an outhouse near a pub come to mind immediately. Moving equipment around, handling the optics, and upgrading power and cooling in sites used originally for cable TV and now used for linear and on-demand TV, routers and transmission equipment, with a side order of CCAP is painful. VM don't have the luxury of a load of additional space freed up by a migration from analogue telephony to digital switched.

it also brings factors outside of control Upgrading cooling requires planning permission, upgrading power relies on the local power company, running out of space requires extensions to be built or additional property to be acquired.

Worst part for VM is that at some point they'll be moving more and more equipment out of those sites and into cabinets in the field.

It sounds reminiscent of the times around the 70s, where the GPO were planning to install TXE equipment into lots of buildings - with all the problems of space and utilities.

A time typified by waiting lists to get a service, rather than oversubscription.

Followed, a couple of decades later by replacing it with SystemX at reduced sizes. And now moving lots out into street cabinets.

Just a slightly more compressed timescale.

guys, please read what i said thoroughly. before december, i was getting 300/20 all day everyday, "on wireless", not just from speedtest, but from actual downloads from steam, origin and other places.

which were 37.5 MB/s - 39 MB/s. i can still achieve this but only during the day between 1am-4pm.

i know for a fact its utilisation, because they told me.

im only on 12 downstream channels and i believe my cab is an older cisco as told by a forum member. dont forget, if the cab has only so much capacity and im using a big chunk, surely il receive the biggest impact.

recently i have spotted atleast 3 new customers in the area from picking up their wifi alone, and thats only within one street.

basically i was doomed and its just going to get worse as time goes on. im waiting for my origin connection date and il be happy once more, although with lower speeds yet more consistent.

this post was a simple warning to those out there.

edit- for all i know those new 3 customers could be on 300/20 too, i know my girlfriend auntie is on 100, so theres 400 right there alone.

i will send a link to a speedtest at around 1am, and you will see.

@ignition, thankyou for understanding, my wireless has always been perfect, virgin told me my area is at 80% at peak times, i know there are atleast 4 more people within 20-30m away from me with virgin, if theyre on the same line as me, then theres the problem, because even if all 4 were on 50Mbps, thats 200 there.

Edited by arronlowley (Sun 29-Jan-17 20:19:54)

The explanation is always appreciated but you know what will be thrown back at it.

VM are not forced to release higher speed tiers, there is e.g. no competitive pressure from BT that meant VM had to release a 300mbit product, neither 200mbit.
VM continue to signup new customers in congested areas.

From an outside perspective what seems to be happening is network engineers ask the exec's for funding to upgrade capacity, it gets refused unless that work is justified by a new marketable product hence the higher tiers get born.

Never doubted the wireless speeds

In reply to a post by arronlowley:

recently i have spotted atleast 3 new customers in the area from picking up their wifi alone, and thats only within one street.


edit- for all i know those new 3 customers could be on 300/20 too, i know my girlfriend auntie is on 100, so theres 400 right there alone.

i will send a link to a speedtest at around 1am, and you will see.

@ignition, thankyou for understanding, my wireless has always been perfect, virgin told me my area is at 80% at peak times, i know there are atleast 4 more people within 20-30m away from me with virgin, if theyre on the same line as me, then theres the problem, because even if all 4 were on 50Mbps, thats 200 there.

So 3 new users in Wifi range of you, presumably with Superhub 3's, so putting out 3x3 802.11ac 5Ghz. That's more wifi congestion.

Yes you can show us a speed test at 1am, but that just as much shows wifi congestion is less of an issue at 1am as it does anything else.

Virgin have told you it's at 80% utilisation at peak time so it still has free capacity then I guess?

this is a speedtest done at quarter to 1 today.

http://www.speedtest.net/result/6010025410.png

il post one at 6pm.

The way Ookla handles the sampling and picking tester with lowest latency can skew things sometimes, so try http://www.thinkbroadband.com/speedtest the two download tests can convey a lot about a connection too

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

From an outside perspective what seems to be happening is network engineers ask the exec's for funding to upgrade capacity, it gets refused unless that work is justified by a new marketable product hence the higher tiers get born.

You can't fund planning permission for upgraded HVAC, power feeds or premises.