Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[atkinsong]

Edit: What would have happened if you were still above the minimum for the line?  My range for "acceptable" performance is 25Mb, to me that is not an acceptable range it should be 5-10Mb at the MOST for an established line.  If I tried a new modem and lost 25Mb of performance I wouldn't be happy if I couldn't get a reset, if I had lost 5Mb I wouldn't be happy.  If you can give a sensible reason and you are not continually asking for resets the ISP/OR should just reset the line no questions asked.

I wouldn't even have bothered raising it if the line had not been below the min guarantee. The purpose of my post was to show that at least OR can see the sense in doing it this way rather than sending out an engineer to do the same thing.

[kitz]

Perhaps BT are now one of the ISPs which can request a remote reset.   I reported in the past that this was something that Openreach had been trialling but they were very strict about the requests.   I know that at the beginning it was available to a couple of ISPs.   Neither being BT or Plusnet.   
However that was now a few months ago and it's not beyond the realms of possibility that BT is now able to do so.   I know for certain that Plusnet can't yet.

See my post which says

this is currently an interim solution for GEA FTTC and as such is not currently available to all ISPs at the present time.

[Black Sheep]

As with all things BT, everything is 'Internal only' ..... even our bi-weekly 'rag' has recently been moved to the same level.

With this in mind just keep watching for 'big news' regarding this coming soon. 

[kitz]

Try telling this to Anoush (Gandalf) as he answered all my questions below:

ME: Will you be able to get in touch with the fault team see what they reckon?

PN: As a business, we've got no control over DLM and can't send out an engineer if your line is performing within estimates.

In addition, our faults team have access to the same tools as I do.

ME: The FIbre do have caution counter (this part need to be check it out) as it will tell how long to wait before the next DLM act again to removed banded?

PN: Our tests don't show that I'm afraid.

Max he was not lying to you.    Plusnet can't do this.   FGS I've said time and time again that they can't yet.
Seriously what is the point in me trying to find out things and then you just read into it what you like.

As I said elsewhere - Plusnet cant yet.

Its an interim solution and not all ISPs can and its not even an automated process.   If you read the thread, it is hoped in time that something can be integrated into tools available to the ISP, but as yet there isnt.

You are also twisting Anoush's words.   He did not say that FTTC did not have a caution counter.   He said that their tests don't show the caution counter stats.

This is also correct.  I know that BTw are attempting to develop further tools for the SPs,  atm some things are only available to adsl and not FTTC.
A step forward is that they have recently added RRT for FTTC.

 

[adslmax]

Oh well. It's just a matter of time before PN become available. For now, BT the only ISP can do it. It's pretty good news for everyones sooner or later. A right step forward. I have been very patience for the last 48 days stuck with 74Meg but I shall not be moaned about it. I am half way to become recovery better from mental health problem with related illness stress and depression.

[kitz]

For now, BT the only ISP can do it.

No read again.  Originally there were a couple of ISPs, I said its not beyond the realms of possibility that BT can now too.   It's currently an interim measure hence why not available to all SPs yet.    Think of it like a trial.   If it was working ok and the other SPs weren't abusing the system, then its probable that they will expand.
I even dropped a big hint that BTwholesale was looking to see if it could be integrated into the KBD suite of ISP tools.   afaik this hasnt been done yet. 

[j0hn]

The above example of a "remote" reset may be unrelated to the new caution counter reset procedure that has recently been trialled.

It's always been possible for an ISP to send a case to OpenReach, and the DCOE perform the reset. There's just never been a proper procedure for it, or any criteria clearly set out. The chances of getting an ISP rep who knows what banding is, never mind who in OpenReach such a case should be raised to, is very slim.

1 of the Zen? (I think) reps pointed out their way of dealing with banding. They raise a case with OpenReach for a frames engineer. In the notes they request the frames engineer arrange a DLM reset via DCOE. They can only do this if the line profile (banding level) is below the downstream handback threshold. The rep says they were told to follow this procedure by OpenReach after continuously pushing them for a better solution to dealing with banding.
It works 9/10 times. If for whatever reason it gets rejected (the frames engineer refuses?) they simply resubmit it.
The above may be a similar example to this.

Personally I don't think ISP's should be given a button to perform DLM resets. I would rather cases were forwarded to OpenReach, who make sure it meets certain criteria. I don't like interleaving shouldn't be 1 of the criteria.
Banding below minimum estimates, or stuck banding (say x number of months) sounds more reasonable.

[atkinsong]

During the long chat we had when the rep called me I specifically asked if this had been done via the new caution counter reset procedure. He confirmed that it had.

[ktz392837]

Banding below minimum estimates, or stuck banding (say x number of months) sounds more reasonable.

I think the handback data needs to be worked on as this data is what is causing some of the problems.  Looking at the data for my line you have a stupid handback speeds with ranges of 33%! It is too harsh of a criteria based on values that appear to be plucked from thin air. 

Extreme example - I have never heard of a line with stuck interleaving that seems to be one bit of the DLM that works but if a customer has had a line with no interleaving for 5 years and then interleaving was applied I think that SHOULD be allowed a reset.

If interleave was reapplied after the reset then perhaps another reset would be harder to get?

The ability to reset should be based on historical & actual data not on estimated criteria with such wide error ranges. 

Customer Service reps also need better training and OR need to reduce the arbitrary and limited criteria for resets.   

If resets can be automated just give everyone a couple of resets per year with virtually no questions asked.

[Black Sheep]

During the long chat we had when the rep called me I specifically asked if this had been done via the new caution counter reset procedure. He confirmed that it had.

I would put my wage on it, that it was done through this procedure. 

[adslmax]

new caution counter reset procedure

I thought DLM would do the job itself or has it failed for some of us like stuck banded? If it was, then why isn't OR adjusted it and fix this system out. Apology if I am incorrect in this stage!

[ejs]

I don't think historical data really adds much justification for getting something fixed or reset. There's nothing to guarantee that your speed will never get any lower or that your line will never get any worse. It shouldn't be like "oh, you used to get the full 80Mb, therefore you should never have to suffer the indignity of getting less than the full 80Mb".

But, like most things, it will probably end up being done to shut up whoever is complaining the loudest. If you ask nicely, the answer will be no, it's not possible, you can't have one. So it'll be the usual kick up a huge fuss to get whatever you want done.

[Black Sheep]

But, like most things, it will probably end up being done to shut up whoever is complaining the loudest. If you ask nicely, the answer will be no, it's not possible, you can't have one. So it'll be the usual kick up a huge fuss to get whatever you want done.

Errrm nope, that's not what I'm reading.

Of course there is criteria, there always is and always will be, no matter what you apply for in life ..... but let's give it a chance to run before 'we' start doom and glooming.

[ktz392837]

I don't think historical data really adds much ....."oh, you used to get the full 80Mb

I believe it could add some value.  For example, if historically your line ran fine for X years at XMb (80Mb or 10Mb doesn't matter), a problem occurred, problem is sorted, you end up banded be it losing 1Mb, 10Mb or 50Mb if the customer gives a reasonable case (be it stats, weather event etc) for a reset they should get one. 

No need to miss a days work waiting for an engineer,  no need to miss another days work as the first engineer didn't turn up, no need to endure the engineer say the ISP can perform a reset why was he here, no need to hear that your internet running 30% or worse than what it should be is acceptable, no need to beg the engineer to reset your line anyway, no need to hear the engineer say XMb is plenty fast enough you don't need more, etc.

I am all for what appears to be  positive development of allowing a reset to be "automated" and requested by the ISP but I am not sure it will have much benefit as it could do unless a bit of relaxing of the rules is applied by both ISPs and OR (who knows that may be the plan anyway).

Eg: Why shouldn't "max" get a chance to get his missing 7Mb back if he has stats that says his line supports it? 

Why shouldn't the (edit: different) person who now has vectoring on his line get a reset so he can get the extra speed?

[adslmax]

@ktz392837 I wish my cabinet have vectoring or target SNR 3dB but there isn't at the moment.