Kitz ADSL Broadband Information
adsl spacer  
Support this site
Home Broadband ISPs Tech Routers Wiki Forum
 
     
   Compare ISP   Rate your ISP
   Glossary   Glossary
 
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4

Author Topic: G Fast  (Read 10214 times)

Bowdon

  • Content Team
  • Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 2395
Re: G Fast
« Reply #30 on: April 17, 2018, 11:05:02 PM »

I'd like to see the BT/OR paper that says they are going to make a profit with G.fast pods attached to cabinets.
Logged
BT Full Fibre 500 - Smart Hub 2

Chrysalis

  • Content Team
  • Addicted Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 7382
  • VM Gig1 - AAISP L2TP
Re: G Fast
« Reply #31 on: April 18, 2018, 12:33:57 AM »

Even if you have G.fast pods activated on your cabinet, chances are that if you're further than around 400 meters from the cabinet there will be next to no benefit over VDSL (FTTC) services or it won't be available to you at all.

in my own personal case I am literally right at the edge of the coverage on my cabinet at just under 400m so yes for me its of no real benefit, but even if I was closer there is no pod anyway. :(
Logged

Ronski

  • Helpful
  • Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4300
Re: G Fast
« Reply #32 on: April 18, 2018, 06:20:36 AM »

:fingers: no network congestion/horrible latency issues then. Otherwise you'll be crawling back to FTTC (assuming you are on it). :P
Yes but on ECI with a very high probability of alluminum lines, at least if I come back I should end up on the Huawei twin cab. At just over 450 meters I get around 47/7
Logged
Formerly restrained by ECI and ali,  now surfing along at 390/36  ;D

Alex Atkin UK

  • Addicted Kitizen
  • *****
  • Posts: 5260
    • Thinkbroadband Quality Monitors
Re: G Fast
« Reply #33 on: April 18, 2018, 07:27:47 AM »

Worth noting however that my connection not only "feels" more responsive using the ECI modem with the ECI cabinet but I get an extra megabit or two downstream.  Everyones mileage varies it seems.

I only recently put my HG612 back because I wanted to see if my stats had changed.

Saying that, I'm getting the lowest pings I have ever seen on this connection right now on the HG612.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2018, 07:31:34 AM by Alex Atkin UK »
Logged
Broadband: Zen Full Fibre 900 + Three 5G Routers: pfSense (Intel N100) + Huawei CPE Pro 2 H122-373 WiFi: Zyxel NWA210AX
Switches: Netgear MS510TXUP, Netgear MS510TXPP, Netgear GS110EMX My Broadband History & Ping Monitors

re0

  • Reg Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 840
Re: G Fast
« Reply #34 on: April 18, 2018, 09:08:53 AM »

in my own personal case I am literally right at the edge of the coverage on my cabinet at just under 400m so yes for me its of no real benefit, but even if I was closer there is no pod anyway. :(
Everyone's mileage may vary, but I imagine that distance would be somewhat less with aluminium or with 0.4mm gauge cabling as opposed to 0.5mm gauge (aka TP-100). I am almost 100% that I have aluminium at 0.4mm on my connection (the worst of both worlds) so even at under 200 meters the higher frequencies may suffer a lot from attenuation on G.fast.

Yes but on ECI with a very high probability of alluminum lines, at least if I come back I should end up on the Huawei twin cab. At just over 450 meters I get around 47/7
That downstream is actually OK considering the distance and if it is really aluminium, but that upstream is damn awful! I imagine the lack of 3 dB profile and G.INP probably didn't help on ECI otherwise it probably would a lot closer to the mid-to-high 50s on the downstream.

Worth noting however that my connection not only "feels" more responsive using the ECI modem with the ECI cabinet but I get an extra megabit or two downstream.  Everyones mileage varies it seems.

I only recently put my HG612 back because I wanted to see if my stats had changed.

Saying that, I'm getting the lowest pings I have ever seen on this connection right now on the HG612.
Perhaps you were using a different DNS service or maybe there were DNS issues when you last used the HG612? :hmm: In the past, especially with ISP-supplied DNS, I have found that it sometimes takes time to resolve IP addresses which impacts the responsiveness. But an extra megabit is an extra megabit.
Logged
ISP: Gigaclear - Hyperfast 900 (up to 940 Mbps symmetrical)

Ronski

  • Helpful
  • Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4300
Re: G Fast
« Reply #35 on: April 18, 2018, 10:15:33 AM »

That downstream is actually OK considering the distance and if it is really aluminium, but that upstream is damn awful! I imagine the lack of 3 dB profile and G.INP probably didn't help on ECI otherwise it probably would a lot closer to the mid-to-high 50s on the downstream.

I was the first on the cabinet back in August 2012, download has never been great, mostly sub 50Mbps speeds, briefly I've had as high as 60 IIRC, but have had as low as 38

Upload started around 12Mbps and has gradually dropped, has been as low as 6. Used to use a Zyxel which gives a nice improvement on downstream but loses some on the upstream so went back to the hg612 to gain a bit of upstream speed.

I did have G.inp when it first rolled out and it worked a treat, can't remember the specifics though.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2018, 10:18:58 AM by Ronski »
Logged
Formerly restrained by ECI and ali,  now surfing along at 390/36  ;D

Chrysalis

  • Content Team
  • Addicted Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 7382
  • VM Gig1 - AAISP L2TP
Re: G Fast
« Reply #36 on: April 18, 2018, 12:11:14 PM »

re0 I also have 50 or so of ali, the last 50m run to the pole is ali.

But given the copper is only 0.2, the ali I believe is no worse than the copper on my run as its 3x as thick.
Logged

sotonsam

  • Reg Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 123
Re: G Fast
« Reply #37 on: April 18, 2018, 12:19:57 PM »

I was the first on the cabinet back in August 2012, download has never been great, mostly sub 50Mbps speeds, briefly I've had as high as 60 IIRC, but have had as low as 38

Upload started around 12Mbps and has gradually dropped, has been as low as 6. Used to use a Zyxel which gives a nice improvement on downstream but loses some on the upstream so went back to the hg612 to gain a bit of upstream speed.

I did have G.inp when it first rolled out and it worked a treat, can't remember the specifics though.
Out of interest, when was G.inp attempted to be rolled out to ECI? then subsequently pulled again...

Only reason I ask is that around 5 or so months ago my connection sync increased to 74Mb, from 63........I thought that was impressive, best I've had, including latency which dropped by about 5ms. But no more than a week or so later it must have reync'd at some point and I was back to 63 as my IP profile.

I’m wondering if during that week I was experiencing G.inp….
Logged
Vodafone FTTC 80/20. ECI Cab.

FTTP via Toob. 900/900.

skyeci

  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1383
    • Line stats
Re: G Fast
« Reply #38 on: April 18, 2018, 12:46:47 PM »

first few weeks, April 2016!

ktz392837

  • Reg Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 559
Re: G Fast
« Reply #39 on: April 18, 2018, 01:32:50 PM »

first few weeks, April 2016!
Quite unbelievable really when you think about it.  Did anyone actually post to these forums saying they had problems when Ginp was enabled for them glorious few weeks?  I wonder what percent of end users would actually have a problem? I wish someone would ask BT what is their Plan Z for when ECI ginp fails (again)?  Are they going to replace with Huawei cabinets? 
Logged

sotonsam

  • Reg Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 123
Re: G Fast
« Reply #40 on: April 18, 2018, 02:37:15 PM »

first few weeks, April 2016!

Interesting, wonder what made my line fly up a few months back then!

It is pretty staggering how slow BTopenreach are, given that something like g.inp is quite a marginal boost...but even that's taking a while. I think I'll be with VM before g.fast is alive! VM will probably be offering 500mb by then as well....

It's frustrating as my area VM Wise has alrways been pretty overcrowded, so I had noise issues when I had them before (having attenuators on the superhubs around here is a given). It's all laid over the top of the exNTL/Videotron network. That's why I prefer BT in the sense that I get what I pay for, but it's just incredibly frustrating that it's so behind the times in the sense of speed avaliable.
Logged
Vodafone FTTC 80/20. ECI Cab.

FTTP via Toob. 900/900.

j0hn

  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 4093
Re: G Fast
« Reply #41 on: April 18, 2018, 03:57:44 PM »

Quote
Did anyone actually post to these forums saying they had problems when Ginp was enabled for them glorious few weeks?

Yes there was a few.
Logged
Talktalk FTTP 550/75 - Speedtest - BQM

burakkucat

  • Respected
  • Senior Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 38300
  • Over the Rainbow Bridge
    • The ELRepo Project
Re: G Fast
« Reply #42 on: April 18, 2018, 04:50:00 PM »

But given the copper is only 0.2, . . .

Are you absolutely sure?  :-\  As far as I can recall, the minimum copper diameter is 0.4mm.
Logged
:cat:  100% Linux and, previously, Unix. Co-founder of the ELRepo Project.

Please consider making a donation to support the running of this site.

Chrysalis

  • Content Team
  • Addicted Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 7382
  • VM Gig1 - AAISP L2TP
Re: G Fast
« Reply #43 on: April 18, 2018, 05:18:35 PM »

I cannot be 100% sure, but it is from 2 sources, one from who works for openreach, the other from a database that used to be publicly accessible that showed lengths of D and E sides, but it also showed gauge of the cables.

Yes you will hear odd comments on forums suggesting there is barely any ali in use and that all copper is at least 0.4, but I think they just paint a rosier picture than the reality, my area was built up during the days of copper shortages.
Logged

Black Sheep

  • Helpful
  • Addicted Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 5717
Re: G Fast
« Reply #44 on: April 18, 2018, 05:26:33 PM »

Absolute fact .... the smallest of all gauges in 0.32.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4