Some router manufacturers need to start also looking at what people need and bring out a decent box too. ATM the choice is far too limited or too expensive, & the BiPac is let down by the fact that it only has ethernet ports not GigE
Well, I guess while OR insisted on its own soft NTE (modem) under its control for VDSL, there wasn't a great incentive for them to do that.
As for my tuppence-worth on the points in this thread that you have been musing:
>> The Huawei HG622
.. and also on a side note I'd seen mention that perhaps the sync isnt quite as good when using them, can someone confirm if that was more of a one off?
I think the basis of that quote is that
both the HG622 and the 'new blob' for the HG612 are (i.e. have) different firmwares to the original HG612, and both of these firmware seem to take a slightly different approach to the use of the bins in the tone plan - at least on initial sync. There has been some speculation that the newer firmwares tend to redistrbute the bit-loadings away from the shared tones. However, once bit-swapping starts things change... One point that has been demonstrated to me by both of these firmwares is that a consequence of this is that there can be (was in my case) a 2.5-4Mb/s lowering of the max
attainable sync rates (presumably because of the above during training). However, as both BE and Asbokid have said, once synced the performance (and the actual rate) is not materially different.
It was my understanding a built in VDSL modem/router is currently against Openreach's FTTC specifications?
Not so. Cab-only installs, which BS trailed for us only a few months back, was the point at which OR accepted that ISPs could provide their own CPE kit, and so opened up the 'one-box' solution. As part of the same move, distributed filtering (as in the current ADSL dongle scheme) was approved too, for those that want it. My experience is the effect on sync rates is comparable with the extra length of extension wiring exposed (assuming no 'bridged-tap' horrors).
>>> two ethernet ports and no wireless.
A big minus for me Im afraid - wireless is imperative and Id need to add on a switch and WAP, which negates the all in one solution
There are +/-s with both I'm afraid. I suspect that (up to now) the reason why there haven't been a) many one-box soultions b) wireless c) Gig-E is down to the amount of processing power required to successfully do this while handling (potentially) up to 80Mb/s VDSL. They will come I am sure and HH5 may have cracked this issue (while leaving us out in the cold monitoring wise), but for the moment, e.g. even the HG622 isn't GigE.
I seem to recall on your other thread that your currently (normally) quite happy with your TG582n on ADSL2+? Are you taking the £5 PN TG582n FTTC? It may be a good (cheap) interim solution, if you can put up with a two-box solution? PN have released a new TG582n FTTC firmware 10.2.5.2EO that supports 300Mb/s wireless and even tunnelled IPv6 (amongst other things) for those who are interested. Combine this with the original HG612 (still available quite cheaply on Ebay), Asbo's firmware, and Eric and Pauls stats monitoring, and you will have a good performant system.
One of the things I did discover that VDSL exposed quite quickly was the fact that it can stress aging wireless networks which aren't up to handling those kinds of speeds - so watch out for increased retries on your wireless networks (unless everything is already .ac of course!).
Author
Topic: BT Announces NEW Home Hub 5 with Built in VDSL modem (Read 16570 times)