Kitz Forum
Broadband Related => FTTC and FTTP Issues => Topic started by: Oldjim on October 27, 2015, 02:06:31 PM
-
First picture
This is the information when I ordered fibre
Second picture
This is what it shows now
My actual Connection speed (kbps): 47723 9462
-
The ASA told BT to give accurate estimates http://conversation.which.co.uk/technology/asa-bt-infinity-broadband-internet-speeds-advertising/
-
That is BT Retail and isn't a factor here as the change only happened in the last few weeks
-
The estimates aren't from Openreach, they are from BT.
-
The are from BT.com not BT Retail and in this case I assume that it is BT Openreach as they are the ones who know where the cab is and the quality of the cabling
-
As you can see here, there is no BT Retail
http://www.btplc.com/Thegroup/Ourcompany/Groupbusinesses/index.htm
-
All right - if you want to be pedantic BT Consumer
-
Oh dear that's gone down by quite a lot. However, I thought the estimates changing is to be expected. Once the line is operating, the data of how the line is performing is used to update the estimate. So if it's a rubbish line, the estimate goes down. Then you get into the various terms and conditions of what would be accepted as a fault, which I don't know off the top of my head, the WBC FTTC Handbook is available for reference.
-
The estimates changing is one of the 'Features' of how it all works.
If you get a line fault or other long term change in the line condition the estimate on your line changes.
This is 'moving the goalposts' imho as the criteria to define an error condition is based on your line estimates.
From memory I think that you will have a reasonable complaint if your line sync's drops by more than 25% of the estimate.
The problem is the estimate drops as a consequence of the error condition so the chances of such a drop is somewhat slim. (25% of the reduced estimate)
This is the issue I had where the estimate dropped in line with the error condition so by the revised numbers my line was OK.
-
ok but the change oldjim posted is one hell of a change, the new high estimate is lower than the previous low estimate. My estimate has never swung that much.
-
Just a question here lets say the line has crosstalk and you do many BT line speed tests you will notice in the second stage the information is being uploaded to the server, Is that information being used as the estimate for that line over time ?
-
I don't think so. I'm sure Openreach could get the VDSL2 line rates and other data from the DLM.
The BT speedtester uploads the results so that they can be seen by the faults handling systems. Apart from retrieving your IP profile, the BT speedtester is really for when your line rate is high, but your download or upload speed is lower than your line speed. It's not really for the line speed itself being lower than it should be. It'll always show that "acceptable range of speeds" according to whatever the current line rate is.
I thought the initial estimate could be partly based on the performance of nearby lines, but of course if you're one of the first few people on the cabinet, there aren't any currently on FTTC, so it could only be based mostly on the line length, and any data they have on line quality, if there is any.
-
The multicore from the fibre cab to the subsidiary cab (just outside my house) is said to be lead sheathed which the engineer said would affect it
Also apparently mine is one of the better wires - my neighbour had two BT engineer visits before he found one which gave similar speeds to mine as all the other free ones were much worse
-
??? The multi-core from the FTTC Cab will have only been put in in recent years ....... so there's no chance it will be paper-insulated/lead-sheathed.
Do you mean from the existing Cab to your Distribution Point (Telegraph Pole or Underground Joint) ??
-
You are correct
It goes from the fibre cab to the main cab and then via the lead sheathed multicore to the subsidiary cab
Our rural area consists of a number of groups of houses fed from a more or less central cab (No 20) and in my case there is a subsidiary cab (No 20/1) which looks a bit like this except it is buried in the hedge
(https://forum.kitz.co.uk/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.telephonesuk.co.uk%2Fimages%2Fsmall%2Fwiring_cab_bt2_small1.jpg&hash=30a6a77e08fa9878e166747fa3d33488f71394ab)
-
That's known as a SCP (secondary connection point) IIRC.
Of course the question no one has asked is how far are you from the main cabinet? The estimates also appear to be to the DP (distribution point), so you have a long drop wire?
I was the first on my cabinet and my estimate was about 13 higher than what I got, not a huge difference like yours but it was still a shock, as I'm relatively close to my cab at 450 meters.
-
You are correct
It goes from the fibre cab to the main cab and then via the lead sheathed multicore to the subsidiary cab
Our rural area consists of a number of groups of houses fed from a more or less central cab (No 20) and in my case there is a subsidiary cab (No 20/1) which looks a bit like this except it is buried in the hedge
(https://forum.kitz.co.uk/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.telephonesuk.co.uk%2Fimages%2Fsmall%2Fwiring_cab_bt2_small1.jpg&hash=30a6a77e08fa9878e166747fa3d33488f71394ab)
I'm genuinely surprised that the lead cable is still in-situ ??
We have an 'Uplift Process' (Which was in place when I started at BT, over 30yrs ago), called A1024. Basically the engineer HAS to submit an A1024 for remedial work to be carried out on defective plant, during the course of their normal duties. Failure to do so means they will be tortured by the auditor, and that's only partially tongue-in-cheek !! ;)
I'm pretty certain, knowing the issues with lead cables, that this particular length will have had an A1024 submitted donkeys years ago ?? I wonder if a separate PETC cable (modern stuff) has been run in parallel with the original, and EU's get swopped out as and when required ??
-
@Ronski
800 metres cable length from the main cab to the house
@Blacksheep
Lead sheathed was what the BT engineer said when he was trying to sort out my neighbours line (he eventually found one good pair free and moved his speeds up to near mine from about 36Mb/s)
-
For 800 meters you're doing very well, my speeds at 450 meters currently are 47/6, best they've been is 50/12, worst is 38 down and around 6 up. My line for the distance is lower than most though.
The estimate always seems to follow the actual sync speed.
-
Just a question here lets say the line has crosstalk and you do many BT line speed tests you will notice in the second stage the information is being uploaded to the server, Is that information being used as the estimate for that line over time ?
I'd say so - I have/had an issue with my line and ran that test a few times, each time the estimate was lowered as I believe it's taking an average from the uploaded results. If not many people are running that test on your circuit then the change will be more evident, especially as you tend to only run that when there's an issue.
I had a min. download speed "guarantee" on my line when I placed the order, but BT has their own definition of guarantee, as when I reported the issue with my line they simply changed the minimum "guarantee" speed to what I was getting after running that test several times at their request. Genius.
-
Just a question here lets say the line has crosstalk and you do many BT line speed tests you will notice in the second stage the information is being uploaded to the server, Is that information being used as the estimate for that line over time ?
I'd say so - I have/had an issue with my line and ran that test a few times, each time the estimate was lowered as I believe it's taking an average from the uploaded results. If not many people are running that test on your circuit then the change will be more evident, especially as you tend to only run that when there's an issue.
I had a min. download speed "guarantee" on my line when I placed the order, but BT has their own definition of guarantee, as when I reported the issue with my line they simply changed the minimum "guarantee" speed to what I was getting after running that test several times at their request. Genius.
:lol:
Well done you have won the Kewpie Doll for working out how it works !! :D :D ;)
That is how it worked for me, as well, when a line fault was 'fixed'. ;D ;D
(I'm not bitter I always grind my teeth when I am happy!! :lol: )
The Line estimates are just that ....... when the line performs 'worse' and there are no 'problems' detected on the line the estimate is adjusted to match reality.
Some people get better than estimates others get worse !!
Not good if you lose out but that it how it goes. :(
-
For balance, it works the other way too. My original estimate was 41, but I synced at 80. About 3 weeks afterwards the BTW estimate was changed to 80.
-
All this "fiddling" with estimates, be they for ADSL or VDSL, would be more honestly dealt with, were the local loop infrastructures in good condition. Why should my close neighbour get half or double speed than I? That seems unfair service.
I could imagine BT management solution to that would be to ****** up my line to make it match next door's! ::)
-
As we've said before, Ronski's line is not 450 metres, it's more like 850.
-
When a circuit length is being discussed I think it is useful to think of both the physical length and also the electrical length. Depending upon the condition of the pair, the joints, the metal of which the wire is constructed, etc, the latter can be significantly greater than the former.
The physical length can be measured, either when the cable is installed or by subsequent processes which include estimations of the extra length in footway joint boxes, up/down the height of any pole, etc. Bald_Eagle1 has first hand, practical experience of such quantification. The end result is a figure in metres, yards, kilometres or miles which can be easily compared with another circuit.
The electrical length is far more difficult to quantify. We have been doing so, somewhat crudely, for many years . . . we look at the attenuation, in decibels, for both downstream and upstream. The problem is that there is no hard and fast rule how those to figures should be obtained. With a circuit that carries a VDSL2 service we can (with suitable hardware and software manipulation) look at (say) a Hlog plot. We all, probably, are aware of what a Hlog plot looks like, for both circuits that are generally considered to be good and those that are deemed to be bad. The visual representation that we see when considering a Hlog plot could be regarded as yet another "handle" on the electrical length of a circuit. Consider the area under the curve. The smaller the area under the curve, the greater the electrical length of the circuit. The greater the area under the curve, the smaller the electrical length of the circuit. I.e. The area under the curve of a circuit's Hlog plot is inversely proportional to the circuit's electrical length.
My apologies for the above nebulous caterwauling. I have had numerous ideas on the subject going back over a number of years. The problem is having a sufficiently large set of data to use as experimental input. Some of you may remember that I asked for specific data from VDSL2 circuits and I was gifted with fifteen sets of data. Manipulation and munging of those data sets did not produce any usable result. My thought then was that (1) the data set was too small (2) the manipulation of the data was incorrect. Since that time I have occasionally thought about what information could be deduced with a sufficiently large data set that was manipulated in other ways. I currently have scribblings on a few sheets of A4 paper as thoughts come (& go) . . . ???
-
I have had numerous ideas on the subject going back over a number of years. The problem is having a sufficiently large set of data to use as experimental input. Some of you may remember that I asked for specific data from VDSL2 circuits and I was gifted with fifteen sets of data. Manipulation and munging of those data sets did not produce any usable result. My thought then was that (1) the data set was too small (2) the manipulation of the data was incorrect. Since that time I have occasionally thought about what information could be deduced with a sufficiently large data set that was manipulated in other ways. I currently have scribblings on a few sheets of A4 paper as thoughts come (& go) . . . ???
Perhaps Tony could assist you with obtaining a large enough dataset?
-
As we've said before, Ronski's line is not 450 metres, it's more like 850.
So you know where I live and how long my line, I think not! It is 450 meters, it has been confirmed by a BT engineer. Oh, and I'm pretty sure you haven't said, and no one else has ever said it is any where near 850 meters, so before you go stating things I suggest you get your facts correct!
Or was that another joke?
-
I wondering if anyone could provide some insight into my estimated DS rate.
Using the same checker as the OP mine originally was 74-odd (over a year ago just as Infinity became available in my area). This I can understand, as Openreach would have no actual real world data to base the figure on.
Up until G.INP Mk 1 was rolled out my DS HIGH I could expect was 59.4; I actually synced around 65.
However since G.INP Mk1 my DS has been artificially capped at 60 (can be determined from my Billion router stats) and the Broadband Checker states DS HIGH of 60.
So it appears a little self-prophesying to me, 'you'll achieve 60 as we're capping you at 60'.
So I'm wondering why I'm capped at 60 when my SNRM is around 8.5dB and I average around 2ES a day.
Mike
-
Are your stats available on MDWS?
-
Are your stats available on MDWS?
Sorry, no. Mac only household I'm afraid.
Mike
-
That's not an insurmountable problem, I hear DSLStats will run using Wine. Or you could grab a Raspberry PI.
-
The goal post moving seems at least partly an excuse to avoid work, surely enough was known to make the estimates realistic in the first place. My estimates are now on their third edit. Assuming that the lowest figures are the ones that matter when raising a fault things have changed a lot.
At sign up FTTC range B impacted 80 - 73 down
a year later 60 - 34 down
now 21 month later 50.6 -30 down
-
That's not an insurmountable problem, I hear DSLStats will run using Wine. Or you could grab a Raspberry PI.
Confirmed - v5.6 is running fine under Wine on El Capitan here
-
The goal post moving seems at least partly an excuse to avoid work, surely enough was known to make the estimates realistic in the first place. My estimates are now on their third edit. Assuming that the lowest figures are the ones that matter when raising a fault things have changed a lot.
At sign up FTTC range B impacted 80 - 73 down
a year later 60 - 34 down
now 21 month later 50.6 -30 down
A little like the BTW side cop out when it comes to throughput levels, IE you sync at 80/20 have an IP profile of 77.35 yet they consider it acceptable if throughput falls down as low as 40mbps because they have not got the capacity in parts of the uk, for full throughput at peak times, but the ADSL availability estimate has always been out for my line, always under estimated what i can get
So as you say it's done to avoid fixing things that will be the only reason