Kitz Forum
Broadband Related => FTTC and FTTP Issues => Topic started by: broadstairs on May 10, 2016, 08:54:08 PM
-
Having got no where in raising my issue over this as a fault with TT I have now raised a complaint with them. I suspect this will go no where either but hey I feel better having a rant. Perhaps if I still get the brush off from TT as I suspect I will I'll try the CEO ... then I might try OFCOM.... but you never know ... I live in hope ... for now!
Stuart
-
You are aware TalkTalk have absolutely no control over this, and no recourse of any kind with Openreach, right?
-
You are aware TalkTalk have absolutely no control over this, and no recourse of any kind with Openreach, right?
Yes but the point here is that unless customers complain to their ISPs nothing will happen. Just remember 'He who pays the piper calls the tune' TT pay BT or BTOR. If we all complain and all get the brush off from our ISPs then we all complaint to OFCOM then someone somewhere will get fed up with all this noise and maybe just maybe do something about this situation. But if we all sit on our hands and do nothing then yes nothing will happen. So if you are fed up raise a complaint and dont be fobbed off. BTOR in this situation have been totally incompetent and some how we must find a way to make them realise it. So complain to your ISP, then to OFCOM and then to your MP and just dont sit on your hands.
Stuart
-
Yes but the point here is that unless customers complain to their ISPs nothing will happen.
And the reason why G.INP was removed from the ECI estate to many issues with G.INP than Openreach could handle and the result is just remove it and we will investigate this further and feck the UK majority of lines who enjoyed G.INP on ECI while it lasted
-
Yeah us punters can only raise it with the CP due to the structure put in place by ofcom.
-
Hopefully Openreach will find a fix soon! :fingers:
-
In a way I agree with this. EU's have been kept in the dark.
At least we kind of know what's going on and that Openreach are trying to sort a fix out with their supplier.
There will be a lot of users suddenly lost up to 10Mbps and increased latency with no idea WTH is happening, so no doubt that will generate an awful lot of 'where has my speed gone' tickets to the ISPs.
I didn't bother contacting my ISP when I've had my lowest sync ever and found myself interleaved, because I knew that in a few days there would be a good chance DLM would catch up. Joe Bloggs wouldnt know that though would he.
-
This time it's different the ECI estate is showing issues on the downstream where as on the huawei estate the issue was coming from the upstream it was an easy fix for Openreach just turn OFF G.INP on the upstream as being the standard config.
The only option for ECI G.INP on the downstream is either ON or OFF and it's OFF for most end-users at the moment, don't know how they are going to fix this issue.
-
Openreach aren't. I'd say this is entirely in the hands of ECI.
I wonder how many complaints this has actually produced from Joe Public rather than the population of forums like these. Given it hasn't hit mainstream news I'm speculating not all that many in the grand scheme.
-
Whilst I agree that fixing this is almost certainly in the hands of ECI I don't believe that BTOR are without blame here. Given the initial issues with G.INP I believe that BTOR did not properly plan testing or rollout of G.INP on the ECI cabinets.
Stuart
-
@ignitionnet
Considering Openreach say they are "working hard with our vendor to find a permanent solution" does indeed suggest its now in the hands of ECI.
-
Openreach aren't. I'd say this is entirely in the hands of ECI.
I wonder how many complaints this has actually produced from Joe Public rather than the population of forums like these. Given it hasn't hit mainstream news I'm speculating not all that many in the grand scheme.
joe public because the CPs and openreach keep them in the dark 99% wont even know what g.inp is.
Instead they just notice a speed drop and moan at the isp (which even then is probably only a few %, maybe 5% max).
This would have been the same as the bodged hauwei rollout. But that few % was enough for them to come up with a fix.
There is some obvious cheap fix options available to openreach, however I think they wont take them up and instead put the onus on ECI, if ECI fail to deliver then I expect no g.inp.
As I said before, openreach testing of new configuration is clearly flawed, as well as the CPs policy of keeping end users in the dark, I know why they do this, they do this to manage expectations and to hide the truth from end users hence your comment about joe public not complaining because they got no clue whats going on, this is very wrong but it will continue as long as they get away with it.
ECI could quite easily come back to BT with something like this "we only support using compliant modem's with our product and you are responsible for enforcing this on your network".
-
I rather suspect that 90% of joe public don't even look at a speed tester and will be totally unaware of any speed drop.
-
Well I had a response to my complaint email today which was less than useless. Basically they had not addressed my questions at all and suggested I talk to support about my line. I have replied pointing out that the ONLY issue is the removal of G.INP which caused the speed drop and asked again what they are doing about chasing BTOR on this.
I suspect I'll get another useless answer..... >:(
Stuart
-
basic tech support wont have a clue what you on about, escalate it.
-
At different times I ring sky fibre pro team to see what they have to say about g.inp etc.. always the same response of no idea of what it is even though I am sure I read on here "or" advise their customers of network changes yet they dont have a clue
-
Try not to take this the wrong way ;D why would you need to call your ISP and complain about G.INP surly you only need to talk to your ISP if there is Voice and or Line fault or Billing issues.
Do you guys just pickup the phone /online chats to your ISP for something to do as you have all the information you need from the Kitz forum on what is going on.
-
skyeci what I did was send a statement in live chat, and told them to copy and paste it word for word up the chain until someone who understands it receives it.
-
basic tech support wont have a clue what you on about, escalate it.
Yes that's what I intend to do after one more try to see if they do it anyway.
Stuart
-
Try not to take this the wrong way ;D why would you need to call your ISP and complain about G.INP surly you only need to talk to your ISP if there is Voice and or Line fault or Billing issues.
Do you guys just pickup the phone /online chats to your ISP for something to do as you have all the information you need from the Kitz forum on what is going on.
er.. who said I was complaining. I am asking purely from a technical implementation/do they know anything about it point of view which so far has always been what's G.INP :lol:
-
I think that anyone who had no issues with their line but suddenly lost 10000kbps in sync after a re-sync with no fault issues would actually be quite likely to contact their ISP and ask why. Now some of those people might well come here and find out that G.INP might be why this happened. I guess most would not and yes quite a lot of people would be fobbed off by their ISP or even that their ISP had no idea what G.INP was or why it might have been removed.
However some folks are more savvy and wont leave things at that and will complain, and quite right they should. Some of use may know more about how this stuff works than the ISP support staff, and also may know more about how business works than their ISP support staff as well. None of this means we should not complain and not let things lie.
One thing I am thinking about doing (if I can find the correct email addresses) is to contact some journalists/BBC technology correspondents and try to get them interested as to why there is a post code lottery on your internet connection and that BTOR directly or indirectly caused this post code lottery. With the current views about BTOR I would hope it might garner some interest.
Stuart
-
Hi Stuart
Good idea I reckon...
-
rather you than me and any communication I've had with ISP's in the past leaves me frustrated to the point my voice starts to become louder and then the expletives and the reason why I never call my ISP's unless it's terminal ;)
-
rather you than me and any communication I've had with ISP's in the past leaves me frustrated to the point my voice starts to become louder and then the expletives and the reason why I never call my ISP's unless it's terminal ;)
Yes I know but I actually rather enjoy winding them up, the more I can do it the more I enjoy it. My wife doesn't call me grumpy for no reason :lol: Years ago I even complained about no free washing power in a new machine we bought, my wife refused to come with me but I came home with two packets of powder and some soft rinse as well. ;) ;D :cool:
Stuart
-
Its such a pitty we never had a purge of complaints to ISP's when G.INP was removed as standard from the upstream last year on huawie cabinets we are still awaiting 1 year on for this to become the standard config again (Mk1) :shrug2:
-
One thing I am thinking about doing (if I can find the correct email addresses) is to contact some journalists/BBC technology correspondents and try to get them interested as to why there is a post code lottery on your internet connection and that BTOR directly or indirectly caused this post code lottery.
I think that Rory Cellan-Jones (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/correspondents/rorycellanjones) would be the best person to contact. If you look on this page (https://media.info/people/rory-cellan-jones), a possible e-mail address is mentioned.
-
Mk1 is highly unlikely to happen.
There are far too many modems out there (such as the ECI modem/HH5A etc) that cant do upstream G.INP.
When it was switched on, people with those modems saw a loss of ~10Mbps and increased latency.
The compromise with Mk2 was to make G.INP available to those lines which needed it and which were capable.
The 2016 rollout is different in that its causing PPP issues for modems which arent in some way compatible with the ECI rollout. This is service affecting because they either cannot get connected or they have problems remaining connected.
In some way it looks like Openreach may have anticipated there being a PPP issue and its why they issued this warning in Jan 2015 - ECI modem - Issue 1 (http://forum.kitz.co.uk/index.php/topic,15283.msg284199.html#post_ECI_modem_issue1). What they didn't seem to anticipate is that not only would it affect ECI modems with old f/w... but also other modems such as the Drayteks, or Fritzboxes.
Draytek seem to have admitted defeat knowing that their equipment cant be updated - hence offering circa £100 off a newer model. These didn't work on the Huawei cabs, but for some reason there seems to be a heck of a lot more people with Drayteks on ECI's. I think I only saw one or two posts about people having to consign drayteks to the bin last year.. but I seem to have seen half a dozen or so just in the past few days on the ECI's.
From what I can gather from one ISP, faults have taken a steep rise where they've had to send out OR engineers. I guess we are now seeing why Openreach are being more firm about Modem Conformance Testing.
-
I think the PPP issue has been horribly misdiagnosed.
g.inp shouldnt break the protocol, the modem is a bridge passing unmodified packets across, I still think these PPP issues are because of high amounts of loss of sync causing ghosted PPP sessions and end users having to wait for those sessions to timeout.
-
Well I've had yet another useless and I suspect automated or at lest scripted email back with nothing sensible in it so this complaint will be sent directly to the CEOs office.
Thanks burakkucat I will indeed try that email, it was R C-J I was thinking of but had not yet found that.
Stuart
PS email sent and so far not bounced back, I copied Click as well for good measure.
-
The CEO Office are also useless. You'll get passed around and around.
-
The CEO Office are also useless. You'll get passed around and around.
Yes I know as I've done it before but as I said earlier I like to cause a bit of aggravation ;) :cool:
Stuart
-
I think the PPP issue has been horribly misdiagnosed.
g.inp shouldnt break the protocol, the modem is a bridge passing unmodified packets across
Both Huawei and ECI 'modems' are routers in bridge mode. Plenty of room for SNAFUs.
-
Quick reply that I dont have time to look further in to.
The ITU specs for g.inp specifically mentions 'initialisation failures' if g.inp is forced with non-compliant kit.
I would liked to have tried to look further to see if I could find anything more about the type of initialisation failure and if it could occur as something wrongly configured too.
But story of my life these days, not finding time to do much other than admin :/
-
The ITU specs for g.inp specifically mentions 'initialisation failures' if g.inp is forced with non-compliant kit.
would that be the end-users modems ?
-
yep
-
I think the PPP issue has been horribly misdiagnosed.
g.inp shouldnt break the protocol, the modem is a bridge passing unmodified packets across, I still think these PPP issues are because of high amounts of loss of sync causing ghosted PPP sessions and end users having to wait for those sessions to timeout.
Whatever the cause, it patently isn't simple, else we'd have seen it happen with the Huawei activation.
Some of the symptoms sound, to me, a little like he software in the CPU is losing control of the hardware, suggesting exceptions and timeouts are happening. Lots of fun to investigate.
Other symptoms are, frankly bizarre. High FEC rates for a precise 1 hour period? Doesn't sound real, and seems more likely to be a reporting issue. Memory references going wrong?
Interworking with other vendor's equipment has, at times, been the bane of my life.
-
openreach should be coming on here and asking for volunteers who understand how things work, and if required ship them hardware out that they need to test as causes of the problem.
Not doing silent covert tests with CPs on unaware users of whom they dont know what modem they using (Clearly a flawed strategy).
I have contacted the BT retail testing team offering to test g.inp, since they still inviting me to various trials years after I left the isp.
-
Re the error bursts, since g.inp and then interleaving has been removed.. Im seeing CRC bursts at the same time.
-
I have not seen this at all in the days since my G.INP was removed although I am interleaved right now and have a much lower sync speed at present, but no not seen any CRC bursts at that time.
Stuart
-
Just looking back into your history you have lost 3Mbps
-
Not sure how you work that out. My sync went from 71842kbps to 62019kbps which is a loss of 9823kbps by my maths, actually a little lower now as I did a re-sync to install new f/w on my ZyXEL VMG8924.
Stuart
-
I am looking at your interleaving sync before G.INP was activated and after it was removed the current state your in to-day.
-
OK I see, not sure why that is relevant to the original complaint though.....
Stuart
-
Well I left it a few days before raising the complaint with Dido Harding's office and have now had two email replies and one phone call this afternoon.
The young lady who called is not a technical person but a complaints manager. I explained to her hopefully in layman's terms what I was complaining about over this G.INP roll out/back and she has promised to feed back through the relevant people my concerns however she did not really indicate that I would hear anything more on this or any feedback on what if any pressure TT is or will be exerting on BT/BTOR about this. She did say that my complaint was the first they in that office had received on this topic. I did explain that the fiasco on this with ECI cabinets has left a doubt in my (and I would guess loads of others) mind that if ECI cannot properly support G.INP what real chance is there that these same cabinets will properly support vectoring or G.FAST either, in which case the 'postcode lottery' created by BTOR will only get far worse.
I should also point out that I am still interleaved after 8 days with no sign yet of DLM removing it, I did have one re-sync 6 days ago to put new f/w on the 8924 but that should not have delayed DLM as my line was disconnected for about an hour while I did other things at the same time.
Stuart
-
Hi
I've not switched back to non-interleaved either. It's probably some hysteresis thing in effect to stop things constantly switching back and forth, so now we are sat on interleaved, our line conditions are not good enough to overcome the hysteresis and switch back.
Regards
Phil
-
My G.INP was removed on the 29 April, on the 1 May went on fast path, on 9 May back on interleaving.
-
G.inp lost 8th april. Fast path came about 4 days later from memory and has remained since then...
-
OK I see, not sure why that is relevant to the original complaint though.....
Stuart
Your line has had interleaving and fastpath before but it seems to take 4 to 5 months to go from one to the other which is a very long time for anyone.
Now I can see why G.INP was very important to you
-
She did say that my complaint was the first they in that office had received on this topic. I did explain that the fiasco on this with ECI cabinets has left a doubt in my (and I would guess loads of others) mind that if ECI cannot properly support G.INP what real chance is there that these same cabinets will properly support vectoring or G.FAST either, in which case the 'postcode lottery' created by BTOR will only get far worse.
Just FYI G.fast isn't going to be run from cabinets. There isn't going to be much vectoring however some of it will be from ECI kit.
-
Regardless of the technologies involved, must say I support Stuart in making the complaint. So many organisations these days seem to think they have no obligations for customer service, as long as they have a complaints procedure. So why not let's use it?
I have invoked formal complaints procedures of ISPs, Insurance Companies, Pensions trustees, GPs, and more, never regretted and it and even had a few good outcomes. Brits are often criticised for not being good at complaining, we suffer in silence until Things have gone too far and even then we don't complain, we just rant and rave. :(
And in cases such as ISPs and CPs with outsourced Indian helpdesks, if enough people invoked the complaints procedures, it might must cause enough grief for senior execs to force them to admit, things ain't working. >:(
Good luck, Stuart. :fingers:
-
For reference this the reply I got from sky after I raised it.
Thank you for your positive feedback regarding our service, I have an answer to your technical fault query. Sky is working with Openreach to resolve the current problems with g.inp on some cabinet's. We have no estimated date for a resolution but as you said in your query, this has not negatively affected your service and is still working within expected performance levels. We have also taken aboard your request to be put forward for any trial should there be one in the future.
.
-
Well after feeling I was getting nowhere with TalkTalk I decided to try to enlist the help of my Local MP and get this issue raised perhaps with the relevant minister and see what happens. Once again I wont hold my breath!
Stuart
-
Good luck Stuart.
The thing that irks about G.INP is EU's were kept in the dark. ISP's should have made info available to the EU's.
To be honest if the SP's had made EU's more aware, then possibly there wouldnt be as many 'why have I lost xMbps' of type speeds.
Whilst Openreach are working with ECI to find a solution, this info is also not also being relayed. When we know that something is being worked on and the info is being relayed, then we are more likely to be patient.
There's a few on here, who think Openreach could perhaps be more selective with their testing.. but then again there is a problem with that in that its some of the SPs who dont like OR directly communicating with the EUs :(
-
Interested in Chrys's comments re SKY. Not that I make a habit of it but I called Sky today to speak with Broadband complaints just to ask whether there was any further update/news on g.inp issues with ECI cabs etc..
I was told in a very certain manner that no information had been passed on from OR regardless of what I already knew about this and even if they had any info they would not be allowed to pass it on anyway??!...waste of time really. Was told it was not of interest to support staff to be briefed on these issues..
-
I cannot help feeling that proper communication would actually help a lot. It would make BT/BTOR look a lot less arrogant than they currently do and might just start to improve their very tarnished image. That said my run ins with BT go back a very long way to the early 70's and their attitude then was just as arrogant and it has not really improved. In these days of electronic communication it is not acceptable for people to be kept in the dark either by ISPs or BT/BTOR and the sooner they realise that the better. In todays modern world the 'dont do as I do, do as I tell you' just wont wash.
Stuart
-
no information had been passed on from OR regardless of what I already knew about this
False - several updates have been passed to the SPs about this.
Was told it was not of interest to support staff to be briefed on these issues..
That's more your answer :(
-
Yeap I made a point about this being already known in the public domain but again told several times no information had been passed on from OR....even though we know this is not the case..
-
Kitz in the light of your comments here and in the ECI thread I am going to contact the lady from TT again who called me and ask a few more pertinent questions about why more information was not and seemingly is not forthcoming from them about this kind of situation.
Stuart
-
@Stuart, if you want to escalate this further and/or give TT the motivation to help, one tactic I once used (thirty years ago) to good effect was to contact local TV news programmes. Got my 5 mins of fame, by the time BBC phoned back to arrange a visit, ITV had already been out to see me. My issue was duly broadcast in every ITV local news bulletin of the day.
If it's a slow news day they might well take the bait, after all it affects lots of 'local people' and everybody has heard of Talk Talk. Far more effective than the dedicated consumer shows, the likes of 'Watchdog' seems to be scripted and planned far in advance and I don't think they take any actual notice of individual approaches.
Providing of course you're not camera-shy, they'd probably want to interview you... :-[
-
Interested in Chrys's comments re SKY. Not that I make a habit of it but I called Sky today to speak with Broadband complaints just to ask whether there was any further update/news on g.inp issues with ECI cabs etc..
I was told in a very certain manner that no information had been passed on from OR regardless of what I already knew about this and even if they had any info they would not be allowed to pass it on anyway??!...waste of time really. Was told it was not of interest to support staff to be briefed on these issues..
I will be honest, I did have to be firm with sky, initially I got a couple of idiotic replies, thats when I gave them clear instructions to copy and paste my statement word for word and keep passing it up the chain until someone understands the content. I didnt hear anything for a few weeks and then got that reply.
Isp's have been informed by Openreach on what is going on, kitz is correct on that. But they either playing dumb or not filtering it down the chain.
Also to add sky didnt answer me fully, I did also ask why they withholding the information, they chose to ignore that question.
-
Hi
Hi
I've not switched back to non-interleaved either. It's probably some hysteresis thing in effect to stop things constantly switching back and forth, so now we are sat on interleaved, our line conditions are not good enough to overcome the hysteresis and switch back.
Regards
Phil
This morning, early at around 4:20am, my line resync'd and finally back to no interleaving, and my SNR is restored back up to 9db from 6.5db.
Regards
Phil