Kitz Forum
Announcements => News Articles => Topic started by: Bowdon on December 07, 2017, 01:55:44 PM
-
https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2017/12/openreach-pause-uk-trial-g-inp-fix-eci-fttc-broadband-cabs.html (https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2017/12/openreach-pause-uk-trial-g-inp-fix-eci-fttc-broadband-cabs.html)
In an unsurprising development Openreach has paused a trial of Physical Retransmission ReTX (G.INP) technology for their troublesome ECI based FTTC “fibre broadband” street cabinets. The technology works fine on their Huawei estate but ECI has long been the naughty child.
More bad news for G.INP on ECI cabinets.
-
You're too efficient in posting news :)
UPDATE 1:53pm
We understand that this pause is temporary and will last until sometime in early 2018, which is largely attributed to the Christmas and New Year break.
In other words the trial should continue and Openreach are currently examining the initial rollout to 30,000 lines. Once resumed the plan appears to be for this to be extended to 570,000 lines, which suggests more of a wide-scale pilot than a limited trial.
-
yes this is just for christmas and new year break.
-
I have no idea what Kits is talking about when she says G.nip. The majority of Huawei lines have benefited from G.INP.
Does she mean g.fast?
-
I have no idea what Kits is talking about when she says G.nip. The majority of Huawei lines have benefited from G.INP.
Does she mean g.fast?
Yes, I suspect that is the case.
-
Storm, teacup.
UPDATE 1:53pm
We understand that this pause is temporary and will last until sometime in early 2018, which is largely attributed to the Christmas and New Year break.
I've long said that these Christmas freezes happen. And that they affect everything about rollout planning - particularly the allowance of time for a rollback to happen.
Openreach are currently examining the initial rollout to 30,000 lines. Once resumed the plan appears to be for this to be extended to 570,000 lines, which suggests more of a wide-scale pilot than a limited trial.
Given the timing of the pilot, this is precisely how I'd have planned things .... A limited-scale rollout to trial and gather evidence (one limit being the time needed to rollback; one requirement to gather enough evidence statistically). Then, having accumulated evidence of behaviour, use the Christmas downtime to study that data. Then come back with a confirmation as to whether a full rollout can go ahead.
-
Predictions on further delays? I have doubts we'll see G.INP fully rolled out next year somehow.
-
I have some doubts too, but I'd say I'm maybe leaning more towards a rollout starting, anyway.
IIRC, the previous announcement/status suggested that the combined G.INP and XdB trial might not have happened, but the G.INP trial has progressed right up to the freeze.
The good news, then, is that nothing catastrophic has happened to cause a rollback.
Analysing the outcome of the pilot will be ECI's next opportunity to show BT that their QA can be trusted. My guess will be that they don't then jump into an immediate rollout. That it'll be staged, and monitored. I doubt the freeze lasts until March, but I'd expect us to next hear about progress then.
-
ECI cabinets are probably the worse for FTTC than the Huawei cabinets. I think to resolved for the better for everyone's is to replaced all ECI cabinets to have a new Huawei cabinets as it will be lots easy for Openreach to do G.INP, Vectoring, 3dB SNR Target and G.Fast adjustment etc. And scrap all ECI cabinets to scrapyard to gained money.
-
I have no idea what Kits is talking about when she says G.nip. The majority of Huawei lines have benefited from G.INP.
Does she mean g.fast?
Unsure. I thought G.nip was the special extension dedicated to download of porn.
She refers to G.fast correctly in an earlier post which makes me think she's referring to G.INP.
-
I thought G.nip was the special extension dedicated to download of porn.
I really wouldn't have a clue - linky (http://bfy.tw/FTK7) :D
She refers to G.fast correctly in an earlier post which makes me think she's referring to G.INP.
I'm still clueless.
The news article is about G.INP, yet upon re-reading it would appear she could be talking off topic about g.fast speeds
At first I thought G.nip was a typ0 for g.inp, but in her later link she refers to a forum post about g.fast. She is talking about g.fast in there, but then in her next post she yet again twice refers to what is obviously this time g.inp as G.nip. :-\ ??? :shrug2: :hmm: