Kitz Forum
Broadband Related => FTTC and FTTP Issues => Topic started by: V_R on October 10, 2018, 01:37:51 PM
-
Just looking for some info from the experts if I may. :)
I'm with Zen, They have just announced they are doing a G.fast product, which I'd registered my interest in previously.
Turns out my cab which is showing G.fast enabled is showing as Amber. Which they say means its at capacity. I'm on the wait list.
Just wondering what you guys think? What's my chances, or any other info that might be of interest?
Thanks.
(https://i.imgur.com/V0sXLQX.jpg)
EDIT: Also with regards to the modem, I take it I get the Huawei MT992? I assume no DSL Stats with that? Will be sorely missed if so.
-
I was under the impression that "Amber" is when there is a level of uncertainty on the estimated speed, not something of capacity. I could be completely wrong since there is not a lot of information about G.fast in the open. But it should be noted that the current max ports in a G.fast pod is 48 (planned 96 in the future).
I would try and order with them anyway. The worst they can say is "no". Don't ask, don't get. :)
For the moment you will get a MT992. An engineer visit will also be necessary as a self-install option isn't planned for later this year. Your ISP may provide their own G.fast capable hardware (not sure about Zen) but the engineer needs to be able to provide the MT992 regardless as far as I am aware.
-
Well that's what she told me....
So the Openreach checker just shows FTTC as available to order and Gfast in an amber status. So we can’t place an order against an amber status however we could place an order to go on the “waiters list” and if capacity is increased your order would progress, if not it would be cancelled and refunded after 3 months.
Yes I have placed the order. Will see what happens.
Zen said they provide a Fritzbox, not sure which one.
Cheers for the reply.
-
There is a good chance I could be wrong, so perhaps we need another voice in here. :D
Out of interest, does:
- Checking your address and number differ?
- Checking other addresses on the same cabinet differ, including addresses closer to the cabinet?
As far as I know, the FRITZ!Box device will not have a G.fast modem so it will need to be used in conjunction with the MT992.
-
I would be put off by the chance of drastically lower upload speeds. If I was upgrading to a faster product I would expect it to be faster not 50% slower! I probably won't need to worry as I am on the boundary of gfast distance and if btor has reduced rollout the chance of it coming to my area is very low/non-existant anyway.
-
I would be put off by the chance of drastically lower upload speeds.
You say that, but from what I have gathered the upstream should be around the same if not slightly faster than with FTTC up until around 300m line length. As we start to approach 350m, for the it is probably not worth the upgrade as the downstream would not be significantly better and the upstream has the potential to be worse.
-
There is a good chance I could be wrong, so perhaps we need another voice in here. :D
Out of interest, does:
- Checking your address and number differ?
- Checking other addresses on the same cabinet differ, including addresses closer to the cabinet?
As far as I know, the FRITZ!Box device will not have a G.fast modem so it will need to be used in conjunction with the MT992.
Interestingly, (I'm in a block of 6 newly built flats) the flat across the hall from me shows this.
G.fast Range A (Clean) 231 201.7 33 14.1 167.6 Available
G.fast Range B (Impacted) 258.8 175.7 29.9 12.4 152 Available
and this is the house across the road...
G.fast Range A (Clean) 207.9 181 29.1 12.1 149.5 Available
G.fast Range B (Impacted) 149.4 100.3 17.8 8.9 91.3 Available
and this is a random house just down the road from the cab...
G.fast Range A (Clean) 330 322.3 50 30.7 278.5 Available
G.fast Range B (Impacted) 283 213 39.7 20.3 196.1 Available
-
Interestingly, (I'm in a block of 6 newly built flats) the flat across the hall from me shows this.
. . .
I suppose those are on the same cabinet? If so, I believe with quite a reasonable amount of confidence that you should be able to order. I just don't think Amber status has anything to do with capacity.
I am not aware of any gotchas in this instance, so perhaps someone else has their "two cents" for this situation? :)
-
It's not capacity, it's probably because your estimates are just below a threshold.
Your Range B downstream is under 100Mb, it could be that. It could be 90Mb downstream handback, no idea.
If others on the cabinet are available and you are amber, all your lower estimates are below all those other lines that are available. Check the neighborhood and see if you can spot a pattern.
From what you've posted I'm convinced it's an OpenReach/Wholesale imposed threshold that you're below and the ISP should be able to prod OpenReach and get the line checked to see if it meets the requirements.
First off, and important, have you checked both phone number and full address on the BT Wholesale Broadband Availability Checker?
Can you post both results?
-
j0hn is very likely on the money here, as usual. :) Perhaps the person you spoke to at Zen does not understand what Amber status is.
I should have perhaps made it clearer when I asked whether there was a difference between your telephone number and house number on the DSLchecker.
-
@re0, yep all on the same cab. As I said, everyone around me I check including in this block can get it. With better estimates strangely.
@J0hn
Sure, via phone number:
VDSL Range A (Clean) 80 60 20 19 52.7 Available -- --
VDSL Range B (Impacted) 75.7 50.2 20 16.7 39.8 Available -- --
G.fast Range A (Clean) 189.9 164.6 26 10.2 135 Amber -- --
G.fast Range B (Impacted) 151.2 97.8 17.2 7.9 88.8 Amber -- --
via address:
VDSL Range A (Clean) 80 60 20 19 52.7 Available --
VDSL Range B (Impacted) 75.7 50.2 20 16.7 39.8 Available --
G.fast Range A (Clean) 189.9 164.6 26 10.2 135 Amber --
G.fast Range B (Impacted) 151.2 97.8 17.2 7.9 88.8 Amber --
This is across the hall via the address checker:
VDSL Range A (Clean) 80 60 20 19 52.7 Available --
VDSL Range B (Impacted) 75.7 50.2 20 16.7 39.8 Available --
G.fast Range A (Clean) 231 201.7 33 14.1 167.6 Available --
G.fast Range B (Impacted) 258.8 175.7 29.9 12.4 152 Available --
The flat below:
VDSL Range A (Clean) 80 60 20 19 52.7 Available --
VDSL Range B (Impacted) 75.7 50.2 20 16.7 39.8 Available --
G.fast Range A (Clean) 249.1 218.6 36.2 16.1 182 Available --
G.fast Range B (Impacted) 283 198.1 32.9 14 173.9 Available --
Another in this block
VDSL Range A (Clean) 80 60 20 19 52.7 Available --
VDSL Range B (Impacted) 75.7 50.2 20 16.7 39.8 Available --
G.fast Range A (Clean) 231 201.7 33 14.1 167.6 Available --
G.fast Range B (Impacted) 258.8 175.7 29.9 12.4 152 Available --
just for fun this is the block next to us (its two identical buildings, 6 in each) which is technically that much further from the cab.
VDSL Range A (Clean) 80 62.9 20 19 55.7 Available --
VDSL Range B (Impacted) 79.3 55 20 17.7 40 Available --
G.fast Range A (Clean) 238 208.3 34.3 14.9 173.2 Available --
G.fast Range B (Impacted) 208.9 140.2 25 11.5 123.3 Available --
Finally, the house opposite us.
VDSL Range A (Clean) 80 65.6 20 19 58.1 Available --
VDSL Range B (Impacted) 80 58.3 20 18.4 44 Available --
G.fast Range A (Clean) 207.9 181 29.1 12.1 149.5 Available --
G.fast Range B (Impacted) 149.4 100.3 17.8 8.9 91.3 Available --
and while I'm at it, my line stats. When we moved in were were one of the first and my attainable was about 100000kbps, but as people moved it its dropped to this:
xdslcmd info --stats
xdslcmd: ADSL driver and PHY status
Status: Showtime
Retrain Reason: 1
Last initialization procedure status: 0
Max: Upstream rate = 32568 Kbps, Downstream rate = 80484 Kbps
Bearer: 0, Upstream rate = 20000 Kbps, Downstream rate = 79999 Kbps
Bearer: 1, Upstream rate = 0 Kbps, Downstream rate = 0 Kbps
Link Power State: L0
Mode: VDSL2 Annex B
VDSL2 Profile: Profile 17a
TPS-TC: PTM Mode(0x0)
Trellis: U:ON /D:ON
Line Status: No Defect
Training Status: Showtime
Down Up
SNR (dB): 6.3 13.8
Attn(dB): 14.1 0.0
Pwr(dBm): 13.5 4.4
VDSL2 framing
Bearer 0
MSGc: -6 20
B: 130 239
M: 1 1
T: 0 64
R: 8 0
S: 0.0518 0.3819
L: 21468 5028
D: 16 1
I: 139 120
N: 139 240
Q: 16 0
V: 14 0
RxQueue: 60 0
TxQueue: 15 0
G.INP Framing: 18 0
G.INP lookback: 15 0
RRC bits: 0 24
Bearer 1
MSGc: 186 -6
B: 0 0
M: 2 0
T: 2 0
R: 16 0
S: 5.3333 0.0000
L: 48 0
D: 3 0
I: 32 0
N: 32 0
Q: 0 0
V: 0 0
RxQueue: 0 0
TxQueue: 0 0
G.INP Framing: 0 0
G.INP lookback: 0 0
RRC bits: 0 0
Counters
Bearer 0
OHF: 0 2746118
OHFErr: 0 1630
RS: 142530336 4293437
RSCorr: 120425 0
RSUnCorr: 0 0
Bearer 1
OHF: 917807563 0
OHFErr: 0 0
RS: 2423755431 0
RSCorr: 88 0
RSUnCorr: 0 0
Retransmit Counters
rtx_tx: 8939 0
rtx_c: 7027 0
rtx_uc: 0 0
G.INP Counters
LEFTRS: 74 0
minEFTR: 79982 0
errFreeBits: 808980845 0
Bearer 0
HEC: 0 0
OCD: 0 0
LCD: 0 0
Total Cells: 284855441 0
Data Cells: 2693617220 0
Drop Cells: 0
Bit Errors: 0 0
Bearer 1
HEC: 0 0
OCD: 0 0
LCD: 0 0
Total Cells: 0 0
Data Cells: 0 0
Drop Cells: 0
Bit Errors: 0 0
ES: 55 1164
SES: 11 0
UAS: 8506 8495
AS: 14742333
Bearer 0
INP: 48.00 0.00
INPRein: 0.00 0.00
delay: 0 0
PER: 0.00 6.13
OR: 0.01 33.91
AgR: 80614.82 20033.74
Bearer 1
INP: 4.00 0.00
INPRein: 4.00 0.00
delay: 3 0
PER: 16.06 0.01
OR: 95.62 0.01
AgR: 95.62 0.01
Bitswap: 5032987/5032994 211/211
Total time = 1 days 4 hours 13 min 10 sec
FEC: 120425 0
CRC: 0 1630
ES: 55 1164
SES: 11 0
UAS: 8506 8495
LOS: 1 0
LOF: 9 0
LOM: 0 0
Latest 15 minutes time = 13 min 10 sec
FEC: 110 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 0 0
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Previous 15 minutes time = 15 min 0 sec
FEC: 0 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 0 0
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Latest 1 day time = 4 hours 13 min 10 sec
FEC: 158 0
CRC: 0 2
ES: 0 2
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Previous 1 day time = 24 hours 0 sec
FEC: 208 0
CRC: 0 23
ES: 0 15
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Since Link time = 49 days 17 hours 2 min 47 sec
FEC: 120425 0
CRC: 0 1630
ES: 0 1145
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
#
I know this probably isn't needed, but I will use this thread as a kind of notepad to refer back to. :)
This is what the checker used to say, this was early April:
(https://i.imgur.com/j9lw52g.png)
Heres my stats when I got connected on the 20th April.
xdslcmd info --stats
xdslcmd: ADSL driver and PHY status
Status: Showtime
Retrain Reason: 0
Last initialization procedure status: 0
Max: Upstream rate = 37561 Kbps, Downstream rate = 100740 Kbps
Bearer: 0, Upstream rate = 20000 Kbps, Downstream rate = 79987 Kbps
Link Power State: L0
Mode: VDSL2 Annex B
VDSL2 Profile: Profile 17a
TPS-TC: PTM Mode(0x0)
Trellis: U:ON /D:ON
Line Status: No Defect
Training Status: Showtime
Down Up
SNR (dB): 12.0 17.5
Attn(dB): 14.1 0.0
Pwr(dBm): 13.5 4.4
VDSL2 framing
Bearer 0
MSGc: 18 20
B: 239 239
M: 1 1
T: 23 64
R: 0 0
S: 0.0955 0.3819
L: 20104 5028
D: 1 1
I: 240 120
N: 240 240
Counters
Bearer 0
OHF: 1197192 323939
OHFErr: 0 0
RS: 0 3550836
RSCorr: 0 0
RSUnCorr: 0 0
Bearer 0
HEC: 0 0
OCD: 0 0
LCD: 0 0
Total Cells: 304389959 0
Data Cells: 25090494 0
Drop Cells: 0
Bit Errors: 0 0
ES: 0 0
SES: 0 0
UAS: 8470 8470
AS: 1980
Bearer 0
INP: 0.00 0.00
INPRein: 0.00 0.00
delay: 0 0
PER: 1.65 6.13
OR: 116.09 33.91
AgR: 80103.09 20033.74
Bitswap: 390/390 0/0
Total time = 2 hours 54 min 10 sec
FEC: 0 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 0 0
SES: 0 0
UAS: 8470 8470
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Latest 15 minutes time = 9 min 10 sec
FEC: 0 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 0 0
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Previous 15 minutes time = 15 min 0 sec
FEC: 0 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 0 0
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Latest 1 day time = 2 hours 54 min 10 sec
FEC: 0 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 0 0
SES: 0 0
UAS: 8470 8470
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Previous 1 day time = 0 sec
FEC: 0 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 0 0
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Since Link time = 32 min 59 sec
FEC: 0 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 0 0
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
#
-
When we moved in were were one of the first and my attainable was about 100000kbps . . .
Crosstalk will reduce that, as you may know. :)
This is what the checker used to say, this was early April:
(https://i.imgur.com/j9lw52g.png)
The estimates have changed based on what is believed is possible on your line.
As j0hn essentially said, it's probably because one or more of the estimates is below the 100 Mbps threshold now (before, you can see that it was not the case and it was Available instead). You need to badger the ISP to prod Openreach about it if it's not allowing them to order, but how to go about it I don't know. The ISP may have a capacity issue, but it won't be related to the Amber status like they have made it out to be.
I think your line should be capable of towards 200 Mbps downstream and probably no more than around 30 Mbps upstream.
-
Yes, the dreaded crosstalk!
I'm going to email the woman I was speaking to previously now, with the same results I posted above and ask her to call me in the morning to discuss.
Cheers for your help so far gents.
-
Re 'Amber', if its the same as the checker I hook into, then that could mean some uncertainty as to the live date rather than anything to do with over capacity.
The instruction manual from BTw states "A = Amber (May be available)"
>> FRITZ!Box device will not have a G.fast modem so it will need to be used in conjunction with the MT992
Correct. My daughter is with Zen and has a FRITZ!Box 3490 for the router used with an MT992 supplied by Openreach.
-
The more I read the more it looks like the woman from Zen doesn't know her stuff. I had the same problem last time I spoke to them.
Thanks guys, will tackle this with them in the morning with any luck.
-
The whole Amber thing reminds me of the RAG test (https://kitz.co.uk/adsl/RAGtest.htm). :D Though this is going back to ADSL now. :)
-
What I think is that someone needs to do something about how wide those estimations are, to me an estimate with such a large coverage area is not much of an estimate.
Its not too far off from someone ordering FTTC and having an estimate of between 20 and 80mbit/sec.
I probably wouldnt order that g.fast service personally.
BTw estimate range from 97 to 189, with a potential fault threshold of just 88
Upload estimate from 7.9 to 26, thats about 1/3 of the maximum ideal frequency as the range of the estimate way too much.
The range of the estimates need to go down not just so they more meaningful but also to increase standards. So for me the handback threshold should no longer be a thing, the low estimate is the min expected working service and the min should be no more than say 20% lower than the max. There also should be no impacted, just a clean estimate.
It will either mean lower estimates so less disappointments on activation's and same level of speed faults, or same estimates, but network having to be kept to a higher standard so those estimates can be pulled off, I know I sound overly strict but I just dont like how wide the ranges have got. This has probably happened because ofcom keep restricting openreach's revenue and in return openreach are having to provide this kind of service.
-
I would be put off by the chance of drastically lower upload speeds. If I was upgrading to a faster product I would expect it to be faster not 50% slower! I probably won't need to worry as I am on the boundary of gfast distance and if btor has reduced rollout the chance of it coming to my area is very low/non-existant anyway.
I missed this last night, I'm not sure on the exact length of the line but this is the route it takes to my property.
Would you guys say I'd be ok with G.fast or should I stick with FTTC?
FWIW, the white road is all underground and not via poles.
(https://i.imgur.com/j3tx4Gs.jpg)
-
260m is within range of the current G.Fast spec OpenReach is using, though it is nearing its limits.
You may end up with an upload nearer 30Mb at the top end.
You would be at the very bottom of the estimates to get 10Mb upload. Your downstream may be too low if you are hitting the bottom estimates though.
More likely the upload will be somewhere nearer the middle though falling between 15-25Mb.
Do you upload much? Many people don't. Some would bite your hand off for double download with a slight reduction in upload.
Others would rather have higher upload, it depends on your usage.
-
For between 170-185Mb (according to the estimates) I'd be going for it, if it were me.
I'm 600m from my cabinet so no G.Fast for me (at this juncture, I am unsure why I taunt myself with checking the DSL site every so often, I know I won't be able to take advantage!)
Roll on 2025... lol.
-
Would you guys say I'd be ok with G.fast or should I stick with FTTC?
I'd say jump to it if you want it and/or believe it will benefit you. As I essentially said before, I would probably expect sync speeds to be around max. 200/30 Mbps (DS/US). Anything above is a bonus, seeing 10% less would be unfortunate.
There's a thread here (https://forum.kitz.co.uk/index.php/topic,21963.0.html) where someone has a line which is around the same length as yours and has upgraded to G.fast, perhaps a bit shorter in terms of the reported loss. It's not as simple as I would like it to be, but it should be near the speeds of that line.
-
Well she said she passed on the info to the provisioning team for investigation, about the same time I got a email from Zen, the auto generated kind, saying my install date is the 24th.
Lets see what happens. I shall keep you posted.
I'll really miss DSL stats though, that's my biggest issue.
-
If you care about DSLstats and can't live without it, then you could invest in a Asus DSL-AC88U (modem-router combo). G.fast compatible modem, works with DSLstats. A little pricey selling new for over £200. Might be able to pick one up for a bit cheaper if it's open box.
Some people would say it's too soon to invest in G.fast hardware in case of further amendments but it's a risk you take. It's using the same Broadcom CPU as the MT992 as far as I know so any later changes should not negatively impact the DSL-AC88U without also impacting the MT992.
Anyway, :fingers: for your install.
-
Previously the Asus DSL-AC88U required debug versions of firmware to get telnet access for DslStats. No idea if they changed their stance on this but worth bearing in mind if not.
-
Hmmm, I'll see how it goes, Really liking my RT-AC86U for the minute.
-
Good morning everyone, thought I would add some detail here as I had Zen G.Fast installed last week.
I was Zen's first g.fast customer and the regrade got really messed up and took a few days to sort out and become active which resulted in me losing service. However, Zen's customer support was amazing and they provided me with a LTE hotspot and all sorts as they acknowledged that this was all new to them and needed some figuring out.
Anyway, at install the Openreach engineer measured my line length at 340m from the cabinet (I reckon the straight line distance is about 250) and I am seeing speed tests of 200 down and 27 up (as opposed to my old 80/20 on FTTC). Again, when the Openreach engineer ran his sync test at install he was getting 240 down on a 3db snr profile - so I'm guessing that I am currently on a 6db one and I may get a little more at some point (sorry, I forgot to ask about upstream).
Sadly, with a MT992 + Asus AC68U I have no access to stats and the Zen customer portal hasn't been updated yet so that it can show g.fast stats, so I have no way of knowing for sure and I wonder if the Asus DSL-AC88U has sync rates, snr information etc. that is available from the GUI you can get to by logging in to the router?
Interestingly, pings to bbc.co.uk are now 13ms rather than the 8-9 that they were before, but I am now routed differently from the exchange on g.fast (which was one of the major problems with my install).
Please ask if you have any questions as I will be happy to share more detail of my experiences.
-
Hey Spudgun,
Cheers for taking the time to reply, an interesting read. I'd imagine my line length is not far off yours, as you see from the pic below, its down the road and round the corner, about 260m on foot, add to that the obvious extra length I'd bet I'm somewhere in the 300-350m range? 400m max I would think (read: hope!)
The missing stats thing is my biggest issue, the geek in me likes to see whats going on. Guess DSL Stats has well and truly spoilt me. I take it you can't even log into the MT992 with a second ethernet cable like with the HG612 then? Will have to do some research. Worst case I'll get a new router, but I've had the 86U less than a year and it is a cracking bit of kit with the Merlin FW running on it.
If anyone knows of a good G.Fast router let me know. :)
Regarding the install, did you need a new faceplate or anything else like that? I've got a 5C mk4 or whatever they're calling it at the moment, was installed in April so I would imagine that wouldn't need changing.
-
I believe the MT992 only has a single Ethernet port, and there aren't even any headers on the board to solder one on.
-
I believe the MT992 only has a single Ethernet port, and there aren't even any headers on the board to solder one on.
That is correct, there is only one ethernet port on the MT992.
That Asus modem/router gets some pretty bum reviews on Amazon and other sources for stability - so i'm not tempted at the moment, but maybe there will be some other options available as g.fast becomes more available.
-
Sadly, with a MT992 + Asus AC68U I have no access to stats and the Zen customer portal hasn't been updated yet so that it can show g.fast stats, so I have no way of knowing for sure and I wonder if the Asus DSL-AC88U has sync rates, snr information etc. that is available from the GUI you can get to by logging in to the router?
No! It's a router not a modem/router, you can only get stats from the modem.
-
No! It's a router not a modem/router, you can only get stats from the modem.
Actually, the DSL-AC88U contains a modem, *and*, is G.Fast compatible :)
-
Good morning everyone, thought I would add some detail here as I had Zen G.Fast installed last week.
I was Zen's first g.fast customer and the regrade got really messed up and took a few days to sort out and become active which resulted in me losing service.
Thanks for sharing.
I'm not sure who told you that you were Zen's 1st G.Fast customer but if you only had it installed last week I can assure you 110% you weren't their 1st.
I was using a Zen G.Fast line over a month ago.
edit: to add
Correct. My daughter is with Zen and has a FRITZ!Box 3490 for the router used with an MT992 supplied by Openreach.
If I recall correct kitz daughter has had G.Fast considerably longer than a month, with Zen.
-
I believe the MT992 only has a single Ethernet port, and there aren't even any headers on the board to solder one on.
Why would we need headers to solder an additional Ethernet port?
Adding a 2nd Ethernet port would be entirely unnecessary and a huge amount of work.
Serial headers would be all that would be needed.
At first glance they can't be spotted but they are likely there.
With the Huawei HG612 the 2nd port was used to easily unlock the device.
It isn't needed for stats collection, that can be done on port 1.
-
Why would we need headers to solder an additional Ethernet port?
Adding a 2nd Ethernet port would be entirely unnecessary and a huge amount of work.
Serial headers would be all that would be needed.
At first glance they can't be spotted but they are likely there.
With the Huawei HG612 the 2nd port was used to easily unlock the device.
It isn't needed for stats collection, that can be done on port 1.
Well yes, this is very true.
What there seems to be a lack of, is spare MT992's to have a go at.
-
My saved search on eBay has had 0 triggers in over 6 months.
-
If I recall correct kitz daughter has had G.Fast considerably longer than a month, with Zen.
@Spudgun
Yup since end of May. They were on one of the listed trial exchanges and the order was first placed end Feb/beginning March.
There was a delay with installation due to waiting on a new host link for Zen to be installed to take g.fast connections ... rather than use Zen existing GEA cablelinks for FTTC & LLU. What that means is that Zen is using BTw backhaul for g.fast rather than their own network, but they still needed to purchase a host link at their Manchester PoP to connect up to the BTw backhaul.
13ms rather than the 8-9 that they were before,
but I am now routed differently from the exchange on g.fast
Out of curiosity where are you located? I wonder if you are going via the Manchester PoP or if they have installed a new hostlink in London yet.
My daughter is in the NW, so going via Manchester PoP didn't cause them any additional delay. DLM intervened at one point which did affect latency, but that's another story.
If you are in the South and they are routing you via Manchester then that could explain some of the additional latency.
-
@Spudgun
Yup since end of May. They were on one of the listed trial exchanges and the order was first placed end Feb/beginning March.
There was a delay with installation due to waiting on a new host link for Zen to be installed to take g.fast connections ... rather than use Zen existing GEA cablelinks for FTTC & LLU. What that means is that Zen is using BTw backhaul for g.fast rather than their own network, but they still needed to purchase a host link at their Manchester PoP to connect up to the BTw backhaul.
Out of curiosity where are you located? I wonder if you are going via the Manchester PoP or if they have installed a new hostlink in London yet.
My daughter is in the NW, so going via Manchester PoP didn't cause them any additional delay. DLM intervened at one point which did affect latency, but that's another story.
If you are in the South and they are routing you via Manchester then that could explain some of the additional latency.
The info about being first came from Zen themselves, with them only selling the product from their website from 17th September (e.g. see https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2018/09/isp-zen-internet-launch-300mbps-g-fast-uk-home-broadband-service.html), so I guess I might be their first 'retail' customer who purchased a regrade of their Zen FTTC to g.Fast through the website rather than any special trial users, but anyway, that is a minor irrelevance to all of this.
I can confirm that I am in the south of the UK and my traffic used to roughly follow a path along the m4 towards London - but now I am routed North to Manchester and then back South to London.
Hopefully this is something that they might address in the future as more users join the service and more links get added to Zen's network
-
I would think they will. They've always had both Manchester and London PoPs.
As g.fast is a relatively new product for them, they may not yet have sufficient live customers to justify host links at dual locations. With them being based in Rochdale and (most) of their trialists were in that area, then it would have made sense to put their first link in at Manchester.
>>> with them only selling the product from their website from 17th September
Probably :) They had info about their trial on their blog, but that link has now vanished.
-
I would like to see more traffic shortcutting routes where feasible, rather than going all the way down to London and then all the way back. I just can’t see it making financial sense though.
-
Geography is quite irrelevant. The UK is a pretty small country, the vast majority of the traffic is generated within 250 miles of London and delays minimal.
To go into more detail would drag the thread way off topic but it's tricky and expensive to keep traffic local, and virtually impossible when using someone else's transport network as they decide the path your customer's traffic takes to get to your network where you have control.
-
Just thought I'd let you guys know, install day is the 24th.
I'm considering a new router so I can at least see the basic stats. So any options would be welcome. Ta.
-
Choices are practically nil.
The Asus DSL-AC88U - full Broadcom stats and some elements work with DslStats.
BT Smart Hub X - limited stats provided by its WebUI.
Huawei MT992 - no stats
There may be other models, but none I've seen mentioned in use in UK on G.Fast.
-
So to me anyway the only option there is the Asus. Which isn't a bad thing as I'm a big Asus fan. As I have the AC-86U and before that the N66U. Both with Merlin FW. Shame the DSL models don't work with Merlin FW though.
Have you seem any reports of anyone actually using the Asus on a G.fast connection?
This guy has t on BT, needed a FW update to get it working, but he seems happy.
https://community.bt.com/t5/BT-Fibre-broadband/BT-Ultrafast-2-and-ASUS-DSL-AC88U/td-p/1859519
-
Have you seem any reports of anyone actually using the Asus on a G.fast connection?
Browni (https://forum.kitz.co.uk/index.php?action=profile;u=2132) is using an ASUS DSL-AC88U with his G.Fast (ITU-T G.9700/9701) circuit (https://forum.kitz.co.uk/index.php/topic,21963.msg378203.html).
-
Choices are practically nil.
The Asus DSL-AC88U - full Broadcom stats and some elements work with DslStats.
BT Smart Hub X - limited stats provided by its WebUI.
Huawei MT992 - no stats
There may be other models, but none I've seen mentioned in use in UK on G.Fast.
Don't suppose you know if the BT Smart Hub X can have its config edited so that you can connect to an ISP that isn't BT do you as the Openreach engineer that did my G.Fast install left me one even though I'm on Zen? I've never even thought of opening the box, but it might be worth it to see basic stats such as sync and snrm?
I'm also assuming it has the same broadcom chipset as the MT992 and Asus DSL AC88U?
-
@burakkucat, Thanks for the link, interesting read. :)
I was wondering the same thing Spudgun, would at least be another option for the moment anyway.
-
Was the DSL-AC88U locked down stat wise before? I seem to recall reading that here. Good to know though!
-
I believe you may need to use debug firmware for Telnet access, or did at one point.
No idea now as Asus closed their community forums that had all the DSL modems on them.
Don't suppose you know if the BT Smart Hub X can have its config edited so that you can connect to an ISP that isn't BT do you as the Openreach engineer that did my G.Fast install left me one even though I'm on Zen? I've never even thought of opening the box, but it might be worth it to see basic stats such as sync and snrm?
I'm also assuming it has the same broadcom chipset as the MT992 and Asus DSL AC88U?
It's almost identical to the BT Smart Hub/HH6 which only allowed certain ISP's to use it to connect.
Not sure if the smart hub x is the same.
-
No idea now as Asus closed their community forums that had all the DSL modems on them.
That's handy then isn't it :lol:
-
http://whatsyourrouter.com/mybb/forumdisplay.php?fid=6
-
http://whatsyourrouter.com/mybb/forumdisplay.php?fid=6
handy for now, but 2 days ago
Hi j0hn
As you may have noted when you last visited ‘WhatsYourRouter.com’ – I have decided to close WhatsYourRouter.com and have created a brand-new Forum ‘UKTechHub.com’ which meets with the recent GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) and as such, I am unable to automatically transfer existing accounts across to this new Forum easily.
WhatsYourRouter.com will be closed on the 1st November, but will be available for a few days after that for viewing only, no new posts will be allowed.
-
At least he is doing something.
For whatever reason Asus closed the VIP forums without notification/reason.
-
Choices are practically nil.
The Asus DSL-AC88U - full Broadcom stats and some elements work with DslStats.
BT Smart Hub X - limited stats provided by its WebUI.
Huawei MT992 - no stats
There may be other models, but none I've seen mentioned in use in UK on G.Fast.
add to that with..
Comtrend GFR-9511U
&
Technicolor DGA2231
Both of which are the only MCT approved G.Fast modems (published at least).
https://uno.help/knowledge-base/article/openreach-approved-vdsl-modems
-
I've decided to cancel the upgrade for now.
For several reasons, loss of stats unless I buy a new router, increased cost etc, but mostly I'm already half way though a contract with Zen and I don't want to start a new one at the moment. I shall wait until this is up and see what other offers are out there.
Also as a side note, Zen keep telling me it shows as amber due to capacity, and it just so happens that a slot became available just as I put my order in.... yet no one else between me and the cab are showing as amber and I'm sure they're wrong. Hmmm.
Thanks for all the info as you guys helped me make up my mind. :)
-
I've decided to cancel the upgrade for now.
Toss it over my way if you don't want it. :D
For several reasons, loss of stats unless I buy a new router, increased cost etc, but mostly I'm already half way though a contract with Zen and I don't want to start a new one at the moment. I shall wait until this is up and see what other offers are out there.
I wouldn't have thought the loss of stats would have been an absolute deal breaker, but I see it's not your only reason (and to be honest, there probably won't be many budget options for G.fast modems that have statistics access for the foreseeable future). I can definitely see it being a problem if your line underperforms and you want to be more able to rule out problems, be able to "scientifically" prove something.
The pricing for 160/30 isn't actually too bad at Zen; at first glance their monthly pricing for Ultrafast is better than BT's non-discounted price, Freeola and certainly AAISP. TalkTalk and, quite surprisingly, IDNET are cheaper. ISPs can't be directly compared in some instances as you probably know, since some offer specific discounts, products and perks that may or not be important, and there may be charges associated with activation, migration and cessation of services (and contract lengths may be a factor). Furthermore, Freeola and AAISP have a different type of line rental; the former has "silent line" where you can make calls to free numbers and emergency services and be able to receive calls, while AAISP has does not have either inbound or outbound at all - worth noting if landline calling is important.
Also as a side note, Zen keep telling me it shows as amber due to capacity, and it just so happens that a slot became available just as I put my order in.... yet no one else between me and the cab are showing as amber and I'm sure they're wrong. Hmmm.
I would like to say that perhaps they have misunderstood the meaning of the Amber status. As I believe we have established in this topic, it is more likely down to there being uncertainty of what the line can support.
One thing I will say is that G.fast pods only currently support up to 48 subscribers. I do not know how popular G.fast is as a service and whether it is usual for pods to be at max capacity. But there is perhaps a slim chance that your pod may be full when you come to look for a G.fast product at the end of your current contract.
Sorry for the long post. :-[
-
Updated:
I come across on this thread and for anyones wondering what does Amber mean on G.fast?
Re: Gfast - Amber availability see link here: https://community.bt.com/t5/BT-Fibre-broadband/Gfast-Amber-availability/td-p/1922889
Hi Everyone,
I've emailed the G Fast product manager in BT Wholesale to see if I can get an explanation for this result, when I hear back I'll let you all know the outcome.
Cheers
Neil
Re: Gfast - Amber availability
Hi Everyone,
To clarify the amber result simply means that Openreach are recommending that the G.Fast install is done by an engineer rather than the self install option that is being trialled by them at the moment, it won't prevent you from ordering and doesn't indicate any issues with the line.
I hope that clears things up?
Cheers
Neil