Kitz Forum
Broadband Related => FTTP Rollout => Topic started by: tiffy on September 17, 2021, 10:21:42 PM
-
My sister has just had a FTTC/FTTP upgrade with BT, got a good deal on a 300/50 service retaining the land line.
The install was carried out by OR contractors, KN Circet in our area (N.I.), overhead feed from a pole at the end of her front garden fence.
The original copper drop cable takes the normal route from pole to front door and service ends up at the master socket at the back of the hall way, not sure how it actually gets there, likely through the loft.
The fibre installation tech opted for the easiest solution for him, new fibre drop cable to gable wall, drilled through and stuck the ONT there.
Of course he then decided that the router would go beside the ONT, normal procedure I would think, connected by a short ethernet cable.
The problem being, it's a very long bungalow with the ONT/router sighted at the (wrong) end of the dwelling in a spare bedroom, the household like most today rely completely on Wi-Fi coverage which due to the current router location is useless.
The installation took place just over a week ago.
Her original FTTP service router situated in the hall way at the master socket provided full coverage to all areas without any issues.
She did complain to BT advising that the system was virtually unusable and certainly well below the performance of her previous FTTC service, they offered to supply a second Wi-Fi repeater (not sure what BT call these) and arranged a OR engineers visit.
The OR engineer duly attended and agreed that the installation was terrible, however, he verified the available speeds at the ONT/Router, paired the 2 Wi-Fi boosters and was on his way!
So, the current situation is, the Wi-Fi boosters connect when reasonably close to the router (blue LED) but drop out (red LED) when situated where they would need to be for reasonable Wi-Fi coverage!
I'am of the opinion that the installation/service is currently not fit for purpose, anyone agree?
She has been in further contact with BT, local help desk, not India, but no further solutions are currently being offered, there has even been the suggestion by one help desk operator that a further engineers visit would attract a charge!
I feel quite bad about the situation as I badgered her to upgrade from a reasonably fast FTTC service which worked without issues.
So, what's the best way forward?
-
Tricky one, if she had brought this up during installation they should have been able to put the ONT wherever she wanted within reason, but its also understandable that she might not know this would be a problem at the time. If she did raise this and they ignored her or told her it would be fine, then perhaps she has a case.
At this point ideally you'd run an ethernet cable from the ONT to a better location but I can't imagine BT would be willing to do that, their responsibility ends at the ONT. So I'm not really sure there is any way forward with this, unless they guarantee good WiFi performance which few ISPs are brave enough to do as its kinda unrealistic.
-
I'am of the opinion that the installation/service is currently not fit for purpose, anyone agree?
Yes, agreed. At present the installation is not fit for purpose.
She has been in further contact with BT, local help desk, not India, but no further solutions are currently being offered, there has even been the suggestion by one help desk operator that a further engineers visit would attract a charge!
A written complaint, with full details, not forgetting to include the above "veiled threat" to apply a charge made by the BT operative.
---
<Now with a change of hat.> How easy/difficult would it be to run a length of Ethernet cable from the ONT to a more appropriate location for the router/WAP? (I'm thinking about running it through the roof space.)
-
Can Powerline adapter has a place in this situation? and since it is FTTP there nothing to make interference with :hmm:
-
Another option would be to run ethernet cable from to the ONT to a more conveniently placed router.
Is it a large bungalow - any really thick internal walls?
But really - complain to BT. If nothing else the wifi discs should work. The tech should not have left the premises with discs not working effectively. I think there is a FTTP phone number? Perhaps some other poster here can recall it.
-
Hi
I would consider the quickest and less stressful option would be to use a PoE wi-fi AP and position roughly middle of bungalow in the roof area.
This then would leave the ONT/router as is with a single network cable running into roof area from the bedroom.
The PoE are not expensive as they once were and been in central position loft area, should give same or greater wi-fi coverage as was experienced with the FTTC router, but been out of sight.
It is just an idea though as I suspect OR would not move the ONT.
Many thanks
John
-
Thanks to all for the for the responses and suggestions.
Unfortunately my sister was not present during the original installation, her husband was there, he is a very quiet and certainly non-tech person who just agreed with the installers decision to site the ONT at the easiest location for him, would definately not have been the case if my sister had been present.
After further consultation with BT most of yesterday when she eventually requested that the previous FTTC service was reinstated on the grounds that the FTTP service as provided was not currently fit for purpose, had a call back last night at 9:00 pm from BT stating that an OR engineer would attend next friday (FOC) and move the router to a more suitable location.
Will have to wait and see how this is achieved and if the attending OR engineer is actually willing to run an ethernet cable from the ONT to the original router location in the hall, I know entrance/working in the roof space is a no no for them.
My sister lives some 70 miles from my location so I can't easily visit to assess the situation for myself.
While I appreciate that my brother-in-law agreed to the ONT location, surely the original installer should have known that the location chosen would cause issues with Wi-Fi coverage especially as he had no intention of extending the router from the ONT to a more practical location.
I'am sure with the vast majority of installations the customers are non-tech and very much rely on the tech ability/advice of the installer to provide a fit for purpose system.
It has occured to me that the installer supplied router Wi-Fi might be faulty, was surprised that this was actually changed out as a replacement router & Wi-Fi booster was supplied by BT less than a year ago on last contract renewal, not sure if the old router was left or removed by the installer.
Again, I'am not in a position to easily check this, hopefully the attending OR engineer will.
My sister is a medical director of one of the main N.I. health trusts, not working from home as such but very reliant on her BB at home during the limited time she gets to spend there, with the ongoing NHS hospital situation she certainly could do without the additional hassle involved with this.
-
@d2d4j:
I would consider the quickest and less stressful option would be to use a PoE wi-fi AP and position roughly middle of bungalow in the roof area.
Yes, certainly an option in the longer term when BT/OR's best efforts have been exhausted.
I assume the BT router would not directly support PoE and some form of power adaptor would have to be interposed to power the Wi-Fi AP?
-
Depending on the house its possible the OR tech could cable around the house and move the ONT and router to a better location. Anyway - hope things work out okay.
-
Depending on the house its possible the OR tech could cable around the house and move the ONT and router to a better location. Anyway - hope things work out okay.
Don't think that moving the ONT would ever be considered by OR, as suggested by most of the forum patrons the best solution would be to extend the router to a more suitable location, will have to wait and see if OR will do that on the currently planned engineers visit next week.
-
@b*cat:
<Now with a change of hat.> How easy/difficult would it be to run a length of Ethernet cable from the ONT to a more appropriate location for the router/WAP? (I'm thinking about running it through the roof space.)
Being a bungalow with roof space access, messy but not that difficult, will certainly go down that route if I have to.
However, why should BT/OR/their sub-contractors be let off the hook for an obviously shoddy installation?
-
I see the failing as, quite clearly, being in the Openreach domain. The appointed sub-contractor took an easy option rather than consider the situation as then currently existing with the FTTC service.
BT (residential), as the service provider to the end user, only has the responsibility with that which exists "downstream" of the Ethernet port on the ONT. As such BT (residential), the ISP/CP, have fulfilled their commitments and should "push back" the failings of the Openreach sub-contractor to Openreach, for the latter to rectify.
Are Openreach aware of the dissatisfaction with the installation? Have BT (residential) "pushed back" to Openreach?
What could Openreach do? One possibility would be to fit a CSP (either internal or external), an extra length of fibre cable (either internal or external) and re-site the ONT.
My plan of action would be to carefully document the situation and send it to Clive Selley (clive.selley@openreach.co.uk) for review.
-
@b*cat:
Many thanks for your further input.
Are Openreach aware of the dissatisfaction with the installation? Have BT (residential) "pushed back" to Openreach?
I certainly would assume so (via BT) but as there is no way to directly contact OR (other than e-mailing the boss) as far as I'am aware can only assume this to be the case.
My sister has certainly expressed her dissatisfaction firmly but politely (she's that sort of person) by the only means available, the BT help line.
As stated earlier, she has even requested that the old FTTC system is reinstated, this appeared to prompt the offer yesterday of a further (FOC) OR engineers visit.
I current have no idea if the old copper drop cable from the adjacent dist. pole has been removed as not in a position to visit the location at present.
What could Openreach do? One possibility would be to fit a CSP (either internal or external), an extra length of fibre cable (either internal or external) and re-site the ONT.
To be honest, have no expectation that this would happen, much more likely to extend the ethernet connection from ONT to enable the router to be sited in a more sensible location with respect to Wi-Fi coverage, would be quite happy with that option.
The physical location of the ONT is not actually an issue as such, it's the fact that the router has currently to be sited adjacent to the ONT which is causing the Wi-Fi issues, that of course is assuming that the installer supplied router does not have faulty Wi-Fi.!
My plan of action would be to carefully document the situation and send it to Clive Selley (clive.selley@openreach.co.uk) for review.
Yes, certainly an option if a mutually satisfactory result is not obtained in a reasonable time scale, have advised my sister to methodically record and document all contacts for future reference.
-
Hi Tiffy
Yes, as this would be only a single PoE AP, you would buy the PoE adaptor that plugs into a mains socket and feeds the PoE AP using the same network cable.
The BT hub is not PoE as far as I know
Good luck though, as it sounds as if progress is been made
Many thanks
John
-
Don't think that moving the ONT would ever be considered by OR, as suggested by most of the forum patrons the best solution would be to extend the router to a more suitable location, will have to wait and see if OR will do that on the currently planned engineers visit next week.
Moving the ONT is not a difficult job as such. It would just need a new joint making. I don't know the layout of the property, but fitting ethernet cable internally probably will not look pretty. So ethernet cable could be run on the outside wall or move the ONT and run fibre optic cable on the outside wall. Anyway - good luck.
-
Well, despite assurances and multiple texts from BT yesterday it was a no show from OR with respect to the appointment advised last week.
The BB service (via Wi-Fi) varies from barely usable to no signal dependant on location and proximity to the router.
My sister is now spending (even more) extended time at work due to the situation where reliable BB service is not available.
BT help desk personnel have actually been very good and appear to be embarrased/frustrated with the unpredictibility of OR, they have already credited a number of compensation payments to my sisters account.
Next OR appointment scheduled for Wednesday.
I've decided to install an ethernet cable run through the roof space from the ONT location to a central point in the house in order to locate the router in a more sensible location, will probably do early next week before the scheduled OR visit as I believe it's hardly likely that OR will agree to do this.
I'am not sure how the land line (VOIP) telephone provision on FTTP with this particular installation works, my sister was provided with a new phone as part of the migration deal which she claims is not directly connected to the router, obviously must be a Wi-Fi connection, is this possible?
When my son migrated from FTTC to FTTP with BT last year he just retained his existing DECT phone, base station now plugged into the router, would think this would be the normal VOIP land line installation?
-
I've decided to install an ethernet cable run through the roof space from the ONT location to a central point in the house in order to locate the router in a more sensible location, will probably do early next week before the scheduled OR visit . . .
Annoying but a sensible decision.
I'am not sure how the land line (VOIP) telephone provision on FTTP with this particular installation works, my sister was provided with a new phone as part of the migration deal which she claims is not directly connected to the router, obviously must be a Wi-Fi connection, is this possible?
It's not something of which I have any experience but, from what you have described, it seems to be the case. Thinking about it, is the telephony service now as bad as the Internet service (via WiFi)?
When my son migrated from FTTC to FTTP with BT last year he just retained his existing DECT phone, base station now plugged into the router, would think this would be the normal VOIP land line installation?
Yes, that is what I would expect to be the case when the ISP/CP is providing a telephony service.
-
The BT Smart Hub 2 that is used for Digital Voice is also a DECT base station.
I believe the BT provided handsets can be paired to work wirelessly with the hub.
Technically OR are meeting their obligations. Their responsibility ends at the ONT.
Wireless in the home is the ISP's responsibility.
-
@ b*cat:
Thinking about it, is the telephony service now as bad as the Internet service (via WiFi)?
In a word, yes, connection drops out, doesn't ring sometimes on incoming calls.
As per most these days, my sister uses the land line very little, would probably have been best to drop the option, it's just that she was offered a very good deal for FTTP migration where the landline cost was minimal with a free phone supplied, will very likely drop LL provision at end of contract.
@j0hn:
The BT Smart Hub 2 that is used for Digital Voice is also a DECT base station.
I believe the BT provided handsets can be paired to work wirelessly with the hub.
Yes, that would appear to be the case, only logical explanation.
Wonder if a DECT phone could still be used with the BT Smart Hub 2 with the base station directly plugged into the router along with or instead of the new BT supplied DECT phone?
Technically OR are meeting their obligations. Their responsibility ends at the ONT.
Wireless in the home is the ISP's responsibility.
Hear what you are saying j0hn and doubtlessly technically correct, however, regardless of the ISP involved, in this case BT, the only means of contact with OR is via BT and the only technical resources that BT have available to them in order to achieve a solution to what is obviously a genuine issue currently rendering the FTTP installation unfit for purpose are the services of OR!
Bit of a catch 22 situation that is not of the customers making and very disappointing when the former FTTC service was totally reliable throughout the house and of a speed that was more than adequate for all her needs.
-
"Unfortunately my sister was not present during the original installation, her husband was there, he is a very quiet and certainly non-tech person who just agreed with the installers decision to site the ONT at the easiest location for him, would definately not have been the case if my sister had been present."
Not to try and pour salt on the wound, tiffy ... but from a business perspective any remedial work you are requesting from OR would be done purely as a goodwill gesture.
The onus is and always will be on the EU to give instruction as to where they want their service fitting, and as long as it's within OR scope that is what will happen. If your sister wasn't going to be available, why didn't she leave a note with her hubby to ensure no confusion existed, on installation day ??
As I say, this isn't to stir the hornets nest, more of a prompt for the forum's readership should they be predicting a similar situation. :)
-
Probably a case of assuming it would be installed in the same place as the phone socket, I don't think its an unfair assumption to be honest as your average person wont have a clue at what is involved in switching to FTTP.
Its just an unfortunate situation all round, as the householder can't be expected to know they might install it somewhere else and the engineer can't be expected to know it wasn't suitable to put it where they did, if the person in the house at the time said it was okay.
-
@ Black Sheep:
Being a long standing forum member/contributer can I firstly say that your response is very much appreciated, your knowledge is widely recognised and your advice is always freely given in a very courtious and uncondescending manner, thank you.
As stated at the outset, the FTTC/FTTP conversion was carried by an OR sub-contractor, in N.I. that happens to be "KN Circet".
Subsequent (requested) visit was by an OR engineer who basically agreed that the installation was "not ideal" but did very little other than re-pairing the Wi-Fi repeaters & phone, situation certainly not improved.
The onus is and always will be on the EU to give instruction as to where they want their service fitting, and as long as it's within OR scope that is what will happen. If your sister wasn't going to be available, why didn't she leave a note with her hubby to ensure no confusion existed, on installation day ??
To be fair, I think you are assuming an unreasonable level of knowledge on the system beyond normal expectation of the vast majority of EU's, surely that's why a technically competent person attends offering guidance on the best solution based on his or her knowledge and experience to produce a fit for purpose installation which is at least as efficient as the system it's replacing.
Is it fair to expect the EU to advise the engineer in attendance on the best location of the router (Hub) for most efficient Wi-Fi coverage?
Yes, my sister was not in attendance, would it have been any different if she was, she is not technically qualified to understand the system and appreciate that the router (Hub) would really need to be located in the same location as her previous FTTC router for Wi-Fi to have a chance of working throughout the house.
I intend to install a Cat-6 ethernet cable run from the ONT to the logical location for the router (Hub) through the roof space on Tuesday, day before the next scheduled OR visit, a 140 mile round trip for me to my sisters residence.
Do I think I should have to do this, no, but can see no other long term solution and can't see OR ever agreeing to undertake this activity.
The forthcoming OR visit, re-schedule from a no show last Friday, has been agreed (with BT) to be FOC, will see how things look on Tuesday after router re-siting before deciding on cancelling.
Should the visit go ahead for any reason I will be very, very displeased should any charge be levied and if so will advise my sister to contest vigorously through OFCOM if necessary.
-
I hear you, tiffy, and agree with some of your points .... but I still say the onus is on the EU to decide where the installation is to take place. I absolutely take your point that some kind of discussion should take place ... but that should be between the EU and the ISP when an order is placed.
Openreach simply haven't got time to become an advisory clinic, if the installer on the day had suggested the ONT be fitted elsewhere, would your brother-in-law have then said I need to contact my wife first to confirm ?? Every single situation is bespoke, different folk will react in different ways, that is why this should be sorted pre-install with the ISP and notes put on the task.
Believe me, I get the gist of what you're saying regarding it being a subby who did the install and yes, a quick chat will have seen a better solution .... but I'm afraid your kin should have determined all this before he/she arrived with one another and their ISP.
-
@ Black Sheep:
Many thanks for your further comments.
The location of the ONT was never an issue, all be it at the back corner of a very long bungalow in a bedroom which happens to be the furthest point from the normally habitated areas of the house during daylight hours, the issue is caused by locating the router (Hub) beside the ONT.
that is why this should be sorted pre-install with the ISP and notes put on the task.
Sorry, but I think you are again being very unrealistic here assuming the EU has the technical knowledge to discuss/arrange finite details of any proposed installation with most ISP's that's assuming that the ISP's sales/help assistant has sufficient technical knowledge and/or inclination to offer detailed assistance, certainly, in my experience not always the case.
As I say, this isn't to stir the hornets nest, more of a prompt for the forum's readership should they be predicting a similar situation.
Yes, certainly agree with you on that one as it looks like if things don't turn out to plan through any perceived shortfall of the EU then you are on your own.
As stated before, you are a fantastic asset to this forum and a gentleman, I have absolutely no wish to fall out over this matter so I suggest we agree to disagree on this issue and once again many thanks for your input.
-
Having travelled to my sisters house yesterday, spent most of the day installang an ethernet, Cat-6 cable run between the ONT location to the central point of the bungalow, through the roof space, boxed and module terminated at both ends leaving short "jumper cable" connections to the ONT & Hub respectively.
Not a very pleasent job in an unfloored, restricted height, well insulated roof space but at least a tidy installation was produced in the end.
Ran a speed test (Speedtest.net) from an ethernet connected Hub port to laptop before re-siting the hub:
DS speed, approx. 309 Mbps, US speed approx. 47 Mbps.
Contracted for 300/50 service so obviously no issues there.
Repeated this test with the Hub re-sited, results the same, ethernet WAN cable link working to expectation (had pre-tested the wiring)
Re-paired the 2 available Wi-Fi repeaters (BT call them Disc's) and the Wi-Fi VOIP land line phone, sited Disc's at areas of max distance from the Hub.
Performed Wi-Fi speed tests with laptop in all areas.
Found that max attainable Wi-Fi DS speed was approx. 150 Mbps even with the laptop beside the Hub with the US not degrading as much, dropped to approx. 40 Mbps.
To expectation, DS speed degraded further in weaker Wi-Fi signal areas with the US speed again degrading by a much smaller factor.
Probably normal expectation on Wi-Fi service?
My sister is more than happy with the result and has a system which works again with Wi-Fi throughout the house, had not been the case since migration from FTTC to FTTP.
I have demonstrated to her that to get the full benefit of her 300/50 service an ethernet connection to the Hub is necessary, however, as per the vast majority of EU's I would imagine, as long as Netflix, Facebook etc. works on demand she's not that bothered!
My feelings on the FTTP installation by OR and their appointed sub-contractors have already been expressed at length in this post as indeed have alternative points of view, I have no wish to resurrect this, I still hold the same views as I'am sure do the other parties.
Suffice to say, to avoid the situation my sister ended up with, anyone undergoing FTTP migration needs to ensure that a pre-arranged plan agreed with ISP is in place for when OR or their appointed sub-contractors attend.
See "Black Sheep's" replies #19 & 22.
After an "unsatisfactory" installation for whatever reason most EU's (I would think) would not be in a position to self rectify and this could prove costly if the error is deemed not to be with the installer.
-
The location of the ONT was never an issue, all be it at the back corner of a very long bungalow in a bedroom which happens to be the furthest point from the normally habitated areas of the house during daylight hours, the issue is caused by locating the router (Hub) beside the ONT.
Understand that, but Openreach are only responsible for the ONT location so for them to put the router centrally that would have meant putting the ONT there too. I'm not aware of their engineers carrying ethernet cabling, its just not within their remit. However I'm not sure they would go near an unboarded loft either, they would have ran the fibre in the house so a much more messy installation.
Found that max attainable Wi-Fi DS speed was approx. 150 Mbps even with the laptop beside the Hub with the US not degrading as much, dropped to approx. 40 Mbps
Have you checked the channel width on the WiFi? You should be able to easily get full speed over WiFi if the settings are correct. Although if its coming from an extender the WiFi speed might be halved, but that could still reach 300Mbit if they are optimally located and with the right channel and width.
-
Congratulations on a good job, done well. :)
From the opening post can we read --
The install was carried out by OR contractors, KN Circet in our area (N.I.), overhead feed from a pole . . .
The original copper drop cable takes the normal route from pole to front door and service ends up at the master socket at the back of the hall way, . . .
The fibre installation tech opted for the easiest solution for him, new fibre drop cable to gable wall, drilled through and stuck the ONT there.
Note what I have emboldened -- that is the failure of the sub-contractor and the source of the dissatisfaction with the installation.
-
@Alex Atkin UK:
Understand that, but Openreach are only responsible for the ONT location so for them to put the router centrally that would have meant putting the ONT there too. I'm not aware of their engineers carrying ethernet cabling, its just not within their remit. However I'm not sure they would go near an unboarded loft either, they would have ran the fibre in the house so a much more messy installation.
As stated in previous post, not going to get into this again, have already upset BS.
Never had any expectation of OR or sub-contractors being willing to run wiring in roof space, I know that's a no no.
Suffice to say, I still don't think it was an unreasonable expectation for the Hub, and by association the ONT to be situated in the same location as the FTTC modem/router it was replacing!
Have you checked the channel width on the WiFi? You should be able to easily get full speed over WiFi if the settings are correct. Although if its coming from an extender the WiFi speed might be halved, but that could still reach 300Mbit if they are optimally located and with the right channel and width.
That's interesting, will admit that I have never speed tested any W-Fi connection and had no idea what to expect by comparison to a direct ethernet connection, my desktop PC's, laptop, Free-View PVR, Smart TV's, RPi's at home are all wired connections, Wi-Fi is really only used for mobile phones so didn't really know what to expect.
I never attempted to access the BT hub GUI to check on Wi-Fi configuration.
When using the Wi-Fi signal checker app on my mobile phone did find the indications from the Hub & Disc's confusing, with the disc's down powered found 2 SSID listings from the Hub which I assumed were the 2.4 & 5 G.Hz signals although not clearly identified as such.
With the Disc's running appeared to get the same scenario from them also.
Will clearly have to look into this further after some research into the workings of the BT Smart Hub, thanks for the tip.
Have no real idea how much is configurable on the latest BT Smart Hub with respect to Wi-Fi connection, never had occasion to find out.
-
Suffice to say, I still don't think it was an unreasonable expectation for the Hub, and by association the ONT to be situated in the same location as the FTTC modem/router it was replacing!
I don't think its unreasonable either but sadly its not standard, Openreach contractors will put it wherever its easiest unless the customer asks them otherwise.
Ultimately I think the issue is ISPs should be warning users that FTTP wont necessarily be installed in the same place, so customers know to let the engineer know their requirements. Or it SHOULD be policy to put it in the same place, unless the customer asks them to relocate it.
Its both a failure on the ISP to not inform the customer of how it works, and a failure on Openreach to not do the sensible thing and install it where the router already is situated by default. Although it wouldn't have helped here if the engineer had still asked "is here okay" and the reply was yes.
When using the Wi-Fi signal checker app on my mobile phone did find the indications from the Hub & Disc's confusing, with the disc's down powered found 2 SSID listings from the Hub which I assumed were the 2.4 & 5 G.Hz signals although not clearly identified as such.
With the Disc's running appeared to get the same scenario from them also.
Will clearly have to look into this further after some research into the workings of the BT Smart Hub, thanks for the tip.
Have no real idea how much is configurable on the latest BT Smart Hub with respect to Wi-Fi connection, never had occasion to find out.
The problem with WiFi is a strong signal or even high link rate does not necessarily mean a stable link. I've seen a full link rate become extremely unstable when in active use, presumably due to reflections in the signal which you can't identify until its actually being used.
I'd probably be using my phone connected to the main WiFi with the discs off, to test the speed and see if there's a spot slightly closer to the main router that comes out faster. Then assume at best you'll get half that speed from the extender. Of course, that depends on the phone having good WiFi for it to be a realistic comparison.
That said, I only get 228Mbit down, 69Mbit up in the most awkward part of the house, compared to 661Mbit down in the same room as the Access Point. So 150Mbit via an extender doesn't sound so bad with that in mind.
Extenders are just a cheap, poor solution used because they can throw them at the end user and forget about it, whereas ideally you'd run ethernet to them instead (assuming they support wired backhaul) for a good uplink and no halving of throughput. Its just unfortunate that with how cheap extenders work (sharing the same channel), it brings the speed down for ALL clients whereas with wired backhaul even if you got 150 from one extender, the others could use the rest as they would be broadcasting on different channels.
Of course compared to what she had before its still a huge improvement, so possibly not worth the hassle.
-
The BT discs are a mesh system so if well sited should be able to provide decent speeds throughout the property. I don't believe you get the 50% speed reduction that standard extenders cause, so it's surprising that you could only get 150Mbps on WiFi. As Alex Atkin UK has said it could be a setup issue.
:)
-
As stated in previous post, not going to get into this again, have already upset BS.
Absolutely not have you upset me, tiffy. As in any debate, there is (or should) be at least two opposing views. ;) ;D
-
@Black Sheep:
Glad we are still pals and once again many thanks for your much valued input and advice. ;D
@Alex Atkin UK & tubaman:
Thanks to both for further input regarding Wi-Fi connection speeds.
Have been reading up on the latest BT Smart Hub 2 available configuration options with respect to the Wi-Fi mesh system and will certainly investigate further.
Have read that the latest SH-2 Wi-Fi 2.4/5 G.Hz SSID's can not be separately identified which is considered a retrograde step by most.
There certainly appears to be a number of Wi-Fi configuration options that could be tried in an effort to improve throughput speed.
Unfortunately my sister's residence is located some 75 miles away so not so convenient to visit and have a play.
Tried some comparative Wi-Fi connected speed tests (Speedtest.net) with my laptop on my humble FTTC 40/10, ZyXEL VMG3925-B10B router system, using 2.4 G.Hz service, absolutely no difference in DS/US speeds from wired ethernet connection at any location in the house.
So what I would like to establish is why a FTTP 300/50 service with a BT Smart Bub 2 & 2 Disc's produce at least a 50% Wi-Fi DS speed reduction even when tested beside the Hub by comparison to a wired connection?
-
...
So what I would like to establish is why a FTTP 300/50 service with a BT Smart Bub 2 & 2 Disc's produce at least a 50% Wi-Fi DS speed reduction even when tested beside the Hub by comparison to a wired connection?
I assume the devices you used to test the wireless can connect at speeds greater than 150Mps as some older ones will max-out at this?
:)
-
Well spotted "tubaman", you are absolutely on the ball!
My circa 5 year old Win 10 Home HP i5 laptop uses an Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC3168 module, on checking it's spec. believe that this is the most likely cause of the lower than expected Wi-Fi DS speed indication.
Should have twigged on to this as the US speed on test only dropped marginally on Wi-Fi by comparison to a wired connection.
Many thanks for the prompt, will save me a lot of time chasing an issue that most likely doesn't exist.
Completely off topic, I noted with interest from another recent thread that you were actually an amateur tuba/bass player.
I'am also a long time now lapsed amateur musician, woodwind, Bb/Eb clarinet, similar background, concert band and periodic local amature dramatic society orchestra service.
Too old now and front teeth well past the very tight embouchure required especially for the Eb clarinet.