Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Charles]

Hi,

I recently had FTTC installed (by a BT subcontractor) and it appears to be working well however I am unsure whether it has been installed optimally.

I had ADSL installed in the early 2000s, when all installs were performed by an engineer.

The configuration before ADSL installation:
Line from outside -> NTE5 Master socket indoors downstairs -> Extension sockets around the house

The original engineer installed a NTE2000 (V 1.0) filtered faceplate on the master socket, wired the extensions to the extension terminals, and installed a new ~30m CAT5e 2 pair white cable plugged into the NTE2000 (RJ45 using one pair) and terminating to a RJ45 socket upstairs for connecting the modem/router.

This arrangement made sense to me, filtering the line once and as early as possible in the chain, and a high quality cable running upstairs for data only. This setup has remained in place for over a decade and has served me well.

For my FTTC install I assumed that it would simply involve replacing the NTE2000 with the newer VDSL SSFP and keeping the wiring configuration the same. Or perhaps even leaving the NTE2000 as it is because I read on here that they are electronically identical.

However, this engineer opened the master socket, cut the RJ45 plug off the CAT5e cable, wired one pair to the feed from outside, and the other pair to the back terminals of the socket.

Then on the other end of the CAT5e upstairs he removed the existing RJ45 data socket, and replaced it with a new NTE5 plus VDSL SSFP. The CAT5e pair (connected to the feed from outside) hooked up to the back terminals, and the other pair to the extension terminals.

So he effectively moved the master socket from downstairs to upstairs, and converted the original master socket into an extension socket, but left the NTE2000 installed, so the extensions coming off the NTE2000 (and a telephone connected to this socket) would be filtered twice (first from the upstairs VDSL filter, and again through the NTE2000).

So to my questions:

Was it necessary to move the master socket?
Is it OK to have a filtered pair and an unfiltered pair running in the same cable for ~30 metres?
Is it OK to have the extensions passing through two filters?
As the extensions are now only being wired from a pair of wires, is the bell wire no longer available to the extensions?

Thanks in advance

[Black Sheep]

So to my questions:

Was it necessary to move the master socket?
Is it OK to have a filtered pair and an unfiltered pair running in the same cable for ~30 metres?
Is it OK to have the extensions passing through two filters?
As the extensions are now only being wired from a pair of wires, is the bell wire no longer available to the extensions?

a) No. If I read your description correctly, I would have swopped the old SSFP for the later spec VDSL frontplate at the NTE5, then connected the Modem/Hub/Router upstairs into the in-situ data extention socket.
b) Age old question. I personally leave the choice to aesthetics/ capabilities as in, would another cable be possible to be run without looking awful ? Regarding the crosstalk issue, its a debate in itself but I personally think the effect is nill, or at worst negligible. The reason the practice is frowned upon is down to 'demarcation' of EU owned wiring.
c) Wont affect your extention sockets at all. Again, for aesthetics I would have put an NTE frontplate on in place of the old SSFP, but it wont have any adverse affect as it is now.
d) Correct.

HTH.

[burakkucat]

There is one thing with which I am not happy (I note that BS did not comment  ) and that is, from Charles' description, there are now two NTE5/As in the circuit. 

[Black Sheep]

?? The 'feed', from what I gather, was 'crimped through' at the rear of the first NTE, and as such, this same NTE is now 'back-fed' and is classed as an extention socket itself ?? The only thing this would do, is increase capacitance to a point where nobody, or nothing, would ever notice.

It most certainly would not impact on the VDSL stats.

 

[Charles]

Thank you both for your replies, much appreciated.

To clarify, the 'feed' coming from outside was disconnected from the rear of the first NTE and gel-crimped to one pair of the CAT5e, extending the 'feed' line to the new NTE upstairs. The original NTE was then repurposed as an extension socket, being fed from a filtered pair from upstairs.

It did seem odd that the engineer created more work for himself, with the only 'gain' being the addition of a telephone port upstairs, but the room already had a telephone extension socket wired from the original NTE so it's not needed at all!

In any case, it looks like any potential line degradation is negligible, so I'm not too concerned although it is annoying that the ~30m CAT5e cable is now presumably off-limits to the end user, as it would need to be removed when redecorating the house.

Charles