Thans to the OP for the thread.
My belief is BT switched to ECI for cost reasons, and perhaps initially didnt think much about how good the units are in terms of vdsl features. Then at some point BT decided they were looking into vectoring (I still think this will rollout on all hauwei cabs not just public funded areas), at that point they probably found out the ECI were junk for that purpose and then switched back to hauwei. I think the chinese stuff had absolutely nothing to do with it. Its all about money.
I mentioned in numerous threads on here, tbb and plusnet that ECI would be problematic for extra features, why? because I know from experience, think back when bitswapping was introduced, a compatibility nightmare across different chipsets. Then SRA which was even worse than bitswapping to the point pretty much only one router worked with it on ukonline, even the same chipset on a newer generation was not working right with SRA.
It was completely logical that anything non broadcom based would be problematic for things like g.inp and vectoring. I kept been shot down by certian people, saying I am talking rubbish, ECI is compatible etc. Then openreach tried to pull a fast one and hope ECI users didnt notice they were switched to interleaving. I dont believe for one minute openreach were unaware of the interleaving on ECI modems prior to rollout.
Everything about BT now days is secrecy. NDA on faults, rollout plans, DLM and more. The approach taken by plusnet (BT owned company) on their clear capacity issues is disgusting a vague "no comment" on what I think is a fairly widespread issue that luckily for plusnet much of their customer base doesnt notice.
So was it a mistake? Depends who you are.
An accountant may say no, as was cheaper.
An engineer will say yes.
I think one way g.inp is as good as it will get for us ECI users.
The problem BT have as a company is that they can only think short term. 2-3 years ahead at the most. So there is little forward planning. I would guess that when the FTTC rollout got approved, they were trying to cut costs everywhere on the rollout just so shareholders would approve it, probably was their only priority.
