Print

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

[Bowdon]

Years ago I had a couple of OR engineers out, or at least engineers (I'm not sure if they were all from OR as I'm not sure if the ISP I was with (Sky) had their own. The OR guy was amazing and he really knew his stuff. He knew it right down to the basics, so even if the newish electronic fault finding devices didn't locate an issue that he was from the old school and could manually track back the problem.

Anyway, when talking to him about previous visits I'd had to the property he mentioned that not much information is actually passed on, even to the next engineer so he can see what's been previously done. He said he didn't even know the previous engineers names or any information like that. He wasn't from around this area so had to work with the local engineers at the exchange.

So my question is, as this situation ever been fixed? Is there now a system were if an OR engineer visits that he can file a report with his details on, and if another engineer is asked to visit the property then that report becomes available?

I sympathised with the guy and all engineers if it hasnt been fixed as it seems like on each visit that a new engineer makes, he's effectively starting again. There didn't seem to be any building up of information and history about engineer visits, what the problem was/is, or what's been previously done.

I think if there was a way to record these reports in a database then it might help fix long standing problems at the end users end. Also it could also reveal local area problems before they appear as major faults. It would also be good if the engineers included their details so other engineers, who might know them, can consult each other.

If the system is how I described in the old way then I can see why there is a lot of frustration as the problem wouldnt be advanced that fast, and is literally down to the first guess of each engineer. So it's possible all the engineers could attempt the same thing having no knowledge that the previous engineers also tried that.

Anyways, I'd be grateful of any feedback on this situation, as to me the old system of no proper logging of visits, and no passing them on, or even including identifying information could be a major flaw in the system, and for once it wouldnt be a technical fault! lol

[GigabitEthernet]

I've had nine visits and some of them could get the details of the previous visits, some of them couldn't.

[Black Sheep]

Nope, every single broadband fault we receive is as if it's the first time we have visited. I absolutely agree it is ludicrous and very embarrassing when confronting the EU, and they are amazed at the lack of information on the job.

I know I'm OR-employed and biased to a point, but this has to lie at the foot of the ISP's door.

When they are raising a fault for OR via the NEO system (that they all have access to), they should at least give mention as to how many previous visits have occurred. If there's not enough room to go in-depth as to the previous visits, at least we would now have the info to ring the ISP before we get to site, and ask what has happened previously ??

Even when a fault is raised and it is the first time ..... the amount of info from the ISP is truly abysmal. By that I mean there is literally an address and a 'mapping' of the circuit from Exchange to EU. We are going in blind for approx. 95% of BB jobs I would say from personal experience.

Before you ask  , yes we have fed this back till we're blue in the face but does anything get done ?? Well, you're answer lies above. 

[NewtronStar]

Does the OR Engineer have access to DLM history for the end-users line ?

[Black Sheep]

Yes ...... but only on BT Classic circuits with regards to ADSL services. For VDSL we have full access as 'we' own the kit regardless of the re-seller.

[GigabitEthernet]

In my experience, the engineers can actually do very little themselves to modify how a VDSL circuit works. They can reset DLM but any changes have to go through DCoE and they can basically turn interleaving on and off and that is it.

As usual from BT, they play the fool and then try to do the same with their customers.

[Black Sheep]

The engineer can also apply soft and hard 'over-rides' should he wish to, on a VDSL circuit. I've had two occasions to do so when both EU's were on long loops, but were more concerned with having US speed as opposed to DS speeds.

The 'Over-ride' allows us to decrease the DS to give more tones to the US. The parameters presented to us are 'set' and no further fine-tuning is permissible.

In a nutshell, either on ADSL or VDSL, there is very little modification we can do. The DCoE  don't have much more at their disposal either, as the DLM should be a 'Hands-off' tool.

[GigabitEthernet]

What sort of benefit is gained from allocating more tones to the upstream?

[Black Sheep]

On the two instances mentioned in my above post, both EU's had their own businesses, both EU's were on long-loops, and both EU's wanted to be able to view their CCTV at home ..... whilst at work. One in particular wanted to watch what his dog got up to, I kid you not.

[GigabitEthernet]

I am saying, what sort of gain did they get by you doing the aforementioned modification.

[mrpops2ko]

The 'Over-ride' allows us to decrease the DS to give more tones to the US. The parameters presented to us are 'set' and no further fine-tuning is permissible.

Very interesting, could you speak more about this? I'm on VDSL or rather will be and an engineer is coming out in 2 weeks.

My sync speed is always 80/20 and my attenuation is 100/35 but I do not get the full 20mbit. The best i've got was 18. Can I ask the engineer to do what you mentioned here? Would / could that result in me actually being able to attain the 20mbit?

[Black Sheep]

If your synch speed is the full 80/20 ...... then your throughput speed (surfing speed) will be less than those figures due to overheads. I think the average figure quoted is approx. 96% ??

So roughly work out 96% of 80 and 20 .... and that's what is to be reasonably expected. Of course, there are always going to be other contributory factors that may see you receiving less speed than the 96%, but my advice is not to be toooo anal about it. OR work to synch speeds .... not throughput speeds ......... so you may receive a bill if you push the subject and demand an engineer ??

[Bowdon]

Nope, every single broadband fault we receive is as if it's the first time we have visited. I absolutely agree it is ludicrous and very embarrassing when confronting the EU, and they are amazed at the lack of information on the job.

Thanks for your insight BS

I thought it still might be like this. But I was hoping that it had improved.

I think the key thing in any technology problem is recording information. Then using it to help solve a problem.

I do understand that the feedback hasn't got through as over the years I've noticed the 'business mind' is very different to people in to technology.

I do feel that this system of not being able to share information between engineer visits is something that is causing a lot of faults to be persistantly there. In my mind it should be one of the founding procedures to solving faults.

One of the big frustrations is having to repeatedly tell the engineer about the same problem over and over, and after that there is a chance the problem never gets solved. I think it leaves both the EU and the engineer frustrated. Are visits time limited to a set time?

I do have to wonder why BT, the business, doesn't want to implement this system. Even if it was just an internal OR system it would be an improvement.

I think in some ways BT is that big that it still as a hangover from being nationalised. One of the big failures of nationalisation is one of deadlines. There isn't a big incentive to actually complete things on time, council roadworks being a good example of this i.e. long delays.

There is probably an actual clash of philosophies between the 'old BT' and the 'new OR' people.

I guess the question is how to resolve this issue so that the attitude changes at the top of BT and they give way to newer ideas and streamline procedures.

It is a good step that they are now listening to people about the indian call centres. So they are listening on some level. Maybe if more people knew about this lack of communication (ironically) system at engineer level holding things up, then BT might listen more intently if its coming from its customers.

P.S.

I don't think the attitude of BT is unique to them. We see other companies doing the same slow thing in other areas of business were they have a built in advantage. Sky comes to mind when it comes to tv channels. I must admit it gives me a chuckle when BT and Sky fight. Both plead innocence, yet both try and cut each other the lowest deal. So we know if Sky was in the same position in this area they would be doing exactly the same.

I guess the problem is, how do we get the front runner to regulate themselves competitively.

[Black Sheep]

Nope, every single broadband fault we receive is as if it's the first time we have visited. I absolutely agree it is ludicrous and very embarrassing when confronting the EU, and they are amazed at the lack of information on the job.

Thanks for your insight BS

I thought it still might be like this. But I was hoping that it had improved.

I think the key thing in any technology problem is recording information. Then using it to help solve a problem.

I do understand that the feedback hasn't got through as over the years I've noticed the 'business mind' is very different to people in to technology.

I do feel that this system of not being able to share information between engineer visits is something that is causing a lot of faults to be persistantly there. In my mind it should be one of the founding procedures to solving faults.

One of the big frustrations is having to repeatedly tell the engineer about the same problem over and over, and after that there is a chance the problem never gets solved. I think it leaves both the EU and the engineer frustrated. Are visits time limited to a set time?

I do have to wonder why BT, the business, doesn't want to implement this system. Even if it was just an internal OR system it would be an improvement.
I think in some ways BT is that big that it still as a hangover from being nationalised. One of the big failures of nationalisation is one of deadlines. There isn't a big incentive to actually complete things on time, council roadworks being a good example of this i.e. long delays.

There is probably an actual clash of philosophies between the 'old BT' and the 'new OR' people.

I guess the question is how to resolve this issue so that the attitude changes at the top of BT and they give way to newer ideas and streamline procedures.

It is a good step that they are now listening to people about the indian call centres. So they are listening on some level. Maybe if more people knew about this lack of communication (ironically) system at engineer level holding things up, then BT might listen more intently if its coming from its customers.

P.S.

I don't think the attitude of BT is unique to them. We see other companies doing the same slow thing in other areas of business were they have a built in advantage. Sky comes to mind when it comes to tv channels. I must admit it gives me a chuckle when BT and Sky fight. Both plead innocence, yet both try and cut each other the lowest deal. So we know if Sky was in the same position in this area they would be doing exactly the same.

I guess the problem is, how do we get the front runner to regulate themselves competitively.

As I mentioned previously, the technology is there to provide information when the ISP raises a fault via NEO. They just don't seem to want to use it
 

[Bowdon]

As I mentioned previously, the technology is there to provide information when the ISP raises a fault via NEO. They just don't seem to want to use it

I think finding a way to bring together all the information, and to share it would be a bigger benefit than the OR seperation debate.

From what you say, the information is there. Even the system is there for the ISP's. I'd like to see maybe an upgraded 'Fault Information Exchange' (FIE) maybe setup. So all engineers and ISP engineers can have access to it. The more people have access to the information the better. I mean its not 'top secret' or anything.

I notice on another forum there is a guy complaining about OR. Saying he's had NINE engineers visit his house, and the problem still isn't solved.

I wonder why these sort of complaints arent being listen to and escalated to at least ask what is going wrong in the system.

I think if that FIE was setup and in action then situations like that wouldnt happen. Apart from the frustration of the end user, 8 OR engineers have had their time wasted really. If they had the history presented in front of them I'm sure the problems would be fixed in a lot less time.