Print

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

[Chrysalis]

I hope you understand now kitz why I said it would make sense that the 3db profile would be hauwei only to start with as it seems we starting to see unexpected behaviour on ECI g.inp lines.

[kitz]

I hope you understand now kitz why I said it would make sense that the 3db profile would be hauwei only to start with as it seems we starting to see unexpected behaviour on ECI g.inp lines.

Not really for the following reasons.

Same thing appears to be happening on at least some Huawei cabs. 
FEC count alone shouldn't negatively affect DLM. 
If it's going to work the same way as 21cn DLM, then 6db will still be standard and 3db will only be applied to lines with ILQ green.
From what I can see on my own line, the FEC has got to be occurring at the DTU, perhaps it gets busy once per day doing something else at that particular time.
3db doesn't need G.INP, but G.INP will make those lines on 3db more stable.   
 
3db was already trialled last year over various cabs.  This trial now is large scale involving ~100k lines, but it's still a trial so can be stopped any time they like.   I strongly suspect that they deliberately delayed this larger trial until after the eci cabs had been upgraded.  If they would have wanted it to be Huawei only, then why wait until now... they could have easily continued where they left off last year.

[Chrysalis]

Why wait till now? cause they BT?

Curious can I ask why you didnt tell us about these earlier trials before the guy on TBB leaked it, would have been nice.

Different DSL chipsets behave in different ways, standards dont mean jack in that regard, even me someone who thinks BT tend to be very passive, thinks not testing something on a different chipset is irresponsible.  Not to mention when you mix and match chipsets between dislam and modem even more unpredictable things can happen.

There is a very long history of different chipsets performing at different levels with xDSL technology which makes your stance baffling.

So the most likely reasons for this delay between smaller trial and larger trial?

1 - The first trial may have just been proof of concept with no plan to roll it out at the time, BT do lots of proof of concept trials that dont lead to rollouts which makes people think they are a industry leader in innovation, clever PR.
2 - The second trial may have occurred after they started seriously considering it as a rollout strategy which may have took them a year to make that decision.  It also could have been delayed to wait for the ECI g.inp rollout so ECI could be tested as well.

[kitz]

Curious can I ask why you didnt tell us about these earlier trials before the guy on TBB leaked it, would have been nice.

Because I only found out this weekend. 

Different DSL chipsets behave in different ways, standards dont mean jack in that regard, even me someone who thinks BT tend to be very passive, thinks not testing something on a different chipset is irresponsible.  Not to mention when you mix and match chipsets between dislam and modem even more unpredictable things can happen.

There is a very long history of different chipsets performing at different levels with xDSL technology which makes your stance baffling.

Your counter claim is even more baffling because you just contradicted yourself.  You acknowledged that unpredictable things happen when you mix the chipsets...  this is exactly why they should be (and are) trialling on both ECI & Huawei cabs. 
Yet above you said it should be Huawei only?


---
ETA

Thats it.. totally fed up.    I went asking and got told a bit more info and may even have some more info to further questions when my contact is back at work.  (ie after the weekend!)
There is absolutely no point in me saying anything any more - because every time I bust a gut to try and get more info...  then out come the accusations & conspiracies

[Chrysalis]

Curious can I ask why you didnt tell us about these earlier trials before the guy on TBB leaked it, would have been nice.

Because I only found out this weekend. 

Different DSL chipsets behave in different ways, standards dont mean jack in that regard, even me someone who thinks BT tend to be very passive, thinks not testing something on a different chipset is irresponsible.  Not to mention when you mix and match chipsets between dislam and modem even more unpredictable things can happen.

There is a very long history of different chipsets performing at different levels with xDSL technology which makes your stance baffling.

Your counter claim is even more baffling because you just contradicted yourself.  You acknowledged that unpredictable things happen when you mix the chipsets...  this is exactly why they should be (and are) trialling on both ECI & Huawei cabs. 
Yet above you said it should be Huawei only?


---
ETA

Thats it.. totally fed up.    I went asking and got told a bit more info and may even have some more info to further questions when my contact is back at work.  (ie after the weekend!)
There is absolutely no point in me saying anything any more - because every time I bust a gut to try and get more info...  then out come the accusations & conspiracies

kitz dont get like this again note my #2 scenario is in a way sort of agreeing with you.  Depending on if I understood you correctly or not. So it may be BT only decided this year to consider this as a viable option and hence the wait.

The bit where we clearly dont agree is you think there is no merit in testing this on a second chipset, before rolling it out on a second chipset.

[atkinsong]

Curious can I ask why you didnt tell us about these earlier trials before the guy on TBB leaked it, would have been nice.

It's comments like this that cause the problem. If I had been in Kitz position I would have taken offence as well. Think before you type!

[kitz]

 I was responding to "I hope you understand now kitz why I said it would make sense that the 3db profile would be hauwei only to start withit would make sense that the 3db profile would be hauwei only to start with
If the smaller trial last year was on both cab types, why make this years just on Huawei? 

I dont know the exact date of the smaller trial, but surely if it was last year then there is a good chance it would have been at a time when the Huawei's were g.inped and the ECI's weren't.  What if from that trial they decided that 3dB works better on g.inp lines - which logically it should. 

The bit where we clearly dont agree is you think there is no merit in testing this on a second chipset, before rolling it out on a second chipset.

Its already been small scale tested on both,  the larger trial is on both.   I cant see why you think that "I think there is no merit on testing this on a 2nd chipset".    They are testing on the second chipset.  It was YOUR earlier post that implied that they shouldnt test on the ECIs.

kitz dont get like this again

Well dont start saying stuff like "why you didnt tell us about these earlier trials before the guy on TBB leaked it, would have been nice." when I am doing my damnedest to find out official info.    It seems of late that every time I do try get info and try put it public, then all it does is cause accusations. 

[Chrysalis]

I think is just a misunderstanding then.

I was "speculating" that they would only be testing on hauwei's because of the ECI rollout of g.inp been too new.  I never meant that they would never ever test or rollout on the ECI's.

Before rolling out on to ECI's I think they need to test.

I hope that makes things clear.

[roseway]

I hope that makes things clear.

Not really. You haven't said anything about your wholly unjustified accusation that Kitz has been witholding information from you. She isn't the only one who's sick of these accusations.

[Chrysalis]

I hope that makes things clear.

Not really. You haven't said anything about your wholly unjustified accusation that Kitz has been witholding information from you. She isn't the only one who's sick of these accusations.

Well I am been accused of making an accusation, I asked a question and she answered it.  Now you are trying to make this into an issue.  I had another look at the comment I made and it was no accusation, I asked why the information was not provided earlier and the answer was she didnt have the information, thats it really.

Now if there is some kind of agenda you want to push against me go ahead, otherwise we need to be mature and move on.  My question was polite.

Plus the fact the question was not related at all to my comments regarding ECI cabinets, yet you decided to make it related, if you really dont want me here eric then just delete my account.

Your comment seems only there to provoke me, otherwise why say it?

[plexy]

Lets all put handbags down. *sniff sniff* Cant we all just get along? *sniff sniff*

Chrys, to be fair you did have a bit of a dig over the info withheld accusation. It did seem a bit personal to me. Maybe it was just the way it came across

disagreements happen all the time - best way to deal with it is to not sit at your keyboard doing this;



it soon de-generates - people take sides, or just stop visiting as no one wants to see people duke it out. It rots forums from the inside out. The work on this site alone when it comes to our phone and broadband network is worth its weight in gold, lets not eff it up yeah?

Im sure everyone can agree the staff here do great work, as do individual contributors too. No point in slamming the door to the internet on the way out of a scrap, especially when the door leads to the pool of knowledge available here.

[Chrysalis]

I know, I think its best been left alone which is why i was surprised by eric's comment.

I can come across aggressive in the way I communicate, its a problem I have but it was not intended as an accusation, thats the best I can say really and I hope this is the end of the matter.

[burakkucat]

Now if there is some kind of agenda you want to push against me go ahead, otherwise we need to be mature and move on.  My question was polite.

Plus the fact the question was not related at all to my comments regarding ECI cabinets, yet you decided to make it related, if you really dont want me here eric then just delete my account.

Your comment seems only there to provoke me, otherwise why say it?

Having just read the above and then --

I know, I think its best been left alone which is why i was surprised by eric's comment.

I can come across aggressive in the way I communicate, its a problem I have but it was not intended as an accusation, thats the best I can say really and I hope this is the end of the matter.

-- I wonder if I am expected to remain mute? (Rhetorical question, no answer required.)

I think quite enough has been typed, at least for now. So I make the statement:

This thread is now locked.