Kitz ADSL Broadband Information
adsl spacer  
Support this site
Home Broadband ISPs Tech Routers Wiki Forum
 
     
   Compare ISP   Rate your ISP
   Glossary   Glossary
 
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic: G.fast - first mile latency?  (Read 1952 times)

psychopomp1

  • Reg Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 199
Re: G.fast - first mile latency?
« Reply #15 on: July 15, 2018, 02:40:04 PM »

Where abouts are you psychopomp? I am in Skye.
I'm in Inverness, so not too far from you  :)
Logged
FTTPoD 330/30

adslmax

  • Reg Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 735
Re: G.fast - first mile latency?
« Reply #16 on: August 08, 2018, 11:22:22 PM »



G.Fast is a rubbish technology really, reach is poor, and it interferes with FM radio so has to have all sorts of power reductions applied over specific frequencies, further reducing reach.



Don't understand why OR spend too much money on G.Fast roll out. A biggest setback and biggest mistake by OR. Should have FTTPoD2 replaced but as a cheaper install and monthly fee than FTTPoD
Logged

kitz

  • Administrator
  • Senior Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 31601
  • Trinity: Most guys do.
    • http://www.kitz.co.uk
Re: G.fast - first mile latency?
« Reply #17 on: August 09, 2018, 01:01:33 AM »

Quote
A biggest setback and biggest mistake by OR.

Not really max.    The g.fast pods are relatively cheap to install and can use the same UG trenches between cab and head-end exchange.
Its bringing faster broadband to those who are in range without having to dig up pavements and roads which is costly.

I'm not in range and I won't benefit.. but I am not begrudging the technology for those who can get it.
I thought you weren't bothered anyhow.    At least you are on a Huawei cab.   Some of us are stuck on ECI's with no G.INP, no vectoring, no 3dB Target SNRM and have lost headline speed of ~35 Mbps to x-talk...  and no chance of VM.

g.fast at the DP would be good.  FTTH would be brilliant but I'm not holding my breath. 

 
Logged
Please do not PM me with queries for broadband help as I may not be able to respond.
-----
How to get your router line stats :: ADSL Exchange Checker

Weaver

  • Addicted Kitizen
  • *****
  • Posts: 6272
  • Retd sw dev; A&A; 4 × 7km ADSL2; IPv6; Firebrick
Re: G.fast - first mile latency?
« Reply #18 on: August 09, 2018, 03:32:43 AM »

Upgrade those who already have the fastest connections. Why, exactly? I cant begrudge them, good luck to them, but the politicians are either bent or insane for not having something to say about it at least. BT has so much money that it can do these upgrades but cannot be bothered to upgrade the slowest first, increasing the divide from 160:1 to what 320:1 or 600:1? Engineer who came today agreed with me that there are locals who have 500k and I see in the speed test maps some reports of 200k, which is surely a sign of something very wrong - bad wireless, bad in-premises wiring, bad line, duff modem, missing microfilter it a combination of the above. Or am I wrong. I don't even understand how BT is making any money out of this.

Am I wrong to insist on a bit of morality - I know this is a capitalist system and BT is out to make a profit, not serve the needs of the people, that is government's job and government should be giving BT contracts to enable them to do the right thing. They don't say that some people can't have electricity, for the most part, because they live in the wrong place and that is 'their fault', the electricity companies' job is to get it to the people, not mown about the people being in the wrong locations. It may be that the Scottish government is waking up, fifteen years late, and deciding to do the right thing though. But I just do not understand the pointless upgrades, not from any perspective. Is it just because BT is worried about high-speed competition? And so going to lose money on it?

There certainly are some people who do not have electricity though. And in some places there is perhaps little point in having a fixed supply. A couple, maybe three, diesel generators plus wind and solar power would do the job nicely. I am thinking about a couple of places not too far away where that would work nicely.

And I do not have mains water or sewage or gas, and do not want any. Certainly would not accept the mains water that some people get around here which is incredibly nasty - full of chemicals and making them ill. I had to stump up half the cost of drilling my borehole, and happy to do so. The hardware associated with it used to be incredibly unreliable, but it is ok now.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2018, 03:50:19 AM by Weaver »
Logged

Black Sheep

  • Helpful
  • Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4927
Re: G.fast - first mile latency?
« Reply #19 on: August 09, 2018, 07:39:31 AM »

Whether 'you' agree with g.Fast or otherwise, matters not ............ the powers-that-be don't just throw a bowl of chicken bones on the table-top to see what they tell them ??

There will be industry experts involved in this, who will have a mandate to follow ..... of course, with cash always being king ..... and sceptically I suppose, with Ofcoms draconian measures levied at BT's door to meet as well.

But it is what it is ..... either the government steps in to fund it, or the option to move to somewhere with FTTP is always available ??

I'm pretty sure shareholders would have something to say if BT were to throw hundreds of thousands of pounds at projects with no ROI for centuries to come.

Harsh reality of it, I'm afraid.  :)

Logged

johnson

  • Reg Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 509
Re: G.fast - first mile latency?
« Reply #20 on: August 09, 2018, 08:25:30 AM »

I'm aware you are much closer to this than us lay people black sheep, so would be neat to get your thoughts on openreach's network in relation to this.

I'm sure the ROI has been calculated and beans have been counted for g.fast... but how much sense does it make continuing to maintain the copper last mile, and spending more money on new technology that uses it?

I know going to FTTP even in small areas at first would be a monumental investment, but how much do the constant engineer visits and general maintenance of the frankly ancient current system cost? For instance there is a new build estate being constructed near me and we are on the 4th set of road works with traffic lights to "excavate and clear ducts to facilitate spline cabling". Each time they have to dig up the road and there is a crew working there for several days. Also given some of the tales recounted on this site about endless engineer visits to solve needle in the haystack problems that just don't seem to exist with the only slightly more advanced coax network VM maintains, is it really still the right thing to do to not invest in anything past the cabinet?

Maybe I'm way off and even with all the work and visits maintaining the copper is still super profitable and will be for the foreseeable future, but to me it seems short sighted and greedy given the recent public money invested.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2018, 08:27:39 AM by johnson »
Logged

Weaver

  • Addicted Kitizen
  • *****
  • Posts: 6272
  • Retd sw dev; A&A; 4 × 7km ADSL2; IPv6; Firebrick
Re: G.fast - first mile latency?
« Reply #21 on: August 09, 2018, 09:08:14 AM »

I am with Black Sheep 100% here. BT's duty is to its shareholders unfortunately but that is what it is and it is a for-profit company which creates a lot of jobs and provides us with a fantastic mountain of infrastructure and is a fountain of expertise. Government's job is to serve the people, and you would hope fairness would come into that when you have disparities like 40:1 and then 600:1. Government should pay BT to do social projects if they decide they are worthy, and BT does the work, banks the cheque and says thank you very much, please give us some more jobs. If a self-interested moaner such as me does not like it then the thing to do is to tell one’s MP or MSP or whoever that you would like one free lunch please, in a lunch box.

As for the indigenous population, they did not choose to live here, they were born here. Politicians who have that attitude have a very warped mindset, middle-class, almost 'racist', which is definitely the wrong word, I don't know the word, anyway making ludicrous universal assumptions based on themselves. Assuming everyone is mobile and has freedom to just pull up their roots, can get a job in the capitalist economy anywhere. A (very) small number of my neighbours have difficulty with english because it is a second language. They are not portable, this is where they live. I do know a couple of people who are much happier when speaking their native language than having the mental workload of english. Those politicians are living in a different world.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2018, 09:19:00 AM by Weaver »
Logged

adslmax

  • Reg Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 735
Re: G.fast - first mile latency?
« Reply #22 on: August 09, 2018, 09:26:52 AM »

Don't forget it's all Margaret Thatcher to blame for saying no to full fibre in early 1980's.
Logged

Weaver

  • Addicted Kitizen
  • *****
  • Posts: 6272
  • Retd sw dev; A&A; 4 × 7km ADSL2; IPv6; Firebrick
Re: G.fast - first mile latency?
« Reply #23 on: August 09, 2018, 09:41:02 AM »

I kind of missed that, I have heard others say so. Went the same way as high-speed trains and the space programme? Advancement - can't have that.

Again, apologies to the OP for both rants and being ridiculously far off-topic. Mea culpa maxima / is mise as coireach a-rithist.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2018, 09:45:16 AM by Weaver »
Logged

Black Sheep

  • Helpful
  • Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4927
Re: G.fast - first mile latency?
« Reply #24 on: August 09, 2018, 12:33:55 PM »

I'm aware you are much closer to this than us lay people black sheep, so would be neat to get your thoughts on openreach's network in relation to this.


Hi Johnson

Alas, I'm really not 'That much closer' than your goodselves regarding decision-making in our network.

We are privy to lots of stuff regarding infrastructure deployments, trials, pipeline works, etc etc ...... but of course all that is covered under the NDA's.

How I look at it, tends to be how I look at other stuff in general ................... leave it to the professionals. I've mentioned it here before now, I really wish you could see the 'behind the scenes' stuff that goes on, before the very simplest of decisions are made !!

It has to make sound business sense before anything is deployed ........... especially large-scale roll-outs such as g.fast.

Do people really think that a blue-chip FTSE100 company such as BT, will just ask a couple of their own guys if g.fast is commercially viable ?? They will have done deep, in-depth research on other countries with similar infrastructure and similar equipment, way before they go into the laborious task of costing and ROI predictions.

So yes, we are 'sweating our copper' I suppose, to maximise on the assets already at hand. I feel it's only with the growth of competition, and pressure from the ombudsman, that we are now being pushed to realise the dream of a fully FTTP network.
But I'm certain our spreadsheets will state, that decision-making thus far regarding all Fxxx roll-outs has been financially sound ... and that is what counts in any business .... the bottom line.  :)

Logged

Weaver

  • Addicted Kitizen
  • *****
  • Posts: 6272
  • Retd sw dev; A&A; 4 × 7km ADSL2; IPv6; Firebrick
Re: G.fast - first mile latency?
« Reply #25 on: August 09, 2018, 12:50:40 PM »

And what Black Sheep says is to be expected. BT has the resources to do the research to get the numbers right. The fact that I can't see for the life of me how G.Fast will make any money is as much about my total ignorance as anything.

Those of us who do not like what is going on should pester our government and get them to write out a really bug cheque to BT. I want the money spent with BT not some johnny come lately who will create a local near-monopoly with a very limited service that is only fit for rock-bottom home users and who does not resell so that users have no choice of ISP. We don't need umpteen tiny local electricity distribution companies. The current system where BT an TTB resell, just shifting bits reliably and at high speed, and ISPs provide service and services and freedom of choice because home users and kids are different to real businesses with clue (even very small ones, provided clue is present).
Logged

kitz

  • Administrator
  • Senior Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 31601
  • Trinity: Most guys do.
    • http://www.kitz.co.uk
Re: G.fast - first mile latency?
« Reply #26 on: August 09, 2018, 01:21:00 PM »

I suspect they had plans but some of those have been scuppered due to the restrictions of LLU.

Some of the indicators that they wanted to move over to a fibre network were:
1) >10 years ago they wanted to replace the existing PSTN equipment
2) In the early noughties,  they 'sold off' a lot of their exchanges which weren't 'head end' ones.   
The deal was BT could stay in these premises for 'x' years until the lease was up for review.  This is beginning to bite them in the butt because some of those leases are expiring and the new landlords want them out so they can develop the property for housing/commercial use.   
I don't for one minute think they would have done this if they hadn't expected to be out of those premises by the said date...  nor do I think their legal team would not have been so blind as to put some sort of provision in place so that BT couldn't be kicked out at that date.  The coming years are going to be interesting as a lot more leases start to expire.

It's no secret either that they would like to get rid of a lot of the exchange equipment and copper..  but can't due to OFCOM and the LLU ISPs.

It doesnt take a genius to put 2+2 together to see that when they started implementation of 21CN, the long term goal would be to have replaced most of the copper by the time the leases expired and have no need for the smaller exchanges.  :(

Ben Verwayeen was in charge in the early noughties and he was a massive supporter of broadband progression and technology.   He got the ball rolling for nationwide DSL and set the wheels in motion for 21CN.    His successor was put in place to rein back some profits, because Verwayeen was spending too much on the network and they needed to swing back in profit.   Nothing much happened when Livingstone was in charge other than the 21CN PSTN upgrade never happened.
I liked Verwayeen - he had the balls to stand up to OFCOM and more than anything else wanted the UK to have one of the best broadband networks. 
Logged
Please do not PM me with queries for broadband help as I may not be able to respond.
-----
How to get your router line stats :: ADSL Exchange Checker

Weaver

  • Addicted Kitizen
  • *****
  • Posts: 6272
  • Retd sw dev; A&A; 4 × 7km ADSL2; IPv6; Firebrick
Re: G.fast - first mile latency?
« Reply #27 on: August 09, 2018, 01:47:54 PM »

Ofcom needs to basically be taken out, round the back and shot. Would that help?
Logged

Black Sheep

  • Helpful
  • Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4927
Re: G.fast - first mile latency?
« Reply #28 on: August 09, 2018, 01:49:04 PM »

Ofcom needs to basically be taken out, round the back and shot. Would that help?

I'm ordering silver bullets as we speak, Weaver !!  ;) ;D
Logged

Weaver

  • Addicted Kitizen
  • *****
  • Posts: 6272
  • Retd sw dev; A&A; 4 × 7km ADSL2; IPv6; Firebrick
Re: G.fast - first mile latency?
« Reply #29 on: August 09, 2018, 01:59:58 PM »

Whom are OFCOM helping now with the LLU crap? Central government needs to step in and order OFCON to drop it. LLU ISPs need to be told that “sorry, ADSL2+ has gone the way of the horse and buggy” and they can forget it because it will not be allowed to block serious movement forward to a future-proof platform.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3