Print

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

[bogof]

Had a new line put in, with Unchained ISP, looking to move away from AAISP.  Can't fault the AAISP service, but the metering setup bothers me - I don't need 10TB, but the 1TB isn't quite enough.  I hate "wasting" money, so flip-flop between the 10TB and 1TB offerings every few months and use the rolled-up allowance, but it's just annoying to do.  It's not even the money, really, but anyway.

I ordered the Unchained ISP 1000/115 FTTP service as an extra line, and had hoped I'd get a 4-port ONT, but came home a couple of days later to them having pulled a new fibre to the front door, which was a bit annoying as the path was awkward in the house.  It turns out though you can request a 4 port you can't be sure of getting one.  On the upside I now have dual fibres in case of an issue with one - some level of robustness to a broken splice or accident in the home.

Anyway, come install day, the guy put everything in with a 1 port Nokia 1G device, but on trying to commission it Mission Control sends him a text that it should be a 2.5G one for some reason (I'd only ordered 1000/115) and cue a 2hr wait for someone with one on the van to come and drop one off for install.  I wonder why they put in the 2.5G - our wholesale checker still says only 1000/220 is supported max, as far as I'm aware Norwich isn't getting higher speeds yet.  It was the first one my (Openreach employed) engineer had put in.  Luckily it fits all the same mounting holes and is a drop-in replacement, only obvious difference is an orange RJ45 port instead of yellow.

So far very impressed with Unchained ISP.  Great personal service via their ticketing system, and the performance looks very good - single threaded iperf3's at more or less line rate to Clouvider in UK and Manchester, and over 700Mbps to Germany yesterday.  Will probably cease the AAISP service soon, and perhaps take up another non-BTW cheap service as a backup (eg talktalk or Sky).   

[Alex Atkin UK]

What's the model number of the ONT?

[tiffy]

Interesting, I wonder if your new chosen ISP for parallel provision had come under OR engineering provision would a second CBT to premises fibre run have been installed?
I'am contemplating such an operation at the end of my current BT contract in order to move my LL to VOIP, away from the BT Digital package, however, in my area, any alternative BB ISP provision would be via OR engineering services.
I can't really see OR running a second fibre to facilitate a second ISP?

When my BT contract ends, next March, I may just have to migrate my LL to VOIP so automatically cancelling my BB service and accept the possible break in BB provision until the new ISP's service activates. 

[bogof]

Interesting, I wonder if your new chosen ISP for parallel provision had come under OR engineering provision would a second CBT to premises fibre run have been installed?
I'am contemplating such an operation at the end of my current BT contract in order to move my LL to VOIP, away from the BT Digital package, however, in my area, any alternative BB ISP provision would be via OR engineering services.
I can't really see OR running a second fibre to facilitate a second ISP?

When my BT contract ends, next March, I may just have to migrate my LL to VOIP so automatically cancelling my BB service and accept the possible break in BB provision until the new ISP's service activates.

I'm not sure what you mean.  Both my connections were installed by OR, they're both Openreach / BTW based services (one is AAISP, one is Unchained ISP).  There's nothing else available at my property.

I now have two feeds coming from the single 8 port (for 7 dwellings) CBT that is in a chamber in a neighbour's flowerbed.  These both come out of the underground duct and into the same CSP.  The OR engineer was a bit moany about it as they're only supposed to put one fibre through each hole in the back of the CSP apparently, which wasn't practical as the CSP was installed over the through-wall duct that I needed the fibre to go through to get to destination.  He did phone someone at the time to see if he could get a 4 port to avoid pulling another fibre through.  To be honest I think I prefer having the two separate fibres and two ONTs, I have a collection of spare parts.

From what I understand, it will be pot luck if you place an order for another line whether you get a new fibre + ONT or a 4 port installed.

I'm not even sure a 4 port 2.5G ONT exists as yet, so that might be a reason to prefer separate ONTs?

An "interesting" side effect of having two ONTs both on BTW at the moment - I can actually log into either Unchained or AAISP from either of the ONTs, which I found surprising.  It looks like Openreach puts them on some generic "BTW" network and then only the PPPoE login details actually steer the connection.  Not something to rely on as I assume the behaviour might change.

[bogof]

What's the model number of the ONT?

Not sure, not wanted to lift it off the wall.  I assume it is probably Nokia G-010G-T as referenced here: https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2022/09/pictured-openreachs-future-2-5gbps-ont-for-fttp-broadband.html

It's odd I've ended up with this as I don't think my area is in the trial (I think it is just Swansea and Ipswich), my ISP don't offer 1.8G services (yet) and we're well before the end of the trial date as reported here:
https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2023/09/openreach-uk-extend-pilot-of-1-2gbps-and-1-8gbps-fttp-to-end-of-2023.html

Though I suppose it may make sense to be putting them in if there are no downsides, it's funny mine seemed singled out somehow.  Maybe they're being put in for 900 orders as they're the most likely to jump to higher speeds.  I wonder what the takeup is of 900 vs lower tiers of FTTP.

[Alex Atkin UK]

Not sure, not wanted to lift it off the wall.

If its anything like the older models it should lift and pull off two screws relatively easily.  Though if they fitted it as poorly as mine (they didn't plug the wall they just screwed into the plaster, I think they assumed it was boarded because its got a void from age) I can understand the concern.  Though I adjusted mine as they put it too low down on the wall and I wanted to be able to see the LEDs.

Maybe they're being put in for 900 orders as they're the most likely to jump to higher speeds.  I wonder what the takeup is of 900 vs lower tiers of FTTP.

Makes sense, and possibly a good sign they are planning to go ahead with a larger rollout?  I'd certainly be game for a little faster as CityFibre are taking forever.

[bogof]

If its anything like the older models it should lift and pull off two screws relatively easily.  Though if they fitted it as poorly as mine (they didn't plug the wall they just screwed into the plaster, I think they assumed it was boarded because its got a void from age) I can understand the concern.  Though I adjusted mine as they put it too low down on the wall and I wanted to be able to see the LEDs.

Makes sense, and possibly a good sign they are planning to go ahead with a larger rollout?  I'd certainly be game for a little faster as CityFibre are taking forever.

The fibres seem a bit tightly clipped in the case of both my ONTs, so I can't comfortably dismount either of my ONTs without disconnecting the Fibre, and I don't have anything to clean the fibre if I have a fingertip accident, so for now it will stay put.  The first time round they left the box it came in, but not this time. 

Same story with City Fibre in Norwich.  Looks like it is likely won't be til 2024 or 2025 they hit the City Centre.  I don't need the extra, but you can bet I'd end up taking it given the option...

[tiffy]

I'm not sure what you mean.  Both my connections were installed by OR, they're both Openreach / BTW based services (one is AAISP, one is Unchained ISP).  There's nothing else available at my property.

Ahh, opologies, my misunderstanding, I never took the trouble to check that Unchained ISP did not provide their own infrastructure and relied on OR engineering services as per the majority of ISP's

Really surprised that OR would opt to install a second fibre, especially in an UG fed installation and fit a second ONT, surely a multi-port ONT would be an easier solution and a lot less time & effort/cost for OR?
In my case, my original copper POTS line was DIG so no duct available, the fibre was run across my front garden to a very shallow depth in a flex conduit about the diameter of a garden hose pipe, don't think there is any way a second fibre could be fed through this and I certainly would not wish to see a (new) second fibre run across the garden.

So unless OFCOM manage to get BT to change their policy where BB is terminated when digital phone service is migrated away from them, I believe this has been in the pipeline for some time, then looks like I will have to take my chances on phone migration to VOIP, BB termination from BT and a possible BB outage until my chosen ISP's service goes live.
I would hope that this would encourage OR to use the existing fibre run and ONT as one service would actually be terminated before the replacement service was comissioned.   

[bogof]

It sounds like the guys in the van have some discretion - that they can get a 4 port and get it set up.  What threw me was that literally the day after we ordered the OR "external" team turned up and pulled another fibre from the CBT, in spite of a 4 port being requested at order.  As they have access to the duct etc I guess they just decided to do it; if it involves digging across your lawn you'd expect they'd have a bit more cautious outlook and at that point might not do the outdoor work and co-ordinate to get you a 4 port. 

I think it's worth noting though that from what I understand a lot of consumer ISPs can only actually be ordered via their websites etc to go onto the 1st port of a multiport ONT, so even having a multiport or multiple ONTs may not get you a particularly straighforward process.  One of the reasons I went with someone like Unchained was that I could have sensible conversations about what was supposed to be happening - even though as it happens it seems OR do more or less what they like

[tiffy]

Yes, don't seem to be any hard and fast rules regarding multi-fibre connections and as you have said, it would appear that OR will do it their way regardless of any arrangement you may have thought you had with your ISP.

I don't have any real issues with BT's BB provision and the cost is still competitive enough, would be quite happy to re-contract provided a suitable retention discount could be negotiated towards the end of the present contract, however,  I do want to get my LL service divorced from the package and onto VOIP with another provider, something I can't currently do without loosing the complete service.

[tiffy]

It sounds like the guys in the van have some discretion - that they can get a 4 port and get it set up.  What threw me was that literally the day after we ordered the OR "external" team turned up and pulled another fibre from the CBT, in spite of a 4 port being requested at order.  As they have access to the duct etc I guess they just decided to do it; if it involves digging across your lawn you'd expect they'd have a bit more cautious outlook and at that point might not do the outdoor work and co-ordinate to get you a 4 port.

Surely running a second fibre to property will eventualy cause issues or at least extra work/expense for OR.
The footway chamber outside my front garden wall houses a 4 port CBT which serves the 4 adjacent properties 2 ports being currently populated, other 2 neighbours still being on VDSL/ADSL copper BB & LL service.
Any dual fibre run from this CBT would leave one property without easy fibre access when we are led to believe in the not too distant future copper service will cease and full fibre migration will be mandatory.
Perhaps if such a scenario was to occur in the future then a multi-port ONT would be contemplated?

I observed the full fibre upgrade in my area two years ago and noted that the CBT port blocks in respective chambers mirrored the number of properties to be served as would be expected accepting odd/even number combinations and the available CBT port blocks.
However, my area also has cable service which was available long before FTTP or even FTTC so has quite a large subscriber base, also a large older, retiree population where full fibre BB speeds are not a priority and VDSL or even ADSL copper service is still deemed adequite.

[spudgun]

I'll be following this thread with interest as I'm got AAISP and Unchained on my short list if/when FTTP comes here as I will abandon Zen due to their occasioal GEA issues on some of their lines, so I am hoping to hear that Unchained's performance via their BT backhaul is as good as AAISP's as it will work out cheaper per month

[Alex Atkin UK]

Surely running a second fibre to property will eventualy cause issues or at least extra work/expense for OR.
The footway chamber outside my front garden wall houses a 4 port CBT which serves the 4 adjacent properties 2 ports being currently populated, other 2 neighbours still being on VDSL/ADSL copper BB & LL service.
Any dual fibre run from this CBT would leave one property without easy fibre access when we are led to believe in the not too distant future copper service will cease and full fibre migration will be mandatory.
Perhaps if such a scenario was to occur in the future then a multi-port ONT would be contemplated?

I observed the full fibre upgrade in my area two years ago and noted that the CBT port blocks in respective chambers mirrored the number of properties to be served as would be expected accepting odd/even number combinations and the available CBT port blocks.
However, my area also has cable service which was available long before FTTP or even FTTC so has quite a large subscriber base, also a large older, retiree population where full fibre BB speeds are not a priority and VDSL or even ADSL copper service is still deemed adequite.

If we assume they have 30 ports per fibre run then the point would be moot as one customer having two connections would still put them over their intended load.

Although I wonder if that is why they aim for 30 rather than 32, so they can have a couple of dual-port customers without hitting the PON limit?

[tiffy]

If we assume they have 30 ports per fibre run then the point would be moot as one customer having two connections would still put them over their intended load.

Although I wonder if that is why they aim for 30 rather than 32, so they can have a couple of dual-port customers without hitting the PON limit?

I was thinking more of/refering to the physical connection (number of ports) limitation to the CBT rather than the PON distribution capability.

[Alex Atkin UK]

I was thinking more of/refering to the physical connection (number of ports) limitation to the CBT rather than the PON distribution capability.

Yeah I get what you mean, in that it limits it on a specific CBT vs otherwise only reducing the PON capacity which is far less likely to be an issue, in the short term at least.

I mean couldn't they technically split the single fibre between both ONTs anyway?