Month(ish) old Fibre installation - what should I expect?

[#1]

The following link should tell you what cabinet you are connected to. Finding where it is located is the next step. Not sure about that.
http://www.dslchecker.bt.com/

[#2]

Yes I'd already seen that page and established we're on Oakham Exchange, Cabinet 13 but I've literally no idea of where that is or how to find it.  We're semi-rural so it's not "simply" a case of walking around the local area until you find it.  My estimation (FWIW) is 1.5-3 miles.
There's a new hyper-mega-fast ultra-broadband installation closer than that (an expensive new business park) but because of the way the cabling is likely to be routed - along the main roads - we're almost certainly not connected to that cabinet, nor could we be I suspect.
I've raised a ticket which has now been 'taken off hold' so hopefully we'll see some action.  But this definitely feels like rural communities being left well alone by service providers because it isn't commercially in their interests to give us a good service.
Again, not really feeling that I've been 'done proud' at the moment.

[#3]

So I've had a chat with a PN chap called Nick.
His advice was thus: the problem we've experienced is most likely down to our distance from the cabinet.  I'd estimated ~1.5 miles, Nick confirmed it is just over 2 miles away and, as a result we're paying for a service that will "never in a million years" be deliverable by PN.
Our line profile is going to be downgraded from 80/20 to 40/2 to see if that resolves the problem and if it doesn't PN will do a further downgrade to ADSL "free of charge" (lucky us).  We're presently seeing 2Mbps down and 0.02-0.05 upload - apparently it is the upload which is causing the problem, it is having to work too hard to try and match the line profile.
I will definitely not be happy if we have to go back to ADSL as we were consistently 'sold' a higher speed/better service offering from PN which they knew all along is geographically not achievable and never will be if my research is anything to go by.
Very, very disappointed of Rutland.

[#4]

Seems like being downgraded to 40/2 hasn't had the desired effect.  A marginal improvement for a couple of hours yesterday morning but today we're back to 'normal'.  Currently getting 2.66Mbps down, 66kbps up and the following ping responses for Google:
Pinging 8.8.8.8 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=352ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=115ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=229ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=356ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=602ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=519ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=405ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=241ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=330ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=211ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=514ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=600ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=336ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=238ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=267ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=416ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=365ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=667ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=641ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=628ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=314ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=157ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=371ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=573ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=228ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=63ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=96ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=270ms TTL=5
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=124ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=409ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=93ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=355ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=148ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=73ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=643ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=187ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=146ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=125ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=99ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=243ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=153ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=84ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=138ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=98ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=130ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=133ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=142ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=147ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=112ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=214ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=130ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=246ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=29ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=56
Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=443ms TTL=56
Clearly *not* fixed and no response to either my ticket update or PM to Matthew on here asking when we should be likely to see any kind of change/resolution.
If this is what Plusnet think is 'doing us proud' then I'd hate to see them not giving a sh__ .  Currently feeling somewhat frustrated & misled by the sales hype/process, especially after comments Nick (from PN) made last week detailed in my previous message.

[#5]

I don't see how going from 80/20 to 40/20 could resolve that issue. I think you have been misinformed on that one. They are both essentially the same product, except that on the 40 product, Plusnet limit the download at their end by setting their own profile to 40 Mbps. Everything else remains the same.
I think your issue, as you already stated, is distance from the cabinet. Fibre is generally sold as faster than ADSL on the assumption that most people will have a cabinet closer than the exchange.
In some cases, the cabinet may be so far away as to make the speeds worse (or similar) to ADSL. Fibre (VDSL2) is designed for shorter runs. It uses higher frequencies (up to 17 MHz) that attenuate more quickly over distance than ADSL frequencies.
You might just be one of those unfortunate cases where ADSL is going to be faster and more reliable than fibre.

[#6]

@jafreer, I think in this case they specifically went for 40/2 (one of the available BT Openreach FTTC products) and not 40/20, the 40/2 would certainly use fewer upstream frequencies and the thought was that this might reduce interference between upstream and downstream (though it appears not to have had the desired effect).
@YellowBarley, those pings (and particularly the variability) are absolutely awful but there is no apparent packet loss showing, not sure how a long or poor line would cause that, have you tried a different router at any point?

[#7]

@w23  That's correct, the intention was that 40/2 would resolve the issue, although the way PN explained it to me was slightly different to the way you've described it working.  Either way, we're not seeing a positive impact from this change.
I think it's pretty disgraceful that Plusnet have lured us to buy a service from them which, in reality, they knew would never be fit-for-purpose.  As described previously: PN have now advised that we're over 2 MILES from our cabinet and it is my understanding that fibre just isn't workable over these kinds of distances.
That situation hasn't suddenly changed, PN quoted to provide a given speed at a given price to a stated address.  We accepted their offer and they're now saying they can't provide it having messed us around for weeks and weeks.
As I say: if this is "doing us proud" then I'd hate to see their complaints team workload.

[#8]

Please see edit on my post above (editing while you posted, sorry).

[#9]

Yes we've tried three separate units: the PN supplied hardware, and our previous netgear unit and its' identical backup.  The netgear hardware had, until recently, been working fine with our BT supplied ADSL connection, it was slow but *consistent*.
The ping result in all three modems is as identical as 'consistently inconsistent' can be so we're currently running the PN supplied unit to alleviate their ability to say "well if you're not using *our* hardware we can't (won't) help you...."
We see occasional improvements, but this doesn't last.

[#10]

Quote from: YellowBarley

PN quoted to provide a given speed at a given price to a stated address.

In fairness, Plusnet give estimates (from what I've seen, usually more conservative ones that some suppliers) based on information available to them from a BT (Openreach or Wholesale) database, they wouldn't deliverately mis-sell as they then have to help to solve problems where things don't perform as expected.
Maybe they're correct that VDSL just won't perform consistently at the distance we now believe you are from the cabinet.
I expect that if you have to be regraded back to ADSLx then Plusnet will refund any difference you've been paying in the meantime for Fibre (or even fully refund for the period of 'inadequate' service), they're usually quite fair when customers suffer degraded service.

Quote from: Matthew

Out of curiosity if you try to ping the router constantly do you see the same variation in pings?

Presumably having tried other routers this probably won't show anything but did you try what Matthew asked?

[#11]

Well, it may be an estimate but to say 14.x Mb to 16.x Mb, likely average speed of 15.x Mb and then be lumped with <3Mb I think is just misleading.
Our location hasn't changed, we're in an 18th Century listed building.  Presumably between us asking for the service and now our cabinet hasn't changed.  Plusnet should really know the acceptable variations in line length for any of their given products.  So, to be sold - in fact to even be allowed to buy - a product they should really have known was *never* going to be fit-for-purpose is, as I say, pretty shoddy (at the very least).
I just tried pinging the router: the first return is 4ms then it goes to <1ms and stays there.

[#12]

We're now at a whopping 1.9Mbps down 150kbps up, pinging the BBC shows the following:
Pinging bbc.co.uk [212.58.244.20] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=530ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=618ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=550ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=834ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=419ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=288ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=368ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=467ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=533ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=584ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=647ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=703ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=810ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=650ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=89ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=530ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=487ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=424ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=645ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=723ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=500ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=737ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=704ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=406ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=615ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=654ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=654ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=423ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=614ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=546ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=578ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=591ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=557ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=289ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=657ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=581ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=446ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=441ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=412ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=456ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=580ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=424ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=409ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=359ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=333ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=382ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=536ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=623ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=672ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=695ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=699ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=542ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=292ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=173ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=489ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=507ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=637ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=555ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=593ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=172ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=496ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=693ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=347ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=336ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=353ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=623ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=637ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=461ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=696ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=652ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=855ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=553ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=326ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=390ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.20: bytes=32 time=455ms TTL=56
Deafening silence from Plusnet on here, in response to my PM to Matthew or on the open ticket looking for this issue to be addressed. Meanwhile a small independent business is being left out to dry with an internet connection which struggles to load the PN forum page in under 30sec, accessing our remote database is a pointless excercise and only one person can help you if you want to get your email. . .
Diabolical.

[#13]

Well spotted W23, I didn't realise Plusnet had the 40/2 offering.

[#14]

They don't offer 40/2 as a customer product but they can order it if required.

[#15]

Sorry for the delay in responding to this.
The fault is with our Business Faults team and they should be getting that picked up today for you.