Info for customers with fibre faults.

[#1]

Quote from: ejs

But I suppose we now want Openreach to come and do for free what we didn't pay them to do as part of the installation.

The example earlier was of Plusnet refusing to raise a fault for low speed, since it fell within the range for an impacted service.  There was no suggestion that Plusnet made any enquiries to confirm that the slow speed was due to customer equipment or wiring issues.    I don't have FTTC so can't comment on Plusnet's current installation charge for a wires-only compared to their previous charges for engineer installs, however if a Openreach had attended in this example and found customer equipment or wiring to be at fault then I would expect a charge to be made as would be the case for ADSL and phone call outs.

[#2]

The different costs for the different types of install are in the BTWholesale price spreadsheet. From the misterTony's previous thread, internal wiring should not be an issue. And they seemed to have an engineer present for the install. Not sure if it's Plusnet refusing to raise a slow speed fault, it could be more about Plusnet's suppliers not accepting the slow speed fault. So then what's left - Plusnet paying for a boost engineer? Or an SFI2 engineer, if that exists for FTTC, then it would cost Plusnet if the line was found to meet the basic requirements for a telephone line (SIN 349).
Does that mean it's always the lowest B speed that's used for accepting or rejecting slow speed faults?

[#3]

Quote from: ejs

Does that mean it's always the lowest B speed that's used for accepting or rejecting slow speed faults?

I think that is exactly what I have found out during this whole case. PN find no faults during testing, quote me with a lower estimate, begin to mention 'impacted' lines and send me on my (not so merry) way.

[#4]

Oooeeer! An engineer appointment. This will be interesting. Lets see if they can do better than this -
FTTC -
Current sync rate: 591 / 14542 (when ADSL was about: 1100/10000)

[#5]

I should hope so too.  I'm wondering if the engineer that did the install did the jumpering at the cab correctly. The stats you posted in your other thread don't seem right when looking at attenuation figures. (As both threads are on the same board I think is would be useful if they were merged to keep all the info in one thread - I'll request a mod to do that).
Do you know how far you are from your Cab?
Can you post the output from the BT DSL Checker I haven't that anywhere - remember to redact your phone number.

Quote from: misterTony

......... For me, I got my estimate on their website as I was 'upgrading'. No copy of this was ever sent to me that I can recall (I shall double check this). But http://portal.plus.net/my.html?action=data_transfer_speed still shows my initial estimate which may be of use to me.

I know you have posted that information, but I would print that page (to a pdf file) in case you need to quote it in a contractual situation. If that's the speed estimate you got when signing up then that's the upgrade you contracted for. It's no good Plusnet now saying that was a mistake, that's tough doodah on Plusnet's part. They want to learn something about contracts

[#6]

Quote from: Anotherone

I should hope so too.  I'm wondering if the engineer that did the install did the jumpering at the cab correctly. The stats you posted in your other thread don't seem right when looking at attenuation figures. (As both threads are on the same board I think is would be useful if they were merged to keep all the info in one thread - I'll request a mod to do that). Do you know how far you are from your Cab? Can you post the output from the BT DSL Checker I haven't that anywhere - remember to redact your phone number.

Here's the output from DSL checker -
Telephone Number 01730****** on Exchange MIDHURST is served by Cabinet 3
                        High Low High Low
FTTC Range A (Clean) 21.6 14.7 2.1       1
FTTC Range B (Impacted) 15.9 6.5         2.1       0.8
Google maps rekons I'm 1.2km from the cabinet but you could add a bit to that to allow for roads/cable routing, etc. PN say it's 1.7km. Either way it's less than a 10 min walk.

[#7]

For these wires only installs, no engineer attendance at the end user, do Plusnet supply a filter?

[#8]

It will be a "Rat's-tail" type which should comply with the requirements of BT spec. SIN498 - latest version at time of posting is v6p0.
This is similar to that supplied by BT Retail - filters they've been supplying are marked DSL472. However they do give customers the option of a "managed install" by an engineer for an additional £35 when I last checked. Plusnet ought to be doing the same.
@misterTony
Those upper estimates (DS & US) do tie in with the distance from that Cab that Plusnet have stated.
There is clearly something wrong when even your US is well below the "Impacted" lower estimate. Let's hope the engineer visit resolves the issue.

[#9]

Quote from: Anotherone

Those upper estimates (DS & US) do tie in with the distance from that Cab that Plusnet have stated. There is clearly something wrong when even your US is well below the "Impacted" lower estimate. Let's hope the engineer visit resolves the issue.

I guess that depends on which distance estimate is right I suppose. But generally I was expecting 'upto' 21M.
While I'm slightly disappointed with the DS I can live with it. It's the US thats a problem for me. It's slow and sluggish.  Will report back on how things go after Tuesdays visit. As you say - somethings not quite right.

[#10]

I hope I'm wrong, but I'm not really expecting that they'll be much the engineer can do. I think your FTTC speeds up and down are not that different from other people's long line FTTC speeds. I think another factor that affects FTTC speeds is the distance from the cabinet to the exchange, because that affects the maximum power levels of the FTTC (VDSL2) signals, to prevent them interfering with the ADSL signals to/from the exchange. I expect it's possible to find examples of lines of a similar length to the FTTC cabinet as here, but getting better speeds, but that might not be possible here.

[#11]

Ejs,
Did you mean cabinet to property (d-side)?  I believe what you've said about power levels does indeed apply to the d-side network.  For the e-side (cab to exchange) FTTC and ADSL use completely different infrastructure - ADSL copper wire (POTS circuit), FTTC optical fibre.

[#12]

No, I was indeed talking about the distance between the cabinet and the exchange. I'm assuming that in this case, the cabinet is fairly close to the exchange. The power levels for the VDSL2 signals on the d-side are, in part, determined by the location of the cabinet relative to the exchange. It wouldn't normally be a significant factor, but if it's a long line only looking at 21Mb at best, then other things become more significant considering the amount of bandwidth lost relative to the total. Trouble is, I'm not sure which would be worse for FTTC speeds, being 1.7km away from a cabinet close to the exchange, or 1.7km away from a cabinet a few miles away from the exchange.
References:
http://forum.kitz.co.uk/index.php/topic,14347.msg269119.html#msg269119
http://forum.kitz.co.uk/index.php/topic,14659.msg273964.html#msg273964
ND1602, which is the Access Network Frequency Plan, Part B in particular

[#13]

ejs,
Ah thank you - light bulb moment!  Thank you for the links.
If I understand correctly, what is being stated here is that the d-side VDSL power levels need to be function of the distance of the cab to the exchange because the coresident d-side ADSL signals will be weaker the further the cab is from the exchange.
In other words, FTTC speeds are not solely governed by the distance over which it operates from the cabinet: the VDSL power level on the d-side has to consider (be reduced for) the residual ADSL power levels so as to not interfere with them.
When I read your original post, I thought you were referring to e-side interaction!  

[#14]

This is interesting and not something I had heard of or thought about before. It took me a few reads to get my head around it.
So in a nutshell, the power levels of the VDSL2 signals from the cab have to be controlled so as not to swamp any adjoining (in the copper bundles) ADSL signals, which have to come all the way from the exchange.
So whilst there is no loss in signal to the cabinet, the location of the cabinet with respect to the exchange will determine the 'baseline' power levels for the VDSL2 signals.
If everyone were to stop using ADSL (just for the purposes of the argument of course), presumably VDSL2 power levels could be increased, and people would eek a little more speed out of the connection.
The interesting thing to know would be how much speed difference are we talking about, insignificant, significant etc.
Hope I grasp that correctly. Very interesting stuff.

[#15]

Just thinking more about this. Wouldn't the target SNRM determine the signal power from the cabinet, rather than any other factors? I thought the end user modem reported the SNRM back to the cabinet and that in turn allows the signal power level to be adjusted accordingly to maintain the target SNRM.
I may be completely wrong as I don't have a full understanding of this, but wouldn't that target SNRM determine the VDSL2 power levels rather than any adjustment based on distance of the cab from the exchange?