Re: [uknof] BT deny demand for broadband without a dial tone
On 22 Mar 2016, at 21:41, Neil J. McRae wrote: At scale? I’m not so sure! Well that rather depends how much you think your POTS plant costs you. A wien bridge oscillator, to pick one of the many possibilities, is not a particularly expensive or difficult thing, but that misses the point somewhat. A POTS facility isn’t technically required by many, but effectively it is not optional. It can be omitted by LLU and SLU operators, but that doesn’t work out well for non-technical reasons. A simple oscillator providing tone would be functionally equivalent for those who don’t need POTS, and should be cheaper, but should not be necessary either - it’s not a technical problem. d.
Re: [uknof] BT deny demand for broadband without a dial tone
I am guessing you are working on MPF from the exchange? We are talking about MPF from the Sub Loop/PCP, and I have yet to find any DSLAM kit that enables us to put a wetting current on the line (i wish we could), and I am not sure from a regulatory perspective we are allowed. Our only option is to deploy some sort of voip platform with analog lines out and and then inject the DSL on top, that works but it adds a lot of cost and complexity to the cabinet deployment for little gain. We tend to find a wetting current on MPFs is enough to keep all but the most inept OR pair thieves at bay and most kit supports it (added bonus as Paul said that it stops the copper joints corroding over time). They *should* be looking for dialtone/current or both. -- Ben King > *WarwickNet - The Business & Science Park ISP* Tel: 024 7699 7222 Mob: 07973 848007 http://www.warwicknet.com What we do - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OSNmyoRBLg
Re: [uknof] BT deny demand for broadband without a dial tone
There is a lot of mileage in that bit of copper yet, vectoring, g.bond, g.fast and beyond will keep it working hard and going faster and faster. And quite rightly so, everybody wants FTTP to very few people really want to pay for it. I recently elected that I wanted FTTP at my house (I have a reasonably serviceable 25Mbit/s FTTC service), unlike the vast majority I am lucky enough to own an ISP, even more so an ISP with code powers (so we can dig up the public highway at will), and an ISP fully accredited for PIA (we can lay our own fibre in BT ducts), an established contractor base with competitive buying rates, I also live in a suburban area of one of the UKs greatest second cities, and fortunately less than a few hundred meters from a major arterial route on which we have fibre I can 'tap into'. Despite all these things in my favor, the final setup cost of the install is going to be the thick end of £4k, admittedly we could have done things cheaper (we dug a new duct underground rather than going overhead), but the point is, installing fibre isn't cheap, especially if you want to do it reliably and with scale, and very few consumers have an appetite for anything beyond a basic setup fee. Regards... Ben On 22 March 2016 at 21:03, Evaldas P wrote: > How sad to use BTs copper pair in 21st century :))) > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On 22 Mar 2016, at 20:57, Neil J. McRae wrote: > > > > "Dodgy practises" - "Effectively admitted" > > > > What a load of old codswallop! > > > > Paul - get a hobby or a pet or something - and soon - please! > > > > Of course BT is the only company that charges line rental. > > > >>> On 22 Mar 2016, at 17:56, Paul Mansfield > wrote: > >>> > On 22 March 2016 at 17:44, Joseph Waite wrote: > > On 22 Mar 2016, at 17:12, Paul Mansfield > wrote: > > "Householders signing up for broadband packages could be exempted from > the rental charge on their landline if they don't use it, under > >>> But the cost will just be added to the broadband so won't actually > effect the cost. But might lead to more transparent pricing! > >> > >> Initially it will, but transparency may lead to BT's dodgy practices > >> being more open to examination. > >> For example, BT effectively admitted that line rental charges > >> cross-subsidise the TV service and other things: > >> > >> > https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-JwAhiHBnn5U/VvGGa7H7OQI/Xps/xg_r8zaoywArf0j8f9jkLhttmvQVPtywgCCo/s720-Ic42/IMG_20160208_075828.jpg > >> > >> I was about to rip up the letter for recycling, but took a photo, so > >> sorry about the poor quality. > > > > -- Ben King > *WarwickNet - The Business & Science Park ISP* Tel: 024 7699 7222 Mob: 07973 848007 http://www.warwicknet.com What we do - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OSNmyoRBLg
Re: [uknof] BT deny demand for broadband without a dial tone
A spokesmen for BT said: "Anyone using broadband uses a landline..." sigh. I have been told by someone lucky enough to live in a FTTP area, that BT *insist* on installing a copper pair alongside it for POTS service, whether you want it or not.
Re: [uknof] BT deny demand for broadband without a dial tone
Hi, The spokesman is probably someone paid to learn lines, and doesn't need BT Wholesale's 'Tags on the Line' data or read the releases out of Openreach very often. Maybe? Kind regards, Mike On 22 March 2016 at 21:41, Neil J. McRae wrote: > At scale? I’m not so sure! > > > > On 22/03/2016, 21:38, "uknof on behalf of David Reader" < > uknof-boun...@lists.uknof.org.uk on behalf of da...@reader.me.uk> wrote: > > > >I’m quite certain there are more cost-efficient ways to put an audible > >tone on a bunch of lines than renting a legacy POTS service… > > > >…technically anyway. It being practical or permitted are likely where > >the problems would lie. It’s not something I ever had sufficient > >motivation or tuits to look into. > > > >d. > > >
Re: [uknof] BT deny demand for broadband without a dial tone
On 22/03/16 21:38, David Reader wrote: On 22 Mar 2016, at 21:16, Ben King wrote: Trust me, pay the few extra quid and enjoy the warm security of a dial tone. I’m quite certain there are more cost-efficient ways to put an audible tone on a bunch of lines than renting a legacy POTS service… …technically anyway. It being practical or permitted are likely where the problems would lie. It’s not something I ever had sufficient motivation or tuits to look into. We tend to find a wetting current on MPFs is enough to keep all but the most inept OR pair thieves at bay and most kit supports it (added bonus as Paul said that it stops the copper joints corroding over time). They *should* be looking for dialtone/current or both. Robin
Re: [uknof] BT deny demand for broadband without a dial tone
At scale? I’m not so sure! On 22/03/2016, 21:38, "uknof on behalf of David Reader" wrote: > >I’m quite certain there are more cost-efficient ways to put an audible >tone on a bunch of lines than renting a legacy POTS service… > >…technically anyway. It being practical or permitted are likely where >the problems would lie. It’s not something I ever had sufficient >motivation or tuits to look into. > >d. >
Re: [uknof] BT deny demand for broadband without a dial tone
On 22 Mar 2016, at 21:16, Ben King wrote: Trust me, pay the few extra quid and enjoy the warm security of a dial tone. I’m quite certain there are more cost-efficient ways to put an audible tone on a bunch of lines than renting a legacy POTS service… …technically anyway. It being practical or permitted are likely where the problems would lie. It’s not something I ever had sufficient motivation or tuits to look into. d.
Re: [uknof] BT deny demand for broadband without a dial tone
On 22/03/2016, 21:22, "uknof on behalf of Paul Astle" wrote: > >Openreach were considering trialling a bundled FTTC product that delivers >the copper pair transparently as part of the service to only deliver >broadband, I think the issue they hit was lack of dial tone and voltage on >the line. Assume you mean SoGEA? - which is (was) in trial now from Openreach. Neil.
Re: [uknof] BT deny demand for broadband without a dial tone
I can echo that, years ago we provided SDSL over MPF's with no detectable conditions on the line including a wetting current. The result was as described with the added fun of the line joints corroding causing further issues. At the end of the day you need a copper pair to carry your broadband and that has to be paid for. Openreach were considering trialling a bundled FTTC product that delivers the copper pair transparently as part of the service to only deliver broadband, I think the issue they hit was lack of dial tone and voltage on the line. -Original Message- From: uknof [mailto:uknof-boun...@lists.uknof.org.uk] On Behalf Of Ben King Sent: 22 March 2016 21:17 To: uknof@lists.uknof.org.uk Subject: Re: [uknof] BT deny demand for broadband without a dial tone Honestly, as an SLU provider who has offered MPF (D-side only/no dial tone) for years, you don't want it! We are plagued with 'pair theft' on MPF, mostly 3rd party contractors to BT who are ignoring the supplied allocation data, working back from the DP to install a new line in the same location, they listen for a tone, there is no tone (Or any line conditions), so they nick the pair, by the time they have pushed the pair back to the PCP and seen the warning notices, it's too late and they move on to their next job leaving our customer high n dry. Trust me, pay the few extra quid and enjoy the warm security of a dial tone. Regards... Ben Sent from my iPhone > On 22 Mar 2016, at 20:57, Neil J. McRae wrote: > > "Dodgy practises" - "Effectively admitted" > > What a load of old codswallop! > > Paul - get a hobby or a pet or something - and soon - please! > > Of course BT is the only company that charges line rental. > >>> On 22 Mar 2016, at 17:56, Paul Mansfield >>> wrote: >>> On 22 March 2016 at 17:44, Joseph Waite wrote: On 22 Mar 2016, at 17:12, Paul Mansfield wrote: "Householders signing up for broadband packages could be exempted from the rental charge on their landline if they don't use it, under >>> But the cost will just be added to the broadband so won't actually >>> effect the cost. But might lead to more transparent pricing! >> >> Initially it will, but transparency may lead to BT's dodgy practices >> being more open to examination. >> For example, BT effectively admitted that line rental charges >> cross-subsidise the TV service and other things: >> >> https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-JwAhiHBnn5U/VvGGa7H7OQI/Xp >> s/xg_r8zaoywArf0j8f9jkLhttmvQVPtywgCCo/s720-Ic42/IMG_20160208_075828. >> jpg >> >> I was about to rip up the letter for recycling, but took a photo, so >> sorry about the poor quality. > -- -- The Networking People (NorthWest) Limited. Registered office: c/o Hanleys, Spring Court, Hale, Cheshire, WA14 2UQ. Registered in England & Wales with company number: 07667393 This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.
Re: [uknof] BT deny demand for broadband without a dial tone
How sad to use BTs copper pair in 21st century :))) Sent from my iPhone > On 22 Mar 2016, at 20:57, Neil J. McRae wrote: > > "Dodgy practises" - "Effectively admitted" > > What a load of old codswallop! > > Paul - get a hobby or a pet or something - and soon - please! > > Of course BT is the only company that charges line rental. > >>> On 22 Mar 2016, at 17:56, Paul Mansfield wrote: >>> On 22 March 2016 at 17:44, Joseph Waite wrote: On 22 Mar 2016, at 17:12, Paul Mansfield wrote: "Householders signing up for broadband packages could be exempted from the rental charge on their landline if they don't use it, under >>> But the cost will just be added to the broadband so won't actually effect >>> the cost. But might lead to more transparent pricing! >> >> Initially it will, but transparency may lead to BT's dodgy practices >> being more open to examination. >> For example, BT effectively admitted that line rental charges >> cross-subsidise the TV service and other things: >> >> https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-JwAhiHBnn5U/VvGGa7H7OQI/Xps/xg_r8zaoywArf0j8f9jkLhttmvQVPtywgCCo/s720-Ic42/IMG_20160208_075828.jpg >> >> I was about to rip up the letter for recycling, but took a photo, so >> sorry about the poor quality. >
Re: [uknof] BT deny demand for broadband without a dial tone
Honestly, as an SLU provider who has offered MPF (D-side only/no dial tone) for years, you don't want it! We are plagued with 'pair theft' on MPF, mostly 3rd party contractors to BT who are ignoring the supplied allocation data, working back from the DP to install a new line in the same location, they listen for a tone, there is no tone (Or any line conditions), so they nick the pair, by the time they have pushed the pair back to the PCP and seen the warning notices, it's too late and they move on to their next job leaving our customer high n dry. Trust me, pay the few extra quid and enjoy the warm security of a dial tone. Regards... Ben Sent from my iPhone > On 22 Mar 2016, at 20:57, Neil J. McRae wrote: > > "Dodgy practises" - "Effectively admitted" > > What a load of old codswallop! > > Paul - get a hobby or a pet or something - and soon - please! > > Of course BT is the only company that charges line rental. > >>> On 22 Mar 2016, at 17:56, Paul Mansfield wrote: >>> On 22 March 2016 at 17:44, Joseph Waite wrote: On 22 Mar 2016, at 17:12, Paul Mansfield wrote: "Householders signing up for broadband packages could be exempted from the rental charge on their landline if they don't use it, under >>> But the cost will just be added to the broadband so won't actually effect >>> the cost. But might lead to more transparent pricing! >> >> Initially it will, but transparency may lead to BT's dodgy practices >> being more open to examination. >> For example, BT effectively admitted that line rental charges >> cross-subsidise the TV service and other things: >> >> https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-JwAhiHBnn5U/VvGGa7H7OQI/Xps/xg_r8zaoywArf0j8f9jkLhttmvQVPtywgCCo/s720-Ic42/IMG_20160208_075828.jpg >> >> I was about to rip up the letter for recycling, but took a photo, so >> sorry about the poor quality. >
Re: [uknof] BT deny demand for broadband without a dial tone
On 22/03/2016, 21:03, "Evaldas P" wrote: >How sad to use BTs copper pair in 21st century :))) Funny that because the people who are getting amazing speeds on G.Fast, that are for example; streaming UHD Netflix to three screens whilst watching BT Sport UHD, playing Xbox Live, uploading RAW images for backup and listening to Commander Scott Kelly give his retirement speech (in HD from NASA TV) all at the same time, don’t appear to be sad when I have spoken to them, infact, they seem pretty insistent that we don’t take the copper pair away!
Re: [uknof] BT deny demand for broadband without a dial tone
"Dodgy practises" - "Effectively admitted" What a load of old codswallop! Paul - get a hobby or a pet or something - and soon - please! Of course BT is the only company that charges line rental. > On 22 Mar 2016, at 17:56, Paul Mansfield wrote: > >> On 22 March 2016 at 17:44, Joseph Waite wrote: >> >>> On 22 Mar 2016, at 17:12, Paul Mansfield wrote: >>> >>> "Householders signing up for broadband packages could be exempted from >>> the rental charge on their landline if they don't use it, under >> But the cost will just be added to the broadband so won't actually effect >> the cost. But might lead to more transparent pricing! > > Initially it will, but transparency may lead to BT's dodgy practices > being more open to examination. > For example, BT effectively admitted that line rental charges > cross-subsidise the TV service and other things: > > https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-JwAhiHBnn5U/VvGGa7H7OQI/Xps/xg_r8zaoywArf0j8f9jkLhttmvQVPtywgCCo/s720-Ic42/IMG_20160208_075828.jpg > > I was about to rip up the letter for recycling, but took a photo, so > sorry about the poor quality. >
Re: [uknof] BT deny demand for broadband without a dial tone
On 22 March 2016 at 17:44, Joseph Waite wrote: > >> On 22 Mar 2016, at 17:12, Paul Mansfield wrote: >> >> "Householders signing up for broadband packages could be exempted from >> the rental charge on their landline if they don't use it, under >> > But the cost will just be added to the broadband so won't actually effect the > cost. But might lead to more transparent pricing! Initially it will, but transparency may lead to BT's dodgy practices being more open to examination. For example, BT effectively admitted that line rental charges cross-subsidise the TV service and other things: https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-JwAhiHBnn5U/VvGGa7H7OQI/Xps/xg_r8zaoywArf0j8f9jkLhttmvQVPtywgCCo/s720-Ic42/IMG_20160208_075828.jpg I was about to rip up the letter for recycling, but took a photo, so sorry about the poor quality.
[uknof] BT deny demand for broadband without a dial tone
"Householders signing up for broadband packages could be exempted from the rental charge on their landline if they don't use it, under proposals to be discussed by the culture minister." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35869222 A spokesmen for BT said: "Anyone using broadband uses a landline..." sigh.
