to save $800 per node
At approximately 50,000 nodes around Australia that would cost 40 million dollars. A drop in the bucket compared to the "56" billion being spent. Bizarre isn't it?
At approximately 50,000 nodes around Australia that would cost 40 million dollars. A drop in the bucket compared to the "56" billion being spent. Bizarre isn't it?
I guess it was either the higher speed modules or the copper purchased in the last 6 months.
So where does the cost of maintaining the network come into it ? Surely they don't think it's going to be plug and pray.....things go faulty even on fibre...... Switches die.... A very high grade Cisco FC Switch got replaced not long ago at work, cost north of $10k to do......
I was aware that optical kit used pluggable modules, but it's been about 5 years since I last had access to any (gigabit switches with dual 10-gig optical links IIRC) so it completely slipped my mind.
In any case, upgrading to 10Gbps requires someone unplugging a module and plugging in a different one. I'd say I was close enough for my main point to be correct ;)
At approximately 50,000 nodes around Australia that would cost 40 million dollars. A drop in the bucket compared to the "56" billion being spent. Bizarre isn't it?
Anything to move CAPEX to OPEX ...
In any case, upgrading to 10Gbps requires someone unplugging a module and plugging in a different one. I'd say I was close enough for my main point to be correct ;)
The transceiver isn't what determines throughput, i.e you can't just swap a transceiver in a router/switch and see an increase in throughput. If the chassis has enough backplane bandwidth you could swap a card (i.e a 40 port 1gbit/s card for an 4 port 10gbit/s card) and maybe use the same chassis (depending on whether the vendor designed it that way), but then you'd need to install another 9 cards in the same chassis to service the same number of subscribers.
It's nowhere near as 'easy' and 'cheap' as you're making out to increase capacity on the delivery network.
It's nowhere near as 'easy' and 'cheap' as you're making out to increase capacity on the delivery network.
We'd have the 10NBN if that was the case :)
We'd have the 10NBN if that was the case :)
The governing factor on delivery bandwidth, with this government, is rupert murdoch... not technology.
It's nowhere near as 'easy' and 'cheap' as you're making out to increase capacity on the delivery network.
I was trying to make the point that it's not cheap or easy to upgrade, and requires someone to physically go to the node, whereas doing it during the initial install is comparatively cheap and easy ...
I was trying to make the point that it's not cheap or easy to upgrade
In any case, upgrading to 10Gbps requires someone unplugging a module and plugging in a different one.
And I was making the point that to upgrade to 10gbit/s the entire chassis need be replaced, not just some module.
Just a general question if someone could clarify for me please. Are all nodes (cabinets) green? As I thought a saw a green one being iinstalled, and then a few hundred meters down the road is a cream variant?
Both are new to the area so I wondered if there is a difference I tech or just simply a different colour.
Many thanks
Many thanks for that and I better sit down to read this very carefully.
The cream node is the closest to me, the green ones are a lot further away.
Maybe, just maybe I'll be lucky in this case.
At approximately 50,000 nodes around Australia that would cost 40 million dollars. A drop in the bucket compared to the "56" billion being spent. Bizarre isn't it?
Perhaps NBN have no faith our dodgy copper tails will allow a node aggregate > 1 Gbps ?
what is the distance of the copper should be ? 10 20 30 meters ?
what is the distance of the copper should be ? 10 20 30 meters ?
It should be 0 metres.
At approximately 50,000 nodes around Australia that would cost 40 million dollars.
But that has to be weighed against the risk of backhaul related congestion causing the public nto decide nthat FTTN suffers heavy congestion during busy hours and maybe being slower than ADSL.
This might then become "a truth".
Should someone come to that conclusion they might not sign up to FTTN and NBNco will loose revenue.
Lucky that didn't happen.
It's nowhere near as 'easy' and 'cheap' as you're making out to increase capacity on the delivery network.
It isn't far off, the NANT-E has 320Gbps switching capacity and the chassis is capable of 10Gbps per LT card, or 20Gbps with dual NANT-E .
There are up to 384 users on a Node and each node has a 1Gb backhaul (upgradeable to 2Gb but the second fibre isn't even terminated!)
well over 2Gbps. just not required as yet.
when plenty of OLTs home ~2000 fibre services on a single 1Gbps links, max 384 on a node is a doddle.
So 384 users share 1Gbit or about 2.6Mbits per user at peak if everyone is online :(
*if* everyone downloaded at max speed at once, which is utterly not the case. I've seen contention ratios at various points of networks of 18,300% with the links not hitting max utilisation.
people download far, far less data than geeks think, because geeks don't realise they are the tiny tip of a large iceberg in terms of data usage.
well over 2Gbps. just not required as yet.
so what is it?
are they 1 Gbps SFP/+ modules or are they 10 Gbps SFP/+ modules running at 1 Gbps?
how many fibres are run to a node?
the NANT-E card can support 4 10 Gbps SFE/+ modules how many and what modules are installed?
8 pm at night 200 people streaming 1920*1080 netflix, all single cast, no multicast, how much bandwidth is required?
8 pm at night 200 people streaming 1920*1080 netflix, all single cast, no multicast, how much bandwidth is required?
Starts for me at about 4pm (especially during the school holidays) on a Telstra RIM in an estate that is maybe 4yrs old if it is lucky with about 60 houses max in it.
My perfect sync speed of 24/1 (speedtest of about 18/1) takes a nose dive, speedtest currently reports 7Mbps for me, which is only just enough for HD Netflix and Stan.
8 pm at night 200 people streaming 1920*1080 netflix, all single cast, no multicast, how much bandwidth is required?
Yeah, that's the problem and it isn't caused by geeks � it was once but now it is just mum and dad users!
There are two in this house (other than myself) who would stream video non stop much of the evening given an opportunity (and that's pretty often). One is in their early 20's the other in their 50's and both are pretty technically illiterate (and they don't need technical literacy to stream). I had a third heavy streamer but she left home some time ago!
Too many techo types don't recognise the internet has changed and is changing even faster. On line streaming is the norm these days (even the BBC in the UK has streaming only channels now � not even broadcasting them free to air) � and contention doesn't play well with streaming. We need to revise the way we think about networks and contention . I've been doing network design for 45 years and the changes required are blatantly obvious to everyone other than the LNP and their avid (or should that be rabid) supporters.
I've seen contention ratios at various points of networks of 18,300% with the links not hitting max utilisation.
Yep, in the old world that was certainly the case � but we are no longer in the 20th century and network utilisation has changed � and so must the attitude of those involved in the design � just like walking in front of a car with a red flag would be a little impractical these days � so is providing high contention internet services. We have moved on from both of those practises.
are they 1 Gbps SFP/+ modules or are they 10 Gbps SFP/+ modules running at 1 Gbps?
how many fibres are run to a node?
the NANT-E card can support 4 10 Gbps SFE/+ modules how many and what modules are installed
If they were 10 gbps sfp's they'd be running at 10 gbps.
4 sfp ports yes but they are pairs, 1 for send and 1 for receive each using a single fibre. So max bandwidth possible is 40/40 gbps.
All the pics I've seen indicate only 1 pair of ports is being used in each node.
Edit, ignore post, tired and have my wits crossed! See if I was using fibre I wouldn't bee having shorting issues would I?
4 sfp ports yes but they are pairs, 1 for send and 1 for receive each using a single fibre.
Don't most normal SFP's have the TX & RX in a single module ?
4 sfp ports yes but they are pairs, 1 for send and 1 for receive each using a single fibre. So max bandwidth possible is 40/40 gbps.
All the pics I've seen indicate only 1 pair of ports is being used in each node.
they are using 1 SFP module which uses 2 fibres
each SFP port can take 1 module which uses 2 fibres, 1 TX and 1 RX,
The NANT-E it will support 4 2 fibre modules,
now as to whether 4 can be active at a time or if some are to be used as a fall over I don't know
Don't most normal SFP's have the TX & RX in a single module ?
Doh posting when I'm tired, not good. Ps ignore my post.
so what is it?
over. industry code for "none of your business", basically.
all you, as and end user, need to know is that it will be sufficient to demand. it will be.
The NANT-E it will support 4 2 fibre modules,
the NANT-E is the current controller card. there are plenty of other options.
again though, requiring such would mean scaling the bandwidth demand of a single DSLAM will over 11 times what a fibre OLT might possibly require, and that's assuming that every single service runs at 100Mbps � which we know that FTTN services will not.
surely a minimum of 1,100% overhead (conservatively estimated) will be adequate?
Could nbnco attenuate the nodes so they wont sync higher then say 50/20? BT does this in the UK, only offering 17-76mbps
over. industry code for "none of your business", basically.
all you, as and end user, need to know is that it will be sufficient to demand. it will be.
I don't believe you.
over. industry code for "none of your business", basically.
well you have stated in other threads that they are not feeding 12 fibres to a node as we all thought they were with 1 12 fibre ribbon. but it would seem to be 4 fibres for the "2 circuits" nbn� have stated they are feeding to a node.
You have said that they are only using 1 1 Gbps SFP module and that none of the other fibres of unknown number even have connectors on them, they are just coiled up in the fibre tray.
This would give 1Gbps connectivity into a node and now you are saying it is lots more and it "the industry" saying none of your business.
Since when did you or nbn� become "the industry"?
The industry ?
My point being that there are things that the public should be able to know and ask about the project such as this. We should be allowed to know if sufficient capacity has been built into the nodes from the start.
My point being that there are things that the public should be able to know and ask about the project such as this.
Should they ?
We should be allowed to know if sufficient capacity has been built into the nodes from the start.
You should ?
Rewind 5 years. If you ordered a DSL service from anyone that had their own DSLAM's installed (Telstra, Optus, iiNet, TPG, Internode, Exetel, AAPT, etc) how would you know what the backhaul from the DSLAM was and whether the particular wholesale provider in question had provisioned enough bandwidth from the DSLAM back to the POI ?
Most of the time (in the industry) it's up to the wholesale provider to provision things how they want to and then create an appropriate "product" to sell to the retail providers. One of the specs of the product that they sell might be the contention levels. I know of products that are exactly the same, but one has a 1:1 contention (full throughput guaranteed all the time), one has a 1:16 contention (max contention, could be less) and another has a 1:x (no guaranteed at all). All provisioned on the same gear with the same backhaul, you just pay more to have something guaranteed.
Should they ?
Yes. This is (or at least used to be) a national public infrastructure project, not a private enterprise.
It seems the whole FTTN rollout is under-provisioned. I'm 200 metres from the node in an area that was supposedly RFS at the beginning of February, but I can't get a connection because of a "core network shortfall". It sounds very reminiscent of "no ports available on the DSLAM so you'll have to wait until someone moves out or dies", but should this be happening this early in the build?
It seems the whole FTTN rollout is under-provisioned. I'm 200 metres from the node in an area that was supposedly RFS at the beginning of February, but I can't get a connection because of a "core network shortfall".
Out of interest, what do the coverage checkers such as http://www.devoted.com.au/sq say your service class is?
Out of interest, what do the coverage checkers such as http://www.devoted.com.au/sq say your service class is?
Is devoted SQ still working for people? mines dead with a HTTP 500 error.
all you, as and end user, need to know is that it will be sufficient to demand
Sadly, all we as end users know is that demand isn't being met...
Is devoted SQ still working for people?
I had a google API error last week, but not when I visited a minute ago however I didn't try putting in an address... when I do that, nothing happens.
but not when I visited a minute ago however I didn't try putting in an address... when I do that, nothing happens.
Yeh sorry � I should have clarified. I get nothing on browser. However when using troubleshooting tools the web server is responding with a Error HTTP 500 in the background.
Looks like its busted since NuSpoke took over
It seems the whole FTTN rollout is under-provisioned. I'm 200 metres from the node in an area that was supposedly RFS at the beginning of February, but I can't get a connection because of a "core network shortfall". It sounds very reminiscent of "no ports available on the DSLAM so you'll have to wait until someone moves out or dies", but should this be happening this early in the build?
there are nodes in the 2WOY roll out region that are declared RFS, yet ALL of them have network shortfall, seems there is no complete fibre path between them and the FAN/AAS
seems 2WOY-04-05, 2WOY-04-06, 2WOY-04-17 and 2WOY-04-18 all fall into that category. 17 and 18 still had their fibre run coiled up on a pole with a nice 2 km air gap back to the FAN/AAS
funny thing is that even the nbn� site says the premises are connectible, yet when people go to connect they discover the "problem"
Looks like its busted since NuSpoke took over
It worked for me a couple of weeks ago while checking the address of a house my sister was interested in buying, and I found that it had FTTP but didn't make a note of the service class... I tried again last week when I found out she was putting in an offer but couldn't find any other checker that lists service class, until I tried http://www.finder.com.au/nbn-tracker/ (not http://www.finder.com.au/nbn/ which has much less info).
Out of interest, what do the coverage checkers such as http://www.devoted.com.au/sq say your service class is?
Devoted has hung telling me to wait, but mynbn says service class 12. NBN accepted the order from my RSP and set an appointment date of last Monday, but when nothing happened they said there was a "core network shortfall" and the order couldn't be completed.
Devoted has hung telling me to wait, but mynbn says service class 12. NBN accepted the order from my RSP and set an appointment date of last Monday, but when nothing happened they said there was a "core network shortfall" and the order couldn't be completed.
Thanks for that, so as suspected is sounds like they are avoiding accurate service classification, presumably for political reasons.
/forum-replies.cfm?t=2512805&p=17#r324
Nice also to see that you are also known as Geo101
I'm not, but If you want to be paranoid and think that, I have no way of stopping you.
Ditto!! Whirlpool can be quite a confusing forum to follow at times, conspiracy theories and politics aplenty.
i cant wait to see fttdp speedtests
i cant wait to see fttdp speedtests
well as all "tesing" is being done at nbn employees premises who already have FTTP connections I hope you are not gong to be holding your breath for unbiased results.
Sure, they should be good, but as they are being conducted in a fully closed environment will we really know if there are any problems.
Remember that the first results form the 11 Node FTTN trial had average speeds of over 60 Mbps.
Telstra when giving evidence under oath in Senate Committee and commecnting on those results, said that they did not expect to see results like that continue in the "real world" roll out due to the distances involved in the CAN
Node FTTN trial had average speeds of over 60 Mbps.
I'm not sure about the other 10 trial areas, but in the initial trial in Umina/Woy Woy, I'd heard that Telstra replaced all the copper lead ins prior to the trial.
I'm not sure about the other 10 trial areas, but in the initial trial in Umina/Woy Woy, I'd heard that Telstra replaced all the copper lead ins prior to the trial.
not quite true
but workers who said they were working for a Labour Hire company employed by NBN were redoing joints in the streets of the 11 trial nodes, this was on Telstra copper and it would appear that nbn had no legal access to those cables and joints, in fact they were using their old access codes from when they did work for Telstra or Telstra contractor, they were out of retirement as the money they were being paod for this work was far above what they would have been paid previously to redo joints/joint enclosures.
All services were run in on the "second pair" so that existing services were maintained, so not sure if new copper was run in or if just locations where a "second path" could be assembled from existing copper was used.
cant wait to see fttdp speedtests
FTTdP on it's own won't boost speeds much above 100mbps, you'd need G.fast for that.
You can see performance using G.fast, with and without vectoring on, but I don't know if nbn are running G.fast trials or just normal copper from the pit to the houses.
FTTdP on it's own won't boost speeds much above 100mbps, you'd need G.fast for that.
You wouldn't bother with VDSL2 on a short FTTdp copper line because you don't need to share spectrum (no need for vectoring) and you have much greater bandwidth available (hundreds of MHz) well above the limitations of VDSL2, so G.fast is the clear natural choice for the copper link standard.
so G.fast is the clear natural choice for the copper link standard.
It will be in the future, but for now VDSL2 on 30+ Profiles can boost to 200mbps+ on the short loops (allegedly, haven't researched lately for actual usage)
nvm
I feel for those who are connected to this copper line! Was given a tip off so thought I'll check it out.
Copper attached to the metal fence
Dexseal Gel Filled Splice Closure
I'm sure it will work very well with the FTTN (in the 2WAG-02 SAM)!
Is the $300 nbn New Development Fee only payable if you're within the area highlighted on this map?
https://www.communicatio
You wouldn't bother with VDSL2 on a short FTTdp copper line
VDSL2 is the beast being employed currently for FTTB, why do you think FTTdp will be any different?
The only thing kept in an "upgrade" of FTTN to FTTP is the transit network and maybe the fibre that went to the nodes.
The transit network is probably off topic, but the aggregation network is most certainly not.
A run of the mill VDSL DSLAM only has real life traffic. For those who are arguing about the difference in cost of initially provisioning a 1x1G link verses the futuristic 2x10G links are in imaginary mode, to say the least.
The reason the NBN DSLAM's are hitting the road running with a single 1G link is because... drum roll.. thats the traffic load in this early stage?
I suspect the NBN have the tools to monitor the situation, they would likely be part of the overall purchase...
Quick question, can the supplied modems for fttn provide the profile (17a, 30a) information of your line? If not, is the information available from the ISP or NBNco?
Hi all, sorry if this has been asked before but is there any issue with having 2 different providers on FTTN? i.e 1 for voice, 1 for data
Hi all, sorry if this has been asked before but is there any issue with having 2 different providers on FTTN? i.e 1 for voice, 1 for data
you can, but it is not like a FTTP connection, you only have one "port" into nbn� network.
You will need a "data" RSP first with a modem configured to give you connection, then you will need a separate ATA or IP phone configured to your VOIP provider and plugged into your modem/router
You will need a "data" RSP first with a modem configured to give you connection, then you will need a separate ATA or IP phone configured to your VOIP provider and plugged into your modem/router
While that would work, unless the RSP modem is properly passing through the DSCP tagging for VoIP then you'll get no benefit of the traffic class 1 bandwidth reserved for VoIP � it'll be thrown in together with the TC-4 for general Internet use. Having the VoIP service from the same provider and on the same modem/router as Internet means they can prioritise the traffic.
Thanks guys, here's a little more info of the situation.
The site currently has ADSL through AAPT and 2 phonelines + fax through Telstra. There is also an EFTPOS machine but we will likely replace it with a 3G/4G EFTPOS machine. We would like to stay with both AAPT for our internet and Telstra for the phonelines.
Is this possible?
We would like to stay with both AAPT for our internet and Telstra for the phonelines.
There is no reason you couldn't have an AAPT NBN FTTN data service on one copper line, and have another copper NBN FTTN service purely for the Telstra Voice NBN service (using a Telstra supplied router with FXS ports).
As to why any sane person would choose to burn their money paying for expensive Telstra voice services is beyond me (NBN gives you the opportunity to finally stop paying the Telstra PSTN voice "tax") and choose a cheaper VoIP provder. But hey it's your money to waste.
As to why any sane person would choose to burn their money paying for expensive Telstra voice services is beyond me
Any mobile plan you buy today comes included with free calls. Why is anyone still considering a landline at all?
Why is anyone still considering a landline at all?
because fixed line services have redundancies that mobile services do not
because fixed line services have redundancies that mobile services do not
Really? If your phone line is down at home... what do you do? Use your mobile.
If your mobile doesn't work, what do you do? Move to somewhere that it does.
Residential customers paying a minimum of $30 a month just to have a landline 'just in case your mobile doesn't work' doesn't sound sensible to me... but maybe that's just me.
Why is anyone still considering a landline at all?
For the entertainment that "The Technical Department of Microsoft" and the like provides ;) This diversion doesn't yet seem to be available on my mobile yet.
Why is anyone still considering a landline at all?
small businesses and shops which either do not have internet, or dont require anything other than a standard phone only service?
at least nbnco appear to be leaving isdn lines as they are.... for now.
As to why any sane person would choose to burn their money paying for expensive Telstra voice services is beyond me (NBN gives you the opportunity to finally stop paying the Telstra PSTN voice "tax") and choose a cheaper VoIP provder. But hey it's your money to waste.
It's a business line, but hey, good job jumping to conclusions.
small businesses and shops which either do not have internet
They still exist?
or dont require anything other than a standard phone only service?
They exist?
Actually there are many, we run a tourist railway in SA and all of our stations require phone and eftpos facilities only, no need for Internet at all, and most voice only nbn services are more expensive compared to a standard voice line.
Any my family's building business while uses a medium amount of data, and phone also requires access to fax services on a duet line, this poses the problem as fax to email service really doesn't cut the mustard. While fttn will offer huge increase to speed over their adsl, really gives problems for the fax service as yet I haven't come up with a workable solution to the fax. It's a pity they didn't use a standard NTD for fttn.
Actually there are many, we run a tourist railway in SA and all of our stations require phone and eftpos facilities only, no need for Internet at all, and most voice only nbn services are more expensive compared to a standard voice line.
Fair enough. That stuff could prob be done over a mobile gateway. I mean the eftpos should be going over gsm/3g by now anyway. Dialup eftpos is a bit old hat?
Heaps and heaps of shops would only have phone and eftpos... Think food shops like bakeries, pizza shops, fish and chip shops, small clothing stores, butchers etc. They will end up paying more for voice only services, and probably don't want to spend extra money buying a modem or interface if they don't need to.
It's a business line, but hey, good job jumping to conclusions.
My comment wasn't aimed at residential lines. I'm exactly in the same boat as you with a business site moving to FTTN NBN later this month. Our voice PSTN lines are already using VoIP over ADSL, only the fax and EFTPOS is using the POTS PSTN part of the ADSL copper line (as Telstra bill you for it whether you use it or not now). Once FTTN is available I'll setup that on another copper line to make migration easier (using an internet data service from a non-Telstra RSP), migrate EFTPOS to a wireless merchant terminal, then connect a Patton 4112 FXS gateway to the fax and use MyNetFone for T.38 compliant fax calls. Voice VoIP calls will continue to use Telecube/MyNetFone and other backup VSP's over the new internet data service. No more need for any useless and expensive POTS PSTN or NBN voice services.
Actually there are many, we run a tourist railway in SA and all of our stations require phone and eftpos facilities only, no need for Internet at all, and most voice only nbn services are more expensive compared to a standard voice line.
You might want to think outside the box. Migrating EFTPOS terminals to wireless versions and several options for phone service exist that would be cheaper. Using mobile phone services directly for voice would be the easiest method (with so many plans to choose from), alternatively if you must have a fixed DID line you can use a VoIP client app on the mobile phone connected to an online PBX to manage the extensions at all the remote stations. Another alternative is to use a 3G/4G wifi internet gateway on a cheap low quota ~$10/month plan and connect a fixed wifi VoIP wall/desk handset for VoIP calls. All these options would be cheaper than paying for a ridiculously expensive NBN voice service which needs the complexity of a new VDSL gateway router with FXS ports in FTTN areas.
Any my family's building business while uses a medium amount of data, and phone also requires access to fax services on a duet line, this poses the problem as fax to email service really doesn't cut the mustard. While fttn will offer huge increase to speed over their adsl, really gives problems for the fax service as yet I haven't come up with a workable solution to the fax.
See what I have written above for what I am doing for fax services. You need a T.38 compliant FoIP provider like MyNetFone and a decent T.38 compliant ATA gateway device. Otherwise the line drops to a voice G.711 stream and suffers jitter problems that will kill the connection before the fax is delivered. Even the "standard" NBN FTTP NTD's as you suggest aren't compliant. They don't work 100% perfectly for EFTPOS and fax as they just use uncompressed G.711 voice codec as VoIP. It is only slightly more reliable because the VoIP RTP streams are prioritsed as TC1 data streams over the NBN but packets can still be dropped or arrive out of order (just less likely than a TC4 general internet NBN service).
Can anyone advise what actually takes place on a FTTN activation callout? I've got a booking for someone to attend the premises on the 27th of May. What exactly is this for?
Is it possible to tweak SNR on FTTN/VDSL2 like it is on ADSL2+?
Is it possible to tweak SNR on FTTN/VDSL2 like it is on ADSL2+?
Yes, only on BYO Modems though. Not recommended however.
I know I can with the Asus DSL-AC68U. But because of my line length being 910m I tend to just pick the Stable Profile. Default and High Performance can also be picked, but tend to lead to more CRC errors and dropped packets.
Can anyone advise what actually takes place on a FTTN activation callout? I've got a booking for someone to attend the premises on the 27th of May. What exactly is this for?
I think it depends who your RSP is. I went with TPG, and the tech came out, plugged his line tester in and headed to the Node to make sure he jumpered the right one..
Others where I am didn't have as much luck..
What exactly is this for?
It appears that it is to ensure that there is at least 'some sort of copper pair' between you and the node.
My story. A young chapped knocked on the door at about 5 minutes past appointment time (it was the 3rd appointment :)) and plugged in a warbler to the 1st phone point, which in my case was the old cream plug and socket arrangement.
I said 'Are you off to jumper the pillar to the node' and he said 'no that is already done'.
20 minutes later he returned and said to me 'It looks like a good pair, it was really loud' and 'that you should get full speed', which was odd as I am at least 500m from the pillar.
He also said, 'it shows the same signal level from each side of the pair to earth, which shows it is good'.
So I said 'Can I connect the modem now' and he said 'Yes'. We chatted a bit although he was keen to go.
Nothing in the check list says that the customers modem should sync. :)
The modem did sync as he was leaving, so it appears he did everything he was supposed to do. :)
Note: I am a SkyMesh FTTN trial customer.
OK so far so good, however the initial speed tests and D-Link DSL-2877AL modem/router status were not overwhelming for a supposedly good pair.
http://s32.postimg.org/91730at2t/screenshot_1241.jpg
Ookla NetGauge Result
http://speedtest.skymesh.com.au/
Thursday, 28 April 2016 17:04+10
Server: Sydney
Down: 29.3 Mbps
Up: 16.8 Mbps
Latency: 8 ms
Details:
- SkyMesh nbn FTTN (Up to 100/40 Mbps)
- Connected via Wi-Fi
- Berkeley Vale CSA
- Berkeley Vale POI
- Flash 21.0.0
- Firefox 46.0
- Windows 7
DSL STATISTICS
Line State up
Modulation ITU G.993.5(G.Vectoring),G.998.4(G.INP)
Annex Mode ANNEX_BDownstream Upstream
SNR Margin 6.0 dB 7.6 dB
Line Attenuation 14.9 dB 2.8 dB
Data Rate 32347 kbps 17692 kbps
ES 0 0
SES 0 0
UAS 133 133
FEC 1679 3
CRC 0 0
Hmmm; I was hoping for 60 -70Mbps?
Well today I sorted it.
It's an old place and had various secondary phone points albeit professionally wired.
I disconnected the secondary points (I'll probably have to go to jail now) and made the point a single primary outlet.
I now have 60-70Mbps.
http://s32.postimg.org/ykjzm
Ookla NetGauge Result
http://speedtest.skymesh.com.au/
Wednesday, 11 May 2016 14:58+10
Server: Sydney
Down: 66.7 Mbps
Up: 26.2 Mbps
Latency: 8 ms
Details:
- SkyMesh nbn FTTN (Up to 100/40 Mbps)
- Berkeley Vale CSA
- Berkeley Vale POI
- Flash 21.0.0
- Firefox 46.0
- Windows 7
DSL
Line Status: Connected
DSL Modulation Type: VDSL2
Annex Type: Annex AUpstream Downstream
Current Rate (Kbps) 27632 72703
Max Rate (Kbps) 27632 73398
SNR Margin (dB) 6.2 6
Line Attenuation (dB) 29.6 14.3
Errors (Pkts) 0 0
Now that's not the full story, as you'll notice that there is a TP-Link TD-W9970 modem router reporting the line stats.
It goes a bit quicker with quicker OOkla speed tests than the D-Link.
I really wanted 60-70Mbps! and no less. ;)
The more pedestrian D-Link DSL-2877AL results:
Ookla NetGauge Result
http://speedtest.skymesh.com.au/
Wednesday, 11 May 2016 15:25+10
Server: Sydney
Down: 57.2 Mbps
Up: 22.2 Mbps
Latency: 7 ms
Details:
- SkyMesh nbn FTTN (Up to 100/40 Mbps)
- Berkeley Vale CSA
- Berkeley Vale POI
- Flash 21.0.0
- Firefox 46.0
- Windows 7
DSL STATISTICS
Line State up
Modulation ITU G.993.5(G.Vectoring),G.998.4(G.INP)
Annex Mode ANNEX_BDownstream Upstream
SNR Margin 0.0 dB 0.0 dB
Line Attenuation 13.8 dB 0.0 dB
Data Rate 62260 kbps 23003 kbps
ES 0 0
SES 0 0
UAS 188 188
FEC 0 0
CRC 0 0
So moral of the story is that daggy home wiring has an enormous effect on VDSL.
So moral of the story is that daggy home wiring has an enormous effect on VDSL.
Probably more than it had on ADSL/ADSL2+. The higher the bandwidth... the more impact errors have over that link.
there's just more damage to be done. when we did a VDSL trial at Telstra some years ago, houses that had been running fine for years with ADSL2+ were basket cases with VDSL. found stuff like sockets wired with speaker wire etc.
Is it possible to tweak SNR on FTTN/VDSL2 like it is on ADSL2+?
yes, but you won't enjoy what happens as a result.
I figured this would be the more apporiate place to post my response instead of in the Actual rollout progress thread.
Up the road from me they have two nodes and two new pillars within 3 metres of each othrr
This isn't my photo but I found it on twitter a couple of weeks back and it appears that they have installed 3 giant pillars right near each other, think It was somewhere in Melbourne https://i.imgur.com/1qJT8mq.jpg
For some reason, my head wants me to call them "the 3 wise Pillars" don't know exactly why through :P
Has anyone seen two nodes next to each other? They removed one cabinet and relocated it approximately 220m down the road and about 6m from another.
another angle https://goo.gl/7ymG0J
is that another Node just across the road? I wonder why they would do such a thing through?
You'd think that they would be placing nodes as further from each other as possible to ensure everyone at least gets a "fair speed". but instead let's just place all these nodes together and hope for the best they say. I sincerely feel sorry for that house owner who will have to put up with the node hums when they are powered on.
May I ask what area you took these in? and to answer your question, yes I have come close to 2 nodes placed near each other but they were on different sides of the road, one was on the left side where the Police station building is next to a RIM, directly across on the main road near the old Dick smiths electronic building is another Node
Sadly not placed together but not far from each other either, I just remembered that I took photos of both of them but not together in 1 pic since that would be a little hard to do.
This isn't my photo but I found it on twitter a couple of weeks back and it appears that they have installed 3 giant pillars right near each other, think It was somewhere in Melbourne
https://i.imgur.com/1qJT8mq.jpg
That would "Melbourne" Perth, the corner of Scarborough Beach Rd and King Edward St in Osborne Park.
For some reason, my head wants me to call them "the 3 wise Pillars" don't know exactly why through :P
Or unwise?
is that another Node just across the road? I wonder why they would do such a thing through?
Depends on the DA. The reason you may have two nodes next to each other is due to size requirements. I believe max per node is 384 pairs.
is that another Node just across the road? I wonder why they would do such a thing through?
No, AusPost mail storeage box for the posties that is on the same side of the street.
May I ask what area you took these in?
In the Wagga suburb of Estella, in the DA ETLA:1 which only has 140 premises. ETLA:3 is the largest with 272, with further developments to be connected in the future.
That would "Melbourne" Perth, the corner of Scarborough Beach Rd and King Edward St in Osborne Park.
Yes it does look like "Ossy Park". I was in Guthrie St yesterday, nodes everywhere!
Depends on the DA. The reason you may have two nodes next to each other is due to size requirements. I believe max per node is 384 pairs.
and yet I know of an ADA that is listed as having 428 premises and only 1 node
http://www.finder.com.au/nbn-tracker/ada/2WOY-09-05
work that one out
Might be a micronode somewhere too...?
nope, this is in a full suburban streetscape.
There is a large "hotel/resort/apartment complex, but it should either be listed as a high value FTTB build and thus not included in the Node premises or it shoull have its own streetside node, again, none exists either physically or according toe the roll out data
according the the data about the copper DAs, the location of the complex is listed as being in WOYY:36 and this is listed as having 553 premises
it should either be listed as a high value FTTB build and thus not included in the Node premises
Why? Is fttb not "copper"? Why does it matter anyway... it says there the number of copper premises. Which is correct isn't it?
Why? Is fttb not "copper"? Why does it matter anyway... it says there the number of copper premises. Which is correct isn't it?
but a node cannot service more than 384, so how is it going to service over 400 or 500 hundred premises?
so if the "complex" is in its own FTTB build the premises should not be getting counted in the normal FTTN node
but a node cannot service more than 384
Some nodes are doubled up with 768 ports in larger cabinets.
Some nodes are doubled up with 768 ports in larger cabinets.
they will be extremely rare (if they are used at all) as the lines lengths for that service area will be far too long to provide 25mbs minimum.
With all the talk of "ripping up everyone's driveways", how many people had their driveways ripped up for FTTP?
I'm serious here, I would like a decent answer. I know some cases involved installing new conduits, but I don't think that could be more than 5% of premises, and only a minute fraction of these cases would have involved removing an existing structure (garden, driveway etc). Morrow is working so hard to justify the MTM plan he has to make such blatantly BS statements and then provide no evidence of anything.
Note: This is part of the reasoning for the "superiority" of FTTN over FTTP, so I think it belongs here.
they will be extremely rare (if they are used at all) as the lines lengths for that service area will be far too long to provide 25mbs minimum.
Not in high density areas where they are used.
I'm serious here, I would like a decent answer. I know some cases involved installing new conduits, but I don't think that could be more than 5% of premises, and only a minute fraction of these cases would have involved removing an existing structure (garden, driveway etc). Morrow is working so hard to justify the MTM plan he has to make such blatantly BS statements and then provide no evidence of anything.
I haven't been involved in the NBN rollout but my area is fibre NBN but approximately 52% of the service area module that surrounds my house (I'm greenfields so not in the same SAM but I drive through older brownfields to get to my house) and overall for all service area 59% is SC3. There were also some older stats but I don't know how relevant they are for now, but...
For the statistics, last stats I saw were about 2 years ago and it was 1-in-10 leadins were not fit for purpose, however just because it is not fit for purpose doesn't mean digging everything up. Horizontal boring machines are used in most cases that I've seen which does not involve digging up the garden, or driveway to do.
When it comes to my local area, I've not seen any house with a displaced driveway or garden because of the NBN. While the rollout was in progress the FDH's had new pipes run for them, and nature strips were not dug up except for where the FDH landed, and that was for its platform. In fact I've seen far more destructive installs done for the FTTN nodes outside of the property line. I've seen probably about 30 or 40 premises near mine that have had lead-in renewal, there were probably more but I didn't actually see them being done and would never know because of lack of displacement.
With all the talk of "ripping up everyone's driveways", how many people had their driveways ripped up for FTTP?
That's not to say it doesn't happen. There will be cases where the composition of the soil does not lend itself to horizontal boring techniques and does require to be dug up, but these are the exception not the rule, and of course the cases that the media, and Morrow jump on to fear monger.
In fact I've seen far more destructive installs done for the FTTN nodes outside of the property line.
Same here. They have been rolling out FTTN in our area for the past 2 months and they have had to excavate to gain access to the underground power (10 year old estate, everything underground). They made a hell of a mess installing two of the nodes near my place. The entire footpath & surrounding nature strips were dug up & had to be replaced once they finished. This would never have happened with a FTTP rollout as there wouldn't have been any nodes requiring access to the underground power.
Some nodes are doubled up with 768 ports in larger cabinets.
just out of curiousoty, can you please show one of these cabinets.
nbn� had 2 cabinet sizes a 192 and a 384.
They have now standardized on the 384 cabinet size and just vary the electronics and copper termination strips
Not sure there would be enough room to terminate 1500 copper pairs in the copper section of the "standard" cabinet.
Remember that nbn� are bringing in an exchange pair to permit voice pass through as well as the outgong VDSL pair
Also not sure if there is enough room for cards to supply 768 copper connections, I think they used all slots for the 384 connections
Not in high density areas where they are used.
They would have to be incredibly high density indeed!
Some nodes are doubled up with 768 ports in larger cabinets.
such a device does not exist. the only way to get more than 384 ports is to install two cabinets, and even then they would be entirely standalone devices, feeding different copper sheaths. to do otherwise would interfere with vectoring.
just out of curiousoty, can you please show one of these cabinets.
with a unicorn standing next to it.
nbn� had 2 cabinet sizes a 192 and a 384.
They have now standardized on the 384 cabinet size and just vary the electronics and copper termination strips
and a few other things, but yes the cabinet shell itself is standarised.
Can anyone advise what actually takes place on a FTTN activation callout? I've got a booking for someone to attend the premises on the 27th of May. What exactly is this for?
I wrote about our experience yesterday here:
Basically, to have our splitter / filter removed, and to tell us to call our RSP for Activation � all this was done at our premises. At the pillar some 300m away, he probably jumpered some copper cables leading to our premises.
Another FTTN graph update, with ~30 more samples when compared to the last ones.
with ~30 more samples
Good stuff.
Q1. What are the total number of samples? Pretty gob-smacked that there is soooo much data. :)
Q2. Is this data simply the 'modem status data' and 'estimated node distance', as posted on WP?
I guess the key thing that it demonstrates (for me) is that:
a). there are an awful lot of bad pairs and/or
b). there are an awful lot of VDSL installations to premises with multiple extensions.
Q3. Might it it be better to maintain the two graphs using the same x, y maximums?
Q4. Would it be possible to overlay a line graph of anticipated VDLS performance vs distance ie not a trend line, but a known best estimate of VDSL performance vs distance. This might assist identifying outliers?
Oh and that MTM is a... crock?
Oh and that MTM is a... crock?
Settle down there. Remember that all those sites are in the initial 18 month co-existence period to prevent interference to adjacent ADSL and other exchange based services so vectoring is NOT turned on yet. Once vectoring is turned on the results will dramatically improve.
And I suspect that are (at least for some) initial figures that might be substantially improved by altering home wiring (disconnecting excess bridge tap points, removing old ADSL filters./splitters, disconnecting mode3 alarms etc)
At the moment beyond about 300m it's a lottery
At the moment beyond about 300m it's a lottery
For me below 300m is a lottery. I am around 250m away from the node and you would think i would get close to 90 Mbps .. but nowhere near that. The max attainable is only 64 Mbps. Uploads are great at 35 Mbps.
Telstra gateway max TG799vac
DSL Type VDSL2
DSL Mode Fast
Maximum Line rate 35.21 Mbps 64.19 Mbps
Line Rate 35.21 Mbps 64.14 Mbps
Data Transferred 131.37 MBytes 2173.92 MBytes
Output Power 13.3 dBm 7.6 dBm
Line Attenuation 5.9, 32.9, 39.6,N/A,N/A dB 15.7, 35.7, 53.0 dB
Noise Margin 6.8 dB 6.4 dB
Trying to find out actual cable distance to node from Telstra is impossible. They don't understand. So pretty much i have given up and just will settle with this. The speeds are a lot better than our 12 Mbps ADSL speeds.
Settle down there.
:)
And I suspect that there are (at least for some) initial figures that might be substantially improved by altering home wiring (disconnecting excess bridge tap points, removing old ADSL filters./splitters, disconnecting mode3 alarms etc)
This is also my very strong suspicion.
I had dramatic results (speed doubled) upon removal of two vacant extensions). see /forum-replies.cfm?t=2479910&p=66#r1302
Using a D-Link modem reported speeds increased from 32347 kbps to 62260 kbps.
Using a TP-Link modem it went from 39854 kbps to 72703 kbps.
It appears that there are a number of variables that impact on the results
At the moment beyond about 300m it's a lottery
Yes, that does show up on the plots quite clearly.
Just thinking out aloud, a plot of modem reported line attenuation (dB) vs modem rate (kbps) should identify the outliers, on the basis that (in theory at least) it is the line length/loss that dictates performance.
This might point to the number of premises with suspect 'untidy' internal wiring?
I wonder if this data is recorded by denmark555?
Another FTTN graph update, with ~30 more samples when compared to the last ones.
Based on the graph and some more data, i can probably hope for approx 40 down and 20 up. And i hope im less than 800m.
This is also my very strong suspicion.
it's been well known from the very first testing that optimising in-home wiring can have substantial benefits to VDSL2 performance. the higher frequency range in use means the impact of minor imperfections is considerably greater than for older forms of DSL.
it's been well known from the very first testing that optimising in-home wiring can have substantial benefits to VDSL2 performance. the higher frequency range in use means the impact of minor imperfections is considerably greater than for older forms of DSL.
something that wouldn't be a problem on FTTP since its not impaired by such issues.
but fttn/vdsl is perfect because you say so....
it's been well known from the very first testing that optimising in-home wiring can have substantial benefits to VDSL2 performance. the higher frequency range in use means the impact of minor imperfections is considerably greater than for older forms of DSL.
Im glad to hear you say that, although i do think you didnt agree with me when i highlighted this risk a couple of years ago. :)
It is a pity we have gone down this path, it would have been better to ask for a co-contribution for FTTP install than cost shifting ntd (modem) and in premises remediation onto end users.
something that wouldn't be a problem on FTTP since its not impaired by such issues.
that's a bit like saying that a Ferrari doesn't need tuning like a Ford. not really a valid point of comparison.
but fttn/vdsl is perfect because you say so....
FTTN is far from perfect. nobody claimed it was. it's a reasonable compromise solution.
the arguments around FTTN largely arise because the absolutists who don't understand the concept of "reasonable" have no ability to see the wider picture beyond their narrow little end-user view of the world.
Im glad to hear you say that, although i do think you didnt agree with me when i highlighted this risk a couple of years ago. :)
I don't recall the comment, although I am sure some nothing-but-fibre zealot will now spend a bunch of time unearthing something to quote out of context.
a lot comes down to what you define as "acceptable". the government made that determination, because we elect it to make decisions on our behalf. that might not suit a small minority of extremists, but that's OK � the noise they make is considerably disproportionate to their actual representation. they'll make the same noise about that too, but that's the name of the game when dealing with zealots.
the bottom line with FTTN is quick installs, no internal rewiring, use what's there. does that optimise performance? nope, nobody (including me) ever said it did. does it provide adequate performance for the vast majority of users? yes, absolutely.
and there's nothing limiting people who want to optimise their experience from getting a cabler in to do so, so their arguments devolve down to "I'm not getting it free", which is another way of saying that everyone else isn't paying for it for them.
speaking as a member of "everyone else", that doesn't lose me any sleep.
It is a pity we have gone down this path, it would have been better to ask for a co-contribution for FTTP install than cost shifting ntd (modem) and in premises remediation onto end users.
perhaps. I don't discount the suggestion, but let's look at the mechanics in brief.
FTTP install is already available via technology change. the arguments around that come down to the costs, not availability. people would like it to be cheaper, but the reality is that telco grade infrastructure is very expensive, far beyond what most people think. far, far beyond. tens of thousands of dollars counts as a simple job. I'd invite anyone that thinks they should get that for free (read: someone else pays for it for them) to go and ask their neighbours if they would be willing to subside their costs for them, because they think they are entitled to it.
that's what the argument comes down to, period.
the leadin and NTD install is a cost, but it's about $300 or so. if you look at the published costs of a technology change, that's not a factor. I'm not even sure NBN charge that part of it.
as for in-premises remediation, that's a valid point of argument. not everyone wants it, but it would be nice to be available for people that do. some considerations for thought though:
- what's covered? rewire of the house? cutaway of everything past first socket? what about backwire of other sockets to modem location for VoIP POTS emulation?
- what guarantees are there? what if the tech attends, isolates the premise internals, and finds the service performance doesn't improve? the job is billable, but nobody is happy.
I personally think that NBN should introduce a beyond-SLA, no-guarantees, best-effort, service optimisation capability, so that end users have an established channel to explore the option if they so wish.
the problem is that best-effort and no-guarantee limitations make it difficult to offer such a capability commercially, because every time that it's not possible, the antis will be out in force claiming that the company didn't care, just ripped someone off, or some such rubbish.
as such, I cannot fault them for steering well clear of the subject until they can determine that they are covered by the same realistic expectations and guarantees as the self-appointed social justice warriors of the anti camp empower themselves with.
I don't recall the comment, although I am sure some nothing-but-fibre zealot will now spend a bunch of time unearthing something to quote out of context.
You are a little easy throwing labels around, i am not a fibre zealot.
I am evidencnce driven, not idealohically driven.
I call to your attention the Time Value of Money (TVM) calculation in the Startegic Review.
I think they have underestimated their build times, cost of build and revenues.
I think time will show the people you are currently calling zealots will be proven to be prescient.
And the politicians of the day will say "how could we have known?".
FTTN is far from perfect. nobody claimed it was. it's a reasonable compromise solution.
Only if the reasons stand up to scrutiny by not just hand-picked people working under non-disclosure agreements.
the bottom line with FTTN is quick installs, no internal rewiring,
but you also stated:
it's been well known from the very first testing that optimising in-home wiring can have substantial benefits to VDSL2 performance.
Any central filters on ADSL set-ups would need to be removed for VDSL2.
And any additional sockets could also need to be disconnected, at the cost of the consumer.
that's a bit like saying that a Ferrari doesn't need tuning like a Ford. not really a valid point of comparison.
Que?
FTTN is far from perfect. nobody claimed it was. it's a reasonable compromise solution.
No it's not ... the cost is obscene!
the arguments around FTTN largely arise because the absolutists who don't understand the concept of "reasonable" have no ability to see the wider picture beyond their narrow little end-user view of the world.
Your concept of reasonable is as wacky as this statement is disengenous.
the bottom line with FTTN is quick installs
Rubbish ... It's proving to be no quicker than FTTP and a whole lot more messy.
Can't be bothered trying to dissect any more of this pap!
it's a reasonable compromise solution.
The assumption you make is that a compromise is reasonable when we are talking about infrastructure that is meant to last decades not a few scant years.
the arguments around FTTN largely arise because the absolutists who don't understand the concept of "reasonable" have no ability to see the wider picture beyond their narrow little end-user view of the world.
Given your comments on this forum I don't think you are in a position to be lecturing anyone on narrow world views. FTTH is the end game, if you believe our speed requirements wont grow beyond what FTTN is capable of then you don't understand the concept of "reasonable" or "value for money"
the government made that determination, because we elect it to make decisions on our behalf.
Correct. I remember we elected a government to make the decision to rollout FTTH to 90% of Australia. A decision blatantly disregarded by the current government for political reasons.
but that's the name of the game when dealing with zealots.
I know, right? Copper zealots are the absolute worst. They have bad habit of denying basic facts and are allergic to logic.
Many people have many complaints about the NBN's current ideology, and I'm not talking about FTTN vs FTTP.
The issue of modems having to be certified, awkward node placement, denying people (who currently have ADSL) FTTN connections, no simple POTS-equivalent for old folks or other "phone only" customers and so on.
I think NBN Co's FTTN-based products are of terrible quality and not well thought out at all (relative to what a FTTN-based product COULD be at best), I'm not sure what everyone else thinks.
The issue of modems having to be certified
Anything with g.vector and g.inp works.
denying people (who currently have ADSL) FTTN connections
What?
It's like the switch from Analogue to Digital TV, and now from MPEG2 to MPEG4 � its a staged transition of similar technology, not at all optimal over that period but done so people don't get left behind.
FTTP is more like the HFC rollout of the late 90s, totally different, expensive and not conflicting
Personally I think for FTTN the NBN would be better not bothering with the 18-mth pass thru. Very few ISPs are offering it and it's expensive. Better to bite the bullet, setup the node then in a day or two cut over up to 180/360 households over.
Not quite sure what you mean by POTS equivalent but for most users with properly setup ATAs or FXS ports there is no difference, even for fax or alarm connections.
The main difference is battery backup.. Rather than a massive exchange building with lots and lots of lead acid batteries (and if you've ever seen an exchange it's a lot) you have a small (although many think still to large) FTTN node and an optional battery at the customer end
Anything with g.vector and g.inp works.
Although there isn't a public official list from NBNCo or ACMA of certified modems for use on FTTN.
exchange based services so vectoring is NOT turned on yet. Once vectoring is turned on the results will dramatically improve.
Vectoring is turned on, the only thing that is in play is downstream power back off or DPBO.
It's like the switch from Analogue to Digital TV, and now from MPEG2 to MPEG4 � its a staged transition of similar technology, not at all optimal over that period but done so people don't get left behind.
...which also worked for mobile phones going from AMPS to GSM and CDMA to the current 3G / 4G � those who bought the older handsets before the cut-off date was announced still had a reasonable amount of use of their devices before the switch-off occurred and an overlap period where both the old and new devices worked.
Personally I think for FTTN the NBN would be better not bothering with the 18-mth pass thru. Very few ISPs are offering it and it's expensive.
It's just a passive splitter in the node and jumpering in the pillars, but it enables a staged cut-over.
and an optional battery at the customer end
only if you are a "priority support" customer. If you aren't, you are on your own to find something that will work in a power failure, especially if you do not have reliable mobile phone coverage.
It's just a passive splitter in the node and jumpering in the pillars,
I believe that in the 192 sized node it is an active card for the pots pass though, not passive filters/combiners
In the 384 connection node there was not room for the active cards as those slots are needed for the extra VDSL lines so they are using the passive filters/combiners in the copper section
Although there isn't a public official list from NBNCo or ACMA of certified modems for use on FTTN.
Who said such a list is necessary for service to work? Who cares...
Show me a case where a modem has not worked, but it supports all necessary protocols.
I believe that in the 192 sized node it is an active card for the pots pass though, not passive filters/combiners
Does this mean that during the 18 month transition, if a customer has VDSL and POTS on the one line, the POTS service will fail if the power and battery backup in the FTTN node fails?
Who said its necessary?
Exactly. 99% will use the RSP supplied equipment. The rest can find a Wiki on Whirlpool
Who said such a list is necessary for service to work? Who cares...
If it is Customer Premises Equipment that the customer pays for and is responsible for, there should be a competitive market that is not tied / locked in to which internet provider one uses, particularly for features like bridge mode or having modem and routing in the one package that meets the customer's requirements (e.g. VPN, NAT table size, VOIP features).
The rest can find a Wiki on Whirlpool
It is still beneficial to have a complete, official list of certified products.
Anything with g.vector and g.inp works.
show me a case where a modem has not worked, but it supports all necessary protocols.
Maybe not quite the same, but do two 100% nbn certified modems that have a considerably different performance count?
That's the cheap D-Link vs the even cheaper TP-Link.
My experience (and that of others) is that the D-link is slower by 15-20%, once line length gets beyond around the 300m point.
It is a crap shoot 'out there'.
It is a crap shoot 'out there'.
Who cares? Why does this stuff actually matter? You're pedanting over bullshit.
Who cares?
People on long copper lengths who need all the bandwidth they can get?
Why does this stuff actually matter?
See above, the world doesn't start and end with your perspective.
You're pedanting over bullshit.
Or, paying attention to details, depends on your perspective.
Show me a case where a modem has not worked, but it supports all necessary protocols.
Cisco 867VAE, I know that model number off the top of my head because I investigated whether the hardware I own would work, and despite supporting G.vector and G.inp in no cases reported has it worked, including a user on these forums who has access to the VDSL test lab.
There was also a couple of older D-Link routers that support VDSL that did not support it and only on 1 specific firmware that they do not shutdown the port, and from memory its somewhere in the middle, not the newest and not the oldest.
Who said such a list is necessary for service to work?
NBN Co, if you have a modem that works, but is not on the approved list, and not running the firmware that is certified they will not investigate any potential line faults.
Exactly. 99% will use the RSP supplied equipment
In my experience working in I.T yes, most will use the supplied equipment, but it isn't 99% its closer to 85% and the remaining 15% are not necessarily whirlpool users, there are a couple in there that just want the latest and greatest and will walk into JBHiFi and buy the $300 modem because it must be better. They walk in with no technical knowledge of whats required, then say "oh $x modem is crap because it doesn't work" when its not necessarily the modem being bad, its just that it doesn't support their connection. You can't assume that if they are buying their own that whirlpool is a sufficient resource.
Who cares? Why does this stuff actually matter?
People do care, just because you don't doesn't mean others don't. For instance in my case, the cisco 867VAE is available through my RSP iiNet, however it does not work for FTTN. If I had an FTTN connection, and plugged it in, it would shutdown the VDSL port, which I have to ring up to get unblocked. This is why it matters. It doesn't automatically unblock, once the trigger has occurred you have to spend however long it takes on the phone to get to talk to someone, so that they can reset the port.
Now there is another alternative, they don't have to publish the list, I think its stupid they don't, but they could relax their restrictions around allowing fault condition assessments, and just refuse to sync modems that don't quite support the features required rather than blocking the port. This would probably be the ideal solution, but if they are going to persist with both of those policies, the list needs to be released, and it is public interest as long as either of these policies are in play.
Personally I think for FTTN the NBN would be better not bothering with the 18-mth pass thru. Very few ISPs are offering it and it's expensive. Better to bite the bullet, setup the node then in a day or two cut over up to 180/360 households over.
Good luck getting 180/360 households/businesses to all agree in advance to selecting an NBN RSP and having someone available at those premises for a technician to test the line and remove any ADSL filters etc. You'd have better luck at winning Tattslotto than hoping what you suggest would be possible without huge problems.
It's a simple fact that if you're going to re-use existing important infrastructure you need a lengthy transition period for a multitude of reasons.
Is that a VDSL2 modem supporting g.vector and g.inp?
Did I not say:
and despite supporting G.vector and G.inp
Is that a VDSL2 modem supporting g.vector and g.inp?
With the more recent v38 or v39 firmware it supports both. You need to specifically install updated firmware and point the VDSL controller to the updated firmware in the router flash for it to be used. The default embedded firmware v35 etc does not support it.
So if a user plugged in any of the Cisco VDSL2 capable modems without correctly updating and configuring it (even new routers bought now) the modem would try to sync but the NBN port would shut it down for lack of vector/inp support. So it's a tricky situation for RSP's to support a device that out of the box doesn't work and either needs a competent person to update and program it before it will work. There is therefore significant potential for support problems unless the RSP actively supports (and ideally supplies a pre-programmed router) the device.
I've just experienced a painful process of trying to get updated firmware for my Cisco VDSL2 cards and gave up by choosing to get it from unofficial sources. The clowns at Cisco only allow access to the VDSL firmware if you have a Cisco 800 product series contract (because they have only listed it in the 800 series software section). However if you have a 1900/2900/3900 series etc router contract (that uses a removable VDSL card) you're locked out of the firmware. It's easy to understand why so many people hate Cisco.
Did I not say:
Sorry, I only half read this stuff. It gets monotonous.
My point is, this stuff does not matter. If you're a user buying Cisco stuff, then Im sure you can deal with a blocked port inconvenience and update a firmware. You know what you're doing.
The 9x% of the rest of the population, the vdsl2 modem situation is a non issue. Its early days, the market will mature, devices will only sell that support FTTN NBN properly, and be shipped with appropriate firmwares. It's a lot of hot air to be whinging about it as though it's something that will matter for any appreciable amount of time.
The list is obviously there as a guideline for RSPs. Like I said, the BYO market will mature and there will be minimal cases where something on the market will not work. And if you're a user that has imported something or some exotic brand or whatever, then good luck to you � NBN doesn't have to supply you a damn list. The sorts of users that would run into compatibility problems, wouldn't be buying of that bloody list anyway � it's probably a list of consumer grade crap.
Vectoring is turned on, the only thing that is in play is downstream power back off or DPBO.
Without DPBO it's vectoring by name only. The ISAM can't effectively control the spectrum unless it has full control.
Do you know if there is a difference between what is enabled at the trial sites and what is now being enabled (or not) at the new live retail FTTN sites?
Without DPBO it's vectoring by name only. The ISAM can't effectively control the spectrum unless it has full control.
Do you even know what DPBO is? its just reducing the output power, its only selective. For the majority of the spectrum everything is running exactly the same as it will be once DPBO is turned off. There is a small section of spectrum that absolutely is impacted, but that is only 2MHz of spectrum and you aren't going to see more than a couple of Mbps from the ADSL crosstalk being removed from the line. The bigger gain will be that the 2MHz will no longer have its power backed off so it will travel further before it attenuates out. I'm calling it now, the biggest improvement will be for those furthest from the node who are not currently getting 25/5, as you get closer it will follow the rule of diminishing returns as they will rely less on that 2MHz and that 2MHz will be nowhere near as attenuated.
Do you know if there is a difference between what is enabled at the trial sites and what is now being enabled (or not) at the new live retail FTTN sites?
Unfortunately I do not.
Sorry, I only half read this stuff. It gets monotonous.
That would be fine, except you are attacking people without reading everything. This is a problem.
My point is, this stuff does not matter.
Oh my god, seriously read the rest of my post it absolutely does matter, even at 10% of the premises that is over 1 million users that are potentially effected.
If you're a user buying Cisco stuff, then Im sure you can deal with a blocked port inconvenience and update a firmware.
If you are buying cisco hardware the inconvenience of a blocked port is greater as these are typically businesses. Downtime is downtime, and that has a cost, either someone has to sit on the phone until its resolved, costing a wage while not being productive and depending on the case can actually be costing the business money. I worked at a place where if we had no internet for an hour we wouldn't be able to do business as my boss thought it would be a good idea to remotely host our invoicing software, which conveniently also triggered the til opening mechanism, and sent the transaction amount to the eftpos machine.
With the more recent v38 or v39 firmware it supports both
35d also supports G.inp and G.vector, but for whatever reason it doesn't work with NBN FTTN. Its an interesting case, because the only real improvements are they added G.vector annex y, and fixed a G.inp bug that was only for profile 30a. The latter should have had no effect as NBN use profile 17a, but it would be interesting if friendly vectoring is actually a requirement. It would certainly go a long way into solving why some modems don't work despite supporting the advertised features.
Although there isn't a public official list from NBNCo or ACMA of certified modems for use on FTTN.
but if they are going to persist with both of those policies, the list needs to be released, and it is public interest as long as either of these policies are in play.
Unfortunately this does not look like it is going to be the case as my review by the OIC seems like it will be unsuccessful.
But there are other alternatives.
The other thing NBNco could do is release a single business grade device that works in bridged mode and is rack mountable.
Do you even know what DPBO is? its just reducing the output power, its only selective. For the majority of the spectrum everything is running exactly the same as it will be once DPBO is turned off.
Not controlling the power output means more noise on adjacent lines through crosstalk. Also ADSL devices don't care about the higher order harmonics etc of their transmissions but it has a huge impact on VDSL devices sharing the same copper bundle.
I'm calling it now, the biggest improvement will be for those furthest from the node who are not currently getting 25/5
The biggest improvement won't be those furthest from the node, it will be where the difference is in distance between the node and the exchange for legacy services running in the same bundle. Where the node is a long way from the exchange (several km's) you have to deal with the very low power exchange based ADSL signals being drowned out by the strong nearby VDSL crosstalk signals from the node. Those customers will have ADSL badly impacted over that 18 month period with reduced sync speeds, and NBN VDSL services will be awful for as long as the node is restricted in potential. It's lose/lose for those customers regardless of when they migrate to the NBN for the full 18 months.
35d also supports G.inp and G.vector, but for whatever reason it doesn't work with NBN FTTN.
If you see how much customisation Cisco has done with vendor specific support it may just be that those features weren't enabled specifically for Alcatel 7330/7302 ISAM's. Either way, 35d is prehistoric (circa ~2011?) firmware that shouldn't be used (unless you're only using the device for ADSL). Update and the problems go away.
Unfortunately this does not look like it is going to be the case as my review by the OIC seems like it will be unsuccessful.
NBN don't care and they conveniently don't have to because they are a wholesaler and don't have to deal with retail end customers. It's the poor RSP's that have to deal with end user support so it's up to them to certify and approve what will work their services.
But there are other alternatives.
Yes, I agree, choose a small agile RSP that will respond to the niche market of users that want to use devices other than bland consumer grade rubbish. That is what I'll be doing instead of continuing services with Telstra that refuse to support anything other than their own gateway device.
Frankly I think it's a positive that NBN doesn't provide a list because it opens up opportunity for smaller agile RSP's to work with customers that want to use some awful telco supplied device as a gateway. Any business that the arrogant tier 1 incumbent telco's lose is a good thing for consumers IMO. Lazy arrogant telco's can go out of business.
The other thing NBNco could do is release a single business grade device that works in bridged mode and is rack mountable.
Like we need more power hungry expensive shite to fill up our rack space?
Not controlling the power output means more noise on adjacent lines through crosstalk
Which only means more work for the SLV processor, not that the SLV processor does a better job.
Also ADSL devices don't care about the higher order harmonics etc of their transmissions but it has a huge impact on VDSL devices sharing the same copper bundle.
Yes, it has a huge impact, but only on a small subsection of the total band. The white papers and research papers into spectrally shaped DBPO vs full output power shows the impact on VDSL2 is minimal, at no more than a 15% penalty to sync. The coexistence period ending is not going to be some silver bullet, it will be a minor increase in sync, and will have the best benefit from those furthest away where the shaped signal has attenuated out.
If you see how much customisation Cisco has done with vendor specific support it may just be that those features weren't enabled specifically for Alcatel 7330/7302 ISAM's
This is entirely possible, I know the Cisco firmwares are edge case hell with a load of if vendor then else crap throughout.
Either way, 35d is prehistoric (circa ~2011?) firmware that shouldn't be used
Which is fine to say, but not everyone can update the firmware easily. The problem with the ISRs is that unlike the 1x00 series devices which have the VDSL processor as a hardware expansion card, the SoC that powers the device also includes the xDSL modem, and cisco in their infinite wisdom (probably to sell more support contracts) don't allow the modem firmware to be updated independently from the IOS version. With my 867VAE-W I had v38 and tried to update it to v39 with the firmware binary they have on their support site and it wouldn't, in the end I had to take up a support contract if I wanted v39, but as I wasn't using the modem I didn't bother until some annoying bugs in IOS forced me to update anyway.
NBN don't care and they conveniently don't have to because they are a wholesaler and don't have to deal with retail end customers.
If thats what they want to claim, then thats what they should claim. It is not the angle they are taking though. They argued that the list of approved modems is commercial-in-confidence because it would harm their business negotiations.
Frankly I think it's a positive that NBN doesn't provide a list because it opens up opportunity for smaller agile RSP's
And frankly I think its a negative. You as a consumer, buy your own modem, it works with the VDSL service just fine, all is fine right? wrong. Say in 6-12 months your line develops a fault, screwing around with your RSPs process to get the fault lodged, NBN send it back saying "Customer is not using an approved modem", as an end user your only solution is to then either enter a contract or extend your contract to get one for free that they supply, or to buy one that is approved from them. Because you don't actually know whats approved you are limited to who you can buy from, because even buying the same modem that your RSP supplies from a third party is no guarantee because the certification also includes firmware versions. That is bad for consumers.
hi, sorry if this is an obvious question or has been answered many times but is there a way for me to see how much speed that is technically possible for me to get on FTTN before I actually commit to a 100/40 plan or whatever, so I don't waste my money? thanks
Estimate your premise to the node via google maps or if it's close enough, simply walk. Using that information there is a chart on the forums (can't find it on mobile atm) you can use to get an estimate of speeds. Then you'll have to factor in other possibilities such as, internal house wiring, copper loop length, possibility that the closes node isn't yours etc etc.
they will not investigate any potential line faults.
Or more precisely ... any customer 'low speed' complaints.
there is a chart on the forums (can't find it on mobile atm)
Could you post the link when you get home
If thats what they want to claim, then thats what they should claim. It is not the angle they are taking though. They argued that the list of approved modems is commercial-in-confidence because it would harm their business negotiations.
They've been hiding behind the ruse of CiC as a catch all excuse that can't be invalidated. All consumers can do is at least choose an RSP that is willing to push our cause to get what we want.
Because you don't actually know whats approved you are limited to who you can buy from
Proactive RSP's will tell you what they have approved and what they are planning to test. I'm going with Aussie Broadband because they are happy to talk with customers about what equipment should be tested for their service. In my case the Cisco card I want to use will be tested by them in a couple months and I will use whatever firmware they approve. That would never happen with Telstra or Optus etc so they are going to lose my business.
If customers choose to go with a lazy RSP and expect to use any modem then they will pay the price ultimately. It will serve as a harsh lesson and push customers to better RSP's.
post the link
Google vdsl distance vs speed, there are 100's of them. But the most appropriate one is here.
My point is, this stuff does not matter. If you're a user buying Cisco stuff, then Im sure you can deal with a blocked port inconvenience and update a firmware. You know what you're doing.
Do I?
I have a Cisco 887VA, supplied to me by the company that I work for. When I get FTTN (would prefer FTTP) and I do the minor config changes for user/pass, etc, I will have to wait however long to get the router firmware updated by our IT person, about the most I know how to do on it is clear NAT, reboot it, check the controller, and add entries to the NAT.
I do software development, not Cisco stuff.
I have a Cisco 887VA, supplied to me by the company that I work for.
Then ask them to fix your issues?
I will have to wait however long to get the router firmware updated by our IT person
and this is NBN's problem, how?
Perspective people. Mountains out of mole hills.
and this is NBN's problem, how?
Its not, its a problem caused by NBN Cos handling of things.
Perspective people. Mountains out of mole hills.
No, you just don't seem to understand why people are unhappy that NBN Co don't want us to know what the hell we can use with their network.
If customers choose to go with a lazy RSP and expect to use any modem then they will pay the price ultimately. It will serve as a harsh lesson and push customers to better RSP's.
+1
Shop wisely.
Re: graphs....
Q1. What are the total number of samples?
Attainable � 90
Line Rate � 78
Q2. Is this data simply the 'modem status data' and 'estimated node distance', as posted on WP?
Yes, collected from at least a dozen threads here. It's a "best effort" on my part, so there may be the odd boo-boo (kind of appropriate, given the subject). I've used modem stats where possible (~90%). The main issue is the distance being an unreliable variable. A lot of people do know their distance quite accurately, from tech information/SQ or informed estimates, but many are a guess.
Q3. Might it it be better to maintain the two graphs using the same x, y maximums?
I almost didn't include those new long distance values, to keep it consistent, but figured they would be of interest. Kind of blew out the scale from the previous graphs. I've cropped the Attainable graph back to 1000m here and bumped up the Line Rate graph to show up to 160Mbps here so they match scales.
Note that there may not be corresponding samples in each graph. E.g. TPG modems do not show the Attainable rate, so none of them appear in that graph, but some do appear in the Line Rate graph. The Line Rate graph was really just to show what actual speeds modems were receiving from NBN. I chose to sample the top rate only, as many lower plans were only showing the capped speeds at most distances. Incidentally these are:
107.735 / 44.199 Mbps � 100/40 plan
54.99 / 22.6 Mbps � 50/20 plan
28 / 11.8 Mbps � 25/10 plan
28 / 6.4 Mbps � 25/5 plan
13.82 / 2.059 Mbps � 12/1 plan
Q4. Would it be possible to overlay a line graph of anticipated VDLS performance vs distance ie not a trend line, but a known best estimate of VDSL performance vs distance. This might assist identifying outliers?
Without knowing the exact implementation NBN are using, its not so straight forward. Someone with more knowledge than I might be able to produce 50m incremental Down/Up estimates based on this Broadband Forum graph used by Comms Alliance on P11.
In saying this, the reality with FTTN is that there are outliers. FTTP would be a pretty boring and unnecessary graph (in a good way).
I get good stats on my modem with adsl2 at the moment. FTTN was activated last week.
So does the copper goes to my DA, via (new) copper again to the fibre node cabinet?
I am going to try and find where this new node cabinet is this week. DA is 4EDM-01-12
Current modem stats as follows
Line State Up
Modulation ADSL2+
Annex Mode AnnexA
Downstream Upstream
Data Rate 22742000 1077000
Maximum Attainable Data Rate(ATTNDR) 25260000 1077000
Interleaver Depth 0 0
Line Attenuation(LATN) 6.0 4.8
Signal Attenuation(SATN)
Signal-to-Noise Ratio Margin(SNRM) 6.3 8.2
Actual Aggregate Transmit Power(ACATP) 18.1 12.1
I get good stats on my modem with adsl2 at the moment. FTTN was activated last week.
So does the copper goes to my DA, via (new) copper again to the fibre node cabinet?
until you request a transfer to a nbn� based plan none of your copper is connected to the node.
You are still fed from the exchange via your pillar
Yeah I signed up on Friday... not being switched until mid next week.
Is it still a lottery even though I get good speeds on ADSL2 now?
Attainable � 90
Line Rate � 78
Thanks for ll the very hard work gathering the information.
I've cropped the Attainable graph back to 1,000m
I reckon that looks better and 1,000m is really the limit.
You can certainly see how it is pretty stable (fewer outliers as well), with actual speeds 100-80Mbps (after overheads) up to ~ 500m and then it goes over the VDSL2 cliff.
So using lots of chewing gum, string, mirrors and ticky tacky ... I came up with this wild guesstimate of the best VDSL2 performance, underlying the amazing data. :)
http://s32.postimg.org/630v4
The number/line I'm planning to put FTTN on has 2 sockets in the house. Will the modem connect on either of those 2 sockets? Will this sort of configuration have any effect on the quality of the connection? I should also mention the line will have no line rental, and the second socket will not be used.
Will the modem connect on either of those 2 sockets?
Yes, but it's better if you disconnect the other. Really just want one clean line running into the house and straight to the modem.
Yes, but it's better if you disconnect the other.
I take it this would require a technician? I also have no idea how or where the wires are split. Also, what are the advantages of having the non-used one disconnected?
I have ADSL2 at the moment and have central filter installed few months back. Going to get FTTN soon. Would the central filter be compatible with VDSL2? How do I check? Where can I find out the model of the filter?
I have ADSL2 at the moment and have central filter installed few months back. Going to get FTTN soon. Would the central filter be compatible with VDSL2? How do I check? Where can I find out the model of the filter?
maybe it is on the invoice/TC1 that the cabler should have given you.
If not give them a ring and ask for the model they installed for a start
If not give them a ring and ask for the model they installed for a start
Thanks. If I open the front cover of the box where the filter is installed, would that be any issue?
Thanks. If I open the front cover of the box where the filter is installed, would that be any issue?
we won't tell
just don't go disturbing anything inside
I take it this would require a technician? I also have no idea how or where the wires are split. Also, what are the advantages of having the non-used one disconnected?
If you're not confident about what you're doing, probably best to get a techie.
I simply opened up the cover on the closest socket to the front of the house and found the incoming and outgoing cables easily. Just removed the outgoing ones and it worked fine.
It probably won't make any difference having the unused one connected, but there are some cases where it can cause interference with the signal. For most people, it's probably not an issue.
See how you go, and if you do have issues, get someone to disconnect the second connection.
FTTN micro-node's likely required for MDU's with FTTN where vectoring has to be turned off to minimise line interference when there are 2 competing wholesale providers servicing the same MDU.
Easier solution. Only have one wholesale provider per building.
For competing wholesale FTTB they are proposing to leave vectoring turned on in the same interference situation for increased stability and what one assumes will be collateral damage to speeds.
nbn�s current default position is to enable vectoring for all FTTB and FTTN architectures. nbn will be able to turn vectoring off in areas where interference with other operators causes an issue regarding the service performance:
� For the FTTN architecture, it will allow each street cabinet to serve a larger footprint, thereby reducing the number of cabinets and compact DSLAMs needed. However, for the special case when nbn customers in an MDU are served from an nbn street cabinet and nbn has to use copper pairs within the same cable binder being used by another operator also serving the building, nbn�s strategy for addressing interference issues will be dependent on the outcome of the Communications Alliance process referred to above. If vectoring has to be turned off due to interference issues, there may be a case where a new FTTN micro-node may have to be installed closer to end-users to ensure the SoE objectives are met in terms of service speeds.
For the FTTB architecture, nbn has decided to also use vectoring when copper pairs within a cable binder are to be used by nbn and another operator located in the MDU building on the basis that there are service stability benefits for nbn�s services with this approach, with nbn having the flexibility to turn vectoring off if it causes performance degradation to the other operator�s services
VDSL2 and G.fast already legacy solutions?
https://www.alcatel-lucent.com/solutions/vplus
Vplus fills the gap between VDSL2 vectoring and G.fast. At loop lengths between 250 and 550 meters, Vplus can give you better performance than both VDSL2 vectoring and G.fast. � See more at: https://www.alcatel-lucent.co
Vplus fills the gap between VDSL2 vectoring and G.fast. At loop lengths between 250 and 550 meters,
pity that a great deal of the CAN is over 550 metres, so to use those techs they are going to have to roll out more nodes (of some size)
little boxes, little boxes all made out of ticky tacky
Vplus can do 200 connections so instead of a node doing 384 across 1km. Why not split it to two micronodes that can service 200 each at 550 distance with better performance.
I'm sure the micronodes are more 'cost effiecient' than the normal 384 nodes.
Vplus can do 200 connections so instead of a node doing 384 across 1km. Why not split it to two micronodes that can service 200 each at 550 distance with better performance.
Maybe the Federal Coalition is about to announce that VPlus is going to be deployed for all future FTTN deployments
I'm sure the micronodes are more 'cost effiecient' than the normal 384 nodes.
twice the power connections so not really.
It costs the same to get power to a micronode as to a "full size node"
so one has the cost spread over "up to" 384 premises/connections (but nbn� have said the average is around 200) versus that cost spread over 48 premises.
so you have, for 200 connections, at least 3 times the power install cost. 3 more battery setups (smaller than a full size node, but still not free)
you also have to drag fibre further into the CAN for micronodes and this was claimed to be a disadvantage of teh FTTP build
Vplus can do 200 connections so instead of a node doing 384 across 1km. Why not split it to two micronodes that can service 200 each at 550 distance with better performance.
FTTdp is more cost effective than Vplus for new deployments in the medium term. Vplus is just lipstick on a pig for Alcatel.
FTTdp is more cost effective than Vplus for new deployments in the medium term. Vplus is just lipstick on a pig for Alcatel.
But if the FTTN brand is trashed, and Federal Labor own the FTTP and FTTdp space, Vplus might sound good as a product differentiator for the Federal Coalition.
But if the FTTN brand is trashed, and Federal Labor own the FTTP and FTTdp space, Vplus might sound good as a product differentiator for the Federal Coalition.
The stupid thing is that the Coalition could actually gain a lot of support by simply saying "sorry, we got it wrong. We're not perfect... lets look at fttp." Problem is that they have their head up their arse so far, its never going to happen. (case in point, hockey chasing slipper for dodgy cab charge vouchers, while trying to prevent the release of his own cab charge vouchers because he believe that would be a chance of terrorism.)
instead of a node doing 384 across 1km. Why not split it to two micronodes that can service 200 each at 550 distance with better performance.
The copper customer side footprint doesn't work that way. It's the reason nodes are always built next to an existing pillar.
Micronodes are only 50-pair. They look different than the 192s you may be referring to (similar to 384s).
you also have to drag fibre further into the CAN for micronodes and this was claimed to be a disadvantage of teh FTTP build
I don't see how this could realistically be the case when I've already seen them putting fibre all over the place as part of the FTTN rollout. At least here in Bunbury, the nodes already seem quite close together, and there are quite a few more of them than I was expecting. I've also heard that there are quite a few micronodes being deployed as part of the rollout here in Bunbury.
Actually....That has me wondering. Originally they were talking of initially providing 25mbit a second speeds minimum and then increasing that minimum to 50mbit. I wonder if the micronodes are a part of that strategy, and they've brought it forward on the quiet so that they can easier provide the 50mbit minimum speeds (of course only publicly guaranteeing 25mbit) to more of the FTTN fotprint?
I don't see how this could realistically be the case when I've already seen them putting fibre all over the place as part of the FTTN rollout. At least here in Bunbury, the nodes already seem quite close together,
That's exactly the point. The fibre is run to areas where it can provide the most efficient coverage.
The further out you go, the less houses there are, but nodes still have a finite range/reach. There's a point where the cost of building a micronode isn't cost effective for the number of houses it services.
so you have, for 200 connections, at least 3 times the power install cost. 3 more battery setups (smaller than a full size node, but still not free)
You forgot no ratified standard, and compatible hardware some time in the never never.
That's a great Idea. Why didn't Mike Quigley think of it? (Hint � Because he is not an idiot)
For those interested I've out together a estimated FTTN speed/distance map (NOTE estimated...), which is an updated version of what was published here many posts ago.
https://nbnmtm.cartodb.com/v
Around ~2750 confirmed pillar locations and a few nodes. Would be interested to see any feedback from those who have FTTN connected as to how far off my formula is. It will be revised on real world data and at some point changed to a range to not be specific.
here you go
https://nbnmtm.cartodb.com/v
FTTN
ESTIMATED DOWNLOAD SPEED (MBPS)
86
ESTIMATED UPLOAD SPEED (MBPS)
35
Actual Connected Speed on 100/40 FTTN plan
Downstream line rate (MBPS)
54
Maximum upstream rate (MBPS)
22
Actual Connected Speed on 100/40 FTTN plan
Do you have additional phone extension points still wired?
Is the VDSL modem at the first point?
Doesn't appear to work for me. Address found, but no data. What am I doing wrong?
Edit: location Gorokan, NSW
For those interested I've out together a estimated FTTN speed/distance map (NOTE estimated...), which is an updated version of what was published here many posts ago.
Nice one Mr Mac.
For ABCH:15 I can help you with actual node location if you like.
http://i.imgur.com/ai56etw.png
Doesn't appear to work for me.
Hmmm,
Doesn't work on my shiny new Sky Muster service.
But fine on 3G.
Estimated
Distribution Area
GRKN:8
FTTN
Estimated Download Speed (mbps) 65
Estimated Upload Speed (mbps) 26
Actual /forum-replies.cfm?t=2479910&p=66#r1302
http://s32.postimg.org/ykjzm
66/26 Mbps
I call that ... a pass. :)
Great stuff Mr Mac!
For those interested I've out together a estimated FTTN speed/distance map (NOTE estimated...), which is an updated version of what was published here many posts ago.
https://nbnmtm.cartodb.com/
Wonder how long before Mr Mac get's paid a visit (including a metadata or other digital or physical visit (invited or uninvited) from either the AFP or some of the 100's of NBN Co legal team?
Wonder how long before Mr Mac get's paid a visit (including a metadata or other digital or physical visit (invited or uninvited) from either the AFP or some of the 100's of NBN Co legal team?
Then we'll sit down, have a coffee and nice chat about how all the information I'm using is available from public available information under Creative Commons 3.0/4.0 licenses and discovery collated by myself and several helpful people around these forums. Though I am guilty of not double checking the annotations required under a couple of those licenses.
I call that ... a pass. :)
Great stuff Mr Mac!
I think you will be the exception, but nice to have a hit! As always with these estimations they are best case, and I always hope I'm wrong and your speeds will be much higher.
As always with these estimations they are best case, and I always hope I'm wrong and your speeds will be much higher.
Yeah, but its still nice to have at least some degree of "in best case the data is accurate". I'm more interested in further analysis of the data, particularly percentage of premises that can expect to achieve at least a given speed band, just to track their SoE expectation of 50Mbps to 90% of the fixed line footprint
further analysis of the data
Currently have ~375,000 G-NAF premises within the confirmed pillar locations. These are only premises estimated to be within distance of the pillar/node to achieve 25mbps, so not currently a reliable indicator for bare min. (complicated currently with available data as you have to factor in the actual fixed line footprint, micronodes, satellite, wireless etc)
Breakdown of speeds of the above would be
31% within 100/40 distance
82% within 50/20 distance
These numbers will vary on a few factors in the future. Some premises may not be in FTTN footprint. I may fix up routing issues that could shorten the runs as well. Node distance will come into play, because it's clear that NBN are more often placing nodes further away from pillars shared across multiple DA's (I'm seeing 500m+ runs).
For example, on Node association I have small base of ~39000 premises
28% within 100/40
89% within 50/20
For ABCH:15 I can help you with actual node location if you like.
Thanks, will go in the next map update.
Do you have additional phone extension points still wired?
no, only 1 point
Is the VDSL modem at the first point?
yes
Yes, i'm not impressed. I will update my speeds once I have completed my testing /forum-replies.cfm?t=2526386
we won't tell
just don't go disturbing anything inside
:D
So my central splitter/filter is as below.
Telstra Mat. No. 903/00409
C1 Model No.C10100E
Mfr. : 201405
N573
So my central splitter/filter is as below.
Telstra Mat. No. 903/00409
C1 Model No.C10100E
does not appear to be VDSL2 complaint
does not appear to be VDSL2 complaint
Darn. Could someone please tell me which filter do I need then?
I have a VDSL2 filter. I will take a look and get back to you with the model number etc. Colin
Darn. Could someone please tell me which filter do I need then?
this is the Netcomm/C10 VDSL2 Splitter
http://www.netcommwireless.com/product/vdsl/cc10100np
but unless you are retaining voice pass through during the transition period then there is no need for a splitter at all.
But if you are going to get a "mate" with a Cabling Registration to install it make sure he uses the correct tool as it appears to be a krone device and using a 110 tool will likely stuff the connections
you seem to be able to get them for between$16 and $20 online plus postage
but unless you are retaining voice pass through during the transition period then there is no need for a splitter at all.
Thanks. Sorry, but I am not sure what you mean by "voice pass through during the transition period".
Let's say I don't need a filter, does it mean that when FTTN is connected, I need to remove the filter? It was added currently because my alarm was causing issues with dropouts but since the installation it is rock solid.
I have a VDSL2 filter.
The VDSL2 filter I have is the C10100NPE Central Splitter in the same "box" as your C1 Model No.C10100E.
I think the "E" is for an external box. The C10 model number inside is C10100NP.
AS D&S says ....
but unless you are retaining voice pass through during the transition period then there is no need for a splitter at all.
My VDSL2 filter is now surplus to my requirements for the above reason. Colin
My VDSL2 filter is now surplus to my requirements for the above reason.
Hey Colin. Are you saying that even if you remove it, it won't matter.
Let's say I don't need a filter, does it mean that when FTTN is connected, I need to remove the filter? It was added currently because my alarm was causing issues with dropouts but since the installation it is rock solid.
- Normally when you transfer across to FTTN then you phone line will cease to work as a phone line, which would man your alarm would not be able to call back to base.
- There is a thing called "voice continuity" which keeps the normal phone line functional for the 'transition" period which is about 18 months and this would permit your alarm to call base, but you will need the splitter changed to a VDSL2 model. note:- not all providers offer this option, in fact very few
- If you were to go with option 2 you would still need to get your alarm reconfigured to enable it to call home after the transition period, which usually means the installation of a mobile based dialler for the alarm, so you can get that done now or do it later. Voip for alarm calling base is frought with risk as if the VDSL modem dies, or in a power outage, then no back to base is available
Are you saying that even if you remove it, it won't matter.
What D&C says. :-) He knows his stuff.
Normally
Thanks. Ok, so let me get this right.
1. Once I am connected to FTTN, I will no longer have a *REAL* phone line and instead it will be a virtual line served by node. I don't actually need a phone line at all as I don't use it. The only reason for it to be there is the alarm.
2. If I install a proper VDSL filter then the phone line will work along with the alarm. But, this will only work for 18 months then what? I will be with Telstra so with they provide this option?
3. Reconfigure to use mobile based dialler? You mean disconnect it from physical line and connect it to a simcard? Wouldn't this cause issues with businesses who have back to base?
1. Once I am connected to FTTN, I will no longer have a *REAL* phone line and instead it will be a virtual line served by node.
No. You either have a VoIP line created by your modem or ATA OR you can temporarily get the existing line you use now retained back to the exchange during the co-existance period (up to 18 months). You're going to have to change the alarm system one way or another.
2. If I install a proper VDSL filter then the phone line will work along with the alarm. But, this will only work for 18 months then what?
After the co-existance period has ended that phone line won't work any more. The dialtone will disappear and the equipment at the exchange will be switched off (where it can be). Your line will definitely be disconnected from the exchange though (probably at your pillar).
3. Reconfigure to use mobile based dialler? You mean disconnect it from physical line and connect it to a simcard? Wouldn't this cause issues with businesses who have back to base?
Yes your alarm system will need to change to use the mobile network instead of landline for its back to base service. How that works in practice is up to your monitoring company and alarm manufacturer.
Normally
No.
Thanks both. This is a real shit storm. Who approved this crap.
Thanks both. This is a real shit storm. Who approved this crap.
This situation isn't hugely different with either method of NBN. Your alarm needs to change regardless.
Forget about coexistence � shift everything once
Get the splitter/filter removed and a direct line to your chosen point.
Then plug the alarm into fxs port on Telstra Gateway, or a dedicated ATA.
Note to protect against power loss you should also use a UPS, although like any wired alarm you are susceptible to wire cutting which is why many prefer using 3g/4g
This situation isn't hugely different with either method of NBN. Your alarm needs to change regardless.
+1 VOIP is VOIP regardless of how it gets delivered (provider IAD vs NBN FTTH NTD). Neither is something you should be running sensitive important services (i.e. alarm or medical alert) over.
+1 VOIP is VOIP regardless of how it gets delivered (provider IAD vs NBN FTTH NTD). Neither is something you should be running sensitive important services (i.e. alarm or medical alert) over.
If IP-based service is too unreliable, what should be used?
(consider a hypothetical location with weak/no mobile coverage, and copper about to either be cut off or cut-over to FTTN).
orthog. spreading code writes...
If IP-based service is too unreliable, what should be used?
(consider a hypothetical location with weak/no mobile coverage, and copper about to either be cut off or cut-over to FTTN).
maybe a sat phone using the iridium system
In theory (yeah, I know) places with no mobile signal should keep their landline access because they're a remote area in a fixed wireless or satellite footprint...
In my testing, given sensible default codec choices, If the VoIP connection is good enough a decent quality phone call, alarm dialers will work over it. (The biggest problem is dialers that use the high speed DTMF Ademco contact ID protocol and rubbish VoIP ATAs not hearing all the digits) I think the main problem is actually connecting the alarm hardware to the router/voip adapter (house wiring) and battery backup (modem and alarm) and rewiring old hard wired mode-3 alarms. For some vulnerable members of our community cost becomes a significant issue both in having this wiring work done and in having to pay for a base nbn Internet service just for their alarm if they aren't already an Internet subscriber.
Other problems including the cost of battery replacements and cheap/old fashioned dialers assuming that all is ok if you're getting dial tone and/or 48V on the line � nope, that's being generated locally now, need to phone home occasionally and make test calls to confirm connectivity.
The best solution and the long-term goal should be to have an IP capable alarm and IP capable monitoring company and drop the use of voiceband altogther. It doesn't look like alarm companies are making much progress here, yet.
The real kicker is the longevity of nbn node power in power outages (from zero in HFC areas, to a couple of hours on nodes, to probably a couple of days or more on fibre). To be blunt, this problem will only be tackled by nbn after the first Royal Commission into some flood or fire disaster that takes out power to an area (and the nbn infrastructure) for a couple of days and nobody can call for help. Neither would I want to get stuck in a lift in a power outage and the building management haven't replaced the lift's modem's UPS batteries in a while or they got confused why the lift needed an Internet connection and cancelled the account...
The real kicker is the longevity of nbn node power in power outages (from zero in HFC areas, to a couple of hours on nodes, to probably a couple of days or more on fibre). To be blunt, this problem will only be tackled by nbn after the first Royal Commission into some flood or fire disaster that takes out power to an area (and the nbn infrastructure) for a couple of days and nobody can call for help
In all fairness I disagree.
I'd argue the situation with the nbn is not that different to what we have now. If anything given the nbn devices are newer their backup batteries should be in better condition. I remember the April 2015 storms on the Central Coast NSW, all of the nice pre-NBN infrastructure folded in short order (pretty much lost mobile coverage for a few days) � didn't hear any calls for a Royal Commission then into telco reliability.
A FTTH network still needs power (both to the NTD devices inside user homes & the active electronics further upstream). While there will be less of them compared to MTM, they are still out there. Users also need to be using a home phone that doesn't need mains power (with the number of cordless phones out there � there is becoming a good dealer rarer).
orthog. spreading code writes...
If IP-based service is too unreliable, what should be used?
(consider a hypothetical location with weak/no mobile coverage, and copper about to either be cut off or cut-over to FTTN).
Apologies for any confusion � seperate VOIP from IP.
VOIP is about taking a digital or analogue signal and sending it over an IP connection. It can (and does) work well for normal phone conversations (that's what my home phone runs off � I cannot notice a difference). Generally the human ear is fairly forgiving about minor drops in quality.
Machine to machine communication over modems (i.e. alarm diallers) are far less forgiving. Minor drops in quality over those can (not will � but can) disrupt the whole communication. As others have mentioned it can be made to work � I've generally found it to be fiddly and prone to the occasional weird errors (again � not something you want on a priority service).
To answer your question � either go mobile (3G/4G) and look at options to boost your coverage (they are out there) � alternatively go IP (budget permitting, do both). Do consider backup power as part of the overall solution � no point having an alarm service that fails when the power goes out.
To answer your question � either go mobile (3G/4G) and look at options to boost your coverage (they are out there) � alternatively go IP (budget permitting, do both)
The most flexible option would be to have an IP based ethernet enabled alarm panel, then it can be combined with any fixed line internet router that has 3G/4G backup to cover failures in the fixed line but without the expense of a dedicated mobile account just for the alarm system.
But progress with remote telemetry devices like alarms is slowly moving towards a future where NarrowBand IoT using LTE-M will take over from legacy PSTN or 2G/3G dialers.
OK, so I need an answer from some more knowledgable people on FTTN and change over process.
First, a little background. Up til today I had ADSL2+ connected to a top hat RIM enabled cabinet. From cabling records with my RSP I was roughly 1.3km away in line distance to said cabinet.
The part of the estate we are in is serviceable by a Pillar that services 2 DA's and unfortunately we are in the DA which is furtherest away in cable distance. When the NBN FTTN cabinets started being installed a cabinet was installed next to the pillar in the adjacent DA and a new cabinet was installed in our DA which I have confirmed from www.mynbn.info website. I have cabling records from Telstra from when we built our house that shows the path of the cabling running up the street to the new cabinet as marked by the mynbn.info website as being the cabinet we should be connected to at an estimated distance of 250m.
Confirming all this info before I signed up with FTTN, I decide to go for 100/40 plan and hope for the best.
Fast forward to this morning. I disconnected my ADSL modem from the wall today before I left for work as my FTTN appointment was for this morning. Came home, configured my ASUS-DSL68U for VDSL2 as per working config on this site and info from RSP, connected the cable back to the socket and things appeared happy and synced up.
Logged in to the modem and checked line sync and found sync rates reflecting a 50/20 connection and showing a downstream attenuation of 19db. I thought nothing of it as we all know FTTN is a best effort based on copper path quality. Tested downloading a file and also performed a speedtest and found my connection was 13mbps down and 0.8 mbps up which is exactly what I used to get on my ADSL2+ connection. (I'm aware of congestion / CVC issues on NBN so this is no true indication, but none the less it's bad anyway). So about 10 mins of an active connection and sync drops and didn't come back. Disconnected the cable from the socket, factory reset the modem, configured back to VDSL2 plugged back in and still no go. Jumped on the phone to my RSP and in the end a fault has been logged as nothing was showing as active since the initial sync.
Based on my modem stats I managed to obtain for a short period I have a gut feeling the NBN Co tech connected me to the Pillar / Node where my original ADSL2+ connection was 1.3 km line distance away and not to the new established Node which is 250m away from my house following Telstra cabling records.
tldr; My area is covered by an ADSL2+ Top Hat cabinet covering 2 DA's for 1 pillar. I suspect in the transition process this morning NBN Co connected me to the FTTN Cabinet where the Pillar is 1.3km away in line distance instead of the newly established Node which is an estimated 250m away following Telstra cabling records.
Any info from anyone appreciated.
Tested downloading a file and also performed a speedtest and found my connection was 13mbps down and 0.8 mbps up which is exactly what I used to get on my ADSL2+ connection.
I have a suspicion that the tech may have jumpered your NBN VDSL2 service and your old ADSL service together by mistake somewhere along the cable run. It would explain what you've experienced and why the interference has caused the NBN port to shut down.
I suspect in the transition process this morning NBN Co connected me to the FTTN Cabinet where the Pillar is instead of the newly established Node closer to me following Telstra cabling records.
Do you know your cable (as initially installed) went past the location of the new pillar? What they do is basically cut the cables as they go past the new pillar and join them back to restore original ADSL service.
When you request FTTN they remove the jumpers going back to the exchange and jumper you to the node at that pillar....
Now here is the rub.... if your original cable pair went via another path and didn't pass the location of the new pillar , then it will still be going off to the original pillar (further away from you) and that's where it will be jumpered to the node..... so longer run and slower speed. Several people have already discovered that after FTTN has been connected that there is a much closer node � but it doesn't service their address. As long as you sync at 25mbps or better � that's all NBNCo guarantee.
The problem is Telstra cable records are often wrong � ever since the maintenance was outsourced. Contractors are paid per job and updating cable records can easily be skipped (saving the contractor time = earning more money). The old adage "the jobs not done until the paperwork is complete" no longer applies :( So at some stage your line might have been rerouted to overcome a fault in a cable..... and where they connected you then is where you are now. They won't re run your cable to a nearer pillar unless there is spare capacity between your residence and that pillar.
Ah the joys of FTTN!
They won't re run your cable to a nearer pillar unless there is spare capacity between your residence and that pillar.
I doubt they would even -consider- doing that, unless there was some kind of significant fault. It's hard enough to even get a physical line connected through the standard/default processes, let alone trying to be "tricky", and work around those pre-defined processes which are basically locked in stone.
Do you know your cable (as initially installed) went past the location of the new pillar?
Not sure, no � however based on estimated 1.3 km cable length for ADSL2+ the cable path works out pretty accurate to the ADSL2+ pillar & cabinet in the adjacent DA. If the cable went the other way it would be over 2km.
I had an ADSL issue one day when they were working on the local cabinet up the road, ADSL dropped for a few hours then came back on.
I did have a fault a few years back where my line was disconnected one day while at work and I had someone else's phone number connected to our house, so best guess is exactly as you mention above... one big cluster (something something).
I have a suspicion that the tech may have jumpered your NBN VDSL2 service and your old ADSL service together by mistake somewhere along the cable run. It would explain what you've experienced and why the interference has caused the NBN port to shut down.
Thanks for the reply, sounds reasonable. During the 10 mins I had an active connection I ran about three speed tests and the upload never went above 0.8mbps.
Just hoping I get an answer from my RSP when NBNCo look in to it.
Screw this FTTN mess....
I doubt they would even -consider- doing that,
I agree.... the one time they would possibly do that is if your sync was less than 25Mbps (only 12 Mbps during co-existence) in which case they would have to � one would imagine..... That's not the OP's situation.
Screw this FTTN mess....
Exactly....
A combination of poor Telstra cable records, even more poorly maintained and decrepit copper and years of band-aid repairs has certainly created the ideal environment for a right cluster............
But Malcom knows best.... what would those of us who spent a lifetime in network design know...... after all he is the expert (not only having a Law degree but a BE in Electrical and Electronic Engineering as well I guess � busy boy!)
It almost sounds like your
I did have a fault a few years back where my line was disconnected one day while at work and I had someone else's phone number connected to our house,
Some of the problems you're mentioning appear when pillars are "commoned" into each other (with the same range designation showing up twice iirc). Services can jump to the wrong pairs when its not jumpered correctly at both. I couldn't say for sure if this explains the other problems, but it sounds like something similar i've come across before. It really depends on what sort of distribution side cable was in the ground to start with, and how they cut it over to the new pillars.
Edit: Just saw the mention of the RIM/Tophat. This opens it up to many more potential scenarios. It largely depends on what was in the ground to begin with, and how/where they decided to cut it over. Unforunately, the existing dial before you dig plans will be fairly useless for reference at this point, as new copper has been hauled and ranges likely to have been changed.
My area goes RFS in about 5 weeks.
Is there any benefit to hopping on your ISP's website just after midnight on the RFS date and ordering a service so that you can be first cab off the rank?
Or should you somehow be ordering/preordering a service before it goes RFS?
Is there any benefit to hopping on your ISP's website just after midnight on the RFS date and ordering a service so that you can be first cab off the rank?
Yep... you get to be one of those brave pioneers who find out all the issues with the new area and help sort out the bugs whilst those who are smart sit back and wait for others to become frustrated, angry and disappointed at the start of the rollout...... and once all has settled down � then they switch services!
And as you are with iiNet I wouldn't be switching to them at the moment � not until they sort out their CVC issues :(
Yep... you get to be one of those brave pioneers who find out all the issues
I definitely shouldn't have bothered yet.... No Internet now and no ETA when it will be fixed.
Faster, sooner, more reliable! � Thanks Malcolm!
/sarcasm
Off topic but it is like the politicians have a neck for taking (not having) a good idea and royally screw it up.
Slightly off topic but has Labor said what will happen to all FTTN sites yet ?
I see a reference to a recent interview from Shorten at Sky News� People�s Forum in April, Shorten said Labor wouldn�t �rip up everything that Mr Turnbull has done� with respect to the NBN, because he didn�t believe �everything that the Liberals do is bad�.
Basically all of us on FTTN will we have a fibre future?
Basically all of us on FTTN will we have a fibre future?
My prediction is they will won't do a thing about FTTN areas and FTTP will be rolled out to those areas currently without any builds in progress for either FTTN or HFC.
Basically all of us on FTTN will we have a fibre future?
When I was talking to Jason Clare he said that those in the process of getting FTTN would continue to get it (and those who already had it are in this as well)..... and that would be revisited after everyone else had whatever form of NBN was chosen (I suspect FTTdp). It makes no sense stopping all installations for years as Turnbull did when he took over.
So you will be stuck on FTTN for some time..... early to mid 2020's I'd guess.
I have a suspicion that the tech may have jumpered your NBN VDSL2 service and your old ADSL service together by mistake somewhere along the cable run. It would explain what you've experienced and why the interference has caused the NBN port to shut down.
For what it's worth, I managed to get my last speed test results last night before the connected crapped out... the best it went was 18 mbps, but as you can see the upload was 0.83 mbps which is exactly what my old ADSL2+ connection could ever max out at.
NBN Co must have done some work today to have a look at the issue from yesterday (faster response than I thought)
Got home, plugged in the router and sync came up tonight without issue where yesterday it was completely dead.
http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/5384951701
Anyone think a Broadcom router / modem would be worth a shot to see if I get a better result? Looks like even though the node is 200m away from me it runs around the block the other way first and comes back up the street...
Looks like even though the node is 200m away from me it runs around the block the other way first and comes back up the street...
I'm in much the same boat, just over 200m by the route that would use least copper & digging, well over 700m actual.
For those interested I've out together a estimated FTTN speed/distance map (NOTE estimated...), which is an updated version of what was published here many posts ago.
Nothing showing for the Cairns region? Does this map only reflect activated areas?
Nothing showing for the Cairns region? Does this map only reflect activated areas?
Currently limited to only locations where I've confirmed or received confirmation on the Pillar location, hence some gaps. FTTP/HFC/Wireless is available on my backend, but not published as I'm limited by size. Working on moving to new system to show all data nationally.
Working on moving to new system to show all data nationally.
Thanks for your tireless work. :star:
Working on moving to new system to show all data nationally.
Thank you for the hard work :)
Not sure if I should place this in the Collation thread or this but what I'm posting below has to do with some very funny places NBN decided to place their nodes and seeing as this could be counted as FTTN general discussion I thought what the heck.
At least the Placement of Nodes in this Node Gallery isn't anyway near water but you have to question why NBN put them in such funny and tight places. They also rip up pavement and don't even bother getting someone to fix it. I took a few photos and they are in the very article below. I'm surprised with the messy job they have done when it comes to fixing up the footpath. If someone isn't paying attention then they could drip over and hurt themselves. If you can't replace it yourself then get a trained person in to fix it so it doesn't create hassles in the long run.
https://delimiter.com.au/201
Not sure if I should place this in the Collation thread or this but what I'm posting below has to do with some very funny places NBN decided to place their nodes and seeing as this could be counted as FTTN general discussion I thought what the heck.
haha! was only looking to do the same thing just now...
Another Delimeter article � https://delimiter.com.au/2016
Anyone think a Broadcom router / modem would be worth a shot to see if I get a better result? Looks like even though the node is 200m away from me it runs around the block the other way first and comes back up the street...
I'm wondering about the same thing, I sitting on around 60mbps but have reports of 80-85mbps at my distance but with how random vdsl has been its hard to judge.
I have the same modem as you so will be interesting to see.
Did you end up trying a broadcom?
'Im wondering about the same thing, I sitting on around 60mbps but have reports of 80-85mbps at my distance but with how random vdsl has been its hard to judge.
It is unlikely you will get much better performance from a different modem chipset.... line length, line quality, line gauge, number and condition of joints, proximity to other pairs with ADSL/VDSL services (crosstalk) etc... etc... will all have a bigger impact. So distance might be the same, but other factors are unlikely to be. That's why FTTN is the same as ADSL � the sync speed you get is a lotto... and the throughput could also be a lot less than the sync speed due to CVC issues....
and the throughput could also be a lot less than the sync speed due to CVC issues....
Has nothing to do with FTTN
Has nothing to do with FTTN
What?
The CVC is used to get traffic from NBNCo's FTTN and FTTP to your chosen ISP! And the average that ISPs are purchasing is only 0.9Mbps per user.
Ask iiNet customers on Cannington and Doubleview here in WA if CVC issues affect the throughput � when they sync at say 95Mbps but at peak only get 1Mbps!!!
Did you end up trying a broadcom?
I have intermittent issues with my connection which a tech needs to check next week. when the modem is syncing and the line stays stable I have gained maybe 10% extra sync up & down with the Billion 8900AX which is using the Broadcom chipset. Each connection will be different though I saw someone get 20% gains but as Fast is Good says above, we are still living in Node Lotto distance / quality situation.
The way I see it is if you see all the modems which are supplied by RSPs they are using Broadcom VDSL chipset so I'm making my end as compatible as I can. Nothing to say the ASUS modem was bad as I did get sync and it worked, but it's personal choice and we should all have that option.
boat, just over 200m by the route that would use least copper & digging, well over 700m actual.
How do you actually find that information out though?
It is unlikely you will get much better performance from a different modem chipset...
I would agree there, but there have been stories out there of broadcom being better for longer line distances.
But it makes you wonder why every single known chipset on approved fttn modems is broadcom.
Edit:
The way I see it is if you see all the modems which are supplied by RSPs they are using Broadcom VDSL chipset so I'm making my end as compatible as I can. Nothing to say the ASUS modem was bad as I did get sync and it worked, but it's personal choice and we should all have that option
Was just what I wrote,
And a 10% increase is still almost another 1MB/s.
I'm tempted to go out and buy a Netcomm NF10W today and test it out.
If I dont get a decent improvement i can sell it off and be out of pocket like $20-$30
What?
The CVC is used to get traffic from NBNCo's FTTN and FTTP to your chosen ISP! And the average that ISPs are purchasing is only 0.9Mbps per user.
Ask iiNet customers on Cannington and Doubleview here in WA if CVC issues affect the throughput � when they sync at say 95Mbps but at peak only get 1Mbps!!!
Correct me if I'm wrong (because most of the time I am) but isn't that an issue with the RSP and not the FTTN infrastructure?
What?
You are correct, but an RSP could easily under provide for an FTTP or HFC connection as much as a FTTN, it just so happens, all of the under provisioning has so far occured on FTTN.
But it makes you wonder why every single known chipset on approved fttn modems is broadcom.
Broadcom are one of the few manufacturers of chipsets which support Vectoring � and that is essential for our implementation of FTTN (VDSL2 + vectoring).
Other manufacturers make VDSL2 chipsets but most don't as yet include vectoring � but I dare say will before long. If only using ISP supplied VDSL2 or TPG FTTB then a VDSL2 modem without vectoring is OK.
it just so happens, all of the under provisioning has so far occured on FTTN.
Agreed � because the uptake of FTTN has been huge over here (really some of the first full scale implementations) and lots of users get added very quickly.
iiNet seem to have a lot of trouble keeping up with demand (other ISPs � including TPG � seem to manage a lot better).
But regardless of whether FTTP or FTTN the average CVC amount purchased of 0.9Mbps per customer is totally inadequate in this day of everyone video streaming � Netflix HD requiring 5 Mbps for just one stream.
Correct me if I'm wrong (because most of the time I am) but isn't that an issue with the RSP and not the FTTN infrastructure?
Depends whether you view charges levied by NBNCo for use of their infrastructure part of that infrastructure (I do).
Since they charge RSPs $17.50 per Mbit for CVC capacity that has two affects
Firstly spare capacity is too expensive so they try to order capacity "just in time" and that isn't working too well!
Secondly long term that leads to the provision of 0.9Mbps per user as they can't afford to purchase lots of CVC � so that means a real threat of peak time congestion.
Whilst the RSPs have to purchase the CVC capacity � if NBNCo make it too expensive for them to afford enough- whose fault is it? I'm laying the blame at the feet of NBNCo.
Correct me if I'm wrong (because most of the time I am) but isn't that an issue with the RSP and not the FTTN infrastructure?
Yes, but because the MTM has completely ruined the NBN's financials, they cant afford to reduce CVC to a sensible level � as was planned and already priced into for FTTP. It costs more to get data from an nbn connection to your local POI than it does to get data from Australia to the US.
The MTM model makes bandwidth a scarcity and charges accordingly.
Whilst the RSPs have to purchase the CVC capacity � if NBNCo make it too expensive for them to afford enough- whose fault is it? I'm laying the blame at the feet of NBNCo.
I agree, and they must be getting instructions from the government of the day.
Since they charge RSPs $17.50 per Mbit
Want a history lesson in Australian telco economics, read this.
i am wondering. i have seen before a user that you can post ur stats to and will tell you how far away ur node is.
Anyone know this fellas name Rendang or something.
Or is there another way to know how far i am from my node.
There are 2 nodes on my street so wondering which one mine is. hopefully its the only only 2 homes away.
i am wondering. i have seen before a user that you can post ur stats to and will tell you how far away ur node is.
Anyone know this fellas name Rendang or something.
Hi Guys,
We are in the same boat. We would like to find out our estimated cable distance from our node. I dont exactly want to end up locked into a 24 month contract 100/40 when i wont be able to get near those speeds.
Thanks
i am wondering. i have seen before a user that you can post ur stats to and will tell you how far away ur node is.
I can't remember where it was posted, but I believe this map is what you need.
https://nbnmtm.cartodb.com/v
Maybe someone can offer some advice here.
I got connected to the FTTN NBN on Tuesday 7th of June and was very happy with my speeds, like so:
Line standard VDSL2
Channel type
Interleaved
Downstream line rate (kbit/s) 107735
Upstream line rate (kbit/s) 44199
Downstream SNR (dB) 15.3
Upstream SNR (dB) 11.5
Downstream line attenuation (dB) 8
Upstream line attenuation (dB) 2.8
Downstream output power (dBmV) 12.1
Upstream output power (dBmV) -0.2
Downstream CRC 0
Upstream CRC 0
Downstream FEC 0
Upstream FEC 0
My connection was extremely stable and never dropped out for almost a whole week, downloads steady at 11.9MB/s indicating I'm hitting the maximum the fast ethernet port could do and I didn't seem to have any packet loss etc
But then my connection dropped, speeds looks like this now:
Line standard VDSL2
Channel type
Interleaved
Downstream line rate (kbit/s) 88793
Upstream line rate (kbit/s) 44199
Downstream SNR (dB) 6.5
Upstream SNR (dB) 8.7
Downstream line attenuation (dB) 24.6
Upstream line attenuation (dB) 44.9
Downstream output power (dBmV) 13.3
Upstream output power (dBmV) 7.3
Downstream CRC 11
Upstream CRC 3
Downstream FEC 353606
Upstream FEC 4765
I've tried rebooting my modem a bunch, fiddling with the cables, factory reset etc but it won't budge � it always sync's between 85Mbit and 90.xxMbit now (like 90.2Mbit) � I know I should probably still be happy with these speeds but why have I lost almost 20Mbit in sync speed in less than a week?
The only thing I could think of is that perhaps more people are switching to the NBN and it's increasing interference on the pillar/DSLAM, I know VDSL is crazy sensitive to interference, I was likely one of the first connected as I put my application in 4AM on RFS day, but if that's the case it's only been one week � surely there is still hardly anyone on the node, how low will it drop when the node is fully populated?
If anyone has any suggestions let me know. Would a port rebuild help? (if I can somehow convince TPG to ask NBNco to do that, I've heard it's possible)
If anyone has any suggestions let me know. Would a port rebuild help? (if I can somehow convince TPG to ask NBNco to do that, I've heard it's possible)
May be more folk on your NODE have signed up and come on line, hence the drop in performance, probably it will get worse when all have signed up and activated on your node. You have the Coalition Parties NBN, the fraudband over copper wire or pretend NBN.
Downstream line attenuation (dB) 8
Upstream line attenuation (dB) 2.8
vs
Downstream line attenuation (dB) 24.6
Upstream line attenuation (dB) 44.9
Is quite strange.
Is quite strange.
It is more than that, look at the power levels, the FEC count and the SNR figures.
The line has clearly gone to s***, the question is why? I think the FEC count raises alarm bells though.
I managed to convince TPG to do a port rebuild
Line standard VDSL2
Channel type
Interleaved
Downstream line rate (kbit/s) 107735
Upstream line rate (kbit/s) 44199
Downstream SNR (dB) 14.3
Upstream SNR (dB) 10.3
Downstream line attenuation (dB) 8.1
Upstream line attenuation (dB) 3.1
Downstream output power (dBmV) 11.8
Upstream output power (dBmV) -0.1
Downstream CRC 0
Upstream CRC 0
Downstream FEC 0
Upstream FEC 0
http://www.speedtest.net/result/5399863979.png
Shrug, lol. Hopefully it stays like this but not holding my breath.
It is more than that, look at the power levels, the FEC count and the SNR figures.
The SNR is consistent with the drop in speeds � close to 6dB target for the downlink, and reduced on the uplink. (No sync speed loss on uplink as probably that part of the spectrum wasn't affected. The downlink ran out of headroom though.)
The FEC could be a result of a long running connection vs. one that was just made.
e.g. on my line:
Downstream line rate (kbit/s) 107735
Upstream line rate (kbit/s) 44199
Downstream SNR (dB) 8.8
Upstream SNR (dB) 8.2
...
Downstream FEC 297004
Upstream FEC 52783
I don't have any CRC yet for this connection, but have had them before. But I also haven't noticed any issues (bar one drop out the other day � I suspect someone messing around in the MDF).
I managed to convince TPG to do a port rebuild
Line standard VDSL2
Channel type
Interleaved
Downstream line rate (kbit/s) 107735
Upstream line rate (kbit/s) 44199
Wow who'd have thought... As they say on the IT Crowd � "Have you tried turning it off and on again"... at the DSLAM.
Shrug, lol. Hopefully it stays like this but not holding my breath.
When a port rebuild is done... the ends of the line forget the buckets where there is interference � speed goes up as more buckets are being used.
After hours or sometimes days, the devices at the end of the line relearn the contaminated buckets (those subject to interference) and they are dropped again � and so the speed drops.
FTTN is just a RIM on steroids with VDSL rather than ADSL � and the same rules apply. A port rebuild is just a palliative (normally suggested by support to make the customer go away)..... it generally provides no long term benefit.
i am wondering. i have seen before a user that you can post ur stats to and will tell you how far away ur node is.
Anyone know this fellas name Rendang or something.
The person you are after is Rendrag . /user/41885
Nice person too.
The MTM model makes bandwidth a scarcity and charges accordingly.
This is not result of the MTM � CVC charge started at $20 under the original Labor plan. Was reduced to $17.50 a couple of years ago and plan to reduce further if RSPs increase bandwidth.
The blowout in construction costs � both FTTP and FTTN means it is hard to reduce as the NBN still needs to make its target returns
The blowout in construction costs � both FTTP and FTTN means it is hard to reduce as the NBN still needs to make its target returns
But FTTP has much higher takeup, and much higher average revenue. FTTN screws up the financials so badly (And the extra operational costs, that CVC charges are the only way they can try to bring in revenue.
But FTTP has much higher takeup, and much higher average revenue.
Only because it's been out longer. Long term everyone has to switch on FTTN so would actually expect it's take-up to surpass FTTP (eg. Older people taking Dodo's 12/1 10Gb plan or equivalent)
Agree revenue is higher given greater availability of 100/40 plans � albeit given the overall take-up of those it's still marginal
The forced use of FTTN for predominately telephone subscriptions will actually help providers deliver a less congested service on FTTN
Folks, I finally found documentation backing up the info I and others had that NBN Co is only using 1/1 GE fibre to Connect Nodes back to the FAN:
See page 30: http://www.nbnco.com.au/conte
The AAS at the FAN is using 10 GE links but the Nodes connect into it at 1 GE:
Currently, 4 x Point to Point fibres will be provided for each DSLAM.
Out of the 4 x Point to Point fibres, the equipment requires 2 x Uplink Fibres which are connected through to the Aggregation switch in the NBN Co Network. The additional 2 x Point to Point fibres are spares, to allow flexibility for future growth or migration activities.
2.4.4 Access Aggregation Switch (AAS)
The introduction of DSLAMs with lower customer density and higher node volumes created the need for an additional layer of aggregation for combining multiple 1GE access interfaces from the DSLAMs into 10Gbps interfaces preferred by the core (Transit and Aggregation) networks. This is provided by an Access Aggregation Switch (AAS).
The AAS solution is positioned in the FAN, which can be physically located in a FAN site or a POI site.
From the diagram above, the AAS is used to aggregate multiple 1GE uplinks from access nodes to 10GE links, connecting to the Ethernet Aggregation Switch or Ethernet Connectivity Switch of the Aggregation Domain.
AAS will connect to DSLAMs via N x 1GE (N ? 4) connections and will be dual-homed to EAS/ECS pair, each via N x 10GE connections. The backhaul connection from FAN to POI can be either direct fibre or DWDM and direct fibre.
1/1 GE fibre to Connect Nodes back to the FAN
I think the whole idea is that the transit (WDM) network would be expensive to extend past the FAN sites into the ones which are part of the LFN.
Much cheaper to use an aggregation switch at the intermediate sites, then interface at 10G to the existing transit points.
If there were a large number of DSLAM 1G uplinks at an intermediate site, then it might be cheaper to extend the WDM to that point and install a 1G interface, for a small amount it's probably not worth it.
Not sure the network design rules really show this very well.
EDIT: possibly also at the FAN sites the WDM equipment doesn't have 1G ports, so the aggregation switches are used to convert the DSLAM uplinks to 10G.
(The POI sites would have 1G ports, but mainly used for other things such as network supervisory systems, etc, the existing GPON equipment would likely only have 10G uplinks)
So i finally got connected up to fttn today.. .
Except i found out i can't get any higher than 25mbit/sec. Telstra said the speed boosts are not available to me. I know i can possibly get faster as my modem syncs up at 39mbit/sec... telstra just can't or won't sell them to me...
Also, a person who is on the same node who got switched earlier has the 100mbit speed through his rsp.
Does anyone know if this is a common occurrence with FTTN?
Does anyone know if this is a common occurrence with FTTN?
Same here ( Belong FttN Caboolture ). A SpeedBoost from 25/5 to 100/40 was declined by them. Perhaps another RSP might up to 50/20 ?
telstra just can't or won't sell them to me...
Might just be the sales rep you spoke to?
Might just be the sales rep you spoke to?
Nope they tried and the system wouldn't let them apply a speed boost in not sure if it's a telstra or nbnco decision to block the speed boost though.
Only because it's been out longer. Long term everyone has to switch on FTTN so would actually expect it's take-up to surpass FTTP (eg. Older people taking Dodo's 12/1 10Gb plan or equivalent)
Agree revenue is higher given greater availability of 100/40 plans � albeit given the overall take-up of those it's still marginal
Revenue per customer is higher for FTTP than FTTN (due to not all FTTN customers being able to get higher speeds) and running costs per customer (to NBNCo) are lower for FTTP than FTTN due to lack of powered nodes and lower levels of maintenance required for fibre versus copper. Customers may also see FTTN as providing a lower quality of service than FTTP and may be more likely to use mobile services instead for voice and data rather than have an FTTN service, giving FTTN a lower take-up rate than FTTP.
I did receive an email reply today from the Department of Communications indicating that they had confirmed with Telstra that Telstra will offer the Standard Telephone Service on FTTN, but that battery back-up would be up to the customer.
Nope they tried and the system wouldn't let them apply a speed boost in not sure if it's a telstra or nbnco decision to block the speed boost though.
Except i found out i can't get any higher than 25mbit/sec. Telstra said the speed boosts are not available to me. I know i can possibly get faster as my modem syncs up at 39mbit/sec... telstra just can't or won't sell them to me...
Same here ( Belong FttN Caboolture ). A SpeedBoost from 25/5 to 100/40 was declined by them. Perhaps another RSP might up to 50/20 ?
I can guarantee you the nbn will not be blocking you from being able to purchase the higher speed tiers if your modem syncs above your current tier.
When you call up telstra make sure to call their NBN line and nowhere else as I've heard stories such people being told as its not approved by the council ect ect from other departments.
I can guarantee you the nbn will not be blocking you from being able to purchase the higher speed tiers if your modem syncs above your current tier.
When you call up telstra make sure to call their NBN line and nowhere else as I've heard stories such people being told as its not approved by the council ect ect from other departments
It was their nbn team who told me speed boost was unavailable. Add i mentioned before,they couldn't tell me why that was so... i would very much like to know why though, as you could well imagine
Same here, the Belong NBN Team in Melbourne themselves stated twice to me ( and as recent as a fortnight ago ) that anything more than 25/5 under FttN ( Caboolture ) was not possible.
As for NBN, they simply referred me back to the RSP.
Belong
belong only sell 12/1 and 25/5 on FTTN, I believe a few other RSPs only do 12/1 and 25/5 over FTTN/B as well
Same here, the Belong NBN Team in Melbourne themselves stated twice to me ( and as recent as a fortnight ago ) that anything more than 25/5 under FttN ( Caboolture ) was not possible.
Time to find a new RSP
belong only sell 12/1 and 25/5 on FTTN
Then why do they advertise Speedboost to 100/40 for $25 a month ?
It was their nbn team who told me speed boost was unavailable. Add i mentioned before,they couldn't tell me why that was so... i would very much like to know why though, as you could well imagine
Tell them you want to break your contract with no exit penalties as they are not providing the "nbn" as you thought if they are not offering higher speeds.
They will either have to let you out of your contract and you will be able to churn to a better RSP/ISP, or they will fix it.
I think the whole idea is that the transit (WDM) network would be expensive to extend past the FAN sites into the ones which are part of the LFN.
Sure but given how easily a very small number of users on each node can saturate the link to the FAN it's very very poor planning.
Compare the difference to the GPON design:
2.5/1.25 Gbps split 32 ways (GPON)
Vs
1/1 Gbps split 192 ways (FTTN)
It's a pretty stark difference (78/39 Mbps vs 5/5mbps minimum peak bandwidth).
2.5/1.25 Gbps split 32 ways (GPON)
Vs
I am not total sure that's correct.
Each FAN can be connected by one or more 10gb trunks. Most f them are only connected by 2. There are multiple of up to 576 connections per interface. Thus bandwidth can be low per user. Just like the fttn. Once they hit points of congestion they upgrade and add more trunks. Fttn and fttp contentions are treated the same. The issue is the cvc and carriers not allowing enough cvc.
Then why do they advertise Speedboost to 100/40 for $25 a month ?
I never had the 100/40 Speedboost option on FttN, only Speedboost from 12/1 to 25/5. Maybe Speedboosting to 100/40 was only offered to those on FttP ?
Time to find a new RSP
Been looking around, for example Telecube FttN, though I got another 11 months to go on a 12 month contract.
I never had the 100/40 Speedboost option on FttN,
Certainly starts to explain the decline in 100/40 takeup.
Maybe Speedboosting to 100/40 was only offered to those on FttP ?
I'd would appear so, if you put in an FTTN address the only speed boost option is 25/5 option, but if you put in an FTTP address you can also select 100/40.
if you put in an FTTN address the only speed boost option is 25/5 option, but if you put in an FTTP address you can also select 100/40.
Reality is very few will get to 100 download once the node is loaded..... some might now but that might not continue. Quite a few would get most of a 50/20 plan although few ISPs offer it. Neither of those speeds are guaranteed by NBNCo -they only guarantee 25 Mbps once each 24 hour period..... and if that is reached ISPs can't report an fault.
So no sensible ISP would offer any speed faster than 25/5 as that's the best NBNCo guarantee. Imagine if you paid for 100/40 and it dropped and stayed at say 30/25.... you would be spewing and so would the ISP as they couldn't do anything about it!
Those who voted for FTTN in 2013 are the reason we have been pwned!
I am not total sure that's correct
NBN's own documentation shows all FTTP FDH's connecting straight back to the poi, unlike FTTN nodes which mostly connect to an AAS switch in a FAN then back to the poi.
http://www.nbnco.com.au/cont
The only FTTP external to poi FAN sites are the TFAN's (temporary), all other sites are within the poi as they house the powered OLT cards and their connections into 10 gbps aggregation switches.
Getting connected to fttn today, but reusing my fritzbox. Just to confirm a couple of things.
Do we remove the adsl line filter and connect the model directly to the wall plate/phone line? Or do we leave the filter in place?
In the fritzbox settings, all we need to change is the annex settings to annex b? (I'm with internode).
Do we remove the adsl line filter and connect the model directly to the wall plate/phone line?
Yes, no more filters for FttN ( exception � a VDSL2 filter is required for the next 18 months if a voice pass-thru landline is used � not many RSPs offer this though ).
In our place, it is a direct RJ11 cable from wall socket to ISP's approved VDSL2 modem.
Getting connected to fttn today, but reusing my fritzbox. Just to confirm a couple of things.
Internode have a guide here for connecting Fritzbox to FTTN that may be of help:
http://www.internode.on
Internode have a guide here for connecting Fritzbox to FTTN that may be of help:
http://www.internode.on
Yep thanks saw that, just trying to simplify the instructions for the missus at home to follow. It looks like from reading that the settings are identical to ADSL except for Annex B (and removal of line filter).
Yep thanks saw that
No worries, let us know how you go with the sync speed. There are reports of the 7390 getting both full speeds as well as hobbled speeds on FTTB/N.
No worries, let us know how you go with the sync speed. There are reports of the 7390 getting both full speeds as well as hobbled speeds on FTTB/N.
Yep I'll post my stats, I've only signed on for the 25/5 plan so can't properly test though. Funny thing is we are moving in a couple of weeks anyway.
Do we remove the adsl line filter and connect the model directly to the wall plate/phone line? Or do we leave the filter in place?
If you wish to keep a filter you need a VDSL type as the ADSL Type will no longer work properly, as the line is different frequency on VDSL.
i am wondering. i have seen before a user that you can post ur stats to and will tell you how far away ur node is.
Anyone know this fellas name Rendang or something.
I'll PM you.
Or is there another way to know how far i am from my node.
There are 2 nodes on my street so wondering which one mine is. hopefully its the only only 2 homes away.
For Wagga Fusion table/map and Google Map with custom icons (nodes, pillars ect), this will give you a better idea to workout what node is connected to a pillar(s).
I can't remember where it was posted, but I believe this map is what you need.
https://nbnmtm.cartodb.com/
Not much use if the area you're in isn't shown
let us know how you go with the sync speed. There are reports of the 7390 getting both full speeds as well as hobbled speeds on FTTB/N.
Reporting back:
FritzBox 7390
Plan: Internode 25/5
Sync: 28 / 6.4
Attainable throughput : 72660 / 3869
Signal-to-noise ratio: 25 / 18
Line attenuation: 13 / 18
Speedtest.net reported 23.8 / 4.6
Reporting back:
Thanks for doing that :)
I wonder whether your 72660 attainable throughput down is real, or due to modem limitations... would be interesting to test with other hardware. Given your attainable up is close to 40, perhaps your down could really be closer to 100.
Given your attainable up is close to 40, perhaps your down could really be closer to 100.
VDSL (FTTN) is just like ADSL where the up "buckets" are lower frequency than the down � so up is often closer to the maximum attainable but the down is more limited by cable length and condition.
In general if up speed is poor it means a cable issue on the run to the premise or frequently in the premise. Up speed is also rarely affected by congestion (inadequate ISP's CVC) as few end users hammer the upload.
VDSL (FTTN) is just like ADSL where the up "buckets" are lower frequency than the down � so up is often closer to the maximum attainable but the down is more limited by cable length and condition.
That's not correct, with VDSL the upstream and downstream allocations are interleaved throughout the bandwidth. The 17a VDSL2 profile (17MHz bandwidth) used by NBNCo looks like the asymmetric 998 plan similar to what Chorus has migrated to in NZ:
http://www.telepermit.co.
Broadcom are one of the few manufacturers of chipsets which support Vectoring � and that is essential for our implementation of FTTN (VDSL2 + vectoring).
Compatibility might be another factor.
In the UK we've seen some interesting issues with interoperability between Lantiq's VDSL chipsets and Broadcom � in either combination (BT's main VDSL DSLAM vendor uses Broadcom, the other supplier is Lantiq).
We don't have vectoring but they've had problems enabling G.INP on the Lantiq-based cabinets, and some people have reported that things are very weird with a Broadcom based DSLAM + Lantiq modem.
Meanwhile my Broadcom modem (on a Broadcom based DSLAM) has been flawless � with a nice 10Mbit speed boost when they finally turned on G.INP (I assume NBN has it on already)
BT does have several Lantiq modems on their approved list, so who knows how that happened..
Hi
Do you guys think its worthwhile moving from 50/20 to 100/40?
Below are my stats from the modem on FTTB. Thanks
Mode: VDSL2
Traffic Type: PTM
Status: Up
Link Power State: L0
Downstream Upstream
Line Coding(Trellis): On On
SNR Margin (0.1 dB): 189 183
Attenuation (0.1 dB): 138 192
Output Power (0.1 dBm): 120 47
Attainable Rate (Kbps): 100279 42893
Path 0 Path 1
Downstream Upstream Downstream Upstream
Rate (Kbps): 54999 22600 0 0
B (# of bytes in Mux Data Frame): 178 195 0 0
M (# of Mux Data Frames in an RS codeword): 1 1 2 2
T (# of Mux Data Frames in an OH sub-frame): 0 0 2 2
R (# of redundancy bytes in the RS codeword): 10 10 16 16
S (# of data symbols over which the RS code word spans): 0.1036 0.2750 8.0000 16.0000
L (# of bits transmitted in each data symbol): 14595 5992 32 16
D (interleaver depth): 16 4 1 1
I (interleaver block size in bytes): 189 206 32 32
N (RS codeword size): 189 206 32 32
Delay (msec): 0 0 0 0
INP (DMT symbol): 43.00 45.00 2.00 4.00
OH Frames: 0 0 2739 2690
OH Frame Errors: 0 0 0 0
RS Words: 1653824 626134 21416 10763
RS Correctable Errors: 0 0 0 0
RS Uncorrectable Errors: 0 0 0 0
HEC Errors: 0 0 0 0
OCD Errors: 0 0 0 0
LCD Errors: 0 0 0 0
Total Cells: 4653701 0 0 0
Data Cells: 0 0 0 0
Bit Errors: 0 0 0 0
Total ES: 0 0
Total SES: 0 0
Total UAS: 120 120
Attainable Rate (Kbps): 100279 42893
go for it mate!
I hope this is the correct thread. FFTN should be RFS for me very soon. I've just discovered my TP-Link TD8817 (http://www.tp-link.com/en/pr
I see iiNet offers the TG-1 but the post here don't paint it in a good light. The main thing I need is good wireless signal, able to stream video over wireless well and the ability to set static routes. Does anyone have any insight with regards to wireless range and streaming reliability and particularly if you can set static routes on the TG-1?
If you can't set static routes can I connect the TG-1 to my TP-Link Router and use that to broadcast the wireless signal/set routes?
If it's not recommended can anyone please suggest a good FTTN compatible product I can buy?
Cheers.
I wonder whether your 72660 attainable throughput down is real, or due to modem limitations
Plan: Internode 25/5
Sync: 28 / 6.4
That looks plan-limited to me.
I'm on iiNet VDSL2, not with NBN FTTN/VDSL2 (i.e. no vectoring), but with a Fritz!Box 7390, like Jad, and I see:
Max. DSLAM throughput kbit/s: 100016 60016
Attainable throughput kbit/s: 49992 9448
Current throughput kbit/s: 49800 9208
I'm on a grandfathered iiNet 80/20 Mb/s plan. I think they've relaxed the bandwidth limits now to whatever the DSLAM & line can support.
If you look in Modems/Routers>AVM, you'll see people with more favourable connections (I'm on about an 850m line) getting much better throughput than that on a 7390.
No worries, let us know how you go with the sync speed. There are reports of the 7390 getting both full speeds as well as hobbled speeds on FTTB/N.
Now that I'm connected myself, I think I might be seeing hobbled throughput with my Fritz!box 7390.
On a FTTN 100/40 plan, my modem stats:
Max DSLAM throughput: 109000 44200
Attainable throughput: 101332 46617
Current throughput: 88792 44168
Will try the provided Netcomm modem when I get time and compare throughputs. If an improvement I can always then run this in bridge mode to my Fritz!box.
If there's a fair chance a node will be installed outside of my property (i'm on a corner block at the entrance intersection for a housing estate and have both a footpath pit and a pillar right next to my fence line) � can I install a new conduit and lead-in from the side of my house (which is closest to the pillar) to the boundary near the pillar?
...in hopes that I can be connected to the node using this rather than the existing lead-in. My existing two-pair lead-in appears to enter my house at a location which is the furthest possible from the aforementioned boundary pillar and/or pit. I fear this might mean my connection to pit or pillar is elsewhere on the block/estate, rather than the one outside my fence.
I have a DBYD from Telstra, but am not very good at reading them, so I don't actually know where I'm connected to. I just know where I can see the lead-in conduit coming out of the ground and into the building.
If there's a fair chance a node will be installed outside of my property (i'm on a corner block at the entrance intersection for a housing estate and have both a footpath pit and a pillar right next to my fence line) � can I install a new conduit and lead-in from the side of my house (which is closest to the pillar) to the boundary near the pillar?
...in hopes that I can be connected to the node using this rather than the existing lead-in. My existing two-pair lead-in appears to enter my house at a location which is the furthest possible from the aforementioned boundary pillar and/or pit. I fear this might mean my connection to pit or pillar is elsewhere on the block/estate, rather than the one outside my fence.
I have a DBYD from Telstra, but am not very good at reading them, so I don't actually know where I'm connected to. I just know where I can see the lead-in conduit coming out of the ground and into the building.
As far as I remember you're responsible for the lead-in conduit from the pit to your premises but you can't pull in the cable � that's done by the authorised contractor (Telstra in days gone by and still today if they have the service contract with NBN. It's highly unlikely that your lead-in will go anywhere other than straight out the front of your house but if you do run a new lead-in conduit then you need to make sure it runs to the same place and you need to follow some rules on placement and number of bends. From memory at least 400mm above ground, on the outside wall, only one sweep bend at each end and must be white communications conduit minimum 25mm. The you need to make available a cable into your house below where the Madison box will be mounted.
If you're that close to where the node will be installed then I don't think it will matter if your conduit runs a few extra metres � you'll still get maximum FTTN speed or close to it and you won't have to dig up your yard, which can be a major PITA once you find a gas line or power cable in the way.
Backhaul upgrade info:
in hopes that I can be connected to the node using this rather than the existing lead-in.
I doubt this will help. The basic principle of the FTTN rollout is to modify the existing copper layout as little as possible, which in practice means just the bit between the node and the pillar, plus, very reluctantly a bit of remediation between the pillar and premises in cases of extreme poor quality copper. My guess is that they would frown on a bit of once-off custom copper from your property boundary to the Node/pillar, even if they are only a metre apart. No rollout likes special cases that depart from the standard. Hope I am wrong.
Hope I am wrong.
You're not unfortunately, very little is done unless they merge to smaller DAs into one larger DA (and in those cases, it is only from the original pillar to the new one)
Hi, I have the NBN currently being rolled out to my area, estimated Nov 16 for service availability.
I have worked out my DA from here www.mybroadband.communications.gov.au
And have found a Telstra pillar and what appears to be a NBN node cabinet a few meters away which is a recent install, my question is will there be only one pillar or NBN node in my DA? or can there be several?
Cheers.
there could be a couple. i know in my area there is a new development behind us which got its own new pillar installed and node next to the existing pit for the streets.
node beautification project underway?
or a local residents sick and tired of graffiti?
This is hand painted, not a stick on
Wonder if the AFP will be called in to find out who interfered with nbn� equipment
http://i63.tinypic.com/iz6wt3.jpg
node beautification project underway?
Probably the most likely.
Wouldn't be surprised if tomorrow they put on their blog how they have just completed a trial program to help "brighten and interact with the community".
Their community satisfaction survey (of one person who happened to walk past that may or may not be a member of the community) will agree it's is a great improvement and worth while project so they will announce that they will be commencing full rollout of the project at the bargain basement cost of $1,000 per Node.
bargain basement cost of $1,000 per Node.
for materials,
$10,000 for management of contract per node,
$15,000 to Prime contractor to arrange work per node.
work done by a work for the dole recipient
edit:- corrected dollar amounts, left off a zero,
bit like some politician's budget figures I guess.
My excuse is I only have myself as a proof reader, they have entire departments
I have a few questions. My SAM has had a lot building going on at the start of July, with most DAs having a node base or even a node placed already. One DA was built and node placed in 2days!.
My question is, most of the construction has happened down the middle of the SAM with the outer few DAs having no work started. Will these outer DA nodes not be built until the SAMs next to them are started? Or maybe they just leave them til later?
Also i wanted to get my home wired with a single new line inside to a single socket. Currently I have 4 sockets, 2 aren't used and one that runs about 40-50outside. Will I see speeds better and stable is I remove all these sockets and leave just 1 new line. House is easily 40yrs old.
Thanks guys.
or a local residents sick and tired of graffiti?
I wish someone with some artistic talent would do something like this to my local bus shelter.
I've made numerous written complaints with photo's since late last year, and each time responded to that something will be done. It gets handballed back and forth between my local council, TfNSW and some local joint government agency graffiti board.
Frustrating. I think some hardcore punishment for offenders is the only way to deal with graffiti "artists".
Hi guys
I live in a previous RIM/ISAM/etc infested suburb. I currently sync ADSL2+ at 18,000/1000
The calculations show that i am possibly 1300m from the pillar at the moment... based on this data I got when I signed up a few years ago (I'm just guessing that the sum of the below numbers is my current total distance):
CableType : CPFUT , cableLength : 177, cableGauge : 0.40
cableSectionGroup : 0
CableType : CPFUT , cableLength : 212, cableGauge : 0.40
cableSectionGroup : 0
CableType : CPFUT , cableLength : 249, cableGauge : 0.40
cableSectionGroup : 0
CableType : CPFUT , cableLength : 174, cableGauge : 0.40
cableSectionGroup : 0
CableType : CPFUT , cableLength : 26, cableGauge : 0.40
cableSectionGroup : 0
CableType : CPFUT , cableLength : 73, cableGauge : 0.40
cableSectionGroup : 0
CableType : CPFUT , cableLength : 71, cableGauge : 0.40
cableSectionGroup : 0
CableType : CPFUT , cableLength : 116, cableGauge : 0.40
cableSectionGroup : 0
CableType : CPFUT , cableLength : 88, cableGauge : 0.40
cableSectionGroup : 0
CableType : CPFUT , cableLength : 84, cableGauge : 0.40
cableSectionGroup : 0
CableType : CPFUT , cableLength : 88, cableGauge : 0.40
cableSectionGroup : 0
CableType : PEIFLI , cableLength : 40, cableGauge : 0.40
Is it likely the cable will be altered so it is shorter? FTTN has commenced in my area, and I've seen a few new pillars and green boxes go up.
Cool. Went for a walk today throughout my DA. Its only the one node and they have just installed a new pillar next to the current one. 220mtrs walk from my house, so im hoping for some pretty high speeds as ive only been getting max 7.5mbps for the last 10yrs I've lived here..
ok so im with telstra for fttn and for the life of me i couldnt find out ehy my ping was 12 ms and other fttn rsp users had 6ms or lower. i recently aquired a dgnd3700v1 and set it up for vdsl. ping times still 11 ms.. i found that the phYr settings in my netgear was on for down but off for up. so i changed it to on for both and pings are now 6ms solid. So any gamers looking for the best possible ping get a 3rd party vdsl modem!!
from http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/5496928158
to http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/5500019392
My question is, most of the construction has happened down the middle of the SAM with the outer few DAs having no work started. Will these outer DA nodes not be built until the SAMs next to them are started? Or maybe they just leave them til later?
The node build in Wagga has been completely random. Sometimes starts in the inner areas before the outer but most of it has been mixed between both.
Also i wanted to get my home wired with a single new line inside to a single socket. Currently I have 4 sockets, 2 aren't used and one that runs about 40-50outside. Will I see speeds better and stable is I remove all these sockets and leave just 1 new line. House is easily 40yrs old.
It is best to have a single line. Shorter the run, the better it can be.
Thanks for the reply ADSL2+. From what I understand FTTN is designed to have a node for every DA near it's pillar, with the odd chance of 2 DAs being joined together. Theres a node about 750-850m away in another DA next to mine. Would they use that node to service our area too, seems crazy because our 2 DAs are quite large. There's a pillar 430m cable length from my house, so I guess I'm hoping they build a node there that will service our DA. I know I saw markings spray painted on the ground..but that was like 4months ago and construction only started this month with RFS for end of Oct.
$10,00 for management of contract per node,
$15,00 to Prime contractor to arange work per node.
$1k or $10k?
$1k5 or $15k?
$1k or $10k?
$1k5 or $15k?
doh!!!! bangs head on desk
$10K
$15K
will fix original post
node beautification project underway?
And a blog from our NZ colleagues facing the same problem!!
https://blog.chorus.co.nz/cabinet-art-gallery/
Even submarine cable landings now end up with not much more than a box on the side of the road.
It's obviously best to allow the locals to put their creativity into action rather than wait for the vandals /s
Some of the traffic light control boxes in Canberra got similar decoration back in 2005. I think that more may have been done since.
From what I understand FTTN is designed to have a node for every DA near it's pillar, with the odd chance of 2 DAs being joined together.
it's also possible that a DA might be split if engineering concerns dictate it.
Theres a node about 750-850m away in another DA next to mine. Would they use that node to service our area too, seems crazy because our 2 DAs are quite large.
there really is no way of determining what will happen based on simply distance and location.
i have two queries.
a) does anyone know if homes with easements cause any particular issues with FttN?
b) does the term 'infrastructure under construction' mean something physically needs rectifying, or not necessarily?
i'm curious as many houses on my street [RFS back in march] have a message saying that further work is needed and "infrastructure under construction", although a couple homes (either side of me) are fine. nbn says i am service class 10 and still in the FttN footprint, but were unable to give me any reason for the issue.
anyway our street has a lot of odd shaped blocks with some having easements which made me wonder if this had something to do with it � i.e maybe originally there were less blocks to be serviced by copper but were at some point subdivided?
nbn said easements would not be the problem but i had a sense they had not come across the question before.
p.s i did search the term but others in a similar boat seem to be classed as MDU's and i could find nothing specifically relating to standalone houses
b) does the term 'infrastructure under construction' mean something physically needs rectifying, or not necessarily?
it can be "not necessarily"
my line was able to be connected in Feb 2016, made enquries, but due to number porting issues had to hold off.
But then when I tried to connect 2 weeks ago I was told that construction was planned and more work was needed, even though every house around me showed as still being able to connect.
After w ekk of back ond forth from RSP to nbn� it was rectified
nbn� database seems to get corrupted pretty regularly
Getting connected tomorrow, someone at internode said to turn off my adsl router before the connection as it can trick out the FTTN but I just rang tech support and they said I don't have to worry. What is the right answer?
What is the right answer?
Turn it off. Sometimes if an ADSL modem is left on when the changeover happens, it might lock up the port on the NBN Dslam.
Cheers, will do.
What is the right answer?
All depends. The generic settings I found for FTTN NBN are:
VDSL2
Vectoring enabled
G.INP enabled
Dynamic IP (Automatic IP)
If your current modem/router can support the above settings, then there is no need to unplug. Otherwise unplug, as any other settings will end up getting your DSL Port blocked.
All depends. The generic settings I found for FTTN NBN are:
VDSL2
Vectoring enabled
G.INP enabled
Dynamic IP (Automatic IP)
If your current modem/router can support the above settings, then there is no need to unplug. Otherwise unplug, as any other settings will end up getting your DSL Port blocked.
Yeah pretty sure my current router doesn't do VDSL2 so will be plugging the new one I was given once the change over has gone through. Ta.
it can be "not necessarily"
cheers. similar situation � was able to get it and started making inquiries but have held off for a few reasons then noticed the status had changed. not in any rush at least � just curious as to what is going on.
at least nbnco have clarified i am still getting FttN � was worried initially as i am 1.2+k's from the node [possibly as much as 1.6 depending] and thought maybe they decided they couldn't service the street.
nbn� database seems to get corrupted pretty regularly
maybe it is just some silly thing like that.
secretly i was hoping for an upgrade due to the distance, but as neighbours can get it i must presume no upgrade.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét