OT - BT testing 800Mbps broadband

It is.

Coax pretty much gives up and waveguides take over above a certain frequency, and then you end up with fibre at political frequencies.

Despite

I think you just did.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher
Loading thread data ...

You can certainly get 1GPS down coax. Whether or not its cheaper to use fibre is a moot point

depends on S/N ratio. remember data rate is bandwidth X SNR.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

You commented that it does not match the performance of CAT5 wrt to distance. This ought not be surprising since they are obviously pushing the baud rate on the single telephony pair much higher than the 125 Mbaud used in 100/1000 ethernet.

Reply to
John Rumm

This is "Fibre to the Distribution Point" which seems to mean DSLAMs on telephone poles. But once they have that, a fiber connection from the pole to the house should be *much* cheaper than current FTTP.

-- Richard

Reply to
Richard Tobin

Ah yes the BBC News article quoted a distance for these faster speeds. Up to 66 m (sixty six metres) or a shade over 200 feet. It also said that covered 80% of lines. which I find very hard to believe even in urban areas.

FTTC is in the process of being installed here, indeed the 30 odd core fibre cable to feed the cabinet passes under our forcourt 20' from the front door. Unfortunately the cabinet will be about 2 km away at that distance FTTC would be hardly any faster than the ADSL2 (up to 8 Mbps) we currently have. I say "would be" as our line doesn't go anywhere near that cabinet anyway so we won't be able to get FTTC full stop.

Reply to
Dave Liquorice

We blame the aluminium.

But only to 100 m and needs 4 pairs that are closely matched and not full of water or dead spiders.

Actually over the years our ali has got better. I suspect that all the jelly beans have been replaced as the wires drop out when they are in fiddling fixing faults on other lines.

The ADSL2 now runs as fast as one could expect it to given the line length/loss. Actually a resync during the day is bad news as it'll sync at close to 8 Mbps (not bad on the end of 3 km plus of line) but once night comes it can't handle the added noise from MF stations and the through put drops and the error rate skyrockets.

Reply to
Dave Liquorice

Interesting idea "DP22" is a small jointing post at the base of "our" pole. Which is fed underground via armoured cable rather than ducted, so how does the fibre get to it and how would these pole DSLAMs be powered? Also there is just one customer fed from DP22 us. Several others pass through but they'll be 1/2 a mile or more away.

IIRC we had a line fault in DP22 once, BT man got out his TDR, the fault was 50+m away. If this technology is FTTDP then I have less trouble with the 80% of lines being within 66 m statement.

Reply to
Dave Liquorice

Humm....

Speeds over copper degrade over distance, but BT said it was able to achieve 786 Mbps download speeds over 19 meters and 696 Mbps download speeds over 66 meters. Fiber and copper deployments can end up sending data over copper for much longer distances, further lowering speed, but BT said that 66 meters and below "encompasses around 80 percent of such connections." It's not clear whether the 80 percent figure refers to BT's existing network, the field trial area, or future deployment plans. We've asked the company to clarify.

Reply to
tony sayer

Ever played around with a lump of the Fibre they, VM install in their ducts it's very robust..

Copper to the home meaning co-axial and prolly not actually copper as we know it;)..

Reply to
tony sayer

Riiight. And how many properties will one "distribution point" be serving?

Reply to
Adrian

It doesn't even come close to covering the spur to next door from where it peels off from us. I'm not even sure it'd even cover one stretch of it.

Reply to
Adrian

No it isn't, not compared to copper. Even doing the usual trick of pulling it through the conduit or putting a heel on it in the trench can break it.

Reply to
dennis

The proposal I developed used a special BT router to power the switch (PoE before it was invented) and terminate the line. As long as one of the homes was switched on it would work, if none were switched on it didn't matter. The router was also intended to prioritise ports so they could have VoIP services in some of them and was to have WiFi to implement a public network (ring any bells?). The switch chips proposed supported an early version of label switching to create VPNs over Ethernet.

I even proposed that multiple ethernet switches could be dropped down foot way holes or put on poles in a daisy chain to deliver longer distances. They still could.

You could have had a pretty good service by now if politics weren't an issue.

Reply to
dennis

Well, look at a telephone pole. Maybe a dozen or so?

I don't see what you're getting at.

-- Richard

Reply to
Richard Tobin

For that distance I would be happy to buy my own fiber!

Reply to
John Rumm

En el artículo , Richard Tobin escribió:

Yes, I spotted that too. Should think it would mean they would need to run power up each DP to run the fibre/copper transceiver.

Hope it comes off - the copper run from the top of the pole to my master socket is about 10m :)

Reply to
Mike Tomlinson

En el artículo , Richard Tobin escribió:

Think Adrian's referring to contention, i.e. the bottleneck moves from the DSLAM in the exchange to the top of the pole.

Reply to
Mike Tomlinson

For the eight houses our handy pole serves, that's probably a quarter of a mile or more of copper from the fibre. But I can't really see them running fibre three or four km from the exchange to the pole for eight houses. The furthest houses from the exchange are about 8km, and one pole DSLAM would be covering one or two of them.

It's another whizzy technology upgrade that forgets that there are a lot of people still coping with sub-1Mbit connections (if they can get broadband at all - not all can), and for whom approaching current speeds would be a nice first step. Yet again the "digital divide" is widened, not closed.

Reply to
Adrian

Quite. Annoyingly leading web designers to inflate gizmos on their already overlarge sites:-(

Reply to
Tim Lamb

Perhaps they did a survey in a tower block

NT

Reply to
meow2222

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.