Dave Plowman (News) formulated on Saturday :
I have my setup the other way around. Phone cable is overhead, comes in at the eaves, into loft, with the main router access point up there. It gives pretty reasonable coverage around most of the place, but could be better on ground floor. On the ground floor, I have a second access point wired up to the first.
John Rumm brought next idea :
Yes, that was also my best guess at the cause and what Plusnet seemed to be suggesting. Possible it is also a faulty or poor quality modem router, hence all of his wifi range problems.
But when they *eventually* get round to your neck of the woods, it'll likely be 330Mbps FTTP
You obviously haven't been paying attention Brian.
Is that all? VM keep trying to get me to upgrade from 100Mbps to their VIVID 350 - though I'm told a lot of the time I'd likely only get 150 to
200 :( And heaven only knows when FTTP will arrive.
Yes, and what is wrong with that? The fibre to the cab looks like fibre and quacks like fibre, so what are you complaining about.
That's not correct when you use them in access point mode with a cat5 back to the router.
before taking into account neighbours on
It?s a lot slower than FTTP can do.
The fibre to the cab looks like fibre
LOL. I think the top for a single monomode is around 100Gbps.
FTTP aint nowhere near that.
I'm not actually a heavy user. Bit of catch up TV etc. But that was fine anyway before paying for the higher speed. The odd download I do from wherever didn't suddenly take half the time.
Sure, but it?s a lot better than VDSL2 can do.
Some places like Singapore you have have 2 1Gb services if you want that. Not expensive either.
Its slow by comparison to FTTP (80/20 at best compared to 330/30 typical for FTTP), and the reliability is limited by what in many cases will be a very old copper installation.
(personally I would not complain about having FTTC, since it would be better than the 1.5Mbps I get at the end of 6km of soggy string - however its a bit deceptive to refer to it as fibre broadband)
I thought we were on Virgin?s Project Lightning (new grey cabinets in the street) but final connection is still coax. No twisted pair though, they?ve just moved over to VOIP.
Tim
Are far as I can tell, Virgin either run coax from a street cabinet to your house OR provide full FTTP. They?re hardly likely to terminate just a few feet from your house.
Tim
Then it's not an extender (aka repeater) is is it? It is, as you say, an access point.
You still need to be careful about channels and any overlap of channels and coverage but you don't get the instant 50% reduction in through put that you do with an extender/repeater.
Tim+ explained :
As near as I could see, what was dropped into the ground from cabinet to every house, was a semi rigid and yellow coloured.
There's an Android app* for looking to see which channels are in use.
*WiFi Analyser
Looking at where general FTTP infrastruture has been installed around here it's not likely to appear here. The places it has are small groups (dozen or so) premesis all fairly close together ie less than a handful of poles covers all of them. The premesis in this part of the world are detached by a 1/4 mile or more...
It's not lack of fibre in the area, they installed a fibre cable down to the villages cabinet for FTTC. They normally put in 96 core cable, that cable passes under our forecourt 10' from the door. There
*might* be access into that cable at large chamber 200 m away.Where there is the infrastructure I don't think I've seen an installed "drop wire" from the fibre DPs at the top of the poles to a premesis. That could mean a few things:
The infrastructure isn't capable of being lit. Highly unlikely, why would Openreach spend money and not light and sell it? Yes, the money could be Phase 2 (Or is it 3?) BDUK money but if so it would be capable of being lit.
The combination of these three is more likely though: The consumer cost (installation and/or rental) of the service is too high. Consumer ignorance and poor marketing by the few ISPs that do sell it. Lack of ISPs selling the service.
Of course if I wait until 2033:
I've been saying since the inception of BDUK and the use of FTTC that they shouldn't be doing FTTC as it's not future proof enough. I used to use the example of a family at home, with Mum watching Men & Motors, Dad a soap and the kids surfing away on YouTube, all with 10 Mbps HD streams so 50 Mbps minimum required not the 24 Mbps mimimum that qualifies a link as "superfast"...
These days with the emergence of 4k UHD/HDR as the broadcast TV standard (new trucks/studios are UHD 4k if not 8k capable and IP based). I'll revise that to 100 Mbps not being enough. The recent trials of live streaming UHD needed a 40 Mbps link...
They are trying to fudge it with G.Fast *up to* 330Mbps but only if you can throw a rock at the cabinet and hit it.
It is when it's a mode you select in that device.
It is, as you say,
A friend who works for openreach, lives on a rural lincolnshire road with individual properties strung-out over miles, apparently they're getting FTTP real soon now (problem due to crossing a railway line).
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.