BT Infinity & FTTx Discussion

Caged · 22 Sep 2016 at 23:22

Yeah, don't replace the whole NTE unless you are confident that you won't bugger it up. I don't think Openreach are going to be asking how you have a shiny new NTE5c if it's installed in a way that isn't causing issues though.

bremen1874 · 22 Sep 2016 at 23:23

MissChief said:
Not everyone uses their master socket for their broadband connection.

In what way does that stop them building the filter in?

The socket just needs two sets of extension terminals, filtered and unfiltered. You connect the extension wiring to the appropriate set.

Caged · 22 Sep 2016 at 23:26

Because then you lose the ability to test the line without anything attached to it. The test port is really useful and the NTE is a great piece of design. It provides a way of an end-user replacing a part that could wear out or become damaged by external factors without risking damage to the network.

The only way to make the socket take up (a useful amount) less space would be to work to recess more of it into the wall, which then places requirements on backbox depth.

bremen1874 · 22 Sep 2016 at 23:51

They've managed to move the extension terminals from the removable front plate to the fixed part of the socket without loosing the test socket. If they can do that with one set they could do it with two sets.

They've made it complicated (and big) to allow it to work with or without the line filter. There's a hell of a lot of fresh air in there, and I'm sure if they'd decided to just include the filtering on all sockets it could have been much slimmer.

The design is over complicated as it is.

The standard phone extensions terminate on the back plate.

The VDSL (unfiltered) connection terminates on the optional front plate.

For that to work the connection must be going out to the filter and then back (which explains that fat double sided connector).

Caged · 23 Sep 2016 at 00:55

It's added cost though, why supply a socket with a ton of components in for filtering out DSL frequencies when there's no guarantee that it will be required? Keeping it separate makes sense from the point of view of having flexibility in terms of what can clip on the front, and it makes a filter swap something that can be done by the customer rather than something that would require an engineer visit.

I don't doubt it could be slightly thinner, but this is a design that has to provide a foundation for services that don't even exist yet, so I can forgive them for trying to ensure they build in enough physical space to make this happen.

Twirlywoos · 23 Sep 2016 at 09:14

Twirlywoos said:
Over a month later and I am now connected with BT

Ran speed test and I am getting

This is on a 55/10 package. Normally I get max speeds as I am close to the cabinet so will investigate by running modem stats later today. I am using the Openreach Huawei modem and AC87U.

After 24 hours this is what my line looks like.

Twirlywoos · 23 Sep 2016 at 09:19

thanks for the headsup but wow they still remain an eyesore

BIGWEB · 23 Sep 2016 at 10:14

bremen1874 said:
60/15 is within the usual range. You'll have been given an indication of the expected speed for your connection when you signed up.

Yes I think their indication was 52-62 so not too bad. anyway to tell how far you are away from a exchange?

Is there anything faster coming out soon?

Simpic · 23 Sep 2016 at 11:39

Disconnects

Hello,

Currently testing a HH5 to see if I can fix some IPC6023 issues from BTTV internet channels.

Just had a disconnect with the following data in the log

Code:

11:35:03, 23 Sep.	( 3018.910000) CWMP: session completed successfully
11:35:02, 23 Sep.	IN: BLOCK [12] Spoofing protection (IGMP 192.168.1.254->224.0.0.22 on ptm0.101)
11:35:02, 23 Sep.	BLOCKED 4 more packets (because of Spoofing protection)
11:35:02, 23 Sep.	( 3018.740000) CWMP: HTTP authentication success from https://pbthdm.bt.mo
11:35:01, 23 Sep.	IN: BLOCK [12] Spoofing protection (IGMP 192.168.1.254->224.0.0.22 on ptm0)
11:35:01, 23 Sep.	BLOCKED 1 more packets (because of First packet is Invalid)
11:34:59, 23 Sep.	OUT: BLOCK [65] First packet is Invalid (Invalid tcp flags for current tcp state: TCP [192.168.1.64]:50108->[216.58.208.174]:443 on ppp3)
11:34:58, 23 Sep.	BLOCKED 3 more packets (because of Spoofing protection)
11:34:58, 23 Sep.	IN: BLOCK [12] Spoofing protection (IGMP 192.168.1.254->224.0.0.22 on ptm0)
11:34:57, 23 Sep.	( 3013.640000) CWMP: Server URL: https://pbthdm.bt.mo; Connecting as user: ACS username
11:34:57, 23 Sep.	( 3013.630000) CWMP: Session start now. Event code(s): '4 VALUE CHANGE'
11:34:56, 23 Sep.	( 3011.870000) WAN operating mode is VDSL
11:34:56, 23 Sep.	( 3011.870000) Last WAN operating mode was VDSL
11:34:54, 23 Sep.	( 3010.450000) PPP IPCP Receive Configuration ACK
11:34:54, 23 Sep.	( 3010.450000) PPP IPCP Send Configuration Request
11:34:54, 23 Sep.	( 3010.440000) PPP IPCP Receive Configuration NAK
11:34:54, 23 Sep.	( 3010.440000) PPP IPCP Send Configuration ACK
11:34:54, 23 Sep.	( 3010.440000) PPP IPCP Receive Configuration Request
11:34:54, 23 Sep.	( 3010.440000) PPP IPCP Send Configuration Request
11:34:53, 23 Sep.	( 3009.190000) PPPoE is up - Down Rate=43948000Kbps, Up Rate=7573000Kbps; SNR Margin Down=6.9dB, Up=5.9dB
11:34:53, 23 Sep.	( 3009.170000) CHAP authentication successful
11:34:53, 23 Sep.	( 3009.100000) CHAP Receive Challenge
11:34:53, 23 Sep.	( 3009.100000) Starting CHAP authentication with peer
11:34:53, 23 Sep.	( 3009.100000) PPP LCP Receive Configuration ACK
11:34:53, 23 Sep.	( 3009.090000) PPP LCP Send Configuration Request
11:34:53, 23 Sep.	( 3009.090000) PPP LCP Receive Configuration Reject
11:34:53, 23 Sep.	( 3009.090000) PPP LCP Send Configuration ACK
11:34:53, 23 Sep.	( 3009.090000) PPP LCP Receive Configuration Request
11:34:53, 23 Sep.	( 3009.090000) PPP LCP Send Configuration Request
11:34:11, 23 Sep.	IN: BLOCK [12] Spoofing protection (IGMP 192.168.1.254->224.0.0.22 on ptm0.101)
11:34:08, 23 Sep.	( 2964.210000) CWMP: session closed due to error: No response
11:34:06, 23 Sep.	IN: BLOCK [12] Spoofing protection (IGMP 192.168.1.254->224.0.0.22 on ptm0)
11:34:06, 23 Sep.	BLOCKED 2 more packets (because of Spoofing protection)
11:34:06, 23 Sep.	( 2962.180000) CWMP: Server URL: https://pbthdm.bt.mo; Connecting as user: ACS username
11:34:06, 23 Sep.	( 2962.170000) CWMP: Session start now. Event code(s): '4 VALUE CHANGE'
11:34:05, 23 Sep.	IN: BLOCK [12] Spoofing protection (IGMP 192.168.1.254->224.0.0.22 on ptm0)
11:34:03, 23 Sep.	( 2959.200000) PTM over DSL is up
11:33:35, 23 Sep.	( 2930.900000) CWMP: session closed due to error: No response
11:33:35, 23 Sep.	( 2930.850000) CWMP: Server URL: https://pbthdm.bt.mo; Connecting as user: ACS username
11:33:35, 23 Sep.	( 2930.840000) CWMP: Session start now. Event code(s): '4 VALUE CHANGE'
11:33:34, 23 Sep.	( 2930.590000) CWMP: Initializing transaction for event code 4 VALUE CHANGE
11:33:32, 23 Sep.	( 2928.320000) PTM over DSL is down after 28 minutes uptime
11:33:32, 23 Sep.	( 2928.310000) PPPoE is down after 27 minutes uptime [Waiting for Underlying Connection (WAN Ethernet 2 - Down)]
11:33:29, 23 Sep.	( 2925.580000) PPP LCP Send Termination Request [User request]

Any idea what might have caused this?

Sparx · 23 Sep 2016 at 18:14

Why the F has my thread on the NTE5c been merged in this thread?

Does the Mod wish to clarify why? It's a complete different discussion and has nothing to do with BT Infinity...

Caged · 23 Sep 2016 at 18:55

Also vBulletin merges threads in a horrific way.

rocketman · 23 Sep 2016 at 19:18

Does anyone know the email address of someone high up in BT to complain to? They removed Infinity Fibre from my account on the 7 September, and are telling me it won't be reconnected until 5 October.

Balb0wa · 23 Sep 2016 at 19:28

rocketman said:
Does anyone know the email address of someone high up in BT to complain to? They removed Infinity Fibre from my account on the 7 September, and are telling me it won't be reconnected until 5 October.

[email protected] that will work, you will get a call from the exec office in a day or so, never fails

rocketman · 23 Sep 2016 at 19:44

Balb0wa said:
[email protected] that will work, you will get a call from the exec office in a day or so, never fails

Thanks

liamcrane · 25 Sep 2016 at 20:12

Hi guys, currently on plusnet and over the past 2 weeks my speed has dropped from 75mb down to 40mb. Plusnet cant give me an answer to why so I am looking to BT Infinty. Just wondered if i can use my own vdsl router if i decide to change? Also i dont suppose BT do static IPs do they? The only real thing i liked about plusnet was you could get one for a one off £5

DragonQ · 25 Sep 2016 at 20:35

You can use whatever router you want with Plusnet and BT. Sky doesn't allow this and requires some extra ****ing about to get it working.

Twirlywoos · 25 Sep 2016 at 22:14

liamcrane said:
Hi guys, currently on plusnet and over the past 2 weeks my speed has dropped from 75mb down to 40mb. Plusnet cant give me an answer to why so I am looking to BT Infinty. Just wondered if i can use my own vdsl router if i decide to change? Also i dont suppose BT do static IPs do they? The only real thing i liked about plusnet was you could get one for a one off £5

I'd get Plusnet to sort it out if it is a line fault as moving to BT will give you the same problem. What speeds do you get from the test port on the master socket?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLCXL8O0EDtjKnh9Blo73VdL1lDxt-i6mL&v=9IG8rcadbj0

andy_mk3 · 2 Oct 2016 at 11:17

I signed up for BT Infinity 1 for my girlfriend's house a few weeks back. Activation date was 26th September but we were on holiday, so collected the Hub from the post office yesterday and plugged it all in. Hub showed a steady orange light so no connection.

After nearly an hour waiting on the BT live chat, she phoned OR who said there was an issue with congestion in the cabinet and it will be fixed on the 4th October. Anyone had this before? Not overly concerned but it's a bit of an annoyance.

KIA · 2 Oct 2016 at 18:06

andy_mk3 said:
After nearly an hour waiting on the BT live chat, she phoned OR who said there was an issue with congestion in the cabinet and it will be fixed on the 4th October.

Congestion as in no more ports available?

andy_mk3 · 2 Oct 2016 at 18:26

KIA said:
Congestion as in no more ports available?

That's all I know. Her grasp of the English language was pretty poor so I didn't bother asking too much.

But that's what I gather.