Re: Oversubscribed areas?
 

Ignition I thank you for indicating what non cable providers follow similar policies, but at the same time I hope you understand my criticism given the poor standard of service in my area not just myself but people in other parts of the city.

Funny enough tho I would not be bothered by reduced speeds as long as things kept working and it wasnt for excessive periods of time, but sadly most of the time when I experience congestion it tends to break stuff, especially streaming. I said on TBB I am happy e.g. for policing to be used which keeps QoE high whilst lowering utilisation.

However VM do seem to disagree with you, if maximum speed isnt important than why are they doubling it? Their historical and current behaviour suggests maximum speed is "all" they care about.

Re: Oversubscribed areas?
 

Because that's all most customers understand. Mention latency or throughput and their eyes glaze over whereas 300mbs is a great willy waver. :(

Re: Oversubscribed areas?
 

Yet VM usually turn up last on every metric except download speeds... Upstream, jitter, packet loss, DNS, stability, shaping, bufferbloat, etc., pretty much everything measured by the Samknows box aside from download speeds.

Perhaps they should worry some more.

Re: Oversubscribed areas?
 

They don't seem to care about quality of experience or speed here. At peak times I can't stream iPlayer or YouTube, browsing is noticeably less responsive, and you can forget about online gaming as latency is all over the place. In my opinion Virgin Media should be banned from selling broadband to new customers on any part of the network suffering these extreme levels of utilisation. That would soon get them to sort it out.

Re: Oversubscribed areas?
 

:)

Dont worry, the headline speeds will save the day.

Re: Oversubscribed areas?
 

I was writing in the context of capacity planning.

---------- Post added at 22:52 ---------- Previous post was at 22:50 ----------

Many of those are due to the joys of DOCSIS. Packet loss I don't think they're the worst for though.

Re: Oversubscribed areas?
 

Really interesting stuff, I'd long suspected that planning permission had nothing to do with streetworks but was just a good "catch-all" explanation.

Didn't realise streetcabs were exempt though. Sad to read in a few other posts that investment since the LG takeover's actually getting worse - I thought the opposite was the case. HO hum.

Re: Oversubscribed areas?
 

There are complications in conservation areas. Where we live, BT has not enabled our local cabinet for FTTC even though all the cabs in the surrounding area have been updated for years.

Re: Oversubscribed areas?
 

The rules for permitted development rights do vary from area to area, but in general unless it's a sensitive area most telecoms and utility street cabs are covered.

Re: Oversubscribed areas?
 

Not for 5 years. Cabinets are permitted development for a while even in conservation areas.

Re: Oversubscribed areas?
 

The openreach checker has had a message like this:

for all the years I have been looking. Here's the answer I got when I emailed NGA Enquiries in Nov 2012:

This was after FTTC had been available in surrounding areas for around 2 years ..

Re: Oversubscribed areas?
 

I wouldn't necessarily say investment has gone down, although I'm not sure on general figures. There seems to be a lot more looking ahead now though, so rather than a fix that's gonna last a couple of years, more solutions are being looked at.

Re: Oversubscribed areas?
 

Investment getting worse? You don't see what has been done since they took over and what will be done in next few years

Re: Oversubscribed areas?
 

That was accurate in 2012. The change was made after that.

Re: Oversubscribed areas?
 

What change? The checker still says

---------- Post added at 20:00 ---------- Previous post was at 19:59 ----------

Current speed on a 152/12 service using a VM speedtest.net site:

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2015/09/5.png