Thread: 120M Honesty from VM
View Single Post
Old 29-01-2016, 09:01   #13
Ignitionnet
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Leeds, West Yorkshire
Age: 47
Posts: 13,995
Ignitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny stars
Ignitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny stars
Re: Honesty from VM

Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 View Post
Some areas are never ready for any upgrade never mind the upcoming one. VM have a problem: they own a patchwork quilt of inherited/acquired physical networks each with own challenges of topology/demographic mismatches, ageing fibre etc. infrastructure, etc.

BT had the luxury, so it seems, to design and deploy a newer, technology wise, network into a far more devolved, fine grained solution. As a result, their ability to react to localised network loading problems seems far more reactive and sophisticated.
More down to the basic nature of the networks each is using than any devolved, fine grained solution.

That and VM's planning criteria. BT upgrade cabinet backhaul well in advance of congestion, VM simply don't.

http://labs.thinkbroadband.com/local...area=E14000652

You can see the cycle of congestion, speed uplifts, and resolution of congestion really well there.
Ignitionnet is offline   Reply With Quote