LLU

andrew_wallasey · 01-12-2004, 12:44

What does everyone think of these LLU plans. I personally don't think they are a very good idea as I think there is going to be loads of service problems and as NTL would not be allowed to change things as they can with their own network. They will take months to get sorted. In the proposal they have released they are talking about services but I don't think BT's network is of a high enough standard to do them any time soon. There is equitment (line cards, etc) in BT exchanges almost 50 years old.

I think it would be better to invest this money in new builds (where there is high demand) and upgrading the rest of the network to support digital.

Neil · 01-12-2004, 12:49

*Moved to Broadband Discussion forum*

andrew_wallasey · 01-12-2004, 13:49

Why? It's nothing relatively to do with broadband its to do with them offering all services over LLU.

**Chris** · 01-12-2004, 13:53

LLU is as much about telephony as it is internet.

quadplay · 01-12-2004, 14:01

And Television too! ntl's plans for LLU include triple-play services.

andrew_wallasey · 01-12-2004, 14:05

That is my point. Why was my topic moved from general?

etccarmageddon · 01-12-2004, 17:36

calm down!

I cant see why not experiment with LLU but arent they going where others have tried and failed due to BT being obstructive and the costs being very high. I recon it's just something to impress the bond/share holders and make it look like NTL are forward looking etc.

BBKing · 01-12-2004, 18:15

There's also the point that you wouldn't get much new build for the price of LLUing the whole country, which obviously gives you greater reach. Remember the only BT infrastructure used in LLU is the twisted pair and the frame at the exchange, all of which is fairly passive and well run-in. I've certainly had no line problems at the two houses I've had DSL at.

It's not a piece of cake, but it's much the most efficient way of extending network coverage.

Escapee · 01-12-2004, 19:08

This will obviously lead to a two-tier system with different services/products for on-net and off-net customers.

Supplying service to remote business customers always used to be a problem for ntl when there was a fault, BT will still be obstructive and I see no way around that problem.

I think it's a good idea, but in practice I just dont think it will be as good as some expect.

BBKing · 01-12-2004, 19:19

Quote:

This will obviously lead to a two-tier system

Why obviously? There are technical differences between DSL and cable that mean things operate in very different ways on very different kit, but the high-level services are much the same, surely?

BT can be obstructive only as far as fixing the twisted pair to the customer, which is the least likely bit to go wrong, anyway. After that it's ntl's stuff to fix, thankfully*. Actually unbundling the customer could be another sticking point, as OFCOM want to ramp up the rate of unbundling, so BT could turn round and say 'we haven't got the staff'. This would get very short shrift, though.

*Yes, insert your own joke here, but I'd far rather work within ntl's fault management procedures than have to go to a completely separate company, we had enough of that with C&W a few years back.

**Paul** · 01-12-2004, 19:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrew_wallasey

There is equitment (line cards, etc) in BT exchanges almost 50 years old.

LOL, I don't think so. There was no such thing as line cards 50 years ago.

BT is now all digital and the oldest System X & System Y exchanges are less than 20 years old.

andrew_wallasey · 01-12-2004, 21:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBKing

There's also the point that you wouldn't get much new build for the price of LLUing the whole country, which obviously gives you greater reach. Remember the only BT infrastructure used in LLU is the twisted pair and the frame at the exchange, all of which is fairly passive and well run-in. I've certainly had no line problems at the two houses I've had DSL at.

It's not a piece of cake, but it's much the most efficient way of extending network coverage.

Yes but they are finding it difficult providing more than 1mbit at around 4km through DSL. I can not see TV, etc working well over the twisted pair using video over DSL I assume.

andrew_wallasey · 01-12-2004, 21:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul M

LOL, I don't think so. There was no such thing as line cards 50 years ago.

BT is now all digital and the oldest System X & System Y exchanges are less than 20 years old.

Wrong wording. When your twisted pair first comes into the exchange. Some exchanges have very old MDF's.

Escapee · 01-12-2004, 21:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBKing

Why obviously? There are technical differences between DSL and cable that mean things operate in very different ways on very different kit, but the high-level services are much the same, surely?

BT can be obstructive only as far as fixing the twisted pair to the customer, which is the least likely bit to go wrong, anyway. After that it's ntl's stuff to fix, thankfully*. Actually unbundling the customer could be another sticking point, as OFCOM want to ramp up the rate of unbundling, so BT could turn round and say 'we haven't got the staff'. This would get very short shrift, though.

*Yes, insert your own joke here, but I'd far rather work within ntl's fault management procedures than have to go to a completely separate company, we had enough of that with C&W a few years back.

Well it's because of the technical differences that I was making the comment, the twisted pair will be the big problem as far as I am concerned.

Yes I agree, the customer could have Internet at broadband, he could have digital TV. What if he wanted both, what if he wanted broadband, digital TV and a second set-top for recording?

I know you probably think I'm just being awkward or anti-ntl with my comment, but that twisted pair will make a big difference to the service on offer to a BT line customer compared to a HFC fed ntl customer.

Yes, BT could install a second line for these customers at ntl's request, but I wonder how smoothly this will happen when no spare lines are available!

It all boils down to the same as you say about ntl relying on cwc, I dont think it matters where the dividing line is drawn because the end result will never run as smoothly as it will on a system fully owned by one provider.

Thats all in my own worthless opinion though.

(not aimed at you BBKing)

andrew_wallasey · 01-12-2004, 21:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Escapee

Well it's because of the technical differences that I was making the comment, the twisted pair will be the big problem as far as I am concerned.

Yes I agree, the customer could have Internet at broadband, he could have digital TV. What if he wanted both, what if he wanted broadband, digital TV and a second set-top for recording?

I know you probably think I'm just being awkward or anti-ntl with my comment, but that twisted pair will make a big difference to the service on offer to a BT line customer compared to a HFC fed ntl customer.

Yes, BT could install a second line for these customers at ntl's request, but I wonder how smoothly this will happen when no spare lines are available!

It all boils down to the same as you say about ntl relying on cwc, I dont think it matters where the dividing line is drawn because the end result will never run as smoothly as it will on a system fully owned by one provider.

Thats all in my own worthless opinion though.

(not aimed at you BBKing)

I don't think you can get Digital TV over the pairs like you can with NTL at the moment. I think what they have to do is provide the TV over the DSL.