|
to ConstantineM
Re: AT&T U-verse FTTP speeds, why do they limit fibre to 18/1.5?30/5 is enough for me as it's the /5 that I really care about. Every once in awhile I download a 4-5GB ISO from MSDN but spending another $50 a month isn't really worth me saving 10 minutes ( best case ) on that download.
For anyone thinking about switching look up TWCdude on this board. Having him around rocked. |
|
David Premium Member join:2002-05-30 Granite City, IL |
to Enlightener
said by Enlightener:History question here:
What ever happened to those FTTH/FTTC deployments that SBC had up in North Texas? ( Richardson? )
I don't remember the details anymore but I seem to remember a situation a few years back where DSL customers could get better speeds then those FTTC customers could get.
Anyone know the current status of all that? Did they get converted over to UVerse FTTP or are they still stuck in old school. I can answer that, they are getting converted. |
|
|
How are they getting converted? Was it something other than BPON, or are they merely converting profiles at the CO and leaving the CPE ONTs untouched?
Does AT&T already use GPON anywhere? Or is FTTP always done through BPON, regardless of region? |
|
chunk73 Premium Member join:2002-02-22 Trumbull, CT |
to etaadmin
said by etaadmin:said by Enlightener:Well guys, I've been with SBC since 2003 and Uverse FTTP since 2007 and it's time for me to move on. I was able to get RR 30/5 installed for $0 and $49.99/mo compared to my U-Verse 18/1.5 for $55/mo
I cancelled my service today, returned the gateway to the UPS store and unplugged the APC ups that's been powering my ONT. I'll be sure to check by now and then to see if AT&T is offering faster service but I won't hold my breath.
[att=1] This is ridiculous! When is AT&T going to read the writing on the wall? btw I would have ordered the 50/5 tier. AT&T will not read the writing on the wall until its too late. I live in a condo complex with only 4 units, very small. At one point in time all 4 units had uverse when it first came out in 2007. We all had great things to say about it, I still think the TV is better in terms of the STB's and software. However as time passed our local cable company kept raising speeds at no additional cost. The writing on the call became clear to all of us in the condos that uverse bandwidth was not and will never keep up with technological advances. We all had much higher bandwidth requirements with more devices in the household and the only option was to move to cablevision. So now a 4 unit condo complex who originally had 4 uverse subscribers now has 0 uverse subscribers. AT&T really knows how to lose its customers. They always say that getting a customer is hard, keeping a customer is even harder and getting a customer to come back after having prior bad service experience is damn near impossible. So AT&T, no matter what they do to boost network capacity, if anything in the near future, can expect no customers from this small condo complex to come running back to them. Cablevision provided all 4 of us with DOCSIS 3 modems running their boost internet offering and none of us ever looked back. Good luck AT&T, pretty soon your time will be up if you dont change your mentality. |
|
|
to ConstantineM
said by ConstantineM:How are they getting converted? Was it something other than BPON, or are they merely converting profiles at the CO and leaving the CPE ONTs untouched?
Does AT&T already use GPON anywhere? Or is FTTP always done through BPON, regardless of region? Good luck getting faster speed man. That being said I honestly would prefer the low latency 18/1.5 connection over the high latency FTTN 24/3 that I have at my father's place. That is just me though. |
|
|
Re: FCC complaint against AT&T deceptive advertising 24MbpsI have just received a formal response from AT&T California, regarding my FCC complaint, via snail mail. Sneak preview: "AT&T records indicate Mr. M is FTTN-BP, not FTTP as they were lead to believe." Man! Seriously?! Glad someone could finally clarify! I'll have to find a scanner, and post the whole letter online! First they leave a voice message on my GV associated with U-verse that U-verse is not available at all, now FTTN-BP (bonded pair, one must presume). As if FTTN-BP is not capable of 24Mbps in the first place! I've never had so much free entertainment, with so little effort on my part, from any of my service providers before! "It is unknown at this time, if Mr. M is satisfied." Satisfied? Hm. Entertained? You bet! |
|
1 edit |
Sorry to dredge this nasty thread up, but there are some loose strings that need tying and I might be able to assist...
FTTN-BP would mean you have a 2wire i3812 iNID, not an ONT. If you have an ONT and your service type is FTTN-BP, then you are not using your ONT.
AT&T is coming out with a couple new HSIA speed tiers. I am required by confidentiality agreement not to discuss specific speed figures. I can, however, tell you what I don't know.
I can tell you that I legitimately do not know an ETA, and neither does anybody you can reach by phone. I can tell you that I do not know the network delivery type (FTTN, FTTN-BP, FTTP/our other fibre types as there are a few).
My theory is that everyone wanting these upgrades will be moved over to iNID (the aforementioned FTTN-BP) installs to achieve this speed. I can't say anything to justify this theory, but I do strongly believe it is going to be the case.
Telephone agents are not necessarily able to confirm anything further than this. Depending on the agent's fear of being terminated and sued for sharing information we aren't allowed to share, you might manage to squeeze the speed numbers out of them.
I can say the slower speed will be competitive, and the higher speed currently has no competition in most regions.
(edit: people have already been posting about related things, but I see no mention of the higher speed that I know of, so the secrecy still applies...should have figured you folks here would have heard the news by now) |
|
dave006 join:1999-12-26 Boca Raton, FL |
to ConstantineM
said by ConstantineM:....As if FTTN-BP is not capable of 24Mbps in the first place! Actually, Bonded Pair does not support the 24/3 HSIA profile at this time. Very much like your current FTTP profile that does not support 24/3. The issue is the profile does not currently allow the upstream to be above 1.5 so they don't offer it to any customers on Bonded Pair. I would also agree that you are not on a FTTN-BP since you have posted the specifics of your physical equipment located in your unit. Dave |
|
|
|
to uversetier1
said by uversetier1:FTTN-BP would mean you have a 2wire i3812 iNID, not an ONT. If you have an ONT and your service type is FTTN-BP, then you are not using your ONT. Just to clarify this long thread: I'm no longer using any 2Wire equipment. I change the MAC address of my ZyXEL and Netgear GigE routers to that of 2Wire PoS, and connect my ZyXEL or Netgear directly to my ONT. I have no idea why AT&T California thinks that I'm on FTTN-BP. said by uversetier1:AT&T is coming out with a couple new HSIA speed tiers. I am required by confidentiality agreement not to discuss specific speed figures. I can, however, tell you what I don't know.
I can tell you that I legitimately do not know an ETA, and neither does anybody you can reach by phone. I can tell you that I do not know the network delivery type (FTTN, FTTN-BP, FTTP/our other fibre types as there are a few).
My theory is that everyone wanting these upgrades will be moved over to iNID (the aforementioned FTTN-BP) installs to achieve this speed. I can't say anything to justify this theory, but I do strongly believe it is going to be the case. Such theory holds no water. FTTP is obviously much faster and with too much underutilised potential, compared to VDSL2 even with FTTN-BP, so I doubt that anyone with FTTP would be moved anywhere. Even 622/155 1:32 BPON would probably still be faster in most real life conditions. said by uversetier1:Telephone agents are not necessarily able to confirm anything further than this. Depending on the agent's fear of being terminated and sued for sharing information we aren't allowed to share, you might manage to squeeze the speed numbers out of them.
I can say the slower speed will be competitive, and the higher speed currently has no competition in most regions.
(edit: people have already been posting about related things, but I see no mention of the higher speed that I know of, so the secrecy still applies...should have figured you folks here would have heard the news by now) Thing is. Currently, AT&T FTTH higher speeds are already BELOW the LOWEST speeds offered by ANY other FTTH provider in the US. Find me a single US-based FTTH provider that offers 1.5Mbps upstream, or below! Not a single one! Unless you want to be compared with bell.ca, which even then would put AT&T at a disadvantage, speed-wise! |
|
ConstantineM |
to dave006
said by dave006:said by ConstantineM:....As if FTTN-BP is not capable of 24Mbps in the first place! Actually, Bonded Pair does not support the 24/3 HSIA profile at this time. Very much like your current FTTP profile that does not support 24/3. The issue is the profile does not currently allow the upstream to be above 1.5 so they don't offer it to any customers on Bonded Pair. I would also agree that you are not on a FTTN-BP since you have posted the specifics of your physical equipment located in your unit. Dave Dave, although what you said is technically correct as a whole, it'd be obviously confusing to a passer-by. The issue of either FTTN-BP (Bonded copper Pair) or FTTP (true fibre at your place) not supporting 24/3 is purely a profile issue. And wheres higher profile speeds may potentially impede the stability of an FTTN-BP connection, they would hardly have any adverse effects on FTTP at all. So, basically, although it seems like AT&T doesn't really want to admit it explicitly as such, the whole issue is a software-configuration issue! "Profile doesn't support" is just a fancy talk equivalent to, "we don't want to flip the bits to give you higher speeds, which all the equipment may already support". And let's not start with the backbone talk, I'm willing to bet that there's so much capacity here at my CO in San Jose that noone in the local backbone or interconnect business would even notice if AT&T quadruples the speed to all U-verse subscribers here in the area. So, overall, it's just not right to be saying that "Bonded Pair does not support", since that's just not true as such, even if what you say overall is true. |
|
|
to ConstantineM
said by ConstantineM:Such theory holds no water. FTTP is obviously much faster and with too much underutilised potential, compared to VDSL2 even with FTTN-BP, so I doubt that anyone with FTTP would be moved anywhere. Even 622/155 1:32 BPON would probably still be faster in most real life conditions. Sorry, allow me to confirm for certain: the faster speed tiers WILL hit bonded pair installations, and very probably first. I do know this for a fact. (regardless of which has more potential, yes, bonded pair will be getting some serious upgrades. FTTP, logically, should as well, but I have seen nothing to suggest it will happen) |
|
|
said by uversetier1:said by ConstantineM:Such theory holds no water. FTTP is obviously much faster and with too much underutilised potential, compared to VDSL2 even with FTTN-BP, so I doubt that anyone with FTTP would be moved anywhere. Even 622/155 1:32 BPON would probably still be faster in most real life conditions. Sorry, allow me to confirm for certain: the faster speed tiers WILL hit bonded pair installations, and very probably first. I do know this for a fact. (regardless of which has more potential, yes, bonded pair will be getting some serious upgrades. FTTP, logically, should as well, but I have seen nothing to suggest it will happen) FTTP requires no upgrade. As mentioned earlier in this thread, the existing FTTP is far from being anywhere near reaching capacity, so, all that's required is the profile change. (I still haven't heard anything else to the contrary, that is, about any specific technical limitations that would prevent FTTP from being provisioned with higher speeds.) So... What are FTTP customers supposed to do? Enjoy their 1.5Mbps upstream, where copper gets several times more? Any way to downgrade from FTTP to FTTN-BP? Or, actually, since AT&T California already thinks I have FTTN-BP, can I just get a profile upgrade to the new speeds the day they're offered? (-: Or would it absolutely require a tech visit? :-p |
|
|
said by ConstantineM:FTTP requires no upgrade. As mentioned earlier in this thread, the existing FTTP is far from being anywhere near reaching capacity, so, all that's required is the profile change. (I still haven't heard anything else to the contrary, that is, about any specific technical limitations that would prevent FTTP from being provisioned with higher speeds.)
So... What are FTTP customers supposed to do? Enjoy their 1.5Mbps upstream, where copper gets several times more? Any way to downgrade from FTTP to FTTN-BP?
Or, actually, since AT&T California already thinks I have FTTN-BP, can I just get a profile upgrade to the new speeds the day they're offered? (-: Or would it absolutely require a tech visit? :-p Well...that's why this is interesting. An iNID install is no small job, and it isn't cheap to the company either. I feel it makes more sense to give FTTP customers everything the system is capable of delivering* before installing expensive iNIDs here there and everywhere. No "upgrade" path from FTTP to FTTN-BP exists currently...one cannot request FTTN-BP just because they want it. I'm curious to see what happens. It's especially relevant to tier 1 staff because not all tier 1s handle FTTN-BP, so will there be more of us who become trained on it as it becomes more widespread? I would venture to guess that -BP is going to surpass FTTP by far, quickly, if it hasn't already. All my thoughts and opinions, though. Except for the fact that FTTN-BP will be getting upgrades; I know that much for certain, as does every other agent, including outsourced ones. The exact nature of the upgrades and how FTTP will or will not get speed increases, I don't know. * please don't read this as "we currently can give you more than you get"...I honestly don't know what limitations are in place or why |
|
1 recommendation |
to ConstantineM
said by ConstantineM:So... What are FTTP customers supposed to do? Enjoy their 1.5Mbps upstream, where copper gets several times more? Any way to downgrade from FTTP to FTTN-BP? As an FTTP customer the solution was simple for me. Switch back to copper and upgrade my speed. It's just my copper was in the form of RG6 not RJ11. Now I enjoy my 30/5 speed for less then I was spending on 18/2. |
|
dave006 join:1999-12-26 Boca Raton, FL |
to ConstantineM
said by ConstantineM:said by dave006:said by ConstantineM:....As if FTTN-BP is not capable of 24Mbps in the first place! Actually, Bonded Pair does not support the 24/3 HSIA profile at this time. Very much like your current FTTP profile that does not support 24/3. The issue is the profile does not currently allow the upstream to be above 1.5 so they don't offer it to any customers on Bonded Pair. I would also agree that you are not on a FTTN-BP since you have posted the specifics of your physical equipment located in your unit. Dave .....The issue of either FTTN-BP (Bonded copper Pair) or FTTP (true fibre at your place) not supporting 24/3 is purely a profile issue. And wheres higher profile speeds may potentially impede the stability of an FTTN-BP connection, they would hardly have any adverse effects on FTTP at all.... Actually neither are currently a simple profile issue. In the case of bonded pair FTTN it is a firmware issue in the iNID. In the case of FTTP it is a hardware issue in older FTTP plants. While yours is using the newer BPON and would most likely not be directly impacted, there are a number of FTTP local plants that need cards replaced to support a HSIA profile above the current 18/1.5 that is offered to all FTTP customers since all FTTP customers are provisioned on the standard 30/3.6 profile which we covered very early in this thread. Dave |
|
|
said by dave006:Actually neither are currently a simple profile issue.
In the case of bonded pair FTTN it is a firmware issue in the iNID. In the case of FTTP it is a hardware issue in older FTTP plants. While yours is using the newer BPON and would most likely not be directly impacted, there are a number of FTTP local plants that need cards replaced to support a HSIA profile above the current 18/1.5 that is offered to all FTTP customers since all FTTP customers are provisioned on the standard 30/3.6 profile which we covered very early in this thread.
Dave What's the older FTTP plant? Was it not 622/155 1:32 BPON? What's the spec of the older one? Again, this is still "an excuse", and an exaggerated one at that. According to » en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AT ··· _U-verse, with U-verse HSI, you have different upload specs for ADSL2+ and VDSL customers (since upload in ADSL2+ is quite limited as per the spec). By that rationale, you should have also had different upload speeds for FTTP customers as well (although VDSL @ 52/16 actually provides more upstream compared to downstream compared to FTTP 622/155 as far as the specs go, with copper any extra upstream always comes at a price in practice). So, even if you have older FTTP plants, I still don't see any technical reasons why you can't be offering better speeds on all the newer plans. I mean, in all honestly, you even already have the better speeds in the price list! So, with my unfulfilled 24/3 upgrade request, it's not even like I am asking something that you aren't already offering to me, is it? WTF? "Makes sense if you don't think about it", right!?! |
|
|
dslfan90
Anon
2011-Nov-6 5:41 pm
Since you seem to know more than anyone at AT&T or anyone else on the forum, I guess your answer is "they just don't want to do it."
I mean why else would they not do something that would take so little effort and would generate more revenue, right? |
|
Ummm84 join:2011-10-26 united state |
Ummm84
Member
2011-Nov-7 7:46 pm
FTTP-GPON will only be used in new deployment areas. Existing FTTP-IP customers are hosed for the time being. |
|
|
What's FTTP-IP?
So, is AT&T already deploying FTTP-GPON? At the time when even existing FTTP-BPON (622/155 1:32) are far underprovisioned, especially on the upload side?
FTTP-GPON really only makes sense if you're bringing speeds above 100Mbps and at affordable price points. BPON is perfectly capable of even every one of the 32 subscribers having a 32/5 profile with 24/3 HSI (which, with tiered pricing, would never be the case anyways). In reality, 32/8 HSI is much more like what should be offered as the minimum higher tier (and probably even speeds more than that are entirely feasible, too, as uptake is never 100%). 32/8 HSI is still very unlikely to saturate BPON under normal conditions at all; I'm sure even 64/16 HSI even under 100$ won't saturate BPON, either. |
|
dave006 join:1999-12-26 Boca Raton, FL |
It means Fiber To The Premises over IP (FTTPIP). The address validation returns the Facility Environment Provisioned field (FEP) will return the following: A = Fiber To The Premises (FTTP) B = Fiber To The Premises over IP (FTTPIP)C = Fiber To The Node (FTTN) enabled No U-verse products at address D = FTTN enabled U-verse products exists at address E = System Timeout, System Scheduled Downtime or a System Failure X = non fiber/Light Speed or any data validation issue I guess you don't know all the answers about FTTP and U-verse just yet. BTW the current highest valid sync service profile is 64/8 and it is that for a reason. Do a little research. Dave |
|
dahan join:2000-10-25 Leander, TX
1 recommendation |
dahan
Member
2011-Nov-9 12:07 am
said by dave006:It means Fiber To The Premises over IP (FTTPIP). That may be what the acronym stands for, but it isn't what it means, unless AT&T has figured out how to encapsulate pieces of glass into an IP packet. Seriously? Fiber over IP? So, what does FTTPIP mean? |
|
dave006 join:1999-12-26 Boca Raton, FL |
It is very simple but since you can't figure it out, I will spell it out for you.
Fiber To The Premises over IP (FTTPIP) - That means that only IP based video, high speed internet and voice services (VoIP) are available.
Dave |
|
|
said by dave006:It is very simple but since you can't figure it out, I will spell it out for you.
Fiber To The Premises over IP (FTTPIP) - That means that only IP based video, high speed internet and voice services (VoIP) are available.
Dave You're kidding us, right? Because you can't possibly be serious! Have you heard of the V return for FEP? The V option is for FTTP-P, Fibre to the Premises over Pigeons. It's what all the new greenfield would be getting very soon; it's in testing and qualification right now. Dave, I guess you don't know all the answers about FTTP and U-verse just yet! BTW, with AT&T BPON, speed offerings (and tech-savvy customer satisfaction) are subpar in all markets compared to all the competition (whether that be Verizon BPON in other markets or the cableco within U-verse coverage), and they're subpar for a reason. Do a little research. Constantine. |
|
dahan join:2000-10-25 Leander, TX
1 recommendation |
to dave006
Well excuse me for not instantly understanding some made-up term that doesn't actually make sense. It sounds like what you're talking about is IP over FTTP, not FTTP over IP. Even Google has never heard of " Fiber to the premises over IP"; the only hits it comes up with are this thread and the document you copy/pasted your post from. It's definitely not a term used in the industry. |
|
Ummm84 join:2011-10-26 united state |
Ummm84
Member
2011-Nov-10 12:41 am
FTTP-IP is AT&T's name for the transport type that covers all existing U-Verse fiber customers. Because this is a discussion of U-Verse it's an appropriate forum in which to use ATT nomenclature. |
|
dave006 join:1999-12-26 Boca Raton, FL |
dave006
Member
2011-Nov-10 12:02 pm
said by Ummm84:We have a winner that can understand AT&T internal system terms. For the others, you asked about is and now you know what it is and what it means in context in terms of AT&T and for U-verse Service at a particular Service Address. Have a nice day. There has been so much discussion about and F-Ticket and facility qualification, I thought it made sense to share the way the system indicates what facilities are avalable at a given service address. You don't have to like it or even understand it but that's the facts. Dave |
|
dahan join:2000-10-25 Leander, TX |
to Ummm84
said by Ummm84:FTTP-IP is AT&T's name for the transport type that covers all existing U-Verse fiber customers. Because this is a discussion of U-Verse it's an appropriate forum in which to use ATT nomenclature. Using AT&T nomenclature is fine; however, claiming that it's "very simple", but I "can't figure it out" when asked for an explanation isn't. |
|
|
dslfan90
Anon
2011-Nov-10 2:18 pm
Just because you and one other person can't figure it out, doesn't mean that others on the forum can't figure it out. |
|
Metatron2008You're it Premium Member join:2008-09-02 united state |
Who the hell can figure out obtuse made up terms? Ask any IT guy what the hell FTTP-IP means and you'd probably get the same answer. |
|
|
dslfan90
Anon
2011-Nov-10 2:46 pm
The information provided by dave006 was "Fiber To The Premises over IP (FTTPIP)" not just FTTP-IP. |
|