dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
2400
coryw
join:2013-12-22
Flagstaff, AZ

coryw

Member

Modem claims much higher speeds might be available

I’m in a former Qwest area and am currently provisioned at 1536/896 kilobits/second. All attempts to get CenturyLink to tell me when the VDSL2 that the other side of town has will show up have been unsuccessful. In addition, I tried for bonded with the business group and while they knew what it was, were unable to sell it to me because the DSLAM had no room for it.

So, while rooting around online, I found one of those distance calculators. My current modem has a line attenuation of 19.0 dB (on my main modem, a NetGear DGN D3700v2). My Qwest Q1000 also reports SNR as 39/13, Attenuation as 19/12, and power as 5/12.7. The calculator said that I might be able to get like 8 megs on ADSL, if everything else was optimal.

So I took a look at the Q1000 and found out how to this:

> xdslctl info --state
xdslctl: ADSL driver and PHY status
Status: Showtime
Last Retrain Reason: 0
Last initialization procedure status: 0
Max: Upstream rate = 1276 Kbps, Downstream rate = 12160 Kbps
Channel: INTR, Upstream rate = 896 Kbps, Downstream rate = 1536 Kbps

Is there some strategy to use when asking them to provision you at a higher rate, or re-testing your line to qualify you for a higher speed? I would be really happy if I could get 7m/896k provisioned. It would completely make my year if I could get 10/1, and if by some winter miracle they could or would provision or qualify my line for the whole speed their modem thinks it is capable of, I’d be completely over the moon.

Thank you in advance for any information!

TAZ
@qwest.net

TAZ

Anon

If you're on ADSL (not ADSL2+), that's the problem: the DSLAM is T1-fed and can't provide anything higher. Bonded service also won't be available on such a DSLAM.

If they upgraded to ADSL2+ or VDSL2, your line should be able to do ~20M.
coryw
join:2013-12-22
Flagstaff, AZ

coryw

Member

The wording they used on the phone with me seemed pretty specific in that whatever DSLAM they were using, (I didn't ask which it was in particular), had bonding available, but that it didn't have available ports. I could have been misinterpreting that as a backhaul capacity issue.

I don't know if I completely believe it's a backhaul issue though, because the addresses right up next to both COs are being offered 12m service. (Even though I searched for Qwest and CenturyLink owned properties in my town, I can't be sure that they aren't using some kind of remote terminal or cabinet DSLAM.)

In addition, it doesn't make sense to me that being on just-ADSL would prevent any speeds higher than 1536/896, unless this is known to be a common way Qwest set up DSLAMs.

Is CenturyLink in the practice of telling you what's on the other side of your demarc? I am quite honestly not sure where the other end of my loop is and to which CO it ultimately goes. If so, what's the best way to ask?

Although I've reconnected my Netgear router, if I plug the Q1000 back in, is there something in the Qwest firmware (either in the graphical interface or by telnet) that will show what type of DSL connection it's using?

TAZ
@qwest.net

TAZ

Anon

said by coryw:

The wording they used on the phone with me seemed pretty specific in that whatever DSLAM they were using, (I didn't ask which it was in particular), had bonding available, but that it didn't have available ports. I could have been misinterpreting that as a backhaul capacity issue.

That's interesting. They only use DSLAM-level bonding, i.e. G.998. (They never got into MLPPP; only 3rd-party ISPs did.) This would imply there's a DSLAM at your cross box (possibly not the one you're connected to, as there can be multiple) that supports at least ADSL2+, and Qwest only deployed GigE uplinks on ADSL2+ and VDSL2 DSLAMs.

You've got me interested now. I seriously wouldn't be surprised if this is a problem with their records.
said by coryw:

In addition, it doesn't make sense to me that being on just-ADSL would prevent any speeds higher than 1536/896, unless this is known to be a common way Qwest set up DSLAMs.

It is. A lot of Qwest DSLAMs were set up years ago with only a few T1s as backhaul. The ADSL circuits are usually capable of higher, but the limited backhaul means they can't reliably provide anything higher.
said by coryw:

Is CenturyLink in the practice of telling you what's on the other side of your demarc? I am quite honestly not sure where the other end of my loop is and to which CO it ultimately goes. If so, what's the best way to ask?

Not really. I have asked tech support for the model of my DSLAM on a few occasions. I've literally gotten 3 different answers: TA5000, TA1100 or "we can't provide that." Everything I know about the local infrastructure has been pieced together by myself, usually over asking questions a dozen times, reading vendor documentation, and reading the forums. (All I know is there's a cabinet of TA1100s at the cross box, and a TA5000 at the DLC which just so happens to be about 4500 ft. away, almost exactly my loop length, but some things a local tech told me would create some doubt.)

Some years ago, I also asked a few techs for the location of the DSLAM and got the same "we can't tell you" response, but one tech was finally willing to tell me.

If you feel comfortable doing this, post an address of a nearby (like, very close to you; close enough that it'd likely be on the same telco infrastructure) business or something and I'll have a look around on satellite & street view. I've gotten pretty good at picking out cross boxes and DSLAMs. :P
said by coryw:

Although I've reconnected my Netgear router, if I plug the Q1000 back in, is there something in the Qwest firmware (either in the graphical interface or by telnet) that will show what type of DSL connection it's using?

The Q1000 will tell you on the WAN status page. I'm not familiar with the Netgear but it should tell you somewhere.

ADSL will probably appear as "G.DMT."
coryw
join:2013-12-22
Flagstaff, AZ

coryw

Member

I'm going away for the weekend without stopping at home, but I'll connect and look at the Q1000 when I get back to see how it's connecting.

I did get a reply from CenturyLink implying that I'm on some kind of remote terminal (is there a particular bit of CenturyLink parlance for this, like how AT&T calls them VRADs?) -- something that's probably small-ish in a cabinet somewhere. I've asked for something more specific, but this e-mail was worded in such a way that it sounds to me like they just haven't upgraded the backhaul to the DSLAM that serves my line.

This is both exciting, because it means my line is better than I thought and when that equipment and backhaul gets upgraded, I may be able to get better speeds, but also disheartening because there's this piece of infrastructure somewhere in the few miles between the CO and my house that, per CenturyLink, may or may not ever get upgraded.
said by TAZ :

A lot of Qwest DSLAMs were set up years ago with only a few T1s as backhaul.

This makes me think I really did misinterpret the phone conversation I had with CenturyLink Business, and there are ports available on the DSLAM, but no throughput out to the greater network.

If this is the case, then if the backhaul/DSLAM get an upgrade, I will be calling CenturyLink Business immediately to ask about pair bonding again.

Is there any wording that people have found to be particularly effective when asking on the status of an upgrade, or does it just show up one day?

TAZ
@qwest.net

1 recommendation

TAZ

Anon

said by coryw:

I did get a reply from CenturyLink implying that I'm on some kind of remote terminal (is there a particular bit of CenturyLink parlance for this, like how AT&T calls them VRADs?) -- something that's probably small-ish in a cabinet somewhere. I've asked for something more specific, but this e-mail was worded in such a way that it sounds to me like they just haven't upgraded the backhaul to the DSLAM that serves my line.

Most Qwest DSL users these days are on remote DSLAMs. A few may still be CO-based for ADSL, but that's increasingly rare.

VRAD is a bullshit marketing term for remote DSLAM. In Qwest-land, if someone is referring specifically to a remote DSLAM, it's usually called an RT (remote terminal) or just remote (short-hand).

(Also note that CenturyLink has 3 different territories - Qwest, Embarq/Sprint and CenturyTel - and they all have different deployment standards and practices.)
said by coryw:

Is there any wording that people have found to be particularly effective when asking on the status of an upgrade, or does it just show up one day?

You can ask tech support chat reps if there are any upgrades scheduled. I've been told they can see up to 90 days in advance.

When it happens, you will notice a lot of CL trucks around the DSLAM (but you need to know where that is). This is actually how I found out about my area being upgraded back in 2009 - I noticed that and just went and asked one of them, who was happy to give me specifics on when it would be available. And sure enough, right when he said, I was able to order the upgrade.
coryw
join:2013-12-22
Flagstaff, AZ

coryw

Member

Probably not surprising at this point, but CenturyLink confirms my line is on an RT. They say that no upgrades are scheduled at this point.

I haven't located it yet, but at some point I'm going to start walking around to see if I can find it.

If anybody's interested in a game of DSLAM hunting, I would start here:
Trinity Heights United Methodist
3600 N 4th St
Flagstaff, AZ 86004

I'm just a few houses to the west on Appalachian Rd. It's still a bit snowy and chilly here, but I intend to take a walk around on Wednesday or over the weekend to see if I can find it. It should be a nice walk.

I suppose my strategy at this point will be to just drop them an e-mail once a week to let them know I am interested in an upgrade. I have some family that works for Frontier Communications a few towns over and their comment on the issue was that eventually, the ISP gets tired of hearing about it and, as the saying goes, the squeaky wheel gets the oil. (In their case, the squeaky wheel has pretty consistently received the newest technologies first, as they experiment with extending the loop length and new types of DSLAMs and other equipment.)

TAZ
@qwest.net

TAZ

Anon

Well, a friend and I must have spent about an hour "walking" (street view & satellite) the area to try to find it, but came up with nothing.

Your CO is on Lockett, near the Lockett & Fanning intersection. It's in the business area with the hotels, fast food restaurants, gas station, etc. There is a Qwest sign there and various CenturyLink trucks (the imagery seems to be right when the rebrand was taking place so they hadn't gotten around to updating all signage yet). Don't bother trying to enter the address into GMaps because it'll put you at the intersection (it took me quite awhile to realize it was actually up the street).

From there, it's difficult to say where the F1s (cables from CO) go. It could go down Lockett and up 4th, or it could fan out and perhaps go up towards Linda Vista. I am fairly positive we did pass by it at some point but the trees make any kind of identification (with street view or satellite) impossible.

When you look, the power meter should be the most obvious thing to look for. On that note, the cabinets with Alpha on the front and power meters are cable company equipment, not telco.

retiredqwest
join:2005-04-01
Spokane, WA

retiredqwest

Member

Click for full size
This is what you are looking for, this came from another location in Flagstaff on Jen Drive.

In the back l-r is the power meter, then a cross connect box, and then the ADSL DSLAM - I think this one is an Alcatel box.

In your search, you need to look up side streets, behind fences and in the alleys.... as well on street locations. In other words, wherever a utility right of way may exist.

If you know where VDSL2+ is deployed in Flagstaff, someone might be able to find that DSLAM so you know if something like that is ever 'planted' in your neighborhood.
I know what the VDSL2+ cabinets look like in Spokane, but that doesn't mean they use the same equipment in Flagstaff. (Long story behind this....)

TAZ
@qwest.net

TAZ

Anon

said by retiredqwest:

If you know where VDSL2+ is deployed in Flagstaff, someone might be able to find that DSLAM so you know if something like that is ever 'planted' in your neighborhood.
I know what the VDSL2+ cabinets look like in Spokane, but that doesn't mean they use the same equipment in Flagstaff. (Long story behind this....)

Are you sure? CL filed this with the FCC in February 2012: »prodnet.www.neca.org/pub ··· 12cl.pdf

It states their current (as of that time, at least, but I doubt this has changed because there isn't anything newer for them to upgrade to) VDSL2 RT deployment is 1-4 TA1148V in a CoolPed. There are several of these near me.

OP, here's a standard CoolPed RT deployment near me (there are several of these, all similar, though there are several cross box cabinet variations):
»i.imgur.com/LLfTht5.png
Left to right: orange fiber optic marker, I guess some kind of cable vault, cross box, CoolPed DSLAM cabinet with TA1100 series, power meter

retiredqwest See Profile, I'm curious what you would think the similar refrigerator cabinet over here is: »i.imgur.com/nYCDXlq.png
(Large one in the back I believe is a DLC, cross box in front left, and I think the front right refrigerator-sized one is a TA5000 but can't be 100% sure so I'm curious of your opinion)
Why they would choose to use a TA5000 here instead of the TA1100s everywhere else, is a mystery to me. But the closest houses do have VDSL2 available, and I cannot think of anything else that cabinet could be, especially not with what appears to be a heat exchanger on the side.

(Both images are from GMaps so not very high quality.)

retiredqwest
join:2005-04-01
Spokane, WA

retiredqwest

Member

Click for full size
Click for full size
The first photo has on the l-r a Litespan 2000 ADSL and VDSL2+ and the x-box.
The second photo l-r is VDSL2+, x-box, ADSL and DMS-Urban RPG.
A third location is behind a fence at 5117 W Woodside. But it has the same configuration as the Royal drive location.

MOST VDSL2+ closures in Spokane are Cool-Ped, just not 100%. As to what is inside I have no idea. I only saw one and I don't remember what was inside.

I hate to make assumptions in parts of company locations that I'm not familiar with as to what equipment is being used.

former qwest
@qwest.net

former qwest to TAZ

Anon

to TAZ
"I'm curious what you would think the similar refrigerator cabinet over here is: " that's a Stinger

TAZ
@qwest.net

TAZ

Anon

Did Qwest use Stingers for VDSL2? It looks like the only Stinger VDSL2 available was the "not really VDSL2 but we'll call it that" (non-Broadcom) junk.

I found this page with an FTTN deployment list: »www.usfamily.net/kbase/v ··· 321.html

The address of that cabinet is listed there as VDSL2 capable. (Actually, all of the cross boxes in the area were turned up on the same day, including my own cross box with the TA1100s. All VDSL2 capable.)
TAZ

TAZ to coryw

Anon

to coryw
Also, OP...
quote:
"In the past, Qwest made a lot of their decisions in Denver; now, decisions about Flagstaff and northern Arizona will be made locally," Unkovich said. "That is a big advantage for the customers."

He said the entire Arizona market, save for the Phoenix metro area, is overseen by one person, whereas the Qwest regional office in Denver controlled operations for several states.

Unkovich encourages residents who have been told "no" by Qwest for additional services, such as high-speed Internet access, to call back.

...

"As an example, since January we've installed 15 new crossbox locations in Flagstaff that offer 40 Mbps (high-speed Internet) services. Qwest never marketed those," Unkovich said.
src: »azdailysun.com/business/ ··· d66.html

I say call him on that one.
quote:
Bill Unkovich (Northern AZ). 928-863--0218. Bill.Unkovich@CenturyLink.com
src: »www.google.com/search?q= ··· turylink - it's the 2nd result, the .swf file (on CL's own site, so you know the number is legitimate). I copied from Google's description as I don't use Flash.

At least maybe he can give you a real answer as to why you haven't been upgraded yet.

ILpt4U
Premium Member
join:2006-11-12
Saint Louis, MO
ARRIS TM822
Asus RT-N66

ILpt4U to TAZ

Premium Member

to TAZ
said by TAZ :

VRAD is a bullshit marketing term for remote DSLAM. In Qwest-land, if someone is referring specifically to a remote DSLAM, it's usually called an RT (remote terminal) or just remote (short-hand).

LOL -- yeah, I can't really disagree too awful much there...
IRAD is even worse IMHO

Remote DSLAMs is a nice all-encompassing term. Whether it describes a VRAD, IRAD, RT, CEV, or even the "MDU ONTs" that Verizon uses, that are really mini-DSLAMs with a handful of VDSL ports on them, typically used in apartment buildings for FiOS, when it is impractical/impossible to run fiber to each unit

My own theory, but part of the reason I think AT&T uses the VRAD/IRAD terminology, is to help differentiate the older ATM ADSL DSLAMs in AT&T's network (that may be in the CO or in RTs/CEVs), and the newer IP/PTM VDSL2/ADSL2+ DSLAMs used for the U-Verse network. So yeah, basically for marketing reasons, highlighting the difference from "old vs new"

TAZ
@qwest.net

TAZ

Anon

I've never heard IRAD before, but that's just pathetic. I can see VRAD at least being somewhat meaningful, as it could refer to a DSLAM with multicast support. They're both dumb anyway - they transport bits, and at that level nobody cares what those bits happen to be.

I think U-Verse in general is more marketing than substance. Qwest's VDSL2 deployment has always been better on a technical level; it just wasn't marketed as well and not with a cool new name. Qwest has had 40/5 and 40/20 since day 1 (and now those tiers are available bonded, to extend the reach; 80/40 and 100/12 are also available now to those who qualify for 40M single-pair), they don't have the arbitrary distance limitations (at least one user here is getting 20/2 bonded at ~8500 ft. over VDSL2), and they've been using Broadcom-based DSLAMs from day one (vs. the Conexant garbage AT&T was originally using). I laughed when I saw their new 45/6 bonded tier - Qwest had that (or close enough) 5 years ago.

retiredqwest
join:2005-04-01
Spokane, WA

retiredqwest to coryw

Member

to coryw
Click for full size
I found a cross connect box at 2984 E Linda Vista Dr. There might be something else north on the back lot lines.

Also, if you go and look at this could you take a look and see if that manhole in the street is marked as Bell System. Just curious.....

And a last note I did some checking and a bunch of RT's east of I-40 are using the same VDSL2+ cabinets as I have seen elsewhere.
coryw
join:2013-12-22
Flagstaff, AZ

coryw to TAZ

Member

to TAZ
Wow, such information!

The whole area south of the university either has been upgraded or is being upgraded, and most of the area downtown has faster speeds available, but I suspect that downtown is CO-served (Aspen/Beaver) and places like Zuni/Pima Dr (which is pretty close to where I lived previously and had 20m/896k) are definitely on VDSL2. It doesn't surprise me to see areas like the mentioned Jen Dr. have such equipment near them. In fact, I was told about that complex by a friend recently.

I haven't actually had the opportunity to go DSLAM-hunting on foot, but I'll take a look and see what I can find.

My attenuation is about 19db, which means that whatever equipment is serving my individual line should be fairly close by, but I am in a buried-utilities neighborhood and in the immediate vicinity there aren't utility alleyways as there are in some of the other places. (Although, there are a few coming off of Linda Vista, so I'll be sure to check those out.)

retiredqwest
join:2005-04-01
Spokane, WA

retiredqwest

Member

Since I'm retired, obviously I don't have access to the company intranet to see if I could find a spreadsheet of cross box locations. Nowadays I could even map the cable route from Flagstaff East to your house.... wish they had that when I worked there. All we had then was paper and microfiche.

»www.centurylink.com/iconn/

Notice the link Cross Boxes with Potential Power Disparity. I looked at that and that's how I found that those sites are east of I-40. The office CLLI code is FLGSAZEA and downtown is FLGSAZMA. This list is far from complete, but I was surprised that are no locations NW of I-40 in your area on the spreadsheet. Unless I missed something.
Also note that there is no breakdown of an ADSL or VDSL2+ remote DSLAM.

There is another link (DLC) about RT's but those only apply to remote pair gain systems. It doesn't mean there is a DSLAM there.

The rest of the links aren't very useful. There are several other websites that can provide C.O. info.
coryw
join:2013-12-22
Flagstaff, AZ

coryw

Member

625 S Zuni DR must have been the crossbox serving my old house.

If I had to pick a box that is most likely the one serving my house, it would be 2100 E Cedar Ave. If I have this right and FLGSAZMA and FLGSAZEA are two different COs, then AZMA is the one on Beaver street, which is our downtown, and AZEA is the one that TAZ identified as being on Lockett Dr. (I've driven by each of them, and had perceived that they were each about equidistant from my house, but I've never actually looked.

In addition, by road, Google Maps says that this address is about 4200 feet from my house. The speed calculator I found online here »www.speedguide.net/dsl_s ··· calc.php suggests that for an attenuation of about 19dB, there's probably about 4500ft of wiring involved, so it makes sense.

I'll investigate further, my housemate sent me a photo of a DSLAM near our house, saying it was on Linda Vista, but I couldn't find anything on Linda Vista on the list.

I'll also be writing and sending either another e-mail to talktous, or to Bill Unkovich, (maybe to both) asking about the status of those fifteen crossboxes/DSLAMs that have been upgraded. It's possible that the fifteen was going to be all (or nearly all) of the ones listed on FLGSAZMA, but if so, the upgrades haven't been completed.

If this hasn't been linked yet, this is interesting: »www.flagstaffbusinessnew ··· telecom/

TAZ
@qwest.net

TAZ

Anon

Those lists are incomplete. I did look at it the other day and actually mapped the distance from the address you provided to each listed address, but came up with nothing.

Email Bill first. talktous won't do anything but tell you there's no upgrades planned; it sounds like Bill actually has some level of authority and maybe can tell you if there's anything possible in the next year (or perhaps even register your interest and have it considered for the 2014 deployment).

AZEA is your CO. I checked the phone number of the church you posted and that is the serving CO.

Also, SuddenLink is pathetic with their bragging about their 10GbE links. As if Qwest/CL didn't have any...
coryw
join:2013-12-22
Flagstaff, AZ

coryw

Member

So, just as an update, my dad (who has worked with the old Bells and who works now with Frontier a few towns over, and has/had a few contacts with CenturyLink from this) and I have been approaching CenturyLink with various questions on this matter.

It looks like for my particular area, the focus in 2013 was to add DSL service to areas that didn't have it before, and the focus in 2014 is to upgrade from old Qwest-installed DSL equipment to new faster stuff. (My dad approached it from the technical side and I approached it from the sales side, so I can't actually be sure if it's going to be VDSL2, faster ADSL, or if they're planning on dropping FTTP/xPON equipment in.)

It sounds like we approached it at the right time because there's a project in the works now to get several devices (RTs, presumably) upgraded to support faster and more service.

Once this service gets added, I intend to order the fastest possible business class package I can get my hands on. I've got an off-site host I intend to replace if I can get 10 or more megs of upload speed. (It's a low traffic site, but it's yet another thing to maintain, which I'd like to stop maintaining if I can.)

On the Suddenlink side of things, they now have 50 and 107 megabit service at my house, but their business class offering continues to be 7m/768k for like $80/mo, and 8m/1m for $135 or so. Even CenturyLink's business class service is... less than that. My housemate has their 30M residential service right now, but the upload speed on that continues to be abysmal. If I'm close enough to the RT, an upgrade to VDSL2 should give me some options for pretty nice upload speed.

Just for fun, I've asked what it would take to get QMOE installed at my house. I'm guessing it will be some number of tens of thousands of dollars, if it's even available in my city to begin with. After that, I may ask about co-location, but that only solves one of my problems.

TAZ
join:2014-01-03
Tucson, AZ

1 edit

TAZ

Member

said by coryw:

It looks like for my particular area, the focus in 2013 was to add DSL service to areas that didn't have it before, and the focus in 2014 is to upgrade from old Qwest-installed DSL equipment to new faster stuff. (My dad approached it from the technical side and I approached it from the sales side, so I can't actually be sure if it's going to be VDSL2, faster ADSL, or if they're planning on dropping FTTP/xPON equipment in.)

FTTP is doubtful. Any new DSL deployment will be VDSL2.

I'll PM you some additional info.
said by coryw:

If I'm close enough to the RT, an upgrade to VDSL2 should give me some options for pretty nice upload speed.

Your line is nearly identical to mine. You won't qualify for anything higher than 896K even on VDSL2, unless they push the DSLAM closer (FTTC for example, which they haven't done yet).
said by coryw:

Just for fun, I've asked what it would take to get QMOE installed at my house. I'm guessing it will be some number of tens of thousands of dollars, if it's even available in my city to begin with. After that, I may ask about co-location, but that only solves one of my problems.

Installation will be expensive (trenching fiber) but monthly shouldn't be in the tens range even for full gigabit.

For colocation, you're better off going elsewhere. Telcos are expensive. Check webhostingtalk.

FTTN DSLAMs are Ethernet-fed BTW and use the same QMOE (now called just "MOE" since the Q = Qwest) infrastructure. If you can find any other addresses served out of your CO with ADSL2+/VDSL2 available, the CO has an Ethernet switch and you can order MOE as well.

mixdup
join:2003-06-28
Alpharetta, GA

mixdup to ILpt4U

Member

to ILpt4U
said by ILpt4U:

My own theory, but part of the reason I think AT&T uses the VRAD/IRAD terminology, is to help differentiate the older ATM ADSL DSLAMs in AT&T's network (that may be in the CO or in RTs/CEVs), and the newer IP/PTM VDSL2/ADSL2+ DSLAMs used for the U-Verse network. So yeah, basically for marketing reasons, highlighting the difference from "old vs new"

AT&T uses "VRAD" to specifically refer to video-capable RTs. VRAD=VDSL, video capable U-Verse RT. Differentiating it from either IP-DSLAMs that provide upgraded yet still no video DSL or the old pre U-Verse DSLAMs

TAZ
join:2014-01-03
Tucson, AZ

TAZ

Member

said by mixdup:

AT&T uses "VRAD" to specifically refer to video-capable RTs. VRAD=VDSL, video capable U-Verse RT. Differentiating it from either IP-DSLAMs that provide upgraded yet still no video DSL or the old pre U-Verse DSLAMs

I believe ILpt4U See Profile is an AT&T tech, so he's certainly aware of this.

The thing is, "video-capable" means nothing. Any DSLAM transfers bits and those bits could conceivably be video. Maybe "video-capable" is referring to multicast support, but it's still weak.

mixdup
join:2003-06-28
Alpharetta, GA

mixdup

Member

said by TAZ:

The thing is, "video-capable" means nothing. Any DSLAM transfers bits and those bits could conceivably be video. Maybe "video-capable" is referring to multicast support, but it's still weak.

It refers to the fact they sell video service out of it and the speed tiers available out of it. What it's technically capable of is of course another thing.

TAZ
join:2014-01-03
Tucson, AZ

TAZ

Member

Right, which is exactly what I mean: it's a lame marketing designation and nothing more.