Slashdot Mirror
BT To Test Huawei 1Gbps Broadband Over Copper
judgecorp writes "BT is testing a different fiber broadband topology FTTdp (Fiber to the distribution point) and G.FAST, which could give 1Gbps broadband speeds at its research site Adastral Park in Britain. FTTdp pushes the network fiber closer to the user's premises than FTTC (Fiber to the Cabinet). In many cases this is less than 250m, a distance at which it's possible to get 1Gbps over the copper phone network using G.FAST, a new variation of VDSL broadband ."
BT used to do interesting things, and was about to d oa very early fibre rollout before Thatcher stuck her beak in, but it's been playing catchup with the rest of the world since it was privatised.
"FTTdp pushes the network fiber closer to the user's premises than FTTC (Fiber to the Cabinet). In many cases this is less than 250m, a distance at which it's possible to get 1Gbps over the copper phone network using G.FAST, a new variation of VDSL broadband"
Throughput depends on the quality of the copper and the properties of the earth it's buried in. There's also cross-talk to consider which can lead to a reduction of 2/5ths in the worst case scenario.
The US gov't buys plenty of things made in China. That's not the issue. Buying equipment from Huawei is buying products from Palantir (a CIA funded technology company). They are both companies with close ties to military and intelligence gathering.
Still, when the US Gov't does buy from China they do prefer to source it from companies like Foxconn, which are Taiwanese owned.
BT also provides FTTH and in many areas Fibre-on-demand (i.e. fibre isn't installed but you can pay to get it installed if you want). I dare say france is in a similar position of pure fibre in some areas, hybrid fibre/coax in others and pure copper in the more remote areas.
+1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
From the 16 July ITU press release:
Because that's what this is all about. It's yet another excuse not to make the investment we've all been waiting so long for. And besides, most subscribers will not be within 250 meters of their DSLAM anyway, crosstalk can still lead to a significant reduction in performance and the upload speed will always be just a fraction of 1Gbps.
Will the only way forward be for us to nationalize our telecommunications infrastructure?
So it'll be about 10 years before they start whining they don't have enough money to roll it out and possibly 20 before the general public outside of select areas actually see it as an available product ?
Test speeds rarely relate to what consumers can expect to get. In the mid-late 90s (don't remember the exact year) I was in one of the early places to get Cable modems. The ISP was testing 100Mbps as a proof of concept, I had 2Mbps which was the fastest they offered customers. It has only been in the past couple of years that they started offering 100Mbps to customers - so roughly 15 years after it was tested.
Umm.I don't think this is about removing fiber, indeed by the sounds of it it's about installing fiber closer to the customer.
Many telcos are reluctant to do fiber to the premisis because it means sending a fiber tech into the home to liase with the customer about locations and then route and splice the new fiber, whereas apparently with this new tech they can achive gigabit speeds while only having to route the fiber to within 250m of a cluster of premises (e.g. to the top of the pole serving those premisis).
The question I would have is whether there is enough demand in the required speed range to make it worthwhile doing this. Does it make sense to put boxes on the top of poles that only end up serving one house each because everyone else is happy with their existing FTTC (or even regular ADSL) service or does it make more sense just to run fiber directly to those few houses who want something more than FTTC can offer?
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
Doesn't matter if Huawei has a backdoor in it, since the front door is wide open. FX has given a couple talks about it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-K1YpJp07s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUC_FduwWxU. The long and the short of it is tons of security holes, pretty amateur coding mistakes, no vulnerability tracking, etc.
That right there should be reason enough not to buy them. Never mind government ties, evil backdoors, etc, these things are just not secure and well designed. They are classic "You get what you pay for."
Except BT is nothing do to with the US, okay?! BT is British Telecoms. Not everything is about the USA, lets get that straight. You yanks seriously need to learn that, it comes across as arrogant and ignorant. Being British myself however I do agree. We should not be dealing with Huawei
G.Fast? Hmph! I've had V.FAST since the 1990s and these savages have only made it up the alphabet to G so far!
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Yes. But when I was in school it was expected that students learned certain bits at one level before being passed to the next. None of the schools I attended had any of the divisive "special needs" stuff with its attendant admin overhead. Someone might get held back a grade but for no longer; they were part of a class and most teachers gentled them along. (We're all born somewhere in the scheme of whatever, so there's no sense laying blame to the individual for that.) I certainly would have appreciated extra stuff alongside regular school, though, but in looking back, that might have been a source for additional unwanted consequences.
The only accommodation I ever saw to anything was Virginia building a raft of schools for just seventh and eighth grades to hand the decade of that bulge in the demographic worm. The one I attended show up on Google Maps, but I don't know what it's being used for. (While they weren't intended to last so long, workmanship was pretty good on the three examples I saw.)
Wait - there was one thing. A guy in fifth grade didn't show up for sixth. We found out he lived at home and got some tutoring, which I now realize was likely for some life skills things. I found out later, after high school - which I happened to attend in that same jurisdiction after a few moves - that in that unenlightened time that his parents only had to pay gas money for the tutor; the school board with the consenting vote of the parents decided that it was only fair to share the load of the tutor's expense rather than over-burden the family.
Different times. Today, given all the misspellings and such, I put it down to ignorance, carelessness, and that most folks are moving so quickly that they have no time for proof-reading or even slowing their typing down enough to catch a few things if they can. As an AC in another thread put it, this is all informal speech, so fuck it.
As for World of Warcraft, I much prefer seeing WoW to WW; the latter, to my generation, stands for World War.
What are you going to do with all that 1Gbps download speeds when your upload is capped to 512kbps?
We have been looking at a reliable provider for high upload speeds (uploading big content such as videos.) It seems LTE has got it right now (but signal reliability is not good especially when it rains.) Fiber is not yet available at our area (hopefully it does soon enough.)
Live your life each day as if it was your last.
I recently had BT FTC (fiber to cab) installed in my area. I upgraded to this new system which promised 80mbit/40mbit.
Dont get me wrong, its a improvement over standard copper ADSL, however, its plagued by basic issues.
The problem with BT, is major network congestion, and, lack of infrastructure that can actually support the user requirements.
Regardless of what glorious speed they "claim" to offer you, unless its 4am, you wont get anywhere near it.
So i'am sorry, but 1Gbps doesn't mean shit coming from BT.
10mbit with a stable/solid connection that doesn't fuck up at dinner time? Yes thanks.
Totally worth placing a $50,000 of piece of equipment in the field that needs power, UPS, cooling, heating, compared to just $500 of passive fiber. They may save money on not sending a fiber tech into a house, but they lose everywhere else. with fiber, a single GPON chassis can serve up to 5,000 people within 20km. These DSL setups are more like serving 100 people within 250m. But hey, you don't need to trench fiber. With Active Ethernet, you can serve about 500 people within 80km on single chassis. No need for expensive equipment in the field that needs to weather the elements, everything can be back in your datacenter.
According to the article these FTTdp boxes will be "reverse powered" from the customer premisis equipment eliminating the need to provision power supplies for them. Making small boxes of electronics that can live up poles or in underground chambers is hardly a new thing.
Ultimately I guess it comes down to how much do the FTTdp boxes cost. If they are $50K each then there is no way it will be viable but I don't see any reason for them to be that expensive.
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register