Moving to VDSL2 based broadband - BT

[Dave2002]

After recent broadband failures I decided to switch providers, and now have a new connection with BT. Really seemed to be quite a good package - phone, plus TV and fibre based broadband (Infinity 1), using VDSL2. Comes with a BT Home Hub 5, and Youview box (Humax with a BT badge?), and I'm hoping they're throwing in a Sainsbury's voucher (£100) as well. Contract is only 12 months, so not locked in for ever, though experiences so far are good so maybe we won't need to change again.

For info on VDSL2 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Very-hi...scriber_line_2

Data transfer rates seem acceptable - measured at over 20 Mbps for downloads and at around 4 Mbps for uploads using http://www.speedtest.net - though so far not close to the advertised download max of 38 Mbps for the package. Any limitations now seem perhaps to be more due to the performance of servers feeding out data than the communications links.

Not over bothered about the additional BT TV channels with the package. The video quality on the SD football channels is not really very good - can probably be improved by paying for HD services at additional cost. The quality is probably good enough for some other sports though - such as tennis.

Looks as though the BT packages may have changed since I ordered though - with longer contract periods (18 months) and a lower download allowance. Costs will be revised (upwards?!) in January.

[Word]

It does entirely depend on how far you are from the appropriate road-side cabinet and the quality of the wiring from there to your house but I would have expected the norm to be a little faster than that. Were you connected over Wi-Fi as that can add a surprisingly high overhead? (Particularly if the neighbours are using the same or neighbouring frequencies - best to find a clear(isn) channel and set it manually rather than relying on the so-called 'smart' automatic setting, which is anything but.)

I'm a fair distance from the cabinet but get a little over 57 Mbps down and 16 Mbps up for Infinity 2 over Ethernet (theoretical max of 76 & 19 Mbps). I seem to remember being in the high 20's (possibly v. low 30's) when I was on Infinity 1, so there should be more performance available if you want it.

[Dave2002]

Word

Your comments re no using the "smart" settings may be helpful. Mostly we are quite pleased with the service - such as the extra TV channels, and the relatively high data rate for downloads, though with a few problem areas, including:

1. We get frequent and disappointing loss of WiFi on Mac laptops, such as a Macbook Pro and a Macbook Air. So far have tried decoupling the 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz channels, and also using different SSIDs for the 2.4. GHz and 5 GHz channels, but problems persist. There seem to be quite a few other Home Hub devices in the area - maybe just using a channel snooping tool to check the channels the neighbours are using, and then manually setting the channels on our Home Hub would reduce problems.

2. The Youview box is very good. However, I think it is made by Humax, so it responds to commands from the remote for a Humax Freesat box (and vice versa), which causes problems - very unfortunate. This is not helped by the "clever" switching by the HDMI links to the TV. I think some recordings have been lost due to errors induced by the confusion re the controllers and we were not aware of this at the time.

You mention that we might be able to get higher data rates. The data rates have, as you may have suspected, only been tested until very recently using WiFI. I am aware that using wired connections can sometimes make a significant difference, though for portable devices such as laptops it can be a pain connecting to a cable. The laptops we currently use most often do not have ethernet conneciions built in. I can test with an older laptop and a direct ethernet cable connection to see if there is a difference.

I did, however, just now test with a desktop - but it is situated in an awkward location, so its "wired" connection is via HomePlug units plugged into the mains. Using the WiFi the data rates were similar to the laptops - over 20 Mbps for downloads, and over 4 Mbps for uploads. Via ethernet/PowerLine the rates dropped to a bit over 9Mbps for downloads and around 1.5 Mbps for uploads. Arguably the "wired" connection would be more secure, and also cause fewer interaction problems if/when the wireless channels are shared between several users.

I would expect to get better results with a cable connected directly to the Home Hub, but that is really not ideal. I've not tested the effect of distance from the router on the wireless connectivity - yet! Maybe I am after all going to be faced with the challenge of drilling holes in walls to put one or more ethernet cables through - something I was really hoping to avoid. Up to now there would have been no point, as the internal data rates have previously exceeded the external broadband rates, but that now seems no longer to be true.

We might find that the "need" for wired connections and cabling in houses could increase as users get more demanding, and applications more reliant on high speed data transfers, and even though wireless links are now more than 40 times faster than original broadband data rates - (our first was 512 kbps) - wired systems are still able to provide faster and more secure service.

[Word]

1. We get frequent and disappointing loss of WiFi on Mac laptops, such as a Macbook Pro and a Macbook Air. So far have tried decoupling the 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz channels, and also using different SSIDs for the 2.4. GHz and 5 GHz channels, but problems persist. There seem to be quite a few other Home Hub devices in the area - maybe just using a channel snooping tool to check the channels the neighbours are using, and then manually setting the channels on our Home Hub would reduce problems.

My brother-in-law was experiencing much the same thing and that was resolved by setting the channel manually.
(The automatic setting defaulted to channel 6, which made for a slow and unreliable connection with frequent drop-outs. Interestingly it was possible to select channel 1 even though that appeared to be used by the router for BT ‘Fon’ public wi-fi access and doing so resulted in zero connectivity.)

Trying a few channels at random tends to do the trick but I’d recommend downloading the free NetSpot Wi-Fi scanning tool from the Mac App Store; sketch out an approximate floor plan then wander round taking a few readings and you can triangulate all of your neighbours’ wi-fi hotspots:

https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/netspot-wifi-survey-wireless/id514951692?mt=12

p.s. There's also a version of NetSpot that costs £34.99 (!) but the free one gives you everything you could want from a wi-fi scanner.

[Dave2002]

Word

Thanks for the tips. I didn't know about the NetSpot tool - and apparently the Pro version costs serious money - over $100!
As you said, the free one is probably good enough. I have had similar tools on PCs before - such as NetStumbler. There are also some other tools for PCs mentioned here - http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...ls_for_Windows

I have at least temporarily abandoned the auto mode, and gone for a different preselected numbered channel in the 2.4 GHz range. It looks as though we have the only hub in the neighbourhood which operates in the 5 GHz range - there are several in the 2.4GHz range. Signal levels seem a bit erratic too, so may need further checking and investigation. Perhaps the Hub should be resited maybe even only a small displacement could make a big difference to signal strength and interference.

Re the speed checking with ethernet cables, I'm making slow progress with that. My now incredibly slow netbook only managed under 10 Mbps for downloads and 1 Mbps for uploads using Firefox to check using the wireless connections, and it went up to 13 Mbps dl and around 4 Mbps ul using Chrome. Next time I have half an hour to spare I could connect it to the router by cable - but that machine is so challenged the results may not show very much.

I'm thinking that life is now too short to deal with machines which are that slow. However, running NetStumbler confirms the levels shown by NetSpot on the Mac. I wonder if the SNR and signal levels are marginal - they show as around -50dBm though they are considerably higher than the other detected access points, which are down at -80 to -90.