Yet Another "Is 0k the same as 'undefined'?" thread

Ripwave

Originally posted by gt94sss2
but the USO speed in Eire can't be zero - as 2.4K is specified in a EU Directive somewhere as they were trying to standardise a minimum USO across Europe (the UK USO exceeds the EU version)

The USO isn't 0K - there is no USO for data at the moment (it's a subtle difference that Muck has difficulty getting his head around).

As an aside, it's Ireland, not Eire. (Éire, with an accent on the E is the Irish language name for the state - our constitution defines the English language name as Ireland, which is why you see Ireland listed among the members of the UN and the EU, and note Éire or Eire).

Urban Weigl

Originally posted by Ripwave
The USO isn't 0K - there is no USO for data at the moment (it's a subtle difference that Muck has difficulty getting his head around).

Haven't we covered this before? While you are technically correct, the USO effectively results in 0k. Sort of like if I said I had no money, someone else might say of me "Urban has 0 euros".

Ripwave

Originally posted by Urban Weigl
Haven't we covered this before? While you are technically correct, the USO effectively results in 0k. Sort of like if I said I had no money, someone else might say of me "Urban has 0 euros".

No, it's not the same. For a start, if it was 0K, it would remain at 0K until the next time a USO document is defined. As things stand, Comreg could set a USO for data tomorrow. (In other words, it's the difference between "Urban is not allowed to have any money for the next 5 years" and "Urban has no money today, but me might have some tomorrow". I'm sure you'd notice that difference!). Of course, Comreg won't set a USO for data tomorrow, but that doesn't mean that it's okay to tell lies about what they have and haven't done.

Read the quote the Muck provided above: Comreg said that "it would not be helpful at this time" to specify a minimum bitrate. That's because it would be unhelpful to specify a rate of 28.8 if say 25% of lines were incapable of sustaining that rate, because the economic cost of upgrading that number of lines would be unsupportable, and, without any legal powers to force eircom to comply, eircom would simply ignore it (they would simply have to ignore it). On the other hand, if Comreg set a minimum rate of 9600bps, that 96% of lines could support, and they could reasonable require eircom to upgrade any other lines, that wouldn't be very helpful either, because a US0 of 9600b would be virtually useless, but we'd be stuck with it for the next few years. That's why the USO requirement isn't 0k - there is no USO for data.

(I just made up those percentages, by the way - I have no idea what the real numbers would be).

Muck completely ignores the important point in Sunils post that

BT have never liked installing them (pairgains)- as they cost more than just installing a new line (unless it requires a substantial cable laying etc)

because it undermines Mucks main propaganda objective.

Why does eircom install expensive DACS boxes instead of just running extra cable? For a very simple reason - average cable runs in Ireland are substantially longer than they are in the UK, and subsequently, a DACS box is cheaper than running new cable in a lot of cases. Some of that is due to underinvestment back in the 70s and 80s, when the then P&T/Telecom Eireann were deplying a world class phone system, but not deploying enough spare cable for future growth, but most of it is due to the very distributed nature of Irish housing - even our suburbs are substantially lower density than urban and suburban neighbourhoods in the UK.

Forcing eircom to split the wires company from the "telecomms" company would be a very interesting exercise, but I'm not sure that it would have the focussing effect on eircom that it's rumoured to have had on BT.

sceptre

Originally posted by Ripwave
In other words, it's the difference between "Urban is not allowed to have any money for the next 5 years" and "Urban has no money today, but me might have some tomorrow". I'm sure you'd notice that difference!

Indeed, but it doesn't change the fact that Urban is hungry today, has no money and hence can't go to the shop to buy bread today. Saying that there might magically be money in the kitty tomorrow or maybe the day after or next year is poor consolation.

sceptre

Right chaps. This is now in its own thread. We've all probably got our own views on what the USO means or effectively means but you two are the main instigators. Ideally what I'd like to see is some kind of detente to come out of this thread but anything close to that would be good.

dahamsta

Originally posted by Ripwave
No, it's not the same. For a start, if it was 0K, it would remain at 0K until the next time a USO document is defined. As things stand, Comreg could set a USO for data tomorrow. (In other words, it's the difference between "Urban is not allowed to have any money for the next 5 years" and "Urban has no money today, but me might have some tomorrow". I'm sure you'd notice that difference!).

That's... ridiculous. Since when did USOs have a timeframe or time limit? If they chose to, Comreg could set a USO tomorrow, and another one the day after.

Honest to god, the amount of effort you expend twisting logic just because you have some kind of problem with Muck is astounding.

adam

watty

Comreg told me there *MUST* be functional Internet access. But won't say how fast that is.

Eircom say they are only obliged to provide voice.

I say the "speed" is only one aspect. Connect time and how often the line is dropped is also a major issue. As is error rate.


I get 41K

If I "force" 19.2K it is a much lower error rate, but the line is still dropped.


Wheter it is 2.4K or 0K or any other K is only a part of the story.

I'm seriously thinking of cancelling my fixed line as it is not functional for Internet (though speed is almost always 41K), and Eircom can't or won't fix it nor can deliver ISDN nor ADSL at 900m on good modern totally underground 900m connection to Digital Exchange.


Whatever way you look at it
1) Eircom are providing a very poor service technically
2) Comreg seem reluctant to do anything that might force Eircom to spend money
3) Eircom customer service is now nearly at "Chorus" levels.

Victor

What use is 2.4K?

2.4K = 0.0K

spongebob

Well the 2.4k obligation was a CONSTANT 2.4k Full Duplex. Internet connections require Full Duplex handshakes such as CTS/RTS . The current situation with an analogue line here is that constant disconnects are allowed since the 2.4k base was removed , and replaced with Nothing. The requirement for constancy disappeared at the same time as 2.4k.

The requirement for Half Duplex Fax support at 9.6k (or any other speed) disappeared as well in the 2003 USO .

That why Biddy is adamant it is a voice line, Comreg cancelled all the other obligations in the 2003 USO .

I think we can all agree on "Nothing" can we Ripwave because if there is anything there you have yet to point out what it is.

M

oscarBravo

Originally posted by Ripwave
Comreg said that "it would not be helpful at this time" to specify a minimum bitrate. That's because it would be unhelpful to specify a rate of 28.8 if say 25% of lines were incapable of sustaining that rate, because the economic cost of upgrading that number of lines would be unsupportable, and, without any legal powers to force eircom to comply, eircom would simply ignore it (they would simply have to ignore it). On the other hand, if Comreg set a minimum rate of 9600bps, that 96% of lines could support, and they could reasonable require eircom to upgrade any other lines, that wouldn't be very helpful either, because a US0 of 9600b would be virtually useless, but we'd be stuck with it for the next few years. That's why the USO requirement isn't 0k - there is no USO for data.

It seems to me you have an over-narrow definition of "helpful". You say Eircom would simply ignore a USO that they can't comply with - is this really a justification for not setting it?

I mean, does anyone think it's OK that ComReg's approach to regulation is to ask Eircom what's OK with them, and regulate accordingly?

On the subject of the thread - Ripwave, the USO may not explicitly specify 0k, but the net effect is precisely the same as if they had. It may not be strictly true to say that Eircom are not obliged to provide a data connection at all, but the reality is that it is the case. In other words, ComReg say "functional Internet access" while Muck says 0k - the facts on the ground indicate that Muck is much, much closer to the real picture.

watty

Originally posted by oscarBravo
. It may not be strictly true to say that Eircom are not obliged to provide a data connection at all, but the reality is that it is the case. In other words, ComReg say "functional Internet access" while Muck says 0k - the facts on the ground indicate that Muck is much, much closer to the real picture.

Eircom themseleves consistantly tell me they ONLY have to provide voice.

Comreg have told me they MUST provide functional Internet access.

I have had Phone, convestions with an Eircom Manager, sent them email, fax and web forms.

I have been rung up by comreg and talked and sent them email and faxes.


There seems to be a reality gap between the two organisations at present.

Ripwave

Originally posted by oscarBravo
On the subject of the thread - Ripwave, the USO may not explicitly specify 0k, but the net effect is precisely the same as if they had. It may not be strictly true to say that Eircom are not obliged to provide a data connection at all,

I never said that - I said that it's a lie to say that "Comreg has defined the USO for data as 0kbps".

You all insist that there is absolutely no difference between "not defined" and "0k".

If there's no difference, why are you all getting your knickers in a twist about insisting that it's 0k?

IrelandOffline used to have a reputation for credibility - is slagging off Comreg really that important to you all that you'd rather twist the truth for a better soundbite?

spongebob

Originally posted by Muck
Well the 2.4k obligation was a CONSTANT 2.4k Full Duplex. Internet connections require Full Duplex handshakes such as CTS/RTS . The current situation with an analogue line here is that constant disconnects are allowed since the 2.4k base was removed , and replaced with Nothing. The requirement for constancy disappeared at the same time as 2.4k.

The requirement for Half Duplex Fax support at 9.6k (or any other speed) disappeared as well in the 2003 USO .

That why Biddy is adamant it is a voice line, Comreg cancelled all the other obligations in the 2003 USO .

I think we can all agree on "Nothing" can we Ripwave because if there is anything there you have yet to point out what it is.

Slag that lot off Ripwave.

This is your final chance to agree on "Nothing" , in which case I may agree to change my notational representation of "Nothing" , when said "Nothing" is applied to data speeds in Ireland , as 0k .

I insist that we refer to "Nothing" in Bold at all times so that we are clear on which "Nothing" we are talking about.

Fair or wha?

M

Ripwave

Originally posted by Muck
Slag that lot off Ripwave.

This is your final chance to agree on "Nothing" , in which case I may agree to change my notational representation of "Nothing" , when said "Nothing" is applied to data speeds in Ireland , as 0k .

I insist that we refer to "Nothing" in Bold at all times so that we are clear on which "Nothing" we are talking about.

Fair or wha?

M

I see you're not claiming that Comreg have defined the USO for data access as 0k any more, Muck (it's now "Comreg cancelled all the other obligations in the 2003 USO").

spongebob

That was my final offer so 0K it is Ripwave

Could ya tell me if it is **** all half duplex or **** all full duplex while you're on the case . ?

M

sceptre

Originally posted by Ripwave
You all insist that there is absolutely no difference between "not defined" and "0k".

I like to put the word "effectively" in there myself


I may not always have done so in the (two or so) times I've mentioned it so everyone, don't go looking for past posts to beat me around the head with in wet lettuce fashion

Ripwave

Originally posted by sceptre
I like to put the word "effectively" in there myself

And you simply avoided the question - If there's no difference, why are you all getting your knickers in a twist about insisting that it's 0k?

It's not defined, and the reason it matters is that IrelandOfflines credibility is damaged when allegations are made that are patently untrue. If it truely doesn't make any difference, then just tell it like it is - that Comreg has failed to define "functional internet access", and no longer specifies a minimum bit rate for data connections.

If, on the other hand, it's really important to you to insist that "Comreg has defined the minimum data rate as 0k", even though you know it's not true, could you at least come up with a rational explanation for your preference? Is slagging off Comreg really that important to you all that you'd rather twist the truth for a better soundbite?

Ripwave

Originally posted by Muck
That was my final offer so 0K it is Ripwave

Could ya tell me if it is **** all half duplex or **** all full duplex while you're on the case . ?

We all know that logical consistency isn't exactly your strong point, Muck (now there's an understatement!).

But I think that the question about whether it's half duplex or full duplex would best be answered by the person who insists that the minimum data rate has been defined. And, last time I checked, that was you.

(This is a bit like giving Muck a piece of paper with PTO written on both sides. It's bound to keep him amused for hours).

spongebob

I have zip to do with Irelandoffline anyway so God knows why you are trying to tar the Committee with whatever I have to say independently.

Your trenchant defence of the 0K USO is noted by all Ripwave. I wish you'd do something useful like go back over the Dept of Social Welfare subsidy to Eircom and reanalyse at the new line rental rates and taking the VUS into account. If you do that I can agree to differ seeing as yoiu have gone to the bother of analysing the scale of the Governments sizeable subsidisation of Eircom and thereby helped to put some information into the public domain.

Nor will I bother to attack you on the presentation , even if I disagree with salient conclusions .......especially your salient conclusions.

If all you can contribute is to bang on about the 'presentation' of the Comreg 0k policy I'll simply mark you down as a nutter or as an agitpropper for the CWU .

Boing.

M

oscarBravo

Originally posted by Ripwave
If there's no difference, why are you all getting your knickers in a twist about insisting that it's 0k?

Who, exactly, is getting their knickers in a twist? Who indeed (apart from Muck) has insisted that ComReg have defined it as 0k?

It's not defined, and the reason it matters is that IrelandOfflines credibility is damaged when allegations are made that are patently untrue.

Ireland Offline have not made that allegation, to my knowledge. Muck is not a committee member; I'm not even sure if he's a member.

If it truely doesn't make any difference, then just tell it like it is - that Comreg has failed to define "functional internet access", and no longer specifies a minimum bit rate for data connections.

Pedantry aside, when I'm talking to people about this issue I don't think it makes the issue clear enough to say that functional Internet access remains undefined - that's a blank look waiting to happen. When I tell them that there used to be a minimum speed that Eircom had to provide - even if it was pants, it at least allowed fax machines to work - and now that minimum has been removed, they get the picture.

If, on the other hand, it's really important to you to insist that "Comreg has defined the minimum data rate as 0k", even though you know it's not true, could you at least come up with a rational explanation for your preference? Is slagging off Comreg really that important to you all that you'd rather twist the truth for a better soundbite?

Saying that ComReg has effectively reduced the obligation on Eircom from 2.4k to 0k presents a much more accurate picture of the current situation than saying that functional Internet access is undefined.

Ripwave

Originally posted by Muck
Your trenchant defence of the 0K USO is noted by all Ripwave.

There is no "0k USO", Muck, so how exactly am I supposed to be "trenchantly defending" it?

Ripwave

Originally posted by oscarBravo
Pedantry aside, when I'm talking to people about this issue I don't think it makes the issue clear enough to say that functional Internet access remains undefined - that's a blank look waiting to happen. When I tell them that there used to be a minimum speed that Eircom had to provide - even if it was pants, it at least allowed fax machines to work - and now that minimum has been removed, they get the picture.

I don't know what you're arguing with me about - the minimum has been removed.

Saying that ComReg has effectively reduced the obligation on Eircom from 2.4k to 0k presents a much more accurate picture of the current situation than saying that functional Internet access is undefined.

Bollox. You've just stated that people are perfectly capable of understanding the implications of removing the minimum, but now you claim that you have to use Mucks lie about "0k" to get the message across. Talk about pedantry!

It's not good enough that you have to bend the truth, now you claim that you have to tell lies because the people you're telling them to are too thick too understand the truth!

You're not running in the local elections, are you, OB?

dahamsta

You should be a butler Ripwave, your politeness knows no bounds.

sceptre

Originally posted by Ripwave
And you simply avoided the question - If there's no difference, why are you all getting your knickers in a twist about insisting that it's 0k?

Actually I'm not - my main contribution to this thread has been to move it away from another thread as this argument never goes anywhere. I didn't avoid the question but if I have to obviously not avoid it, my feeling is that comreg has effectively defined a requirement of 0k as they haven't defined a requirement. And let's remember that I'm not on the committee and have never spoken "for" IOFFL either.

Capt'n Midnight

functional internet connection

Just wondering, what is the slowest speed connection that won't timeout or miss graphics etc, on these sites.
www.eircom.net / www.eircom.ie
www.comreg.ie / www.siteviewer.ie

shinzon

Just to add my pennethworth to this argument or non argument or whatever this is turning out to be

For me personally I see it in plain black and white, if someone wants ADSL , RADSL or whatever, Eircom WONT and repeat WONT fix your line, its as good as having the USO defined as 0k

This whole undefined bit in the uso is what allows eircom to get away with murder, and allows the patchwork of a network to continue to degrade to the point at what it is now, only capable of carrying voice calls

ripwave you seem to obsess over semantics

Why i dunno but whatever floats your boat

Shin

Moriarty

Just a friendly reminder that no one has a special permit to goad ripwave. Attack the post, not the poster.

spongebob

I am trying to lose €40 in the Bickering forum by 00:29 precisely at this very moment ....all in a good cause mind.

M

BigEejit

Why dont ye ask a biddy whether its 0k or undefined ..... you could start out by saying that you are having difficulty connecting to the internet ...... you will then get first hand evidence of whether it is 0k (Biddy might - will - say "Eircom dont have to give you a line capable of data") or undefined (Biddy might - when hell freezes over - say "OH GOOD GOD ALMIGHTY, we'll get someone out right away and fix that problem for you sir")

EFFECTIVELY in this case, undefined = 0k because if you cant get it, Eircom will tell you to get fucking knotted. Saying 0k and undefined are not the same thing is pedantry in this case.

dahamsta

Out of curiousity, has IrelandOffline asked the Minister or someone in his department about this? (Obviously there's no point in asking Comreg, although I'd love to know what they got in return from Eircom for this - pardon my Klatchian - retarded policy. In all seriousness, the fact that it's going on so long creates a stench of brown envelopes.)

adam

Ripwave

Originally posted by BigEejit
Saying 0k and undefined are not the same thing is pedantry in this case.

The question isn't whether 0k and undefined are the same - it's whether Comreg have set a USO of 0k or not. And they quite plainly haven't, because if they had, you'd be able to quote it.

Comreg provided an update to the USO document last month:
http://www.comreg.ie/publications/default.asp?nid=101522&ctype=5
It still doens't defined "functional internet access", and seems to assume that pair gains are the only source of internet access problems.

The eircom document referred to (http://www.eircom.ie/bveircom/pdf/USO_statement_270404.pdf) doesn't mention the internet at all.

Comreg says that discussions with eircom are ongoing, and that details will be published on their website when the issue has been resolved. I just wish they'd refuse to approve any increase eircom requests until these issues are resolved!