Eircom eFibre VDSL/FTTC rollout – plans to reach 1.6m premises by mid 2016

SpaceTime

Vectoring produces more like around 100Mbit/s.

For 200 Mbit/s you'd also need to use pair-bonding (two lines simultaneously)

Eircom Wholesale spec'd the modems to be fully compatible with a vectored service, so any of the 'home access gateways' (modem/router/VoIP box) provided by any of the current 'fibre' suppliers will be able to handle the updated service when it switches on.

Frank Garrett

SpaceTime wrote: »

Vectoring produces more like around 100Mbit/s.

For 200 Mbit/s you'd also need to use pair-bonding (two lines simultaneously)

Eircom Wholesale spec'd the modems to be fully compatible with a vectored service, so any of the 'home access gateways' (modem/router/VoIP box) provided by any of the current 'fibre' suppliers will be able to handle the updated service when it switches on.

Pair-bonding - that the one I meant. So, the routers compatible with that then.

What about those DrayTek routers members on here praise, are they compatible with the updates?

I need something with a flexible firewall and it's a pain in the ass shopping for one because not liking its firewall wasn't a good enough excuse to return an ADSL router I bought from PC World. Returning something I bought online would be even more difficult.

I really fúcking hate restrictive routers.

SpaceTime

Frank Garrett wrote: »

Pair-bonding - that the one I meant. So, the routers compatible with that then.

What about those DrayTek routers members on here praise, are they compatible with the updates?

I need something with a flexible firewall and it's a pain in the ass shopping for one because not liking its firewall wasn't a good enough excuse to return an ADSL router I bought from PC World. Returning something I bought online would be even more difficult.

I really fúcking hate restrictive routers.

Nope, the *MODEMS* most likely aren't compatible with pair bonding. The router/switch is only the bit that shares your connection with multiple computers on your network / manages your WiFi, may have a firewall etc. That can be connected to any modem.

If pair bonding is ever done, it would require a new modem. It's possible they'll just go to full fibre to home by then anyway for people looking for >100Mbit/s

Vectoring should happen in 2014 though so a fairly significant speed bump for a lot of people.

You can't use your own modem with any of these FTTC services as the specs are quite specific and the DSLAM will possibly refuse to talk to modems it doesn't recognise.

The problem is they do not want a mixture of vectoring-compatible and non-vectoring compatible modems on the network and there are different specs for vectoring too as it's a relatively new and still emerging standard.

However, you can use any router you like plugged into whatever modem/router combo unit the ISP sends you out. Pretty much the same as the way you'd do it with a UPC cable modem service.

You'll be wasting you money trying to buy a VDSL2 modem anyway. They're not sold in shops very much and the specs are quite network-specific at present. The ISPs also won't necessarily give you the log in details to connect to the network !

Modem-router gateway devices sold in shops are generally only ADSL/ADSL2+ compatible.

gordonnet

gordonnet wrote: »

Any news about the one near curragh woods ?

checked this morning, cabinet base in place at curragh woods

fat-tony

hellboy99 wrote: »

This is what I got from one VF tech support agent regarding the problems with my fibre service; "if the router is connected to the MDP (Master socket) via a cable length of more than 2 - 3 feet it will not work. It will not work on the CAT5 extension that the engineer installed in my home"

Questioned about this on the VF Community forum and this is the reply;



http://community.vodafone.ie/t5/Services-at-Home/Awful-Tech-Support-experinece/td-p/139044

It's sad and pathetic how poor "customer support" is. They have untrained staff reading from scripts. When I was ordering my fibre connection from VF I asked if I could have the extension kit installed and would they do it for free. The CS rep did not know anything about this but he "thought" that the technician would put the socket anywhere I wanted it. I was put onto tech support and they didn't seem to know much more, so I left it until the tech came to install. Now it stands to reason that if the VDSL signal gets to your house ok via hundreds of metres of twisted pair cable, you can extend it by several more metres (10m in my case), providing you use good quality twisted pair cable and a proper socket termination.
FFS they offer the extension kit, as do BT in the UK, where you can have your VDSL outlet up to 30m from the main socket, so why are they saying you have to have your modem/router beside the main socket - which is usually in the hall beside the front door. I certainly wouldn't use any length of the flat telephone extension cable beyond a couple or three feet as that is untwisted cable and will pick up interference (and radiate signal also).

Uriel.

I had efibre (eircom) installed Friday.

As mentioned by the above poster, usual set up in the house with telephone socket in the hall of the house. A Couple of months ago while installing a home cinema kit, I decided to pre-plan for efibre and when I had the carpet up I ran telephone cable from the TV to the Hall with standard cable (I wanted to move the modem into the sitting room for direct connection to my amp, PS3, TV etc.)

Anyway, usual craic, took the morning off work (Had a text, an email and two calls to confirm I would be in the house for the "between 9 and 12" appointment). Phonecall at 11:30, "eh we're delayed, will you be there in the afternoon" - anyway they couldn't give me a specific time and I had to go to work, so asked my sister to wait for them.

Anyway guy came, did the install using the cabling I had left ready.

It seems I am 500m (not as the crow flies, but walking from cab to house via footpaths) but I am only getting circa 23mb down and 15 up, which while better than previous is not as good as I had hoped.

Anyone have an ideas if it could be the cabling, or should I be getting higher rates at that distance from the cab?

Also, for some reason when I connect my laptop to modem via ethernet (to try test the speed of the wired connection), I can't get a connection (using Vista (no problem connecting wirelessly)). My PS3 and Western Digital Media Server etc all work fine connected via ethernet. Just wondering am I doing something wrong there?

hellboy99

Uriel. wrote: »

Anyone have an ideas if it could be the cabling, or should I be getting higher rates at that distance from the cab?

I prewired also before hand using flat extension cable, when the engineer called out to do the fibre install he replaced it with CAT5 twisted cable, said it was what I really should have and less interference with it too.

As for speeds, I've been told that Eircom are limiting the speed they give to their customers as they hold some back (18 - 24MB) for their TV service.

fat-tony

@Uriel - post a screen capture of your DSL info page from your modem. This will show some stats about SNR, attenuation and should give some info on errors received. I'm not familiar with the eircom modem/router but have seen posts of the info and it should provide some info.

tarakino

I am getting my installation in 2 weeks and as most of users the main phone socket is in the hall.
Now I am only using wired connection with the router connected to 3 devices.
In my case, would it better to use the extension provided by Vodafone for 60 eur or just use powerline adapters??

jeffk

FINALLY got a look at one of these set up. the sister in Mullingar got it, they rang her to see if she wanted it.

It is basically a new phone point in the hall and runs a normal phone lead to your phone and then the same to the router.

Didn't see it in action unfortunately

Dcully

Saw guys laying cables today in Monasterein, asked them if it was for efibre and they said yes it was
We are listed for April to go live, im wondering if we could get it earlier if they are laying cables today.

smelly sock

Dcully wrote: »

Saw guys laying cables today in Monasterein, asked them if it was for efibre and they said yes it was
We are listed for April to go live, im wondering if we could get it earlier if they are laying cables today.

I know of areas in Maynooth that have cabinets in place already but won't be live until Feb. I was hoping the same. Even at that, a lot of areas will still not be able to avail of it. In recent weeks my estate was upgraded by UPC and I have horizon on order for thursday. I'd like a bit of competition though.

Impetus

Uriel. wrote: »

It seems I am 500m (not as the crow flies, but walking from cab to house via footpaths) but I am only getting circa 23mb down and 15 up, which while better than previous is not as good as I had hoped.

The problem is that eircom’s worn out copper pairs seem to run all over the place between one’s local street cabinet and one’s house. I know of someone who lives where there is a cabinet within 200m of the house (physically), yet eircom estimates that the “70 Mbits/sec” service will really work at 40 Mbits/sec - due to the length of the connection. At 200 m, using VDSL2, the maximum speed should be around 170 Mbits/sec.

If eircom was motivated to provide the customer with the service the customer required, they could offer the option of fibre to the premises from the street cabinet. Give the customer the option of paying the capital cost of the fibre connection or pay the cost on an ongoing basis in their regular bill.

Sully

Impetus wrote: »

If eircom was motivated to provide the customer with the service the customer required, they could offer the option of fibre to the premises from the street cabinet. Give the customer the option of paying the capital cost of the fibre connection or pay the cost on an ongoing basis in their regular bill.

The trial didn't really work out with bringing cables directly into houses, drilling doors and floors etc. Not a lot of people want the hassle of all this, never mind the cost (which is a cost eircom probably don't want either).

Johnboy1951

Sully wrote: »

The trial didn't really work out with bringing cables directly into houses, drilling doors and floors etc. Not a lot of people want the hassle of all this, never mind the cost (which is a cost eircom probably don't want either).

I can well understand Eircom not wishing to get into those 'one-off' installations while they are using all manpower they can to roll out FTTC.

Other than that, when things settle down, I see no reason Eircom cannot provide users with the choice - at a cost. That cost would of course include some gain for Eircom, no doubt.

Capt'n Midnight

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

I can well understand Eircom not wishing to get into those 'one-off' installations while they are using all manpower they can to roll out FTTC.

Other than that, when things settle down, I see no reason Eircom cannot provide users with the choice - at a cost. That cost would of course include some gain for Eircom, no doubt.

Considering the target is 70% in 2016 I would not hold your breath.

You have to remember that in the distant past the DSL rollout was held up because of the lucrative income from per minute dial up. If you disagree you'll need to explain why the price of DSL was EXACTLY the same price as downloading the full CAP via evening rate ISDN.

The people on 70Mb ( which may become 100Mb sometime next year ) might not want to pay extra for something that's good enough. Those over a mile away might want fibre but until all the low hanging fruit of capturing 100+ subscribers with one cabinet has been achieved they may have to wait.

Come 2016 it may be a case of more cabinets or even one cabinet per estate which would be far cheaper than FTTH.

In an ideal world all new builds would get FTTH , or at least cabled for fibre so it could be blown through later on. Of course that would have required joined up thinking.




tl;dr I think they'll fill in the gaps with more cabinets / roll out FTTPremises at a premium price for years to come before they even consider FTTH at consumer prices.

Impetus

Sully wrote: »

The trial didn't really work out with bringing cables directly into houses, drilling doors and floors etc. Not a lot of people want the hassle of all this, never mind the cost (which is a cost eircom probably don't want either).

Surely it is up to the customer if they wish to have the service? A tiny hole in the wall for a fibre cable is a five minute job typically. It is typically a smaller hole than might be required for cable tv or a satellite co-ax line. The cost is a matter for the customer. All it requires is for eircom to get out of its slumber, a slumber the company has been in since the date the company was incorporated. Inherited from its state owned past.

The disruption, cost, and issues which will be created by mass water metering to private houses is far far greater (than installing fibre). Not to mention the cost of replacing water meters after freeze damage. Water meters will provide a zero gain for the consumer, and a lot of disruption, pain and needless expense. FTTP on the other hand would allow faster internet, video on demand up to 8k resolution, hundreds of conventional TV channels, phone, security alarm, whatever the customer needed. Delivered in a competitive environment where multiple service providers and consumers had access to the same fibre infrastructure.

Dcully

Noob question for someone stuck on ancient bb for years, is efibre uncongested? as in really uncongested.

jca

Dcully wrote: »

Noob question for someone stuck on ancient bb for years, is efibre uncongested? as in really uncongested.

Yes.

naughto

Its very good dully pulled down a 10gb file in a matter of mins.

jca

Impetus wrote: »

Surely it is up to the customer if they wish to have the service? A tiny hole in the wall for a fibre cable is a five minute job typically. It is typically a smaller hole than might be required for cable tv or a satellite co-ax line. The cost is a matter for the customer. All it requires is for eircom to get out of its slumber, a slumber the company has been in since the date the company was incorporated. Inherited from its state owned past.

The disruption, cost, and issues which will be created by mass water metering to private houses is far far greater (than installing fibre). Not to mention the cost of replacing water meters after freeze damage. Water meters will provide a zero gain for the consumer, and a lot of disruption, pain and needless expense. FTTP on the other hand would allow faster internet, video on demand up to 8k resolution, hundreds of conventional TV channels, phone, security alarm, whatever the customer needed. Delivered in a competitive environment where multiple service providers and consumers had access to the same fibre infrastructure.

I can't see how you can compare ftth with water meter installation. Ftth is exactly that, a fibre cable into someone's private residence with all the disruption that comes with it. Ftth in my case would be very difficult, the cabinet is 500-600m away from my house with the copper cable running underground. A fibre cable would have to follow the same route as the copper to get to my house passing through three access covers, boring the "small" hole would be the easiest bit. The water main is already outside the door with the easily accessible stopcock ready for the new water meter. As far as I can make out, 3 providers namely, Eircom Vodafone and Magnet already have access to to fibre network with Sky joining early 2014 I'm perfectly happy with my fttc it fulfils all my and my gaming kids internet needs.

dxhound2005

Impetus wrote: »

Surely it is up to the customer if they wish to have the service? A tiny hole in the wall for a fibre cable is a five minute job typically. It is typically a smaller hole than might be required for cable tv or a satellite co-ax line. The cost is a matter for the customer. All it requires is for eircom to get out of its slumber, a slumber the company has been in since the date the company was incorporated. Inherited from its state owned past.

The disruption, cost, and issues which will be created by mass water metering to private houses is far far greater (than installing fibre). Not to mention the cost of replacing water meters after freeze damage. Water meters will provide a zero gain for the consumer, and a lot of disruption, pain and needless expense. FTTP on the other hand would allow faster internet, video on demand up to 8k resolution, hundreds of conventional TV channels, phone, security alarm, whatever the customer needed. Delivered in a competitive environment where multiple service providers and consumers had access to the same fibre infrastructure.

You could say that electricity, gas and phone lines are needless expenses. If they are metered and charged for why should water not be the same? As far as expense goes there will be no charge for the meter installation and people will pay for what they use, just like the other utilities. And the meter will be outside any private property and nobody needs to be at home for the installation. So not that much disruption. And I think you should give them a chance before assuming they will not be frost proofed.

It would depend on the cost whether FTTH would be a runner for private house owners. Do you have any figures from your comparison to the water meters which you say would be far far greater? And would the speeds compared to FTTC with vectoring make it worthwhile? If it was less than €500 and really took only 5 minutes to install I might go for it myself.

Impetus

jca wrote: »

I can't see how you can compare ftth with water meter installation. Ftth is exactly that, a fibre cable into someone's private residence with all the disruption that comes with it. Ftth in my case would be very difficult, the cabinet is 500-600m away from my house with the copper cable running underground. A fibre cable would have to follow the same route as the copper to get to my house passing through three access covers, boring the "small" hole would be the easiest bit. The water main is already outside the door with the easily accessible stopcock ready for the new water meter. As far as I can make out, 3 providers namely, Eircom Vodafone and Magnet already have access to to fibre network with Sky joining early 2014 I'm perfectly happy with my fttc it fulfils all my and my gaming kids internet needs.

You sound suspiciously like somebody who works for eircom or UPC. One is not forcing FTTP on any individual. For all I care, you can use dial-up or have no internet connection at all, if it fits your needs.

I know someone who has fibre and a home water meter. The fibre has never failed. The water meter has been replaced 3 times at a cost of almost €300 each time due to freeze damage. When the meter freezes, there is no water supply in the house, even after it thaws, because the glass in the meter breaks and the water pours down the road. Installing a water meter is like installing another thing that will break, in an otherwise basic system.

It is a simple matter to run a fiber optic cable to the average house from the VDSL2 box. Andorra Telecom has done it. They just run the fibre from pole to pole or whatever other legacy route was used by the copper. The fiber is a lot stronger than copper cable, which enables it to withstand 200 km/h winds and being pulled through ducts etc.

Neither eircom not UPC have the right to prevent the wide availability of fibre to customers who want same, simply because they have a vested interest in copper. Fibre shows up copper in performance terms on every front. Connection speed. Choice and number of TV/video/audio channels. Number of phone channels that can be installed. Reliability. Low maintenance cost. A platform for competition (something industry insiders don't like).

Impetus

dxhound2005 wrote: »

You could say that electricity, gas and phone lines are needless expenses. If they are metered and charged for why should water not be the same? As far as expense goes there will be no charge for the meter installation and people will pay for what they use, just like the other utilities. And the meter will be outside any private property and nobody needs to be at home for the installation. So not that much disruption. And I think you should give them a chance before assuming they will not be frost proofed.

It would depend on the cost whether FTTH would be a runner for private house owners. Do you have any figures from your comparison to the water meters which you say would be far far greater? And would the speeds compared to FTTC with vectoring make it worthwhile? If it was less than €500 and really took only 5 minutes to install I might go for it myself.

I have no problem with charging for water. Charge every household €x + €y per bedroom or some other simple measure. Ireland has one of the poorest water distribution infrastructures in Europe. Over 50% of the treated, pumped water in Cork and Dublin vanishes through leaks. These leaks will cost money to fix / re-pipe. Don't spend a billion on meters which will only reduce demand by 5 to 10%. Use the money from fixed charges to reduce demand by 40% by fixing most of the leaks. And bill the water charge on the same bill at property tax to save the double administration cost.

Vectoring doesn't work with loop unbundling. I am trying to promote competition, not the reverse.

Impetus

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

In an ideal world all new builds would get FTTH , or at least cabled for fibre so it could be blown through later on. Of course that would have required joined up thinking.

Absolutely new builds should be 100% fibre, with open access to all suppliers who wished to provide service. It is stupid constructing new builds using 100 year old copper technology for telecommunications. Like it would be stupid to use lead paint, lead plumbing, single glazing, no thermal insulation, etc etc.

There is also no reason why fibre should not be made available as an option to legacy buildings. The building owner could pay for the fibre to the cabinet. Or alternatives could be offered in terms of monthly payments.

Johnboy1951

dxhound2005 wrote: »

You could say that electricity, gas and phone lines are needless expenses. If they are metered and charged for why should water not be the same? As far as expense goes there will be no charge for the meter installation and people will pay for what they use, just like the other utilities. And the meter will be outside any private property and nobody needs to be at home for the installation. So not that much disruption. And I think you should give them a chance before assuming they will not be frost proofed.

It would depend on the cost whether FTTH would be a runner for private house owners. Do you have any figures from your comparison to the water meters which you say would be far far greater? And would the speeds compared to FTTC with vectoring make it worthwhile? If it was less than €500 and really took only 5 minutes to install I might go for it myself.

Not every location is as you describe it.
I have a water meter ..... and was required to pay for it myself some years ago.
The meter IS on my property.
I live in a private house.

In fact the eircom underground wires go across my property, with a manhole between me and my neighbour.
Again that is on private property.

jca

Impetus wrote: »

You sound suspiciously like somebody who works for eircom or UPC. One is not forcing FTTP on any individual. For all I care, you can use dial-up or have no internet connection at all, if it fits your needs.

I know someone who has fibre and a home water meter. The fibre has never failed. The water meter has been replaced 3 times at a cost of almost €300 each time due to freeze damage. When the meter freezes, there is no water supply in the house, even after it thaws, because the glass in the meter breaks and the water pours down the road. Installing a water meter is like installing another thing that will break, in an otherwise basic system.

It is a simple matter to run a fiber optic cable to the average house from the VDSL2 box. Andorra Telecom has done it. They just run the fibre from pole to pole or whatever other legacy route was used by the copper. The fiber is a lot stronger than copper cable, which enables it to withstand 200 km/h winds and being pulled through ducts etc.

Neither eircom not UPC have the right to prevent the wide availability of fibre to customers who want same, simply because they have a vested interest in copper. Fibre shows up copper in performance terms on every front. Connection speed. Choice and number of TV/video/audio channels. Number of phone channels that can be installed. Reliability. Low maintenance cost. A platform for competition (something industry insiders don't like).

Please don't make assumptions. I don't work for any telecoms company. The point I'm making is that ftth is not as simple as running (blowing) a fibre cable from pole to pole and then stringing it into your house via a small hole in the outer wall. All cables to my house ESB,Eircom copper and UPC are underground and in the case of the Eircom copper pair almost 500m from the vdsl cabinet. How can a single fibre strand be threaded the 500m to my house? Everyone contributing to this thread knows the benefit of full ftth so a little less of the patronising crap would be appreciated.

SpaceTime

It was a *BIG* missed opportunity that the Government didn't insist on open-access duct networks going into every property in every new build housing estate from about 2000 onwards.

That being said, eircom does have a duct network in most housing estates. It shouldn't be THAT difficult for them to access individual homes.

Where you'd run into issues is in older areas where you've things like direct-hurried phone cabling in gardens and overhead runs.

Although, there's nothing to stop them doing fibre overhead along the same routes that phone lines run in areas that use that.

Around here, the network seems to be underground to every pole and then there are some drops to older houses from the poles. That wouldn't be all that difficult to fibre-up.

There's absolutely no reason why last drops of fibre couldn't just run the same way as phone lines.

Although some US installations leave a lot to be desired!

http://www.infotelsystems.com/carrier-services/rush-for-fios.jpg

murphaph

Indeed. It's a lot easier to fibre up legacy buildings in the US because they favour overhead supply. In Ireland most urban developments over the last 40 years have had power and telecoms supplied underground, which makes thinks much trtickier to upgrade at low cost.

I think fttc is the right focus for the medium term but yes, we need to be looking at fttb as well. It is a shame nobody was thinking about fttb during the building boom. We could have made massive inroads already by making developments fttb ready. A huge lost opportunity there given we have built so much of our housing stock in the recent past when people knew fttb would be coming sooner or later.

Capt'n Midnight

SpaceTime wrote: »

It was a *BIG* missed opportunity that the Government didn't insist on open-access duct networks going into every property in every new build housing estate from about 2000 onwards.

That being said, eircom does have a duct network in most housing estates. It shouldn't be THAT difficult for them to access individual homes.

Proper insulation to modern standards would have been nice, especially when there was loads of money to do it.



I think at one stage someone reckoned it would take €2Bn to fibre up the whole country. We've spent far more on roads, I haven't been keeping track but I wouldn't be surprised if that figure was close to what has been asset stripped out of eircom over the years.