Eircom and data line Quality

zod

I know we have a very low data speed requirement over land lines but there is some requirement surely, I thought comreg had sorted this issue?

see

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=2229035#post2229035

spongebob

It is a state secret as IoffL found out when they did an FoI , but it is sorted according to Comreg.

M

jwt

One of the really big hurdles with this and FIA (Functional Internet Access) is technically defining the quality of the line

Do you say....

512kb adsl at 10km for 90% of lines

ISDN at 3km for 100% of lines

10dB drop in SNR per km over 100% of lines

100 ohms resistance and 10 microfards capacitance at point of entry into the house

To be trully honest the last option is the more technically correct (The numbers are made up) way to spec the line

Trying to get that legislated would be fun

FWIY Comreg, DCMNR and IOFFL are aware of the difficulties, we (IOFFL) are persuing it, but its a difficult road.

And the FOI results haven't helped

John

spongebob

jwt wrote:

FWIY Comreg, DCMNR and IOFFL are aware of the difficulties, we (IOFFL) are persuing it, but its a difficult road.
And the FOI results haven't helped

Is there any evidence that Comreg ever had a position on this, other than what Eircom fed them .

We have "progressed" from being the laughing stock of Europe in 2001 and 2002 (when Mary Harney was still peddling the E-Hub of Europe myth) to being totally irrelevant now. No advanced communications anything happens in Ireland any more, unlike in the 1990s and even as late as 2000 . Our communications systems skillbase will have totally evaporated by the end of this decade as the global industry migrates to where it IS happening. .

Thats what the dithering really means . The Telecoms industry in Ireland has evaporated since 2000. This headlong charge into irrelevance is led by a Regulator which believes that the Internet is Functional at 0k and regulates accordingly .

M

jwt

Muck wrote:

Is there any evidence that Comreg ever had a position on this, other than what Eircom fed them .


M

Going to choose my words carefully

There is no evidence that ComReg ever had a position on this, including what Eircom fed them


John

spongebob

The Eircom documentation has been withheld from the FoI release but Comreg have apparently not indicated that a position paper exists from their point of view....be it withheld or otherwise...... on the subject of Functional Internet Access . I have not seen any of the documents by the way and must rely on hearsay (despite my offer to do some scanning over the chrstmas) .

We can conclude from all this that the 1999-2003 Data Requirement of 2.4k Full Duplex was reduced to 0k in July 2003, by Comreg, for no reason at all. This is consistency, Comreg style.

Comreg could alway belatedly conjure something out of thin air ....even if only to prove that nobody knew it existed which is why it failed to make it into the FoI release. . That would also be consistency Comreg style.

M

damien

Muck wrote:

The Eircom documentation has been withheld from the FoI release but Comreg have apparently not indicated that a position paper exists from their point of view....be it withheld or otherwise...... on the subject of Functional Internet Access . I have not seen any of the documents by the way and must rely on hearsay (despite my offer to do some scanning over the chrstmas) .

Tell you what Muck, you pay my wages, I'll quit my job and then I can devote time to serving everyone that wants my attention on this forum. Or you could make an FOI request and not rely on the unreliable IrelandOffline people who have not taken up your offer you made a whole week ago.

spongebob

Jeez !

all I said was send me 150 pages for scanning to PDF / HTML Offer still stands till next week .

M

damien

Apologies Muck. I never got my second baby bottle today.

jwt

Tell you what, I'm in Cork this weekend coming. :rolleyes:

How about I meet up with Damien collect the relevant docs and arrange delivery to Muck

Muck, I can either hand deliver during the next week or post

Or use the secret IOFFL drop point, chalk an x on the nearest lamp post and wait for Muck to collect

John

SkepticOne

jwt wrote:

One of the really big hurdles with this and FIA (Functional Internet Access) is technically defining the quality of the line

Do you say....

512kb adsl at 10km for 90% of lines

ISDN at 3km for 100% of lines

10dB drop in SNR per km over 100% of lines

100 ohms resistance and 10 microfards capacitance at point of entry into the house

To be trully honest the last option is the more technically correct (The numbers are made up) way to spec the line

All of these kind of miss the point. They confuse functional internet access with the means of delivering it.

eircomtribunal

SkepticOne wrote:

All of these kind of miss the point.

Isn't that the point Sean McCann makes about the ineffectiveness of sectoral regulators? (From http://www.comwreck.com/blog_35_dec10.html)

"2. DEFERENCE.
A sectoral regulator, with nothing but sectoral expertise, instinctively defers, in technical and operational matters, to the former incumbent. It's hard for them not to - very often, a new regulator will know far less about a particular industry than the former incumbent. An unhealthy relationship can develop. I've seen at first hand how a former incumbent can bog issues down in a lot of red-herring minutiae - there will always be "unfortunate technical reasons" that they "understand better than everyone else". The problem is that a sectoral regulator is awed by this degree of nit-picking experience; and defers to it. This in practice always means favouring doing nothing, just in case. A regulator who was bullish in pursuit of clear principle and less inclined to waste time in rambling sub-committee debates would get better results. Paradoxically therefore, less understanding might be more, not less, useful. Sectoral regulators, as a consequence of their much-vaunted sectoral expertise, are too nervous and too easily swayed by b/s technical sub-committee "arguments" ever to achieve anything bold or decisive."

P.

cgarvey

jwt wrote:

Muck, I can either hand deliver during the next week or post

I can do half, if it's worth the hassle of 2 deliveries .. I can collect them off you somewhere easy to get to as well, if that's of any use.

.cg

jwt

SkepticOne wrote:

All of these kind of miss the point. They confuse functional internet access with the means of delivering it.

Sort of, FIA still has to be defined before you can mandate it.So how do you define FIA?



John

SkepticOne

eircomtribunal wrote:

Isn't that the point Sean McCann makes about the ineffectiveness of sectoral regulators? (From http://www.comwreck.com/blog_35_dec10.html)

Yes, but I think it goes deeper than the point McCann is making. For example, in the case of LLU, there are genuine technical issues that need to be addressed, and the incumbent can certainly complicate matters easily. But in the case of defining functional internet access, the users experience is the important thing. In answer to JWTs question, any definition of FIA must be based on some measurable aspect of the users functional internet access. I would suggest bitrate is the most important of these. The line needs to be capable of sustaining a given bitrate using easily available equipment.