Getting new master box on BT line.

A technologically challenged friend has a BT line that just terminates in a
small master socket. The rest of the house extensions are fed from a cable
run from the back of this. The entire wiring was fitted by BT some years
ago. Now he wants broadband but I am concerned that he will not be able to
isolate everything but the master socket. Ideally the master socket should
be changed for the current type with a removable faceplate. BT have told him
he will have to pay for this. If he signs up for broadband and there is a
problem the first thing most ISPs are likely to tell him is to remove the
faceplate and plug the ADSL router/modem into the socket behind it. As this
will be impossible how can he remove this potential impasse without paying
BT to update their socket? Replies from BT engineers would be particularly
welcome.

Peter Crosland

In article <4391a2d1$0$1457$(E-Mail Removed)>, Peter
Crosland <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>A technologically challenged friend has a BT line that just terminates in a
>small master socket. The rest of the house extensions are fed from a cable
>run from the back of this. The entire wiring was fitted by BT some years
>ago. Now he wants broadband but I am concerned that he will not be able to
>isolate everything but the master socket. Ideally the master socket should
>be changed for the current type with a removable faceplate. BT have told him
>he will have to pay for this. If he signs up for broadband and there is a
>problem the first thing most ISPs are likely to tell him is to remove the
>faceplate and plug the ADSL router/modem into the socket behind it. As this
>will be impossible how can he remove this potential impasse without paying
>BT to update their socket? Replies from BT engineers would be particularly
>welcome.
>
The parts are available if you could just find someone to fit them for you:
http://cpc.farnell.com/jsp/endecaSea...=TE04369&N=411
£3.51 + vat + post
--
fred
Plusnet - I hope you like vanilla

On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 13:51:13 -0000, "Peter Crosland"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>If he signs up for broadband and there is a
>problem the first thing most ISPs are likely to tell him is to remove the
>faceplate and plug the ADSL router/modem into the socket behind it.

most ISPs will tell him to plug it in the front of the master socket.

> As this
>will be impossible how can he remove this potential impasse without paying
>BT to update their socket?

if ADSL doesn't work he could ask the ISP to send BT to sort it and
the master socket issue may be resolved as part of that.

Another approach is to wire an NTE5 master as an extension to the
existing master as proposed by Clarity at
http://www.clarity.it/telecoms/nte5.htm
which doesn't infringe any rules.

Phil
--
Tiscali - dialup speeds at Broadband prices, see
http://bbs.adslguide.org.uk/postlist...&Board=tiscali

AOL - the unlimited ISP of choice for heavy downloaders.

>>If he signs up for broadband and there is a
>>problem the first thing most ISPs are likely to tell him is to remove the
>>faceplate and plug the ADSL router/modem into the socket behind it.
>
> most ISPs will tell him to plug it in the front of the master socket.
>
>> As this
>>will be impossible how can he remove this potential impasse without paying
>>BT to update their socket?
>
> if ADSL doesn't work he could ask the ISP to send BT to sort it and
> the master socket issue may be resolved as part of that.

I, and I expect he, would like to avoid the need to this and make sure
things will work first time.

> Another approach is to wire an NTE5 master as an extension to the
> existing master as proposed by Clarity at

Sorry but it is not possible because the wiring to extensions is all from
the back of the small master socket to which there is no legitimate customer
access. My intention would be to fit such a faceplate to the front of a BT
provided NTE5 socket.
Thanks for replying anyway.

Peter Crosland

On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 16:12:46 -0000, "Peter Crosland"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Sorry but it is not possible because the wiring to extensions is all from
>the back of the small master socket to which there is no legitimate customer
>access.

well you're kind of stuck if you are concerned about no legitimate
customer access. How are you proposing to install a new master box ?
seems to me you either stick to the rules and get BT to do it, or you
break the rules. I see no grey area.

Phil
--
Tiscali - dialup speeds at Broadband prices, see
http://bbs.adslguide.org.uk/postlist...&Board=tiscali

AOL - the unlimited ISP of choice for heavy downloaders.

On Sat, 3 Dec 2005, Phil Thompson wrote:

> Another approach is to wire an NTE5 master as an extension to the
> existing master as proposed by Clarity at
> http://www.clarity.it/telecoms/nte5.htm
> which doesn't infringe any rules.

That ilustration doesn't look right to me. I thought that if you had
an old-style master socket[*], the only thing you were allowed to do
with it was to *plug into it*. However, this depicts wires labelled
"2" and "5" emerging from the side of the BT master socket box and
connecting to A/B of the user's (NTE5) linebox, with nothing at all
plugged into the front of the master socket. I don't believe this is
allowed.

They then ramble off into "Here's a small point raised by an observant
punter recently", and then describe what (to my understanding) *is*
the only permissible arrangement. They then prevaricate about whether
there would be problems from doing it the way that they first
illustrated, *despite* them already having described their way as
"Legal". IANAL, but I believe readers should get more reliable advice
than this (fortunately, I don't have the old-style master socket, so
it doesn't affect me).

cheers
[*] Denoted "non-NTE5 BT master linebox" by them, but to my
understanding this is a "master socket", not a "linebox".

>>Sorry but it is not possible because the wiring to extensions is all from
>>the back of the small master socket to which there is no legitimate
>>customer
>>access.
>
> well you're kind of stuck if you are concerned about no legitimate
> customer access. How are you proposing to install a new master box ?
> seems to me you either stick to the rules and get BT to do it, or you
> break the rules. I see no grey area.


Neither do I! It is my contention that BT are responsible for providing an
appropriate termination of their line. The problem is how to get them to do
so without charge.

Peter Crosland

On Saturday, in article
<4391c3fe$0$1455$(E-Mail Removed)>
(E-Mail Removed) "Peter Crosland" wrote:

> Sorry but it is not possible because the wiring to extensions is all from
> the back of the small master socket to which there is no legitimate customer
> access. My intention would be to fit such a faceplate to the front of a BT
> provided NTE5 socket.

This description sounds a little odd. It's quite possible to have
extension sockets with the BT logo, and I'd certainly check whether the
master socket doesn't lurk somewhere else, where the BT line enters the
house.

Still it's only a dozen or so years since I saw a 1960-period telephone
replaced by an NTE5 socket. Older installations may still have had a
hard-wired connection.

--
David G. Bell -- SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.

"I am Number Two," said Penfold. "You are Number Six."

Alan J. Flavell wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Dec 2005, Phil Thompson wrote:
>
>> Another approach is to wire an NTE5 master as an extension to the
>> existing master as proposed by Clarity at
>> http://www.clarity.it/telecoms/nte5.htm
>> which doesn't infringe any rules.
>
> That ilustration doesn't look right to me. I thought that if you had
> an old-style master socket[*], the only thing you were allowed to do
> with it was to *plug into it*. However, this depicts wires labelled
> "2" and "5" emerging from the side of the BT master socket box and
> connecting to A/B of the user's (NTE5) linebox, with nothing at all
> plugged into the front of the master socket. I don't believe this is
> allowed.
>
> They then ramble off into "Here's a small point raised by an observant
> punter recently", and then describe what (to my understanding) *is*
> the only permissible arrangement. They then prevaricate about whether
> there would be problems from doing it the way that they first
> illustrated, *despite* them already having described their way as
> "Legal". IANAL, but I believe readers should get more reliable advice
> than this (fortunately, I don't have the old-style master socket, so
> it doesn't affect me).
>
> cheers
>
>[*] Denoted "non-NTE5 BT master linebox" by them, but to my
> understanding this is a "master socket", not a "linebox".

Actually. putting the NTE5 in as an extension wouldn't do much good as
the rest of the sockets would still need to be filtered as well.

There is nothing for it, other than the OP (if they do have a problem
with their ADSL) to raise an issue with their ISP who will
(hopefully/eventually) get a BT visit arranged & the first thing which
the field op. should do is replace the old 2/1a, 3/1a or whatever with a
NTE5a free of charge, to the OP, as the ISP will have paid BT for the
visit...

>> Sorry but it is not possible because the wiring to extensions is all from
>> the back of the small master socket to which there is no legitimate
>> customer
>> access. My intention would be to fit such a faceplate to the front of a
>> BT
>> provided NTE5 socket.
>
> This description sounds a little odd. It's quite possible to have
> extension sockets with the BT logo, and I'd certainly check whether the
> master socket doesn't lurk somewhere else, where the BT line enters the
> house.


Thanks for the suggestion but I have checked. The wiring enters at the back
of the small master socket with the BT logo. The extensions are fed from the
rear of that. One of the extensions is hard-wired into a BT junction box.

Peter Crosland