LLU does not cater for regular residential users

Hi,

Like the subject says, I'm disappointed with the results of LLU thus
far.

Just phoned ukonline. They don't have static IPs and you still have to
pay BT line rental. What is the point of LLU? Seems to have made very
little difference. Good for gamers who want to pay top price (30 quid)
for a fast line, but what about someone who just wants a 1 or 2 meg
line for ADSL and no extra line rental?

After speaking to a lady at ukonline it seems that although providers
can install equipment into exchanges only BT engineers are allowed
unrestricted access so they still hold the cards.

I want to use VOIP and break from BT to reduce my bills. All I need is a
1M line to do this, no phone service. No provider offers this to
residential customers! There are two models:

1. offer faster lines to gamers and slower lines, still using BT for
phone provision via mandatory line rental

2. move the whole line management over (e.g. bulldog) but make phone
rental mandatory and only allow fast lines that cost.

I started looking into broadband again in the wake of LLU but it seems
more of a storm in a teacup (owned and managed by BT) than a revolution.

:-(

Ben.

--
Registered Linux user number 339435

Ben Fitzgerald wrote:

> Just phoned ukonline. They don't have static IPs and you still have to
> pay BT line rental. What is the point of LLU? Seems to have made very
> little difference. Good for gamers who want to pay top price (30 quid)
> for a fast line, but what about someone who just wants a 1 or 2 meg
> line for ADSL and no extra line rental?

Am I understanding you correctly?. You want ADSL but you don't want to
pay any sort of line rental. If so then I fear you may be waiting for a
long time, unless you can find a neighbour with an unsecured wireless
connection of course :-).

What incentive would there be for any company, be it BT, cable or
whoever, to go to the expense of installing a line/wireless connection
and the network behind it and then let you use it for free?.

--
Ian

Use the Reply-To address to contact me.
Mail sent to the From address is ignored.

On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 11:57:43 +0000, Ian Bartholomew <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Ben Fitzgerald wrote:
>
>> Just phoned ukonline. They don't have static IPs and you still have to
>> pay BT line rental. What is the point of LLU? Seems to have made very
>> little difference. Good for gamers who want to pay top price (30 quid)
>> for a fast line, but what about someone who just wants a 1 or 2 meg
>> line for ADSL and no extra line rental?
>
> Am I understanding you correctly?. You want ADSL but you don't want to
> pay any sort of line rental. If so then I fear you may be waiting for a
> long time, unless you can find a neighbour with an unsecured wireless
> connection of course :-).

Well, I don't want to go down that route!

> What incentive would there be for any company, be it BT, cable or
> whoever, to go to the expense of installing a line/wireless connection
> and the network behind it and then let you use it for free?.

Why would I be using it for free? Prices are broken down into a flat line
rental +and+ access to bandwidth. I suppose the former will always be a
flat rate, but why so high? Surely when an ISP buys many lines in an
exchange from BT they can pass them onto customers at much less than
BT's 10.50. This infrastructure was put in years ago when BT was under
government control. What on earth is costing them so much to keep this
running? Why, when prices for electronics drop through the floor and
bandwith rises all the time, does my BT line always cost more than 10
quid?

I had hoped that companies would buy lines in bulk from bt and then,
keeping speeds low to allow them to pack more users onto the line,
provide a low line rental. Seems I was +way+ off. I guess you are right,
the only way ISPs can make money from LLU is to charge a premium rate for
users who want 24M. Perhaps once they have mopped up all these users
they will turn their attention to more average customers like myself who
just want 1M and a very cheap line rental, not 24M with TV!

If companies cannot pass on savings from taking responsibility for the
last mile under LLU, then what is the benifit for the consumer? Please
don't read this post as me stating facts, I'm posing questions and if
there are good reasons then I stand corrected and thank that person for
educating me. :-)

ben.

--
Registered Linux user number 339435

"Ben Fitzgerald" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) in...
> Hi,
>
> Like the subject says, I'm disappointed with the results of LLU thus
> far.
>
> Just phoned ukonline. They don't have static IPs and you still have to
> pay BT line rental.

Then you got a bad tubbie - with Local Loop Unbundling (LLU) you pay the
supplier rental, with Carrier Pre Select[ion] you pay BT.

> What is the point of LLU? Seems to have made very
> little difference. Good for gamers who want to pay top price (30 quid)
> for a fast line, but what about someone who just wants a 1 or 2 meg
> line for ADSL and no extra line rental?

It gives you the option of talking to tubbies, often abroad, who have little
if any technical, local or business knowledge.

>
> After speaking to a lady at ukonline it seems that although providers
> can install equipment into exchanges only BT engineers are allowed
> unrestricted access so they still hold the cards.

Correct.

>
> I want to use VOIP and break from BT to reduce my bills. All I need is a
> 1M line to do this, no phone service. No provider offers this to
> residential customers! There are two models:

NTL might, but they usually throw in their expensive (well for short calls
anyway) phone service.


> Ben.

Ben Fitzgerald wrote:
> Why would I be using it for free? Prices are broken down into a flat
> line rental +and+ access to bandwidth. I suppose the former will
> always be a
> flat rate, but why so high? Surely when an ISP buys many lines in an
> exchange from BT they can pass them onto customers at much less than
> BT's 10.50. This infrastructure was put in years ago when BT was under
> government control. What on earth is costing them so much to keep this
> running? Why, when prices for electronics drop through the floor and
> bandwith rises all the time, does my BT line always cost more than 10
> quid?

Never heard of maintenance, even buried cables slowly deteriorate with
time. Add to that all & sundry seem to get great joy from random
digging holes without complying with 'Safe Dig' policies & so cut thru
BT's LL cables It's as simple as that. Even LLU companies are renting
cables from BT. Why????

Because they can't afford to put their own network in place. So they
either charge lowish prices & rent network from BT or they charge sky
high prices & put their own network in place & after the debacle which
occured in many areas when the cable co's where putting their
infrastructure in place I don't foresee any of them doing this in the
near future.

Even the end users who are paying all their bill to the LLU company are
using BT network & the LLU company is paying the rental for said line to
BT


> I had hoped that companies would buy lines in bulk from bt

But who would mantain them????? They rent the line, they don't buy it.

> If companies cannot pass on savings from taking responsibility for the
> last mile under LLU, then what is the benifit for the consumer?

They don't take on any responsibility for anything other than the
service they provide their end users. At the moment BT is looking after
the 'last mile' & in the new year a new company called OpenReach will be
doing so but even so this company will be under the parent company
umbrella that is called BT.

Do you have cable? Then you could just use the internet and VOIP without the
cable tv and phone service.

Even with ADSL you are still using the BT line so line rental is
justifiable. However I agree paying £120+ a year seems to be a bit steep if
you are not using voice.

Dan

On 08 Nov 2005 12:17:08 GMT, in uk.telecom.broadband , Ben Fitzgerald
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>flat rate, but why so high? Surely when an ISP buys many lines in an
>exchange

Almost no ISP (and for sure no retail ISP) buys lines, they all rent
them. I'm not even sure that the UK backbone is on 'bought' lines, I
believe its all rented from specialist telecoms suppliers.

>What on earth is costing them so much to keep this
>running?

Get a cost for digging up 100 yards of say your local High Street for
two days, and you'll begin to get an idea.

>I had hoped that companies would buy lines in bulk from bt

That would be totally insane - we'd have 100 companies all digging up
the road, mucking with the phone lines, every day. Nightmare of all
possible horrors.

--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt>

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Dan" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:4370eb41$0$63072$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Do you have cable? Then you could just use the internet and VOIP without
> the cable tv and phone service.
>
> Even with ADSL you are still using the BT line so line rental is
> justifiable. However I agree paying £120+ a year seems to be a bit steep
> if you are not using voice.
>
> Dan
>
>
>

Not sure you can do that, I don't think NTL have a ADSL only option, but
perhaps they do.

On Wed, 9 Nov 2005 12:54:59 +0000 (UTC), "R. Mark Clayton"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I don't think NTL have a ADSL only option, but
>perhaps they do.

thay have a cable only option if you happen to be in there covered
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 Wednesday, in article
<(E-Mail Removed)>
(E-Mail Removed) "Phil Thompson" wrote:

> On Wed, 9 Nov 2005 12:54:59 +0000 (UTC), "R. Mark Clayton"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> > I don't think NTL have a ADSL only option, but
> >perhaps they do.
>
> thay have a cable only option if you happen to be in there covered
> area.

My experience is that NTL sales don't appreciate the difference between
their physical cable coverage and selling telephone service over the BT
local loop.. OK, so things have changed a bit in the last year, but I'd
be very careful of what they say.

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

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