Annex M on Chorus network

Forums › New Zealand Broadband › Annex M on Chorus network

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

310 posts

Ultimate Geek

#930369 10-Nov-2013 19:42

Talkiet:
techmeister: [snip]
Then thing is from the point of view of an end uniformed user you can see that it is difficult to understand why other ISP's that have their own gear in the exchange can do annex M and yet Chorus cannot, all I started this thread for was to find out why that is the case.
So to that end I will tell all my business customers and anyone else that if you are hooked up to exchange you should go with Callplus or Slingshot problem solved end of story.

Is it really difficult to understand that an extreme niche desire (in the context of widespread VDSL and expanding UFB coverage) for Annex M isn't an attractive investment to Chorus? Simply put there's zero chance they'll ever make back the investment of building the capability. I speak from a position of having a reasonable idea of what it would take to do it too.

Now, it's ok to be annoyed or upset there's a technological capability not being made available, that's completely reasonable and I understand that - but claiming you don't understand WHY a company wouldn't bother making an investment when they'll only ever lose money from it? That's hard for me to understand...

Cheers - N

If Chorus don't think it is worth the investment them that is that, others however have decided it is worth the investment.
So I will go with them.

techmeister

310 posts

Ultimate Geek

#930372 10-Nov-2013 19:51

I really can't understand why all the hostility here for a simple technology question?

Talkiet

4792 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#930373 10-Nov-2013 19:55

techmeister: I really can't understand why all the hostility here for a simple technology question?

At least some of the frustration stems from the issue that there are some relevant facts which are ignored and/or not accepted by the person posing the question. It's really hard to answer questions with that sort of constraint.

It's also tough when you're apparently fighting a belief that there's zero cost to offering a new product if the enabling technology is already in the network.

Cheers - N

Please note all comments are from my own brain and don't necessarily represent the position or opinions of my employer, previous employers, colleagues, friends or pets.

techmeister

310 posts

Ultimate Geek

#930473 10-Nov-2013 23:16

Not fighting any such belief, If there is cost then there cost, a cost Chorus does not think worth their
while, I understand that.

Just asking a a perfectly rational question, from an end user perspective, who does not know that much hence why the question.
You really need to get over yourself.

michaelmurfy

meow
13243 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#930479 10-Nov-2013 23:47

techmeister: Not fighting any such belief, If there is cost then there cost, a cost Chorus does not think worth their
while, I understand that.

Just asking a a perfectly rational question, from an end user perspective, who does not know that much hence why the question.
You really need to get over yourself.

Serious dude? No need for that kind of talk. The question has been answered many times in this thread and all the previous threads posted on this subject by somebody currently posting in here. It's the fact both you and another person here don't want to let this one drop as a "Nope, never gonna happen, I'm just going to have to pay for my upload speed if I want it" situation.

Sorry dude, but before you make these claims you've just got to let the subject drop, thank people who have answered your question and just go with it. I know Neil have the answers but since they've been faced with this question from many people (and those people keep calling them liars), Neil and the other guys in this thread have extensive knowledge of how this all works and when they're called liars it just doesn't work all that well. It doesn't help that the same people come out of the shadows criticising them either about this particular subject.

So before you get all defensive just remember who you're talking to here. I think you and Kirdog owe an apology to Neil.

Michael Murphy | https://murfy.nz
Referral Links: Quic Broadband (use R122101E7CV7Q for free setup)

Are you happy with what you get from Geekzone? Please consider supporting us by subscribing.
Opinions are my own and not the views of my employer.

Zeon

3916 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#930485 11-Nov-2013 01:52

Well Chorus is listed now - feel free to buy up all the shares and u can started demanding changes such as these :p

Speedtest 2019-10-14

Kirdog

202 posts

Master Geek

#930491 11-Nov-2013 03:41

I think we finally declared that "annexM" is not fully technical problem as every technician explained before. I think chorus try to push clients to use VDSL or fiber, and they have stopped ADSL (developing) support, but i think it is not right way to do the business.
As i explained before, nowadays we upload huge amount of stuff to the servers located nationwide, and personally for me waiting time for upload 2 GB video(smallest size for my videos) to Russian server is huge amount of time: 3-5 hours (80-90 Kbytes/sec), thats huge and not good, i need to keep switched on my PC and draw another 600 watt for nothing. I have bought HD web-camera 720p, and guess what? i can't use it in 720p mode, only in 480 with lags, sad. I can't host any game server for my friends, if more than 2 players will play, lags will happen. I can't send emails with attachments over 50 Megs, thats almost impossible, waiting for ages....
so: fail fail fail fail.

AnnexM will not solve the upload speed problem but will make live a bit easier, almost double upload speed, 170-200 Kbytes/sec. thats good. As i can see from SAT maps, 60% VDSL covering and 20% UFB (Auckland) 30-40% don't have ability to connect VDSL/UFB. Chorus should be more friendly with clients (my opinion). And personally for me $10-$25 per month for AnnexM is suitable extra price.

All this post is my opinion :).
And sorry about my terrible English.

michaelmurfy:
I think you and Kirdog owe an apology to Neil.

Agree.

I'm apologizing about my rude behavior on forum, sorry Neil.

Sorry about my English guys :>

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

mercutio

1392 posts

Uber Geek

#930667 11-Nov-2013 13:05

unfortunately chorus have a government created monopoly in new zealand. you're not going to have any luck getting them to make changes that don't create direct profit for them.

and the government seems to keen to reinforce this monopoly, awarding most of their ufb contract to them, which overall discourages competition. and if you're not in a UFB or VDSL area your only real option is 3G or 4G cellphone network to boost your upload speed, but with some increase in latency.

hopefully the cellphone networks will start allowing upload to be sent over them and downstream over adsl merging the two connections as one. (and reducing the latency spike that 3g/4g has)

Regs

4066 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Snowflake

#930796 11-Nov-2013 15:56

mercutio: unfortunately chorus have a government created monopoly in new zealand. you're not going to have any luck getting them to make changes that don't create direct profit for them.

do any of the other LLU providers support annex M? They're not likely to enable it if there isnt a direct profit involved either.

Sales Engineer
Snowflake
www.snowflake.com

about.me/nzregs
Twitter: @nzregs

mercutio

1392 posts

Uber Geek

#930798 11-Nov-2013 15:57

Regs:
mercutio: unfortunately chorus have a government created monopoly in new zealand. you're not going to have any luck getting them to make changes that don't create direct profit for them.

do any of the other LLU providers support annex M? They're not likely to enable it if there isnt a direct profit involved either.

afaik vodafone and slingshot both support it, but no-one is doing llu on cabinets.

i dunno if orcon are or are not doing it. i've got no idea what telstraclear are doing at all for llu.

i think slingshot enable it by default, and vodafone you have to ask for it to be enabled, but i'm not exactly sure. quick searching on vodafone suggests johnr saying that it's not supported and tima saying that "if he did enable it",. so probably worth pm'ing tima if on vodafone to see if he can enable it :)

createcoms

18 posts

Geek

#934074 14-Nov-2013 20:42

Anyone that goes around saying Annex M is being used by x ISP without causing problems is being ignorant or mischievous.

ADSL is an adaptive technoloy, it determines the bit loading per bin as the SNR allows (+SNR Margin of course).

So you could get your Annex M from Slingshot and dance about the house naked celebrating faster uploading then ring the neighbour and ask if his broadband still works and he'll say "yep".

What you don't realise is that Annex M has raised the noise floor in adjacent cable binder pairs for the overlapping bins (frequency range where you are now transmitting but they are receiving). This has actual, definite consequences , no ifs, buts, or maybes. The consequence is subtle and therefore arguably more sinister. Your neighbour just lost some bits on his bins. How many bits of course is highly dependent on the parameters involved (so from "a few" to "more than a few").

My question to the person demanding Annex M - who are you to deny your neighbours those bits, however many or few they may be?

mercutio

1392 posts

Uber Geek

#934107 14-Nov-2013 21:30

createcoms: Anyone that goes around saying Annex M is being used by x ISP without causing problems is being ignorant or mischievous.

ADSL is an adaptive technoloy, it determines the bit loading per bin as the SNR allows (+SNR Margin of course).

So you could get your Annex M from Slingshot and dance about the house naked celebrating faster uploading then ring the neighbour and ask if his broadband still works and he'll say "yep".

What you don't realise is that Annex M has raised the noise floor in adjacent cable binder pairs for the overlapping bins (frequency range where you are now transmitting but they are receiving). This has actual, definite consequences , no ifs, buts, or maybes. The consequence is subtle and therefore arguably more sinister. Your neighbour just lost some bits on his bins. How many bits of course is highly dependent on the parameters involved (so from "a few" to "more than a few").

My question to the person demanding Annex M - who are you to deny your neighbours those bits, however many or few they may be?

the problem is that in various parts of life there are people getting in the way, slowing down progress etc. People being slow to make decisions, people paying bills late, people driving 40k in a 70k area, people not indicating etc.

It's just the way life goes, and I think you have to look at the bigger picture, and see that overall it's more beneficial to give more even if there is some loss in the ability to take. It benefits others when people don't block driveways when someone is signaling to come out onto the non congested side of the road, and if there's congestion, then it's not actually going to make any difference if waiting to let someone else through.

A lot of download "megabits" is unutilised, at the best of times, and at the worst of times. And is it more benefical for people to upload photos and videos or view others photos and videos. In order to download, someone must upload. And the more you take upload away from normal users and only give it to privileged users in "UFB" areas you create artificial barriers, advantaging the rich, and disadvantaging the poor.

Frequency is shared, somewhat like roads. It's reasonably easy to understand that congestion slows down progress, but I think a lot of people just get used to the idea that uploading videos over the internet is slow, that using Skype video conferencing on shared internet can impact other users in the house. If intelliigence was applied there'd be higher/better compression, and resizing before uploading. There'd be using audio rather than video for Skype, there'd be more cc'ing in emails rather than individually mailing people pictures, etc. But that changes the way people do things. And not everyone likes change, or to use more advanced solutions.

The question is, is the benefit worth the disadvantage it may cause others.

Say everyone was using Annex M, and median speeds changed from 10megabit/1 megabit, to 8 megabit/2megabit, would that overall be beneficial or detrimental? To my mind, I'd think it is benefical, but to find out the real numbers, real world testing would need to be done, and the impact on marignal connections would need to be looked at.

yitz

2075 posts

Uber Geek

#934145 14-Nov-2013 22:54

Yeah it all depends on the constraints you want to put on the unconstrained local loop. No where does it state annex M is not allowed. No one is guaranteed anything.
No doubt I think it was the right decision to unbundle and go unconstrained... reminds me of some of the arguments Telecom made for 3.5M vs unconstrained back then.
Another step further we may as well go back to tiered bandwidth... 256/128 3.5M/512 maybe then Kirdog can finally pay more for annex M ;)

mercutio

1392 posts

Uber Geek

#934168 15-Nov-2013 06:51

yitz: Yeah it all depends on the constraints you want to put on the unconstrained local loop. No where does it state annex M is not allowed. No one is guaranteed anything.
No doubt I think it was the right decision to unbundle and go unconstrained... reminds me of some of the arguments Telecom made for 3.5M vs unconstrained back then.
Another step further we may as well go back to tiered bandwidth... 256/128 3.5M/512 maybe then Kirdog can finally pay more for annex M ;)

years back telecom had 192kbit upload, other isp's had 128kbit upload, so i used telecom. sync was 7616 down iirc, so 128kbit upload tends to get in the way of even download traffic.

techmeister

310 posts

Ultimate Geek

#941740 27-Nov-2013 13:56

So before you get all defensive just remember who you're talking to here. I think you and Kirdog owe an apology to Neil.

Yes, sorry for the late reply been busy.
I do apologise to Neil it was said in anger and was not called for, please accept my apology.
I do accept that it is not worth Chorus time and money to do annex M never said it was.
and thanks to all that answered the question.

Please don't make me responsible for Kirdog's comments as he has hijacked my thread.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6