[Gllug] To LLU or Not to LLU?

[David L Neil Mailing list a/c]

Karanbir Singh wrote:
> Chris Bell wrote:
>>    My costs will be the same, my (estimated) sync speed is not likely to be
>> affected much by the move to ADSL2+, but my current download rate is
>> currently being throttled somewhere, probably because Demon do not wish to
>> pay for a temporary increase in capacity, so could increase until C&W decide
>> to add their own restrictions later.
> 
> Just looking around and it seems c&w LLU is the infamous BullDog setup. 
> I never heard anyone say anything good about them.
> 
> - KB


<rant>
Correct: Bulldog = bull-, um, Bulldog = bad!
As in other places/technologies/countries Cable and Wireless (aka 
Completely Witless) set up a technological leader but then didn't know 
how to manage it and basically flew it into the ground...

C&W still run a 'business' side.

Their 'solution' for 'retail' was what became Bulldog.
As for many consumer ISPs, their Help Desk belied the name.
I used the service for a while.
Their staff lied to me during conversation-one (I later discovered, and 
complained about, and complained...), and I continued to experience 
lies, ignorance, and downright stupidity concerning a number of topics 
and incidents, even beyond the end of our relationship - when they 
claimed that my line wasn't LLU (as explicitly requested at sign-up 
time) and thus I would have to pay BT's 'welcome back' extortion.
Since then, I'm proud to say that I have been personally responsible for 
more than several clients, both here and internationally, leaving or 
discounting proposals from C&W (etc).
(sorry if previous comments have caused your present disquiet, Chris!)

Bulldog were taken over by Pipex.
Pipex set up replacement Direct Debit details for me and started taking 
money without feeling it necessary either to bother my pretty little 
?blonde head about it (and the bank let them!!!) or to terminate the 
previous payment transactions.

Pipex then became Tiscali.
Say no more - or if you're with them, say "no more!"
</rant> (maybe)


Trouble is, I'm sure we all have horror stories...


Now I'm with Vispa on BT.
I reported problems but Vispa don't seem to have the wherewithal to fix 
(completely ignored my last report which took me to BT Speedtest level 3 
and an instruction to request an ISP's interpretation of the lousy result).
They (as I suspect will others) lack the determination to take on BT 
(why would you bite the hand that feeds...?)
So I dispute an earlier poster's claim that you are better off with a BT 
re-badger!
OTOH note Jason's comments on this subject - and he ought to know!

My experience is that actual throughput varies from ~7Mbps (rarely) down 
to a usual evening's performance of 300Kbps (and at times apparently too 
slow to even run the BT Speedtester without it timing out) - the 
'average' must be well south of 1.5Mbps, whereas on Bulldog it was 
consistently up around 7Mbps.
BT claim this is a fault within my (home-office) network.
Vispa beg BT to tickle their tums...

How can one find out if the local exchange is over-loaded?
How can one check the ISP's claim that their central(s) are not choked?
Is it advisable to use an ADSL 2+ modem on BT Max, or would it be better 
to stick with a standard ADSL model?
How is the poor user supposed to cope when BT (and its minions) act as 
judge, jury, and executioner in any call for (tech) help or dispute?
(mention OfCom ONLY if you've actually received some redress through 
their actions!)

I am wondering if I went (back) to an LLU environment, ie by-passed the 
BT exchange equipment, and the service improved, if that would prove my 
claim?


I followed-up an earlier poster's comment about AAISP and noted that 
they have an offer to sort out problems as they take over an account. 
Don't think they are LLU, but looks jolly attractive from here, but will 
appreciate anyone's experiences...


Regards,
=dn
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug