Hi there - first time poster to this group.

I use Eclipse for my broadband (0.5 speed which I can flex to 1 or 2
megs whenever I want for 5 pence an hour, which suits me fine). BT are
my telephone provider.

I got an 18 month contract, with about 1 year left to go. I'll certainly
live out my contract although may move to a cheaper provider when it's
up. (There again, I might not: I've found Eclipse to be fast and
reliable, and excellent customer service).

Got a letter today in the post from them, saying that I am due to be
transferred to LLU in the coming months, but if I want to I can tell
them by 15 November that I wish to opt out of the improvement programme.

That fact that I can opt out of it made me wonder why anyone would want
to opt out of something which is meant to improve, according to their
literature, "faster speeds and enhanced performance; improved
reliability; better service and performance; faster fault fix times".


At the moment, my BT exchange can't do more than 2 mbs (meaning that
it's pointless to go with one of those 8 mbs deals that keep popping
through the door). Will joining unbundling the local loop mean I'll
actually really be able to move to a 8 or 24 mbs service and really get
that speed?

By unbundling, will I be tied in with Eclipse for longer? Will it still
be easy to change broadband company?


Can someone tell me, in layman's terms, why I may NOT wish to be, errrm,
unbundled? Why this opt-out option exists? Clearly, some people prefer
not to be unbundled so I'd like to find out why not.

I looked up LLU on Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_loop_unbundling
but it didn't really give me the pros and cons (other than the fact that
Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers are generally opposed to it). I want
to know why customers should be opposed to it. And it didn't say why I
should want to choose to continue using the BT IPStream.

TIA!

Tristán

PS also, in your opinion, are the bills likely to be higher, lower or
the same, compared to the BT IPStream delivered service?

Furthermore, if I say "no", is it easy to say "yes" next year, or will I
have lost my timeslot and be put back on some kind of queue?

Sorry for such a silly question - please remember I'm not a telecoms
professional (probably immediately obvious), just a confused consumer.

"Tristán White" <Tristan_White@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9870BC4C47EDTristanNewsInnitDood@216.196.1 09.145...
Have a look at the forums below
Personally, i would opt out while you still can
Some have not been as lucky as to be given the chance to opt out
You will lose (or gain) nothing by staying as you are

http://bbs.adslguide.org.uk/postlist... sed&sb=5&o=0

HTH

Fisher

"Fisher" <richard@NO_SPAM.gmail.com> wrote in
news:3O6dnWvrRYd4P9fYnZ2dnUVZ8qidnZ2d@eclipse.net. uk:


Thanks - just spotted the discussion about other people who have received
the same letter.

So, in your honest opinion, where it says that by unbundling the local
loop, I will get:

"Faster speeds and enhanced performance
Improved reliability
Better service and performance management
faster fault fix times"

this may in fact not be true?


It's just I don't want to opt out and keep the BT IPStream only to read on
the forum how much faster their connection is now that they back been
transferred onto LLU!!

Thanks AGAIN for that forum. Very interesting.

I think I will opt out, after reading so many people wishing they had done
so.

I must say though, I'm surprised at the amount of moaning about Eclipse
there is, that it's going down the pan etc. Can't say I have any
complaints.

In 6 months the connection has only dropped twice and I had to restart the
Connection Manager.

And the speed is good.

Just went to Toast.net and downloaded a 755K file and it says it was 520 Kb
speed (which is fine, as I am on the 0.5 meg line.

I just flexed the speed to 2 meg for an hour (love that feature) and the
same file took 3.6 seconds which is 1652 Kb - OK it's not the full 2.0 but
not really that bad.

Can't say I've ever noticed it grind to a halt like some are saying.

"Tristán White" <Tristan_White@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns98701DA294B0FTristanNewsInnitDood@216.196. 109.145...
If you delve a bit deeper you might find that its Tiscali providing the LLU
to Eclipse, and if you delve further back there are some horror stories
from people unlucky enough to have been ported across prior to the
opt out system and their experience of LLU with Eclipse/Tiscali was
so poor thet they went through the bother and expense of a cease
and reprovide in order to get away from Eclipse. At present, and for
the forseeable future there is no migration system in place should
you go with the LLU and find it so bad you wish to leave.
So much so that you might revise your opinion of them being "fast and
reliable, and excellent customer service"
Whether the above is true or not doesnt come into it
If you are happy as you are, then why take a chance on being another
dis-satisfied customer?

HTH

Fisher

On 02 Nov 2006, "Tristán White" <Tristan_White@rocketmail.com> wrote:

faster speeds might well be possible - the upload speed certainly could
be higher than 448 kbps, but is not important to all users. For 'better
service' I think it questionable. For 'improved reliability' again I'd
suggest questionable. As for faster fault fixing, that may be possible
but depends on how much remote control is done (and perhaps if there's
more modern kit in the exchange than BTW is using, this might be one
claim that can be proved)...

I don't think there's very much to convince people the "pro" is bigger
than the "con" (which currently means the difficulty which may be had
in switching ISP, and perhaps having to have a 'cease' and then a new
'activation' with the resulting 40 +VAT activation fee).

There seems a good chance that yes, you would be able to get up to 8
Mbps, but apparently Eclipse is using Tiscali, and where PlusNet also
mentioned options for "up to 24 Mbps" some time ago, they've reigned in
their information to only suggest "up to 8 Mbps" and they stated that
for higher speeds, it would depend on their networking partner (ie
whenever Tiscali chooses to upgrade, which may be never!)


Currently people are having problems, either to get a MAC to allow them
to transfer, or, if they are issued a MAC, to get another ISP to accept
it (presumably it looks 'foreign' as it is from a firm other than BTW).

That there have been around 10% of users on PlusNet who had some (or big!)
problems because of being switched over, perhaps? I think the fact that
there's no easy way to switch ISP is the reason many would have to want
to opt-out of this, at least for the time being.


Also the bit on Wiki probably relates more to the voice connection, as
these ISP-related "LLU" descriptions are different, splitting data off
at the exchange and instead of using the BT Wholesale service, using
the alternative network instead. Check back with Google Groups for
posts by Plusnet Support and see if you can find LLU (someone there
posted the proper name for this 'split metallic line handling' - or
whatever it is actually called).

On 02 Nov 2006, "Tristán White" <Tristan_White@rocketmail.com> wrote:

I'm on Evolution level 1 (lowest priority level) but also have not seen
it 'grind to a halt' however www.dslzoneuk.net had some comments about
it being 'unusable' by someone on Evolution 4, so perhaps it depends
on the type of traffic. I'm not a 'light user' by any stretch, but
then again, I tend to do other things in the evenings, when 'peak
hours' are in effect and others might see it getting slower...

On 3 Nov 2006, "Fisher" <richard@NO_SPAM.gmail.com> wrote:

I think that puts an excessively negative slant on the problem, though I've
not been switched to LLU, and have mostly seen comments from people who did
get a MAC but cannot find another ISP ready to accept that MAC, ie there is
a problem with finding an ISP ready to accept a user whose MAC is from one
of these LLU connections.

"NoNeedToKnow" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:k02mk2d1s0p0tdhjr18pva3glkbk7u39bb@complete-pc-services.info...
In what way do you find that an "excessively negative slant on the problem"?
Its what happening, and if you WERE to be put on LLU you would see what
i am saying Peple who have been unceremoniously dumped onto LLU
by their ISPs are having a devil of a time trying to get away to another provider
At present there ARE a few ISPs accepting VALID MACs (the emphasis is
on the word "valid" here) Not many of them accept MACs dreamt up by the
incumbant ISPs, though, which seems to be the case also

Fisher

Thank you, all of you, for your excellent advice.

I am most certainly opting out.

Thanks guys! What a helpful newsgroup (for a change!)

Tristán

"NoNeedToKnow" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message news:k02mk2d1s0p0tdhjr18pva3glkbk7u39bb@complete-pc-services.info...
http://www.kitz.co.uk/adsl/migration.htm list the following ISPs as able to accept
LLU macs

Entanet resellers (Ace, Aquiss, Freeola, Swift, UKFSN, Vivaciti, Xifos)
Brightview Group (Madasafish, Globalnet, Waitrose).
IDNet
NamesCo
PlusNet & vISPs (F9, FreeOnLine, Metronet)
Zen

HOWEVER one of the above (UKFSN) states on their website
that LLU migartion involves paying the full BT activation charge

http://www.ukfsn.org/adsl/migration.html

"*Important Note - We do not offer free migration from LLU connections.
This is because the way they are processed requires a full cease
and reprovision of ADSL on the line and BT charge the full activation
charge for a new line in such cases."


Given the choice I'd stick with BT's network unless I was offered
at least a £4 discount per month to make up for the activation costs,
although even then I'd have to think about it and would probably
still turn it down.

Mel.

On 3 Nov 2006, "Mel" <news.spammel@spamgourmet.com> wrote:

That list is very useful by itself - many thanks... I knew of UKFSN,
Freeola, and Xifos (from the net4now.com or ispreview.co.uk sites, I
think), and more recently had seen someone mention Aquiss, also had
just (in last 24 hours) found Vivaciti because of their (blatant)
postings on ADSL Guide (so I would not be likely to recommend
them), but had not known of Ace (I assume "Ace Internet") nor Swift
(and while I had seen Xifos mentioned, that was on DSLzoneUK.net and
as the site is hosted by Xifos, I had not looked at their 'feedback'
on the site, as users might have been slightly biassed about Xifos.


another useful list, and one to generally avoid, I suspect.



Thanks for that, too. I suppose it might be out of date, as it seems to
contradict EntaNet being able to accept LLU users. I suppose the answer
is to use some other reseller than UKFSN if that's the situation "now".

"NoNeedToKnow" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message news:lb7ok2pmqj3ttfjrubm1c4as7hpkf0ua4i@complete-pc-services.info...


He appears to be saying UKFSN accept LLU macs, but BT charge
£47 for LLU to Ipstream migration. It could be out of date, but if it is
correct I expect most isps will pass the extra cost on, or else insist
on a 12 month contract.