Overclockers Australia Forums
OCAU News - Wiki - QuickLinks - Pix - Sponsors  

Go Back   Overclockers Australia Forums > Specific Hardware Topics > Networking, Telephony & Internet

Notices


Sign up for a free OCAU account and this ad will go away!
Search our forums with Google:
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 4th May 2012, 8:44 PM   #31
chip
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Perth (Mount Lawley)
Posts: 2,859
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunna View Post
How may faults do you think are lodged with Telstra annually
I've got no idea how many faults of this type are repeatedly with Telstra, which is why I raised the question. If AAPT had 110000-odd DSL subscribers (which is apparently what they had when iiNet acquired them), then your anecdote of two customers affected by the issue per week would suggest that it's affecting <0.1% of DSL customers per year. If there are 4 million DSL services in Australia, then that's 4-5000 occasions per year when Telstra unfairly charge the fee. Which, while not massive, is still a substantial number.
chip is offline   Reply With Quote

Join OCAU to remove this ad!
Old 4th May 2012, 11:38 PM   #32
Auriga
Member
 
Auriga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Warnbro, WA
Posts: 1,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by techniciantim View Post
Out of the faults cleared Nationally by Telstra as Right When Tested, Found O.K, No Fault Found, Etc. I can reliably say that at LEAST one third will have been the type of fault described by me and disappeared during testing.
My personal statistics show otherwise. That of my no fault found jobs cleared, vastly less than 1/3 are even re-reported? Let alone for the problem you describe? Are you sure this "High open" fault is actually the massive big problem you claim?

Surely maintenance of known cable joints faults and sections of cable faults is a far bigger problem than "high open" faults?

Quote:
Originally Posted by techniciantim View Post
SHDSL services do NOT require Wetting Current at all, it is an optional facility provided on DSLAM ports that MAY be applied in the event of a fault (HR) connection and an Audible Tone is never required to monitor or measure noise.
Does not require, does not mean best practice! I'd rather have 50v there wetting than not.
Auriga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th May 2012, 12:30 AM   #33
caspian
Member
 
caspian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 6,775
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunna View Post
How may faults do you think are lodged with Telstra annually, i would cop atleast one or 2 phone calls a week when i worked in AAPT's call centre with customers who had an ongoing fault and had paid over 3 tech visits as techs kept claiming no fault.
when I was a DSL tester we used to process in the order of ~5,500 tickets a week - purely for DSL related faults. of those, around one third went to the field for some reason - might have been a line fault, faulty port, needed something done at the customer's premises etc.

the rereport rate (defined as a second report within a 7-day period of the first ticket being closed) was around 7%, and that was for absolutely anything that the customer logged under their phone number, because I didn't have the ability to filter the report any better. that includes anything from a customer calling back because they weren't home for the previous tech visit, to totally unrelated stuff like a problem with their messagebank.

I submit that it's not the problem that it's made out to be.

Quote:
At the time it was $110 so thats over $660 in incorrect call out fees
for starters, it's never been $110. it was $99 when launched, went to $105 and it's now $120 - still not bad when the truck roll costs $200.

also, if the issue was deemed to be a recurrance of the same fault the fees would be waived, so you're adding up numbers that don't exist.

finally, if the end user was using AAPT as their provider, then AAPT was getting charged the callout fee - not the end user, because the end user was not Telstra's customer. I know damn well that Telstra's access seekers monitor their callout fees carefully, because I used to do the warranty claims on their for Telstra Wholesale.
__________________
The stupid, it burns.
caspian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th May 2012, 1:29 AM   #34
techniciantim
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 8
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunna View Post
Surely you guys are mature enough to look past the lack of formatting in the reply and deal with the underlying point.

Put any of your older tradie Uncles, cousins or grand parents who don't use a pc or write aot and i'm sure a reply to a comment would look very simliar to Tims answer.

I know bugger all about the comms network, but if what Tim says is true then i actually think its a massive thing he has done with his efforts to bring it to the public domain.

I only have to ask Tim, why arent more techs coming out saying the same thing as you and why do you seem to be fighting the lonely fight with this topic?
Thank you Gunna. I totally agree.
The lack of formatting was time constrained laziness on my part, I was in a huge rush,(I am even doing this at 1:30am) and I use capital letters for emphasis as my statements are often the complete opposite of the conventional perceptions.
Many Techs are not untethered and in any position to speak out as they wish to keep their jobs. They are very aware of the situation but unfortunately have mortgages and young mouths to feed. I am told that in January this year, over 500 Telephone Exchange Techs had to leave their various jobs with other companies and reapply for the equivalent job offered by another company because Telstra will in future only deal with this newer company for these jobs. These positions apparently are less favourable to the Techs and there were only about 400 positions made available. This was Sydney alone, similar activity was happening nationally. I am 68 years old and can retire anytime and can’t be coerced or brow beaten by the threat of no job. It obviously becomes more difficult to find work at my age and you can no longer get normal contractors insurance etc.
Companies are also constrained and their only recourse is some legal procedure which is not able to be justified for one customer. The Telecom. Industry Ombudsman has no power to take action.
The appalling fault finding status is because Telstra only performs DC tests on usual fault tests, and have a couple of technically ridiculous standards that allow faulty lines to pass the testing. For example Telstra passes up to 5Volts on a line. If you halve this voltage, then halve that again, this gives 1.25 Volts, the same voltage as a rechargeable cell. If you connect such a cell across a telephone pair, or from one wire to earth the line is incapable of use.
The acceptable standard for line loop resistance is up to 3000 ohms, no ULL or ADSL bearer in our suburbs will have this loop resistance. I live in Carlingford and would need to have my line fed from somewhere near Hornsby (several suburbs away) to have this resistance. If a loop resistance is 1500 ohms you definitely have a fault.
The test voltages currently applied are excessive and are not even close to the signal levels normally on the line. If a Modem/Router or DSLAM power level is +18 dBm (631mW) this is a Voltage of 2.51rms or 3.55 peak, average telephone speech level -15dBm0 translates to 138mVolts or 195mVpeak so why on earth do we test with such excessive voltages? These examples make the ‘Experts’ appear less expert. Faulty lines are passed as satisfactory without having any transmission tests performed.
Hopefully we can fix this farcical situation before we go to the big telephone exchange in the sky.
techniciantim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th May 2012, 2:55 AM   #35
Auriga
Member
 
Auriga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Warnbro, WA
Posts: 1,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by techniciantim View Post
For example Telstra passes up to 5Volts on a line. If you halve this voltage, then halve that again, this gives 1.25 Volts, the same voltage as a rechargeable cell.
5V or above is a fail, 4V or less is a pass.

Last edited by gords; 7th May 2012 at 10:47 AM. Reason: Fixed quote tag.
Auriga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th May 2012, 9:41 AM   #36
Gunna
Member
 
Gunna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 3,637
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caspian View Post
for starters, it's never been $110. it was $99 when launched, went to $105 and it's now $120 - still not bad when the truck roll costs $200.

also, if the issue was deemed to be a recurrance of the same fault the fees would be waived, so you're adding up numbers that don't exist.

finally, if the end user was using AAPT as their provider, then AAPT was getting charged the callout fee - not the end user, because the end user was not Telstra's customer. I know damn well that Telstra's access seekers monitor their callout fees carefully, because I used to do the warranty claims on their for Telstra Wholesale.
Sorry may have been out by $5, it has only been 8 years so silly me should have a perfect memory

You said if the issue was deemed to be a reoccurrence of the same job the fees would be waived, if the techs being sent out found no fault, charged a fee and told the customer nothing was wrong then the customer takes that advice. Waits a while and relodges a new ticket then again and again no fault is found, exactly how would they get reimbursed

Also to your last point, yes aapt gets charged the fee, but you think they are wearing the cost?? No, your point is wrong as they forward that charge onto the customer and I'm not sure if they added a markup on it either.
Gunna is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 5th May 2012, 4:43 PM   #37
caspian
Member
 
caspian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 6,775
Default

so AAPT are happy to just pass the charge along without doing anything to be an advocate for their customer's needs, such as checking if the service is OK first, and whether the charge should be disputed?

it's a non-event. Tim is trying to justify a position that he can't convince anyone else of by pulling numbers out of his arse in an attempt to sensationalise the issue.
__________________
The stupid, it burns.
caspian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th May 2012, 5:23 PM   #38
BlueRaven Thread Starter
Member
 
BlueRaven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Sydney 2068
Posts: 2,734
Default

One thing worth pointing out is Tim's fairly unequivocal statement that there would be no disagreement or dissent from other technical staff regarding this issue since it was a widely acknowledged problem that, for one reason or another, other technicians have not been able to raise in the appropriate quarters.

Caspian's and Auriga's responses (to use a couple of convenient examples) suggest that this is not the case, and if two people disagree with Tim's assessment of the severity and frequency of the issue then it is reasonable to expect that others may also.

I'm not suggesting that such HR faults don't exist (which would be pretty silly considering that Caspian's first post detailed the various circumstances under which they might occur), merely that Tim may wish to moderate such statements in future to avoid being accused of misrepresenting the level of accord amongst technicians regarding this issue. "A house divided..." etc. etc.

This obviously wouldn't be the first time that opinions have differed regarding best practice/procedure in a technical field and in my experience, those who claim to be speaking for the whole faculty in such situations often wind up with egg on their faces. Whether valid or not, any attempt to get the testing procedures modified (or even have such a change considered at the appropriate level) could be severely hampered by such an occurrence.

EDIT: Got distracted while writing that, came back to finish and post it and then discovered that Caspian's just made the same point in a much more direct manner.
__________________
"Science is more than a body of knowledge, it's a way of thinking, a way of sceptically interrogating the universe with a fine understanding of human fallibility." - Carl Sagan

You can never explain a good pun to a kleptomaniac... he always takes things literally.
BlueRaven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th May 2012, 5:28 PM   #39
Gunna
Member
 
Gunna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 3,637
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caspian View Post
so AAPT are happy to just pass the charge along without doing anything to be an advocate for their customer's needs, such as checking if the service is OK first, and whether the charge should be disputed?
Correct, if AAPT got charged a call out fee they were forwarding it on to the customers. They didn't have any onsite techs of their own so we were required to do alot of testing on the phone and constantly tell the customer about the charges but more often then not the customer was sick of pulling cables, power cycling modems and getting peppered with questions that i'm sure most ignored the bit about the charges.

Countless people would call up pissed that they got charged the fee when the issue was still there, so i'm not saying there fault was related to what Tim has mentioned but if the onsite techs are not testing the lines completly and they have the tools to do so then i'm suprised it isnt policy. I'm very sure a small number of people may have this issue annually but if that saves some family an extra hundred odd dollars isnt it worth it purely on the custmer service side of things and chews a techs time by 10 or so mintues(only assuming it takes that long, i have no idea).
Gunna is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 5th May 2012, 5:52 PM   #40
caspian
Member
 
caspian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 6,775
Default

ah, an INSP. then.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunna View Post
but more often then not the customer was sick of pulling cables, power cycling modems and getting peppered with questions that i'm sure most ignored the bit about the charges.
newsflash - it's the service provider's job to manage this. they don't just get to sit in the middle and collect 10% of everything going past.

Quote:
Tim has mentioned but if the onsite techs are not testing the lines completly and they have the tools to do so then i'm suprised it isnt policy.
and as I've said, the reason it isn't done is because it would benefit a small proportion of users, whom have a failback process anyway, but would substantially disadvantage all users in both time and cost.

Quote:
if that saves some family an extra hundred odd dollars isnt it worth it purely on the custmer service side of things and chews a techs time by 10 or so mintues(only assuming it takes that long, i have no idea).
correct, in that you have no idea.
__________________
The stupid, it burns.
caspian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th May 2012, 4:56 PM   #41
techniciantim
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 8
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Auriga View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by techniciantim View Post
For example Telstra passes up to 5Volts on a line. If you halve this voltage, then halve that again, this gives 1.25 Volts, the same voltage as a rechargeable cell.
5V or above is a fail, 4V or less is a pass.
Thanks Auriga for supporting my 5Volt Telstra test standard figures, can you also confirm the loop resistance standard of 3000 Ohms?
Caspian, I apologise if I have inadvertently hit a raw nerve with you. I certainly do not wish you or anybody to take issues personally. When I suggested that Telstra Techs could not find this fault I immediately followed with the fact that I also could not find these faults with the test procedures currently used.
Caspian, a Continuity Test is a DC Line Loop Resistance test requiring a Loop (Short Circuit) at the end of the cable pair.
BlueRaven rightly thought it odd that an End – to –End continuity test apparently isn’t one of the first things Telstra Techs do when testing a line. In your 2nd May post you responded by stating ‘it is’. To my knowledge no such single ended test is even designed into the equipment to enable such an application at all. So, via remote testing how is your End to End continuity test performed?
Caspian, you correctly mention on your 3rd May post that I ignore the problem of dielectric insulation resistance - Why you are looking at this parameter and associating it with a simple DC Line Loop resistance fault is not clear to me. In your 3rd May post you mention (crudely) the Insulation to earth threshold of the Test Head in an RCM is about 250K. That is good news that it is far better than the 1M Ohm allowed, - But what relevance has this to the HR fault I describe? None at all.
In order to fix faults you must correctly detect them first. There are so many unsoldered, carelessly crimped, corroded and Oxidised joints in the copper network Pillars, Pits, Cabinets, building MDFs etc. that cause the faults I am describing, yet you appear to think the problem is insignificant.
These faults and any battery faults (Below 5Volts also) cause Longitudinal Imbalance in the lines and permit the ingress of electrical noise. In Britain this becomes R.E.I.N. (Repetitive Electrical Impulse Noise), which I believe is also misguidedly treated as an interference problem, and like us they look for the generating source of radiated interference, but not the actual cause which is Longitudinal Unbalance. Often they fruitlessly chase the Symptoms and not the cause.
My method actually does check every cable segment, it is the DC equivalent of a ‘Ping’ test and equally as profound.

Last edited by gords; 7th May 2012 at 10:51 AM. Reason: Fixed quote tag.
techniciantim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th May 2012, 5:15 PM   #42
caspian
Member
 
caspian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 6,775
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by techniciantim View Post
Caspian, I apologise if I have inadvertently hit a raw nerve with you.
no raw nerves here, Tim. I'm simply arguing the point that's been put, and I'm the one supporting the status quo, remember.

Quote:
Caspian, a Continuity Test is a DC Line Loop Resistance test requiring a Loop (Short Circuit) at the end of the cable pair.
BlueRaven rightly thought it odd that an End – to –End continuity test apparently isn’t one of the first things Telstra Techs do when testing a line.
a DC loop resistance test is the very first test run on any circuit by TADA or SULTAN. it's done automatically by the test head package test, and to my knowledge all staff are taught to do one as the first step of testing a circuit.

yes, it's done on the circuit as-is, which may or may not include DC faults, CPE or breaks.

Quote:
In your 2nd May post you responded by stating ‘it is’. To my knowledge no such single ended test is even designed into the equipment to enable such an application at all. So, via remote testing how is your End to End continuity test performed?
see above. if required it can also be performed at any time using the R key in SULTAN.

Quote:
In your 3rd May post you mention (crudely) the Insulation to earth threshold of the Test Head in an RCM is about 250K. That is good news that it is far better than the 1M Ohm allowed
insulation resistance to earth is required to be 1.8MOhm or better, Tim. not only is that why I pointed it out as an example of uselessness, but 250K is one quarter if 1M the last time I looked? that's a standard that all staff, test and field, should be working to, and it's also the compliance standard for systems like TADA, CRUX, ROLF, FAST etc.

Quote:
But what relevance has this to the HR fault I describe? None at all.
In order to fix faults you must correctly detect them first. There are so many unsoldered, carelessly crimped, corroded and Oxidised joints in the copper network Pillars, Pits, Cabinets, building MDFs etc. that cause the faults I am describing, yet you appear to think the problem is insignificant.
not at all, I think HRs are very important. I just doubt, based on a number of years experience, the magnitude of the problem, and the prevalence of failure to detect and rectify them that you claim.

that's based on around 9 years experience in remote service testing, 6 years of it specialising in data and DSL circuits, and a number of years of being the DSL SME to the national ESD group.

as I've said before, your point has some merit. but you need to stop presenting it as the end of the world, because it's not. the issue is a small proportion of overall faults, the system normally addresses those in an acceptable manner in terms of maintaining acceptable restoration times versus assurance cost component for the vast number of customers, and while some improvement is always possible, the reality is that services are delivered at a cost the market will bear, so that's always going to be the case.
__________________
The stupid, it burns.
caspian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th May 2012, 5:58 PM   #43
Herbo
Member
 
Herbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 8,772
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caspian View Post
as I've said before, your point has some merit. but you need to stop presenting it as the end of the world, because it's not. the issue is a small proportion of overall faults, the system normally addresses those in an acceptable manner in terms of maintaining acceptable restoration times versus assurance cost component for the vast number of customers, and while some improvement is always possible, the reality is that services are delivered at a cost the market will bear, so that's always going to be the case.
If you had to put up with my internet you might have a different opinion on what is "acceptable". The last Telstra guy to come out fixed up my lines to the best of his knowledge/ability, as in went above and beyond as far as I could tell. Yet I still for some reason have lost about a 5th of my overall speed for no apparent reason, have extreme fuzz coming through my IP phone, and every week or so my net will just screw out and I'll have to resync the modem and it will go to read dsl mode and lose a quater of speed again.

I'm tipping this "new" method could pin point my problem so it could be fixed but for now I just have to wait 2-3 years and hope for the NBN to roll around.
__________________
2nd Place in the EA Play 08 Crysis Tounrnament in Singapore
OCAU Weight Training Club Member #3
Over 40 Successful OCAU Trades
Herbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th May 2012, 6:45 PM   #44
caspian
Member
 
caspian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 6,775
Default

there is a perfectly good escalation method available for use if required. or would you prefer to pay twice the line rental a month for 'standard' testing that's not needed most of the time? would you like to explain to everyone else why their line rental just doubled?

bear in mind that Tim's assertions won't touch on Telstra's minimum guaranteed data performance specifications, which are another discussion altogether. I spent the last 12 months I was at Telstra trying to get that changed and failed, because management are fundamentally opposed to spending the money.

if your IP telephony is fuzzy then that's a layer 3 problem.
__________________
The stupid, it burns.
caspian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th May 2012, 9:08 PM   #45
techniciantim
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 8
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caspian View Post
ah, an INSP. then.



newsflash - it's the service provider's job to manage this. they don't just get to sit in the middle and collect 10% of everything going past.



and as I've said, the reason it isn't done is because it would benefit a small proportion of users, whom have a failback process anyway, but would substantially disadvantage all users in both time and cost.



correct, in that you have no idea.
Caspian, Again you are relating Insulation Testing (High Voltage),with my test which must be an extremely Low voltage test we don’t seem to be on the same page.
With the loop test you claim is done, how is the loop from the telephone/modem end applied for this test? I have been doing this for many years and would like to get it right.
In your post on 4th May, you claim that ‘the CEO is advised by people who know very well what they are talking about, such as the TRL research staff. I also base my view on real world experience and wider viewpoint. Here is an example for you.
I was a participant in a telephone conference set up by a very well intentioned Telstra Management, and extending across several Australian States, primarily for me, to explain my contention to their nominated Technical Expert located in Melbourne.
As many participants were non- technical and from various administrative/management areas, I asked that they give me their name and a brief description of their background as they spoke, and I would know how to better answer their questions.
The Telstra nominated Technical Expert proudly announced his attributes and that he has spent a number of years with TRL (Telecom. Research Labs.) in Melbourne.
This nominated Telstra Expert (TRL experienced) subsequently demonstrated to all that were listening, that he simply did not know his basics. When I stated, in answer to one of his questions that a Lines Test Set-2 charged the line capacitance to 30Volts DC, he immediately, vehemently disagreed with me and did so with an astonishing arrogance and rudeness that had to be witnessed to be believed. He insisted that the LTS-2 had a 9Volt battery so where did this power come from.
This fellow was such an embarrassment to the listeners in other states that I subsequently received an unsolicited apology from the Telstra Copper, Fibre and Hybrid Network Infrastructure manager in Brisbane.
They did not use this fellow again. I certainly hope at least, not as an advisor to the CEO.
From your remarks I wish you to know that to me, the world is a laboratory from which I glean most of my knowledge.
I suggested during this same conference a rational, responsible, and realistic approach similar to your somewhat flippant ‘real solution that solves all problems’. My suggestion was to re attend several ongoing faults that had not been found after at least two visits, but try my suggested tests before the usual Telstra tests. This would detect that the problem is still present, and if it was an HR fault, the distance was to be measured without a TDR to ensure the applied non- destructive test was well below 10 Volts. This can make a customer very happy and also save a truck roll.
I am told that Albert Einstein defined Insanity as - when we do the same actions repeatedly and expect a different outcome each time.
Please try to simply address the problem in a civil manner, without being rude to the likes of Gunna telling him he has no idea.
Learn from the Roman God Janus and look both ways. The Access Seekers and Telstra need to work together. Telstra expects AAPT and other providers to find the faults, without the necessary access to the copper network.
Please be fair to Telstra and the Access Seekers. If you disagree then try simply asking us questions.
techniciantim is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Sign up for a free OCAU account and this ad will go away!

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time now is 9:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. -
OCAU is not responsible for the content of individual messages posted by others.
Other content copyright Overclockers Australia.
OCAU is hosted by Internode!