[AusNOG] LSS ADSL vs ULL ADSL - which is more reliable?

[Ryan Crouch]

Hey Radek, Just some perspective for you.

After using ULL vs SPEC/LSS for many years my honest preference for
business customers is Telstra ADSL (direct, not via someone else). Just
hear me out as this is contrary to your experiences.

*Against:*
- It costs a fortune per service by comparison
- It's more costly to deploy properly (if chasing same state redundancy etc
but this model is being changed/modified I believe)
- The ACCC has their fingers in this pie (see point 1, it's both for and
against ...)

You will notice the points above are more related the aggregation
infrastructure vs the last mile?

*For:*
- We can test lines for fault conditions like Battery/Open Circuit etc and
have Telstra technical people dispatched to fix those PSTN issues without
dealing with a 3rd Party Carrier or PSTN provider. (They usually don't care
about your customers as much).
- There are escalation levels within Telstra that you can get to (its hard
work) that can resolve the most insane PSTN faults (usually interference /
induction related) that no other carrier could even attempt to get to
within a reasonable time frame when the fault is related to an ADSL service.
- One of the best tricks is, if an ADSL is hard down its usually as a
result of a fault that would impact a PSTN service too. ADSL has much less
strict SLA requirement vs Voice, particularly in the MSD Areas - which is
something that's starting to happen more and more of late (see recent
weather events). When you run out of steam with DSL fault lodging or get a
appointment date that is weeks away, you just ask the customer to lodge the
PSTN issue and its fixed much quicker.
- For services that are churned away or DSL codes removed the reversal
process is actually pretty quick and every minute counts in getting that
reversal submitted. Doing that via someone else usually misses the window.

These points really apply for the ADSL services with that business focus,
where downtime is more sensitive or costly. If I was servicing a
residential market, I would find a hard time arguing the benefits over the
actual costs.

With Ethernet there are more than a single ULL involved, which will
naturally make it more reliable against those annoying single PSTN issues.
Fault resolution teams for Ethernet products also have the
budget/tools/staff to shark faulty lines and an SLA nudging them along. For
a $lowcost DSL Service (depending on the carrier your using) simply taking
the support call costs more than the monthly rental - let alone someone
heading out there to fix / shark a PSTN.

I don't use a lot of ULL based DSL but mostly because we're happy with the
services that share the PSTN.

As always, make sure they're using good filters, because this can mean the
biggest difference between a happy and unhappy customer. FYI, the one that
came in the box with the modem isn't a good filter.

On a final note, using 3rd Party carriers to get to Telstra or their own
DSL services aren't always bad. It just seems that with more and more off
shored jobs getting a 'good / reliable' customer advocate is becoming
harder and harder. I have seen other companies offer amazing service to DSL
faults from their own DSLAMs, it's just those staff in those teams that
truly don't care and ask questions from the 'script' that cause all the
pain.


I hate to bring up the past, but RequestDSL (wind back that clock) used to
be the best team of xDSL fault finders I have ever experienced. Whether it
was SPEC/LSS or ULL, they were on top of the game and yet to be outdone.
It's all about the service.

Hopefully some food for thought.

- Ryan


Ryan Crouch


APEXnetworks
Phone:  +61 7 3171 3700
Mobile: +61 403 621 711
Email: ryan at apexn.com.au

On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Radek Tkaczyk <radek at tkaczyk.id.au> wrote:

>  Hi Guys,
>
>
>
> I have always preferred a LSS (Line Sharing Service) ADSL service compared
> to a ULL (Unconditioned Local Loop) ADSL service (i.e. naked).
>
>
>
> This is because with a ULL service, you don’t have a dial tone to be able
> to troubleshoot with, and I hear that the Telstra techs in the field
> sometimes get lazy, and if they don’t hear dial tone on a line, they assume
> its vacant and pinch that line for another customer, instead of properly
> checking for voltage on the pair. This may not be the case anymore given
> how prevalent naked services are, but it’s still a valid point I suppose.
> Then there is the problem of ADSL codes constantly getting dropped from the
> line. If a user updates PSTN records like changing a company name, decides
> to move PSTN providers, or a myriad of other events, the ADSL codes get
> stripped from the line.
>
>
>
> However, these days we are starting to run into so many problems with ADSL
> filters, devices interfering with the ADSL line, etc that I’m starting to
> think maybe my logic here is flawed.
>
>
>
> One of the big problems with using an LSS ADSL service, is that when there
> is a PSTN fault on the line, the end user has to battle with Telstra to get
> the PSTN fault repaired, and we are helpless to assist because we don’t own
> the PSTN line, and the customer has to run the gauntlet with Telstra on the
> issue. Really they just want us to handle it, and we can’t.
>
>
>
> At least with a ULL service, we can get our ULL + ADSL supplier (Be it
> Telstra Wholesale, AAPT, Vocus, etc) to handle the fault, end to end, and
> ADSL codes can’t get stripped from the line.
>
>
>
> What are other people’s though on this subject? The Ethernet over Copper
> style services that use ULLs just work, and we don’t have to revisit them
> once they are installed, but the constant attention an LSS ADSL service
> needs really makes me wonder if there is a better way?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Radek Tkaczyk
>
> Ph: 0413 383 231
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20150309/f3bfe688/attachment.html>