08-24-2010 8:45 PM
I was browsing through my line stats database today and saw something interesting.
I have about 25 iNID (i3812V) entries in the database, all of them are hardware version 2700-000679-004, which is a variant of what's in the standard 3800HGV-B router.
But today, there's an odd one in there: An iNID that has hardware version 000705-004, which is a variant of the hardware version used for the new 3801HGV (newer RG, hardware version 000778-004).
It would appear that there may be a new revision of the iNID being looked at or tested, which has the newer chipset in it that the 3801HGVs have. This may continue to improve the iNID's pair-bonding service, which appears subject to several little issues that are sometimes not easy to correct.
Anyhow, I thought it was interesting. The line stats database in general is picking up some unusual things, including 5 people who have or are testing 3801HGV routers.
09-24-2010 3:48 PM
Honestly, your issues that you are having is a major reason why they should abandon the idea of pair bonding; it's just way too troublesome to continue. I've said it before and I'll say it again, they have to bring the VRAD closer to the home; doesn't matter how they do it, they just have to do it. Mini-VRADs, FTTC, etc. Something needs to be done. They're throwing good money after bad.
Now, I do hope that they will be able to fix this situation for you, I really do. uVerse is a great product, it just has a lot of technical limitations that need to be overcome and once AT&T realizes this they will have a killer product.
10-06-2010 8:11 AM
seems they have stopped deploying iNID's http://utalk.att.com/t5/Features/Uverse-availability-amp-iNid/m-p/276638#M17077
I'm on #4.
I plan to have them roll a truck EVERY time I have an issue.
10-06-2010 8:59 AM
Not only do you have to pay the guy to out there (sometimes it's multiple hours), you have to pay for the gas, the cost of the new part, etc.
Seriously, I'd love to know how much it costs the company for each Technician Visit when they have to foot the bill. Then let's factor in not just you but people who have issues everywhere in the company's footprint. Yeah, I'm starting to see a trend here and it's not a cheap trend (a very expensive trend that keeps going up and up).
By not doing the right thing, like getting the VRADs closer to people (either deploying more of the large standard-sized VRADs or using smaller pedestal-sized VRADs for a FTTC-like deployment), it's probably costing the company millions per financial quarter. This kind of plan makes no economic sense at all.
10-06-2010 10:18 AM
That's easy to say, but the ideal place for the VRAD is next to an existing crossconnect box. Also note that the VRAD needs to draw power from somewhere, and currently seem to be getting a direct Electric Company connection at the VRAD (witness the ever present meter). This puts some constraints on where they go. Oh, and you have to drop the additional fiber to the new VRAD as well.
The current model is working for millions of subscribers. Not for everybody, but there's always a point of diminishing returns. Note that AT&T (the original incarnation) left quite a few homes to be serviced by telephone co-ops because they didn't see enough money to be made for the investment in low density areas. Now the Universal Service Fund is supposed to help offset those costs for Telephone; I suppose it's only a matter of time before someone gets the bright idea of building TV plant from those funds. I'm already hearing that everyone has a right to broadband Internet access.
10-06-2010 10:53 AM
I could understand your POV if I was in an outlying suburb.. but I live in densely populated north central Austin. I'm sure that both power and a location to place a VRAD are available.
The issue is that our neighborhood is within a closed loop: http://goo.gl/maps/oMGD To our west is a state facilty, north-warehouses.. east-commercial and train tracks, and south by a very busy street and gas company. All of this isolates us a little which is nice.
I'm telling you all this becasue, they placed the VRAD deep in the neighborhood south of us HERE: http://goo.gl/maps/UqA1
So I'm fairly confident that AT&T could get a return on their investment if the put a VRAD inside our 'hood. It sure beats rolling trucks all the time.. ever since they expanded (with the iNIDs).. I've seen more u-verse service trucks in our hood. I can't be the only one.
To add to the fun.. according to our neighborhood email list serve.. ATT Uverse has a rep promising folks the we already have fiber.
10-07-2010 7:35 AM
No fair, you even have a Cinnabon store nearby, the nearest one to me is 45 miles.
What you can't see on Google Maps is the plant layout, i.e. how do the cables currently snake and branch throughout your neighborhood, where the cross connects are, etc. Maybe there is somewhere to put another VRAD closer to your home, maybe there isn't. In your situation, I would keep asking AT&T what they can do to really improve your service and viability. It would seem to me that running a LOT of pair bondings instead of putting in a new VRAD is probably not the best use of the pairs.
10-08-2010 10:12 PM
kwilson9, sorry, probably way too late for a response. I have the same setup you have. Uverse for almost 2months now with i3812V iNID and i38HG router inside house. Between iNID and router is a battery backup unit (iPSU which comes with phone service). According to u-verse realtime the estimated distance from the VRAD is 2800ft.
After first installation we had all kinds of problems. After about a week and three service visits the system worked. However the iNID would completely reboot every day and sometimes lose connection for 30min. It took the techs 4 times and two new batteries until they (I should say us) figured out what was going on. As soon as the battery was connected it took a day to charge then in regular intervals the system started rebooting. According to the newest info the iNID firmware/software has a problem with the battery backup unit. To solve the problem the battery needs to be unplugged until they find a solution. If they hear about rebooting in this area they just go out to unplug the battery, which solves most of the services issues according to the last tech.
Since the last tech was here I had no problems. Apparently there are some issues with the iNID's firmware/software that still need to ironed out.
10-11-2010 9:04 PM - edited 10-11-2010 9:06 PM
that worked for me 50%. sometimes the iNID would still reboot with the battery warning light blinking and battery attached. The iNID reports that battery is no good.
Since I have the battery unnplugged, no problems. Hope they fix the firmware soon.