Whoops, sent this direct to Neil only rather than reply-all to the list,
Neil, you'll need to resend your reply (which is clearly intended for the
list) to the list also, sorry :)

On Thursday, 18 August 2016, Neil J. McRae <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 18 Aug 2016, at 16:52, Mike Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > If BT encouraged equipment vendors to test instead of CP's, then perhaps
> this would be different.
>
> What makes you think we don't?
>

The most recent evidence (June 2016) of this I saw is here, on Page 6:
https://www.openreach.co.uk/orpg/home/products/super-fa
stfibreaccess/downloads/ProcessGuideforCPEeModemConformanceT
estingIssue1.4.pdf - It seems unlikely (though not impossible) that this
policy is standalone for products intended exclusively for GEA.

Nobody is hurling abuse at you, we're criticising an unnecessarily
inefficient system that CPs are expected to abide by, by BTOR, in pursuit
of better services for everyone.

That you are just about the only face of (part of) BT who both engages on a
regular basis (often to defend the procedure or whatever is being
criticised, putting you at odds with most everyone else right out the
gate) and might have the necessary contacts and input to make helpful
change means you get the shitty end of the stick in a thread, but we're not
hurling abuse.

Simply removing the option for CPs to hide test passes (given everyone
benefits whether they know it or not from any effort to approve kit
*anyway*, and BTs intent behind the MCT, hiding the approval seems
especially daft), and/or insisting (allowing?!) manufacturers do the
testing themselves if they want their kit to be eligible for use in the UK
(BABT green circle style) will provide the shortest path to the aim of more
compliant devices being used/noncompliant firmware being fixed.

Absent manufacturers being able to test direct, does anyone seriously think
that CPs would take their bat and ball home and stop selling broadband if
the list of any off the shelf equipment/firmware that passed MCT was simply
made public as part of the process?

Phil

Reply via email to