atcomsystems.ca/forum Forums Wiring - Telecom Carriers - Trunks & Services Telecom Service & Providers DSL & hunt groups

I'm curious: What is the policy of your local telco regarding the provision of DSL service on one line of a multi-line hunt group?

BT Customer Services will insist that it "can't be done" here, even though technically there is no reason why it could not. The only difficulty might be in the logistics of the automated provisioning based upon phone number in those cases where two or more lines don't have separate assigned exchange numbers, but I can't see it being that much of a problem.

So what's the position in your area?

Paul, Verizon will put DSL on any line they are told. Half the time, they end up putting it on the opposite of what was requested, but that is another subject. They typically suggest to put DSL on the fax line, but I saw one as recently as last week where it was on the customer's main hunt group number.

I really can't see what difference it would make. The DSL is just riding along the cable pair like an antenna. It is certainly not telephone number-specific, so BT's logic sounds a bit flawed.

They won't put it on a line that appears at more than one address but other than that I agree with Ed. I can't see what difference it would make either.

-Hal

That's the problem, I can see no technical reason why it couldn't be done either, since the DSLAM is just jumpered to the physical pair at the MDF and neither knows nor cares about what's behind the voice side of things on the exchange line card.

But every attempt to get anything out of BT on this matter brings no joy. I've had a couple of cases now where the customer would be served quite adequately with DSL on one line of an existing two-line group, but because of BT's "policy" is forced to pay for a third line for the DSL -- Or resort to having the second line of the group converted to a single line and using call-forward on busy to simulate a simple hunt group, which costs per-call here.

It sounds like a way for them to increase revenue.

When DSL first came out here they would say they couldn't put it on a line in rotary.

then I started noticing they where doing it

now it can be on any line as ed said and often not on the line its supposed to be on

Paul -

For the last 20 years I had two lines in a hunt group. For the last 9 of those years I had DSL on the first of the two lines.

No problems - ever.

Three days ago I cut over to FIOS (fiber to the home), dropped the second line, got call waiting,caller ID, Voice mail, 20mbs D/L , 5mbs U/L and a gazillion TV channels.


Sam

at&t (former SBC, former Pac*Bell) won't put in on a Centrex line, and won't put it on a line in a hunt group. That usually leaves you putting it on a Fax line.

Not that they can't, they just won't.

At one of my customer's office, they put the DSL Line in and put their phone jack right in the middle of the backboard...gotta love it!

Weather in can be done technically has a lot to do with how the dial tone is delivered… It’s true that a DSLAM to provide DSL is bridge together with the dial tone at the MDF if…. IF… IF served from a Main C.O. where the sticher is located.

The wrinkle of “remote offices” and “remote terminals (RT’s)” is the curve ball that may have a lot of LECs including BT saying, “no, we can’t do that.”

The cards and/or equipment to transport ADSL further from main C.O. to remotes or RT’s may not always be capable of delivering lines in a multi-line hunt. Very often the NGDLC’s (next generation digital loop carriers) deployed already have the POTS lines assigned a CRV (call reference value) over a GR-303 link AND the DSL path via IMA (inverse multiplexed) links already combined together by the time they reach the remote. Where in your examples the two lines in a multi-line hunt would be working off some flavor of Universal-Voice grade card that would not pass DSL… and since everyone else out of that remote is getting their DSL traffic over a IMA link there’s would be no DSLAMs there to bridge.

So, since knowing a head of time when an order for DSL is placed what the topology of the area would be impossible to tell… Could be they’re saying “no” now rather than later.