Skip Navigation

Entanet warns on LLU migration cost
Thursday 14 December 2006 16:02:33 by Sebastien Lahtinen

Entanet ( has welcomed Ofcom's announcement of the new conditions which require Broadband Service Providers to issue MAC codes to users without charge or delay to allow them to switch broadband providers whilst minimising the disruption to their Internet access. It believes that it is essential that Ofcom enforces the new rules and deals firmly with any providers who fail to comply.

The company also however raises concerns about the difference in costs of moving from a BT IPStream/DataStream based service to another and that of migrating from an LLU (Local Loop Unbundled) service. Under the current charging scheme imposed by BT, moving from an LLU service to an IPStream would would incur an activation charge of £40 rather than the £11 charge for migrations between IPStream suppliers for example. Entanet is concerned that this difference in fees could deter users from switching from an LLU based service to a BT IPStream service, in particular as it absorbs the £11 fee but cannot do this on the higher £40 fee.

"A key part of Ofcom's remit is to enable consumer choice. The very fact that migrating from an LLU provider will incur a new activation fee doesn't do much to support that aim. This may well have been something that was unforeseen when the rules around local loop unbundling were drawn up, but whatever the reasons for the current situation, it needs to be put right. We can take some encouragement from the changes Ofcom has made with regard to broadband migrations this week and we hope the regulator acts soon to urgently review the situation with regard to LLU as well."

Carol Davies

This is a particular problem where customers have been moved from IPStream based services to LLU without their knowledge, something several providers are in the process of doing. This means the customer has no advance knowledge or control over the cost of moving to another ISP.

Ofcom indicated in its report that it will continue working with the industry to try and deal with the remaining issues not addressed by the current policy, something we hope won't be too long away.


Posted by wirelesspacman over 10 years ago
Personally, although I can understand Entanet's point, the issue of having to pay the activation charge would occur if a customer came from NTL/Telewest or from one of the wireless providers. Really, I would argue that LLU is sufficiently removed from BT that they are perfectly justified in making the distinction.
Posted by herdwick over 10 years ago
BT's charges presumably reflect costs to some extent - rewiring a pair from an LLU provider to a BT DSLAM is bound to cost more than reconfiguring the ISP used by an existing IPstream port user in a migration. LLU isn't really migration at all, its a cease and reprovide dumbed down to a "migration".
Posted by neuro96 over 10 years ago
Is there any chance we can stop referring to "MAC codes"? It's like saying CD disc, HDD disk, or PSTN network.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 10 years ago
wirelesspacman, except people know they're on cable. People are shifted to LLU without warning or notification, and then suddenly told they need to pay £40 when they want to change ISP.

It's another area which needs to be acted on - if the customers were not informed in advance (and I'd immediately leave an ISP which did inform me, because I've had nothing but trouble from LLU providers) then the ISP which silently moved them should be liable for that £40.

It's very little different than slamming, from my perspective.
Posted by seb (Favicon staff member) over 10 years ago
If we called it the MA Code or MAC, it will be understood by fewer users.. We could take the technical high ground and refuse to talk about "8 Meg" services and insist of "8 Mbps" too but we have to be realistic if we want to try and help the general public :)
Posted by wirelesspacman over 10 years ago
Dawn_Falcon, point taken.
You must be logged in to post comments. Click here to login.