Kitz ADSL Broadband Information
adsl spacer  
Support this site
Home Broadband ISPs Tech Routers Wiki Forum
 
     
   Compare ISP   Rate your ISP
 
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
 1 
 on: Today at 03:41:59 AM 
Started by johnson - Last post by banger
Be interesting to see if you get this online.

 2 
 on: Today at 02:31:43 AM 
Started by johnson - Last post by johnson
Well the electrical storm this evening had other ideas about me trying out the modem.

What has baffled me is how the HG612 handles it.  All the interfaces show an MTU of 1500 yet it works fine.

Yeah it doesnt make sense, still haven't gotten around to trying an old HG612 but I was assuming its interfaces MTUs would change in accordance.  :shrug2:

 3 
 on: Today at 01:18:24 AM 
Started by adslmax - Last post by Alex Atkin UK
In what sense, Alex ?? There are people connected to G.fast ....... maybe not on this forum, but there are people connected.

It was just with all the discussions on here talking about pods being fitted but not live, I was wondering if ANYONE had been connected.  Guess now I know.

 4 
 on: Today at 01:11:39 AM 
Started by Weaver - Last post by Alex Atkin UK
Could explain it as I'm not sure if I was using an 1500 MTU back then.  Though to be honest, I have not seen any obvious benefit to using it now either, I just do it on the principle of it being optimal and less prone to issues.

 5 
 on: Today at 12:39:41 AM 
Started by Adam86 - Last post by Alex Atkin UK
I certainly can't see anything obvious, the HG612 has a VERY cut-down shell. Still, the WebUI must be doing it somehow.

Looks like the source code is on https://www.openreach.co.uk/orpg/home/products/super-fastfibreaccess/super-fastfibreaccess/landrgnu.do but that doesn't have the WebUI.  Anyone know where the original source code is?

 6 
 on: Today at 12:25:43 AM 
Started by johnson - Last post by Alex Atkin UK
What has baffled me is how the HG612 handles it.  All the interfaces show an MTU of 1500 yet it works fine.

 7 
 on: Today at 12:21:40 AM 
Started by TheVoid - Last post by Alex Atkin UK
so who is your isp?

speedtest.net is not running great on my phone either, that tells me I have an issue somewhere with the phone's tunable, or its wifi connection or the speedtest app, it doesnt mean the test itself is broken.  Might also be an issue with my isp at the time of the test or the speedtest server or the transit link.  With that said I rarely run speedtest.net on my PC now as I much prefer tests that use less threads. like speed.of.me and tbb, also dslreports.

I'm with Zen and have been on at least two different variations of their network, I was also on Origin Broadband both on BT backhaul and before that on Digital Region before it closed down.  I have always had varied results from those speed tests throughout.

I know sometimes single-thread speeds can be hit by contention but its strange how their multi-thread can do too, with only dslreports being fairly consistent.  Pretty sure its not the router either as I have been through various over the years and as I have been running pfSense on an Atom for some years now there is plenty of spare overhead, plus real-world performance is never a problem.  We regularly have three of us watching Netflix at the same time with one of them in 4K without any issues.

Anyway the point is, an artificial speed test can only be a guideline.  You have to monitor real-world performance as well to get a clear picture.  The BT/Openreach speed tests in particular can also be especially pessimistic.

 8 
 on: Today at 12:05:43 AM 
Started by jwbjnwolf - Last post by Chrysalis
adsl2+ allocates less power per tone, even if higher tones are not used (not sure if its supposed to beef up power on lower tones if no high ones used, but thats not my experience).

Thats the reasoning I have always considered it poorer on longer lines, short lines still can get enough bitloading for good performance with the reduced power so isnt a problem on those lines.

I see it fairly consistently when people try adsl2+ on long lines it performs worse than adsl2.

Given that modems will always try adsl2+ first even on high loop loss, I think locking long lines down to adsl1 at the dslam is sound.

Locking down to adsl2+adsl1 is possibly better, but BT with their rigid profiles probably dont have such a profile, so the next best thing is just for an ISP to order the adsl1 product.

 9 
 on: April 21, 2018, 10:24:13 PM 
Started by broadstairs - Last post by sevenlayermuddle
What happened to compatiblility?

Just not fashionable, too much bother, these days.   I was brought up on mainframes then later, Unix.  Backwards compatibility was never negotiable, things just had to carry on working.  And if you were writing something new, you’d make efforts to ensure it would run, as far as possible, on older systems too.

I’ll now offend nearly everybody by saying I do actually blame the open source community for the modern attitudes.  Trouble is, “open” means “open”, nobody to enforce any rules.  So developers get to do whatever is the most fun, rather than what’s best for users.   And the constraints of backwards compatibility are never much fun, so simply ignored.

Apple (I know you won’t appreciate this comment) actually do try.   If I build an App for iOS 9, then the fact is was built for iOS 9 is burned into the binary.   If, at some later version, they decide that black is white and white is black, they can and do check versionung, and strive to make the run time libraries adapt, so my old App continues to run.   But then, iOS is of Unix heritage, not Linux.    :)

Also, if I update an old iOS App, maybe one that I released for, say, iOS 9, with new features that depend upon iOS 11, then the new App supercedes the old day in the App store, and will only be available to iOS 11 devices.   But I can configure that the old App version remains (semi invisibile) in the App store, so it will be installed if an iOS 9 device requests a download.

 10 
 on: April 21, 2018, 09:36:23 PM 
Started by Ronski - Last post by CharTang
Hey everyone,

So whenever I use the postcode checker I get the page that I've attached, it states I'll be contacted to discuss my options, the trouble is over the past 3 weeks I have filled this form out 3 times and haven't had a call or anything so I attempted to call them and got through to a helpful chap who said he'll speak to the cabling team and call me back within 24-48hours that was on Wednesday the 11th much more than 48 hours so now I'm at a loss as I know the cabinet is live as it is the one opposite KFC/Harvester and I can see it from my window.

Did anyone else get this screen first and if so what next steps did you take to bypass it?

Cheers for any help.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
anything