Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[les-70]

 A speed cap to about 40 mb/s for a month might remove the cap but that medicine may be worse than the sickness. However when I used to cap the speed myself I never noticed the lower speed in ordinary use.   Personally  I would leave things as they are, your current speed cap may avoid the line re syncing to too high a speed after a power cut or when someone is on hols and thus avoid possible interleaving.

[Chrysalis]

I tend to be one of the fussier people in terms of line spec, e.g. I throw a fit if my line gets interleaved but a loss of sub 2% of sync speed due to DLM is really not worth worrying about, I would understand if e.g. a crosstalker went away and your attainable shot upto 80mbit, but thats not the case.

If DLM relented whilst in AMBER you would get situations where lines would loop up and down between different profiles which is not a good thing, AMBER is there to keep lines in a stable state.

[broadstairs]

If DLM relented whilst in AMBER you would get situations where lines would loop up and down between different profiles which is not a good thing, AMBER is there to keep lines in a stable state.

But my line was stable before the cap for ages, I then had a bug on the line which they did not fix, it went away. The cap did NOTHING, I had the issue after the cap for weeks was implemented, it disappeared on its own , so no one fixed anything and I'm left with a cap which did NOTHING and still does NOTHING. It makes no sense at all, that is my problem, if it did not fix the problem which I have evidence for, then why leave it on. I'm not bothered if they remove the cap and I end up with a slower speed, it wont drop that much, but IF and its a BIG IF the re-introduce G.INP I will still be at 59995kbps despite the fact that I was running at around 71000kbps with G.INP before. I am at a loss to see why you think this is unreasonable. Bad engineering is bad engineering which is what this is, dont hide a problem - fix it.

Stuart

[Chrysalis]

According to andy some changes are been made soon which seems will make lines recover easier, and even some control given to CPs to remotely issue DLM reset's.  So there is hope for you with that information to get your couple of mbit back.

[broadstairs]

According to andy some changes are been made soon which seems will make lines recover easier, and even some control given to CPs to remotely issue DLM reset's.  So there is hope for you with that information to get your couple of mbit back.

I saw that thread but wondered if it related to the thread about DLM which turned out to be ADSL only.

Stuart

[NewtronStar]

Yeah like asking your ISP to change your DLM profile from standard to speed thats about as much as your ISP can do regarding FTTC.

From observation a capped line is very different than being banded - for example a capped line will not show any increase of SNRM like a banded line which can show +2 dB above the target margin of 6dB yet still the sync rate is still much lower than the circuit should be capable of.

[Chrysalis]

I saw that thread but wondered if it related to the thread about DLM which turned out to be ADSL only.

Stuart

Its related to FTTC.

[les-70]

From observation a capped line is very different than being banded - for example a capped line will not show any increase of SNRM like a banded line which can show +2 dB above the target margin of 6dB yet still the sync rate is still much lower than the circuit should be capable of.

  I don't understand your comment about capping, capping does raise the snrm as expected. see http://forum.kitz.co.uk/index.php/topic,16427.msg304299.html#msg304299