I honestly think you are being over dramatic spring. I have been running the x1 adsl_phy on my line for weeks, with if anything reduced errors.
Weaver and j0hn have also used it, and all they saw was very slightly reduced sync speed.
You have spent a lot of time looking at your line stats and making some strange assumptions. You have a like with an attainable over twice that of your sync speed, and you take interest in things like FECs in the tens. Many perfectly stable lines have millions of FEC errors a day...
I honestly have no idea what to make of your input about the various adsl_phy, or why you feel the need to talk about it the way you do.
where did this come from just now
im going to ignore this post and yes, 10 times the average FEC that had been stable for months with V means i need to leave x1 running for longer before I can justify using it as so far it has been nothing but buggy
by the way, j0hn said it performed worse for him
also, talk about it the way I do? first you said it's nice I'm providing information, now it's somehow meaningless? I wouldn't have gone back to x1, don't want to constantly watch my line.
my line doesn't have vectoring like yours
the reason I'm leaving x1 to run is because it has days with reduced errors, I'm just trying to see how it behaves. when did I say it's going to be like that for everyone? the reason I'm being dramatic is some people have DLM.
and this information doesn't apply to ADSL , weaver is using ADSL.
and what about missing upstream bits?
btw the triggering DLM line was written as a joke not a fact