Kitz Forum
Broadband Related => Telephony Wiring + Equipment => Topic started by: V_R on March 21, 2018, 10:46:40 PM
-
So I'm moving to a new build property soon and this is the master socket in the living room, I'm just wondering if its worth getting a pre-filtered face if I can?
Even if its for no other reason than to not have a filter hanging out of it and making it look nicer.
If so, any recommendations?
Thanks!
(https://i.imgur.com/5V06emd.jpg)
-
Definitely definitely get a pre-filtered facplate, sometimes called an SSFP (service-specific faceplate) with two sockets in the front of it, one for DSL modem and one for a phone.
The thing will be neater, more robust and faster as they are better performers for various reasons. Dangly ‘microfilters’ are not the answer.
-
I shall second Weaver's advice and add that you should source a Mk 3 SSFP.
Here is an example (https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/BRAND-NEW-Genuine-BT-OpenReach-VDS-SOCKIT-MK3/142728429399) of what you will require.
-
I hope and pray that your building contractor has wired the premises correctly, ie: a wire from the outside grey box/capping where the BT underground feed is .... direct to that master socket ........ and any other extensions wired onwards from that master socket ??.
Alas, I've visited more than a few new build estates whereby they have run the wire from the grey box/capping, to a central point in the house underneath the floor boards (or sheet boards as they are these days), and then 'teed out' all the sockets from this totally inaccessible point.
The only way around this, if indeed this is the case, is to re-run a new wire. Who needs that though, when all wiring is currently buried and out of sight !!
Fingers crossed for you. :)
-
I hope and pray that your building contractor has wired the premises correctly, ie: a wire from the outside grey box/capping where the BT underground feed is .... direct to that master socket ........ and any other extensions wired onwards from that master socket ??.
There really shouldn't be any excuse for any developer in creating a pig's ear out of it all. :( As far as I know, the Builders Guide (or other documentation) is still available . . . spelling things out in easy to understand pictures.
-
There really shouldn't be any excuse for any developer in creating a pig's ear out of it all. :( As far as I know, the Builders Guide (or other documentation) is still available . . . spelling things out in easy to understand pictures.
LOL! What is written and what the do to save money are two totally different practices!
-
LOL! What is written and what the do to save money are two totally different practices!
I have lived in a new build house, on a large estate, built by one of Britain’s largest Building companies. Nothing would surprise me about how many corners were cut, or rules broken. The day we took posession a BT engineer was already there, trying to work out what on earth they had done to phone wiring. Despite his frustration in trying to fix the unfixable he was unable to contain his laughter, when overhearing a different conversation between me and the builder’s plumbers, about central heating wiring that also did not work and could never have worked. :)
-
Don't talk to me about new build houses - we bough one in Durham many years ago and someone forgot to tell them you are supposed to put cement in the mortar!
-
Cheers for the replies chaps.
I'm going back there this weekend to check on the progress of a few things so I'll see if I can get the face off the current socket and check the wiring.
I am a little concerned as its slightly sunken into the wall and I think that limits my options from what I've seen.
As for the wiring, I have no idea, but its all been done pretty well by the looks of it, got a panel on the wall for 2x Sat, Digital TV and DAB. Everything is very tidy. Might do some digging and see if I can check out the behind the scenes stuff if I can.
Sounds like you guys got some dodgy builders, no such thing here. :)
-
I am a little concerned as its slightly sunken into the wall and I think that limits my options from what I've seen.
Ah, so the image you provided in the opening post isn't from your new property? That shows exactly what I would expect to see with the NTE5/A fitted to a recessed backing box.
-
Yeah its from the new place.
What I mean't was, I wasn't sure if that being the case might hinder the possibilities to change/upgrade the faceplate. :)
-
Yeah its from the new place.
Then I see no problem to fitting a Mk 3 SSFP. :)
-
Fair play, cheers, as I said in my edit above I was just a bit concerned it might make things more difficult....
-
No difficulty, whatsoever. Just remove the lower front faceplate, offer up and plug in the SSFP, then re-fit the lower front faceplate with the longer screws (which should come with the SSFP).
-
Cheers, shame I can't use the Mk4 or something newer but hey ho.
-
In all seriousness, an NTE5/A & Mk 3 SSFP is far better in terms of quality than the NTE5C & Mk 4 SSFP.
-
Really? Fair enough, TIL.
Cheers. :)
-
Went back today and opened it up.
There is an extension in the bedroom, that's what the blue and white is I assume, right?
(https://i.imgur.com/z7KxG6P.jpg)
-
There is an extension in the bedroom, that's what the blue and white is I assume, right?
Yes, that's correct.
-
Mk 3 SSFP ordered over the weekend and dispatched this morning, thanks for your help burakkucat. :thumbs:
-
Just to be sure, with the lower-front face-plate removed (as in your photograph, above), the extension socket in the bedroom should be "dead". If it's not, then a "folly" has been committed with the wiring. :-X
-
I'll try and check, but I don't actually plan on having a landline installed. Maybe I'll borrow one.
-
I assume you mean handset not landline (you won't get broadband without a landline!).
I's worth having a cheap corded handset to check for noise on the line (i.e. to be able to dial 17070). Argos sell a cheap one: http://www.argos.co.uk/product/3924358
-
Yes, obviously by landline I mean a landline telephone. :)
You're right though, a cheap corded phone would be handy if I have issues.
-
...or you need 999 and your mobile's flat.
-
Mk 3 SSFP ordered over the weekend and dispatched this morning, thanks for your help burakkucat. :thumbs:
I'll try and check, but I don't actually plan on having a landline installed. Maybe I'll borrow one.
No need for a filtered faceplate if there's nothing to filter.
An unfiltered faceplate would be best for you.
AAISP sell them. I think run-it-direct might too.
-
Or just disconnect that extension wiring and get a suitable cable (RJ11 to BT) to plug the modem straight into a phone socket.
-
lol, I said I don't plan on it, not that I won't, I'd rather the option be there just in case. :)
-
I am using the straight-through unfiltered DSL-only faceplates from the Andrews and Arnold shop (http://aa.net.uk/broadband-accessories.html) which J0hn referred to in his earlier post. (You don't have to be an A&A ISP-customer to use the shop.)
I have three three lines, so three NTE5s, no phones. But unfortunately a recent BT man replaced one of the NTE5as with an NTE5c which has a different layout to the older NTE5 backs so this means that I can't use the above mentioned straight-through plate as it won't fit.
-
I am using the straight-through unfiltered DSL-only faceplates from the Andrews and Arnold shop (http://aa.net.uk/broadband-accessories.html) which J0hn referred to in his earlier post. (You don't have to be an A&A ISP-customer to use the shop.)
I have three three lines, so three NTE5s, no phones. But unfortunately a recent BT man replaced one of the NTE5as with an NTE5c which has a different layout to the older NTE5 backs so this means that I can't use the above mentioned straight-through plate as it won't fit.
As per ejs’s comment, wouldn’t a BT to RJ11, connected to an unfiltered faceplate (or the test socket), do exactly the same job?
Speaking from a position of ignorance as I don’t have the bits in front of me to examine.
-
As per ejs’s comment, wouldn’t a BT to RJ11, connected to an unfiltered faceplate (or the test socket), do exactly the same job?
Yes, that would work. I have a couple of those leads, stored in "The Grotto", for use when the situation arises.
-
Indeed, going straight from the test socket to modem is ideal. Just need an old-fashioned BT-plug-to-RJ11 cable for a dial-up modem. I can't find one that is both very high quality and very short at the moment. There’s also the potential problem that Mrs Weaver will say that the end result looks awful.
-
Run IT Direct started selling them:
https://www.run-it-direct.co.uk/adsl-vdsl-patch-leads/adslvdslbtcat5patchlead025m/
As for appearance, I suppose it would look OK with the standard telephone front part of the NTE5C in place.
-
Engineer came to day to activate the line.
He replaced the whole socket for an NTE5C and dual faceplate. Typical. :lol:
Much better connection that I expected....
xdslcmd info --stats
xdslcmd: ADSL driver and PHY status
Status: Showtime
Retrain Reason: 0
Last initialization procedure status: 0
Max: Upstream rate = 37561 Kbps, Downstream rate = 100740 Kbps
Bearer: 0, Upstream rate = 20000 Kbps, Downstream rate = 79987 Kbps
Link Power State: L0
Mode: VDSL2 Annex B
VDSL2 Profile: Profile 17a
TPS-TC: PTM Mode(0x0)
Trellis: U:ON /D:ON
Line Status: No Defect
Training Status: Showtime
Down Up
SNR (dB): 12.0 17.5
Attn(dB): 14.1 0.0
Pwr(dBm): 13.5 4.4
VDSL2 framing
Bearer 0
MSGc: 18 20
B: 239 239
M: 1 1
T: 23 64
R: 0 0
S: 0.0955 0.3819
L: 20104 5028
D: 1 1
I: 240 120
N: 240 240
Counters
Bearer 0
OHF: 1197192 323939
OHFErr: 0 0
RS: 0 3550836
RSCorr: 0 0
RSUnCorr: 0 0
Bearer 0
HEC: 0 0
OCD: 0 0
LCD: 0 0
Total Cells: 304389959 0
Data Cells: 25090494 0
Drop Cells: 0
Bit Errors: 0 0
ES: 0 0
SES: 0 0
UAS: 8470 8470
AS: 1980
Bearer 0
INP: 0.00 0.00
INPRein: 0.00 0.00
delay: 0 0
PER: 1.65 6.13
OR: 116.09 33.91
AgR: 80103.09 20033.74
Bitswap: 390/390 0/0
Total time = 2 hours 54 min 10 sec
FEC: 0 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 0 0
SES: 0 0
UAS: 8470 8470
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Latest 15 minutes time = 9 min 10 sec
FEC: 0 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 0 0
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Previous 15 minutes time = 15 min 0 sec
FEC: 0 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 0 0
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Latest 1 day time = 2 hours 54 min 10 sec
FEC: 0 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 0 0
SES: 0 0
UAS: 8470 8470
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Previous 1 day time = 0 sec
FEC: 0 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 0 0
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Since Link time = 32 min 59 sec
FEC: 0 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 0 0
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
#
-
Kitizens, is that downstream SNRM high for FTTC? Does that mean the speed will go up in time and the SNRM drop?
-
No, VDSL2 is capped at 80 Mbps downstream, so it won't go any higher.
-
Kitizens, is that downstream SNRM high for FTTC? Does that mean the speed will go up in time and the SNRM drop?
No ..... it just means the circuit is a relatively short one, and as such doesn't need to utilise as much margin.
-
So, rather than a new thread, here are the stats from the new connection, anyone see anything of interest? Whats with the blue? I've not seen that myself before.
Bitloading:
(https://i.imgur.com/OkHqq4W.png)
Hlog:
(https://i.imgur.com/3k3NPSg.png)
QLN:
(https://i.imgur.com/1PlB0MY.png)
xdslcmd info --stats
xdslcmd: ADSL driver and PHY status
Status: Showtime
Retrain Reason: 0
Last initialization procedure status: 0
Max: Upstream rate = 37312 Kbps, Downstream rate = 100740 Kbps
Bearer: 0, Upstream rate = 20000 Kbps, Downstream rate = 79987 Kbps
Link Power State: L0
Mode: VDSL2 Annex B
VDSL2 Profile: Profile 17a
TPS-TC: PTM Mode(0x0)
Trellis: U:ON /D:ON
Line Status: No Defect
Training Status: Showtime
Down Up
SNR (dB): 12.0 17.4
Attn(dB): 14.1 0.0
Pwr(dBm): 13.4 4.4
VDSL2 framing
Bearer 0
MSGc: 18 20
B: 239 239
M: 1 1
T: 23 64
R: 0 0
S: 0.0955 0.3819
L: 20104 5028
D: 1 1
I: 240 120
N: 240 240
Counters
Bearer 0
OHF: 34263905 1037022
OHFErr: 5 2
RS: 0 883485
RSCorr: 0 0
RSUnCorr: 0 0
Bearer 0
HEC: 57 0
OCD: 1 0
LCD: 1 0
Total Cells: 122837494 0
Data Cells: 1985033701 0
Drop Cells: 0
Bit Errors: 0 0
ES: 4 2
SES: 0 0
UAS: 8470 8470
AS: 56669
Bearer 0
INP: 0.00 0.00
INPRein: 0.00 0.00
delay: 0 0
PER: 1.65 6.13
OR: 116.09 33.91
AgR: 80103.09 20033.74
Bitswap: 18834/18838 1/1
Total time = 18 hours 5 min 39 sec
FEC: 0 0
CRC: 5 2
ES: 4 2
SES: 0 0
UAS: 8470 8470
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Latest 15 minutes time = 5 min 39 sec
FEC: 0 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 0 0
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Previous 15 minutes time = 15 min 0 sec
FEC: 0 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 0 0
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Latest 1 day time = 18 hours 5 min 39 sec
FEC: 0 0
CRC: 5 2
ES: 4 2
SES: 0 0
UAS: 8470 8470
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Previous 1 day time = 0 sec
FEC: 0 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 0 0
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Since Link time = 15 hours 44 min 27 sec
FEC: 0 0
CRC: 5 2
ES: 4 2
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
#
-
The blue is the result of an error somewhere. Could you copy the pbParams data here please (Telnet Data --> pbParams).
-
As requested. :)
xdslcmd info --pbParams
xdslcmd: ADSL driver and PHY status
Status: Showtime
Retrain Reason: 0
Last initialization procedure status: 0
Max: Upstream rate = 37312 Kbps, Downstream rate = 100740 Kbps
Bearer: 0, Upstream rate = 20000 Kbps, Downstream rate = 79987 Kbps
Discovery Phase (Initial) Band Plan
US: (7,32) (871,1205) (1972,2782)
DS: (33,859) (1216,1961) (2793,3959)
Medley Phase (Final) Band Plan
US: (871,1205) (1972,2782)
DS: (33,859) (1216,1961) (2793,3959)
VDSL Port Details Upstream Downstream
Attainable Net Data Rate: 37312 kbps 100740 kbps
Actual Aggregate Tx Power: 4.4 dBm 13.4 dBm
====================================================================================
VDSL Band Status U0 U1 U2 U3 U4 D1 D2 D3
Line Attenuation(dB): 5.6 17.3 24.6 N/A N/A 9.2 20.4 31.2
Signal Attenuation(dB): N/A 16.9 24.2 N/A N/A 11.4 20.1 31.2
SNR Margin(dB): N/A 17.3 17.4 N/A N/A 11.9 12.0 12.1
TX Power(dBm): N/A -26.4 4.4 N/A N/A 10.4 7.7 7.1
#
-
Thanks, I can see the problem now. The U0 band isn't used at all, so DSLstats is getting the band allocation wrong. I'll look into this, but in the meantime it only affects the colours of the graphs, not any of the actual displayed data.
-
Cheers for the clarification, As it was a brand new line on a G.Fast enabled cab I wasn't sure if it was something to do with that or not.
-
G.INP was applied overnight.
xdslcmd info --stats
xdslcmd: ADSL driver and PHY status
Status: Showtime
Retrain Reason: 1
Last initialization procedure status: 0
Max: Upstream rate = 37172 Kbps, Downstream rate = 104448 Kbps
Bearer: 0, Upstream rate = 20000 Kbps, Downstream rate = 79999 Kbps
Bearer: 1, Upstream rate = 0 Kbps, Downstream rate = 0 Kbps
Link Power State: L0
Mode: VDSL2 Annex B
VDSL2 Profile: Profile 17a
TPS-TC: PTM Mode(0x0)
Trellis: U:ON /D:ON
Line Status: No Defect
Training Status: Showtime
Down Up
SNR (dB): 12.8 17.2
Attn(dB): 14.1 0.0
Pwr(dBm): 13.5 4.4
VDSL2 framing
Bearer 0
MSGc: -6 20
B: 130 239
M: 1 1
T: 0 64
R: 8 0
S: 0.0518 0.3819
L: 21468 5028
D: 16 1
I: 139 120
N: 139 240
Q: 16 0
V: 14 0
RxQueue: 60 0
TxQueue: 15 0
G.INP Framing: 18 0
G.INP lookback: 15 0
RRC bits: 0 24
Bearer 1
MSGc: 186 -6
B: 0 0
M: 2 0
T: 2 0
R: 16 0
S: 5.3333 0.0000
L: 48 0
D: 3 0
I: 32 0
N: 32 0
Q: 0 0
V: 0 0
RxQueue: 0 0
TxQueue: 0 0
G.INP Framing: 0 0
G.INP lookback: 0 0
RRC bits: 0 0
Counters
Bearer 0
OHF: 0 552557
OHFErr: 0 0
RS: 1550143072 649277
RSCorr: 15 0
RSUnCorr: 0 0
Bearer 1
OHF: 1254661 0
OHFErr: 0 0
RS: 15055191 0
RSCorr: 0 0
RSUnCorr: 0 0
Retransmit Counters
rtx_tx: 2 0
rtx_c: 2 0
rtx_uc: 0 0
G.INP Counters
LEFTRS: 0 0
minEFTR: 79966 0
errFreeBits: 24591120 0
Bearer 0
HEC: 0 0
OCD: 0 0
LCD: 0 0
Total Cells: 3100387549 0
Data Cells: 475205625 0
Drop Cells: 0
Bit Errors: 0 0
Bearer 1
HEC: 0 0
OCD: 0 0
LCD: 0 0
Total Cells: 0 0
Data Cells: 0 0
Drop Cells: 0
Bit Errors: 0 0
ES: 55 19
SES: 11 0
UAS: 8506 8495
AS: 20153
Bearer 0
INP: 48.00 0.00
INPRein: 0.00 0.00
delay: 0 0
PER: 0.00 6.13
OR: 0.01 33.91
AgR: 80614.82 20033.74
Bearer 1
INP: 4.00 0.00
INPRein: 4.00 0.00
delay: 3 0
PER: 16.06 0.01
OR: 95.62 0.01
AgR: 95.62 0.01
Bitswap: 6412/6412 1/1
Total time = 1 days 18 hours 43 min 30 sec
FEC: 15 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 55 19
SES: 11 0
UAS: 8506 8495
LOS: 1 0
LOF: 9 0
LOM: 0 0
Latest 15 minutes time = 13 min 30 sec
FEC: 0 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 0 0
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Previous 15 minutes time = 15 min 0 sec
FEC: 0 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 0 0
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Latest 1 day time = 18 hours 43 min 30 sec
FEC: 15 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 11 0
SES: 11 0
UAS: 36 25
LOS: 1 0
LOF: 9 0
LOM: 0 0
Previous 1 day time = 24 hours 0 sec
FEC: 0 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 30 16
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
Since Link time = 5 hours 35 min 53 sec
FEC: 15 0
CRC: 0 0
ES: 0 0
SES: 0 0
UAS: 0 0
LOS: 0 0
LOF: 0 0
LOM: 0 0
#
-
I shall second Weaver's advice and add that you should source a Mk 3 SSFP.
why not a MK4 faceplate? as those seem to be the current version.
is there a reason why the MK3 would still be the preferred option?
-
The fashionable opinion is that the NTE5C is crap. And the master socket was an NTE5A at the start of the thread, so a MK3 would fit that master socket.
-
The fashionable opinion is that the NTE5C is crap. And the master socket was an NTE5A at the start of the thread, so a MK3 would fit that master socket.
crap in what way?
just aesthetically or in performance too?
-
I think it is OK performance wise but no better than the MK3, however the construction of the MK4 with no circuit board with soldered connections, just wires pushed into slots in metal sheet looks cheap and nasty. The tool free connections for the incoming pair and extensions along with the wobbly clip on front plate don't seem too clever either. I didn't want one of these master sockets but I had a noisy line and the first thing the OR engineer did was change it to the MK4, didn't do anything for the noisy line fault of course, they are just replacing the older sockets.
-
The tool-less design of the front plate for me is the most irritating feature of the NTE5C. What I found is that it clips on reasonably well when the master socket is not installed but once the back plate has a bit of flex from the screws, the front plate no longer installs correctly. I prefer the old design where two screws hold the front plate secure.
-
Ref the unsoldered connections on some appuratus it is worth mentioning that expectations of long-term reliability of soldered connections, based upon a century or more of reliable electronic manufacturing experience, can no longer be taken for granted, following EU bans on lead content in solder in recent years. The following Nasa analysis (77 pages!) tends to suggest the EU ban was possibly misguided. In particular, discussions of “tin whiskers” is interesting.
https://nepp.nasa.gov/whisker/reference/tech_papers/2011-kostic-pb-free.pdf
Whatever the truth about lead hazards in solder, and whether or not the EU politicians struck the right balance, it just may be the case that the solderless constructions have advantages after all. Was that in the minds of the NTE 5 designers? Who knows. :)
-
So is it worth ensuring that the back part is not under too much tension from screws so that it does not get distorted? Is slightly reducing the torque on the screws a sensible option if there is such a problem?
I want my old unit back. Although the removable front is very convenient for Mrs Weaver as she finds it difficult to unscrew the fronts for tests.
-
On mine the front plate was really insecure, the clips basically didn't grip properly. One of the OR guys tried a few from his van and found one that fitted better. Before that I was wondering about fitting a couple of self tapping screws to hold it in place.
-
At that point we just need to go back to the old design that worked.
The new idea is nice but it needs real-world user/dog/hoover-proofness testing and very tight manufacturing tolerances and quality control plus monitoring of the performance of actual kit deployed. I think they need a v x.1 and a trial of it that whose results are observed properly.