Kitz Forum
Broadband Related => ISPs => Topic started by: jabns on May 20, 2008, 06:56:19 AM
-
Update:
Just to let you know i have just put the beta firmware on that was released about 4 hours ago and that has improved my sync speed by 500kbit per line.
I also have rewired my house and now my attenuation has dropped by 1db on one line and 0.5db on the other. The syncs when using annex A are both just above 17000kbit. Its pretty cool that with this new firmware you can change from Annex A to M on the fly just by entering:
adsl debug multimode config=g992.5_AnnexAor
adsl debug multimode config=g992.5_AnnexM
(https://forum.kitz.co.uk/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fb.imagehost.org%2F0866%2Fspeed2.jpg&hash=79faffedf189e1c6acb02e6dc686121e2ebd1bca)
Note: I am moving another line of mine to be* and it has a 8db attenuation. That should be some nice stats :lol:. Imagine if i put Be* pro on all four lines there. That would be like 90mbit(down) and 10mbit(up) :lol:
-
>> i have just put the beta firmware on that was released about 4 hours ago
Is that ST or DG834GT firmware?
Interesting in the swapping from Annex M to Annex A on the fly
- although Be havent yet invited me to move to Annex M. :/
>> Imagine if i put Be* pro on all four lines there. That would be like 90mbit(down) and 10mbit(up)
Dunno about you but Ive noticed quite a bit of contention of late, Particularly during the day.
This seems about the norm (my line syncs at 24Mb)
(https://forum.kitz.co.uk/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.speedtest.net%2Fresult%2F273603441.png&hash=e31ff06efc7bfa5979d9b9ecb412faacf7c5af0d) (http://www.speedtest.net)
(https://forum.kitz.co.uk/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.speedtest.net%2Fresult%2F273605497.png&hash=585a167f65ad00027abba1bea821b279728a71e2) (http://www.speedtest.net)
-
It is the ST. Firmware version 7.4.1.x (can't remember the last digit).
----------------
On my first day i just said:
Please can you put me on a fastpath 6db profile.
Also could you please enable Annex M on my line.
Thanks,
James Barlow
They did it all within 6 hours.
----------------------
That's weird I get none(noticeable).
Here is a speedtest from 5mins ago. I will do a few more throughout the day. If you want me to do any specific tests to help you diagnose it just give me a shout as I am in pretty much all day.
(https://forum.kitz.co.uk/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.speedtest.net%2Fresult%2F273606913.png&hash=4222c6e4c6c45004ae48fc8ffa1c2f3c5fd696f9) (http://www.speedtest.net)
In a bit I will leave CentOS downloading(i will get it do do it about 3 times) and post a 2hr RRD graph.
-
>> It is the ST. Firmware version 7.4.1.x
Presumably DMT tool wont work with that?
I'm tweaking to 3dB since my line seems pretty stable at 3dB and only fluctuates about 0.5 db
>> Here is a speedtest from 5mins ago.
How many lines is that on James.. if its on 3 it could be about right - I even seem to have lost some of the upstream.
Modulation: G.992.5 Annex A
Bandwidth (Up/Down) [kbps/kbps]: 1,313 / 24,414
(https://forum.kitz.co.uk/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.speedtest.net%2Fresult%2F273609880.png&hash=751772987d0e9af6c83d3ea8513bb70849cb4d3a) (http://www.speedtest.net)
-
DMT does not work on it unfortunately but I am getting faster speeds and next to no errors.
---------------
Thats on two lines syncing at 17,1xx . If i do the BBMAX checker thats single threaded i get about 14900kb/s usually. Sometimes I get just over 15000k but that is rare.
EDIT: There running in annex a ATM
EDIT2: Did you remember to tweak your LAN connection again.(I had to on one PC)
Another:
(https://forum.kitz.co.uk/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.speedtest.net%2Fresult%2F273614931.png&hash=c828e7633e2ea8b8c251a6752f6a3e82de21e015) (http://www.speedtest.net)
-
(https://forum.kitz.co.uk/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.speedtest.net%2Fresult%2F273633895.png&hash=1d201217ce000b66d576abd90b2345138fa80088) (http://www.speedtest.net)
-
How strange - Im still seeing circa 10Mb - yet by evening its normally ok and I can get full speed.
I'll test again later tonight.
Edit to add
---------------
Interesting - the more connections the faster the speeds.... hmmmmm.
Results shown on DUmeter whilst downloading via grabit.
You can see a distinct difference in speeds depending on no of threads open.
One thread = 10 mbps (circa)
Two threads = 16 mbps (circa)
Three threads on usenet = 21 mbps
Four threads on usenet = Maxing out line and this PC starts to struggle processing it quick enough :D
-
That is interesting. Keep me informed on any conclusions you have as to why this is happening.
Its probably why I don't notice it as i get virtually everything with a DL manager with 10 threads. I was just thinking could that be some very basic QOS in play and by using multiple threads its getting round it(maybe per connection based QOS). That's a silly idea actually.
You need to get the WD Rapters in place :D You should here mine when I am pushing 30mbit/s to them through Rapidshare. :lol:
-
I wouldn't go basing speeds on one, two or even three usenet threads. Like James I use 10 threads and with usenetserver.com each thread runs at around 2-2.5Mbps. Speedtest.net is OK but isn't reliable during daylight hours IME.
Having said that, I have seen contention on Be when one of the exchanges in the "chain" has issues. As you know it doesn't have to be your exchange either :(
I'd just blame James for eating all the backhaul :P
-
:lol:
-
I'd just blame James for eating all the backhaul :P
Actually... that might not be quite as silly a suggestion as it first appears!!! What backhaul do Be typically have in an exchange? If it's 100Mbps, that means James and Kitz can use more than half of it between them!!
-
This is what I was told was the case some months ago :
Minimum backhaul from "satellite" exchange = 100Mbps
Minimum backhaul from "master" exchange = 1Gbps
Most of the London exchanges are 1Gbps and the master exchanges are 10Gbps. The master exchange I went through is now 10Gbps AFAIK so 10Gbps is not limited to within the M25/major cities.
There has to be some traffic management going on anyway as even 1Gbps backhaul is going to get eaten PDQ.
-
Interesting... do you know any way of finding out which are master exchanges and which are satellite ones? (I haven't trawled the Be forum looking for this information yet, just wondered if you knew off the top of your head :) )
-
I was about to say Im down to around 8-9Mbps tonight - upstream is struggling too. At one point earlier I looked at a speedtest and thought - hell thats similar to what I got on PN and BT.
If I open up several threads though I can eventually max out.. so there wouldnt appear to be any QoS going on.
Wouldnt be surprised if it is 100 Mb on the backhaul as Ive heard that figure before too.
Anyhow like rizla says it could well be speedtest.net ... because the TBB speed just gave me this
19471.44 Kbps ( 19 Mbps ) (http://www.thinkbroadband.com/speedtest/results/id/12113133126482553382.html)
-
>> Interesting... do you know any way of finding out which are master exchanges and which are satellite ones?
IIRC me and rizla had that convo several weeks back, and by process of elimination its likely to be Blackpool (re the installation dates) for around here.
-
I have emailed ookla asking how many threads the use on the london server(probably not going to get a reply because of the amount of mail they will get).
PS: Just did a resync and managed to get another 500k out of each line. Then I added some firewall rules so that only my pc could get the internet and got the result in my sig ;D. I might try a 3db profile on 1 line and see how it goes.
EDIT: Just rang up and got both lines put on 3db profile. The result is that both of them are syncing between 18900 and 19200 (on a 27db attenuation :o)
What is the maximum upload speed on annex a because mine is 14xx (1404 IIRC)
EDIT2: Speedtest.net spits out a random figure(that must be a lie as both lines are now syncing at 192xx):
(https://forum.kitz.co.uk/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.speedtest.net%2Fresult%2F274051138.png&hash=3e58794855e5f5897f7830e9fdaca4fdb2b8cad1) (http://www.speedtest.net)
-
>> What is the maximum upload speed on annex a because mine is 14xx (1404 IIRC)
They say 2.5Mb on the site.
This is with the default 6dB profile*
Modulation: G.992.5 Annex M US 56
Bandwidth (Up/Down) [kbps/kbps]: 2,476 / 19,394
I may raise a ticket to see if changing to 3dB makes any difference to the upstream - or if 2476 is the limit.
Be are really naughty I notice that they have put a block on 2053kHz-2156kHz (Tone476-Tone499) - See attached.
This is stopping me getting the full downstream when using Annex M when theres no valid reason to >:(
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Whoops sorry I just noticed you said Annex A - Site reports 1.3 Mb
When on Annex A
- again 6dB upstream - but downstream tweaked with DMT tool.
If youre on the 3dB profile then you may be able to get a little more since you cant tweak the upstream yourself.
Modulation: G.992.5 Annex A
Bandwidth (Up/Down) [kbps/kbps]: 1313 / 24,574
Right now Im torn between keeping this firmware so I can tweak the SNR ....
or updating to be able to switch between Annex A and Annex M.
----------------
and B0lls - I just noticed I have interleaving switched on !
They must have done that when I asked for annex M
-
Yes because before i got 3db it was always about 1390. I have had 1 resync on each line but it has been up now for about 1hour with no issues.
---------------------
I wonder why they have put a block on the frequency.
Thats why i use that trick with switching to and from annex m on the fly. Half the time i don't need it. Its only when i am doing my php or hosting game servers when i make the most of it.
Thats actually annoyed me now because i thought that because my dads office only had a 8db attenuation it would get both full upload and full download >:(.
---------------------
EDIT: you can't use DMT period on the new firmware though (it won't even open because the CLI is so different) :no:.
I am going to leave CentOS downloading for the next 30mins to see if there is much flutuation. You try a speed test in 5mins LOL - finished and it was always 17mbit/s per line accept when it was opening new threads and parts. I will try it tonight as thats probably the busiest time.
---------------------
I love the way this has turned into a huge multi topical thread(well it revolves around Be* so that will do me :lol:). I seem to have a habbit of this.
-
I thought my upstream had dipped quite a lot with Annex-M. No wonder if theyve turned Interleaving back on.
Ive raised a ticket requesting Interleaving OFF and the 3dB profile - so will see what happens later.
As regards to the blocked frequencies - thats annoying the hell out of me - since like the connection at your dads office I should be able to get both up and down if they didnt block those frequencies. Its only going to be an annoyance to those on very good lines.
Theres no valid reason for them to do this, good lines will still get the "tail off" over and above those frequencies anyhow. AFAIK theres only Be that does this. UKO dont.
Re the thread going OT a bit - I did wonder earlier if I should perhaps split the thread.
-
When they put the 3db profile on that will turn inteleaving off as it only works on 6db and above(according to the CS rep I spoke to this morning).
Cheers for cleaning the thread :).
-
I spoke to someone in CS this morning to ask for Annex-M.. but unfortunately I found myself keep saying Pardon?
Its the first time Ive struggled to understand what theyve been saying, as the ones Ive spoken to before now have always been OK.
Therefore I decided it was easier to raise a ticket to get the 3dB profile and interleaving off :D
-
:lol:
The one i spoke to this morning sounded like she had just took some illegal substances :lol:. She was speaking so fast and sounded like she was in such a good mood i just burst out laughing when she spoke so i had to put the call on silent and take a deep breath :lol:.
-
>> both of them are syncing between 18900 and 19200 (on a 27db attenuation)
Thats a hell of a speed for 27dB atten line. :o :o
I just did a resync on mine to clear any DMT values
- I strongly suspect that if they try place me on a 3dB profile whilst I have DMT set to sync at 3dB below default - then my router wont stand a cat in hells chance of trying to sync on a 3dB profile. :lol:
The following seems to be the default setting now for my line - which gives a crap speed.. iirc last time Interleaving took off about 2-3Mb. :(
Uptime: 0 days, 0:39:31
Modulation: G.992.5 Annex M US 56
Bandwidth (Up/Down) [kbps/kbps]: 2,407 / 17,942
Data Transferred (Sent/Received) [MB/MB]: 4.71 / 16.44
Output Power (Up/Down) [dBm]: 13.0 / 18.0
Line Attenuation (Up/Down) [dB]: 5.5 / 12.5
SN Margin (Up/Down) [dB]: 6.5 / 6.5
-
>>Thats a hell of a speed for 27dB atten line.
I know its off all the charts that predict the speed by about 4db.
>>then my router wont stand a cat in hells chance of trying to sync on a 3dB profile
:lol:
>>iirc last time Interleaving took off about 2-3Mb.
My lines both started at around 13xxxkbps and the changes i have made are as followed:
New firmware(7.4.x.x) - Link to list (http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.speedtouchforum.de/viewforum.php%3Ff%3D8&sa=X&oi=translate&resnum=1&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dsite:speedtouchforum.de%2B585%2Bfirmware%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-GB:official%26sa%3DG)
Annex M off
Interleaving off
3db Profile
Rewired house
I will post the stats of one soon as i need to check the errors with the 3db profile.
-
lol - I think youve done and tweaked just about everything you possibly can do to make the very, very best of those lines
:lol: :lol:
-
Oh I also have a 14inch fan cooling the Be* Boxes :lol: .
-
Uptime: 0 days, 9:35:36
DSL Type: G.992.5 annex A
Bandwidth (Up/Down) [kbps/kbps]: 1,403 / 19,110
Data Transferred (Sent/Received) [MB/GB]: 151.60 / 3.33
Output Power (Up/Down) [dBm]: 12.0 / 18.0
Line Attenuation (Up/Down) [dB]: 14.0 / 27.0
SN Margin (Up/Down) [dB]: 3.0 / 3.0
Vendor ID (Local/Remote): TMMB / BDCM
Loss of Framing (Local/Remote): 0 / 0
Loss of Signal (Local/Remote): 0 / 0
Loss of Power (Local/Remote): 0 / 0
Loss of Link (Remote): 0
Error Seconds (Local/Remote): 5 / 0
FEC Errors (Up/Down): 1,273 / 0
CRC Errors (Up/Down): 1,273 / 1,548
HEC Errors (Up/Down): 250 / 919
The bold upload errors are a glitch in the firmware :(.
It hanging on for its dear life LOL
-
Thats not bad - 5 errored seconds in 9 hours looks ok to me.
Although atm Im unsure what to make of the BeBox error stats and their recording of errors.
Mines been switched to 3dB Fast, but I really havent seen as much difference as I thought...
or Annex M is taking away 5.5Mb of my downstream! - I was syncing in the 24000s prior to Annex M so thats a hell of a from my downstream for an extra 1.2Mb of upstream.
Uptime: 0 days, 0:36:31
Modulation: G.992.5 Annex M US 56
Bandwidth (Up/Down) [kbps/kbps]: 2,636 / 18,796
Data Transferred (Sent/Received) [KB/KB]: 88.00 / 170.00
Output Power (Up/Down) [dBm]: 13.0 / 18.0
Line Attenuation (Up/Down) [dB]: 5.5 / 12.5
SN Margin (Up/Down) [dB]: 3.5 / 3.5
Vendor ID (Local/Remote): TMMB / µ
Loss of Framing (Local/Remote): 4 / 0
Loss of Signal (Local/Remote): 1 / 0
Loss of Power (Local/Remote): 0 / 0
Loss of Link (Remote): 0
Error Seconds (Local/Remote): 1 / 0
FEC Errors (Up/Down): 0 / 1,326
CRC Errors (Up/Down): 7 / 0
HEC Errors (Up/Down): 2 / 0
-
My upload was lower the official Be* firmware. I reckon your problem is caused by the firmware. Be brave and go with the 7.4.x.x release. At least then you can change on the fly.
I just threw caution to the wind and it worked for me.
-
Hmmm Ive just used DMT to force a resync at 2.5 dB just out of curiousity and look what I see.
Uptime: 0 days, 0:08:56
Modulation: G.992.5 Annex M US 56
Bandwidth (Up/Down) [kbps/kbps]: 2,675 / 19,205
Data Transferred (Sent/Received) [KB/KB]: 63.00 / 479.00
Output Power (Up/Down) [dBm]: 13.0 / 17.5
Line Attenuation (Up/Down) [dB]: 5.5 / 12.5
SN Margin (Up/Down) [dB]: 3.5 / 2.5
Vendor ID (Local/Remote): TMMB / µ
Loss of Framing (Local/Remote): 4 / 0
Loss of Signal (Local/Remote): 1 / 0
Loss of Power (Local/Remote): 0 / 0
Loss of Link (Remote): 0
Error Seconds (Local/Remote): 1 / 0
FEC Errors (Up/Down): 0 / 1,820
CRC Errors (Up/Down): 7 / 0
HEC Errors (Up/Down): 12 / 0
Compare with my stats 10 mins ago. I wish the ST would have a reset counters or I damn well would have spotted that sooner
This is what Be said in the ticket
As you have requested, we switched your line to 3db SNR profile with fastpath.
So who do you believe eh? :-\
-
It must have got lost in translation :lol:
-
lol obviously.
Look now
FEC Errors (Up/Down): 0 / 6,094
Ticket chucked back at them.
Which also raises the query about what you were told this morning... Im obviously on a 3dB profile - with Interleaving,
-
>>Look now
:o
>>Which also raises the query about what you were told this morning
They must have different script in front of them. This is what I miss from Upstream Internet - suppose I am paying half the price. :(
If Upstream had ADSL2+ Annex M that would be nice for me.
-
True
Although one thing does occur... and Im not sure if this is conincidence - but I consistently seem to sync with 3.5dB SNRM both up and down. Surely theres not a 3.5dB profile?
-
And that's without any bitloading tweaking?
-
My latency has just gone crazy. The load balancer thought my links were down(hense the packet loss). Yet my speed is the same???
(https://forum.kitz.co.uk/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fb.imagehost.org%2F0883%2Fpacketlossmidmay3.jpg&hash=359fabc338039b3cda8d1b48cb31f338766c06ca)
-
>> My latency has just gone crazy.
I wasnt in last night so dont know what it was like here I'm afraid. :(
--------------------
BTW got this last night
We have double checked and the interleaving profile was not completely disabled. We have now disabled it.
Apologies for the mistake.
So there you go.. 3dB with Interleaving afterall!
Now syncing at
Bandwidth (Up/Down) [kbps/kbps]: 2,680 / 22,964
So Interleaving was loosing me around 3.5Mbps.
Looking at the new figures, an increase of circa 1350 upstream has lost me about 1600 kbps of downstream...
which is much more like it :)
Now if only Be didnt block those 2053kHz-2156kHz frequencies - then I'd have both full up and downstream.
-
I can't believe you loose that much with interleaving :o.
Don't try the new firmware. My modem was in a constant reboot loop all night.
I went to bed after the footy and was woken by my annoying sister at midnight because we had no internet. It took me from then till 6 in the morning to get it sorted because when I reset the modem to factory defaults it still was not working because be*s gateway decided to not respond to pings last night so pfSense thought I had no connection. So I switched the monitor IP to the Upstream Internets gateway and it worked.
(https://forum.kitz.co.uk/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fa.imagehost.org%2F0816%2Fpacketlossmidmay4.jpg&hash=ad7266ae10d97404f3571c1adc54285868053e14)
-
3Mbps was about what I "gained" when I went to fastpath. Seemed a bit much to me but I haven't bothered working it out. I sync a bit higher on an interleaved UKO line compared to an interleaved Be line but whether that's due to the router or the fact that SRA is active I dunno.
-
>> Don't try the new firmware. My modem was in a constant reboot loop all night.
:( Not good.
I think since I got Interleaving removed I'm not so much bothered - yeah it was nice that I was in the "24Mb Club" for a few weeks, but the 2.5Mbps upstream is good and Im still pretty happy with just a tad under 23Mb.
TBH my jaw still drops at how fast I can download.. and for what I use the net for, then generally speaking theres not really that much noticible difference.
>> Seemed a bit much to me but I haven't bothered working it out.
It does doesn't it? and me neither.
But looking back from my very first connection speed and then after it was removed I gained 5.5Mb by FastPath and 3dB
>> I sync a bit higher on an interleaved UKO line compared to an interleaved Be line
Anything to do with the gaps on Tones 476-499 (2053kHz-2156kHz) thats bound to make a difference if you're using them with UKO.
-
It wasn't the new firmware!
Guess what it was? The street lights. All the way down my street they fitted new street lights last year and I don't think there friends with ADSL2+.
The weird thing is that after the first disconnection the interference came in pulses of 10secs??? So my line would sync and then exactly 10secs later disconnect.
You will see why I twigged what it was last night(twice is to much of a coincidence). Also the street light are on LDR's and it was cloudy last night.
(https://forum.kitz.co.uk/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fb.imagehost.org%2F0176%2Fpacketlossmidmay5.jpg&hash=b6bce08b5162b145e5b95eafea7a4250bcd71fe1)
I think I am going to have to wite a script to switch me back to ADSL1 every night at about 20:45 >:( . I tried switching from Annex A to Annex M last night and neither could hold the connection. I would like to tell BT but they probably would not listen. I feel sorry for anyone on my street(or anywhere that uses these lamp posts) because most of them would not have a clue what to do.
I will leave the modems on tonight to see if it comes back up at about the same time as last time. Thank god I am not on the BT Profiles any more :lol:.
-
Strange if this has only just started happening with the street lights? Did you only notice it after the change of firmware?
BT wont be interested :( Street lighting is the councils responsibility:/
-
I think it is because I am on a 3db profile now so its obviously a bit more sensitive. I got the 3G backup in place for tonight though :lol: .
I might just have try setting 1 profile to 6db and see if it can hang on.
-
>> I think it is because I am on a 3db profile now so its obviously a bit more sensitive.
Ahh yes sorry forgot you got that at the same time.. so yes.
Shame you cant use DMT to try 4dB... damn firmware :(
-
:'(
I will do some more testing tonight and see what the results are but I can't mess to much because my sisters needs it to measure her contractions or something(All I know is I am going to be an uncle in a few days ;D).
-
I know it's a bit late, but re: 3.5dB SNR - the default SNR on Be is 6.5, not 6 - so perhaps the "3dB profile" actually sets 3.5dB
Rizla, UKO possibly use a lower Interleaving depth than Be, which could account for slightly higher sync? Just a thought :)
-
Just a quick update as I have just got an email back from ookla:
James,
Our software uses 2 parallel threads for each (upload & download).
-
Interesting - just had a look - and I'm not sure that it does, certainly on the bbmax speedtester.
Netstat shows two connections established, but one to lb1.namesco.net which appears to be just the webpage, and then when you run the test another connection to gonzales.namesco.net is opened.
Interestingly, speedtest.net appears to use two threads - and the London server is the same as the bbmax one anyway - so perhaps speedtest.net using the London server will give better results than the bbmax speedtester, which only uses one thread.
Good for testing single vs multi-threaded performance, i guess... however I find usenet a better multi-threaded tester anyway ;)
-
Rizla, UKO possibly use a lower Interleaving depth than Be, which could account for slightly higher sync? Just a thought :)
I think they both use a default depth of 64 Chris.
On reflection I think I know what it is. Be had a few tones blocked for some reason up around tone 456 or so IIRC. That'd be enough to explain the difference I think.
James you have my sympathies. I would suggest that the only realistic thing to do is to switch ISP to UKO as that way you can get SRA working on the lines. I had (still do to some extent) local noise issues and had to run my Be line at a margin of around 9dB to ensure it was stable. Since moving to UKO the line stays up for months at a time with a margin of around 6.5dB.
The downside of course is that they only offer 16/1Mbps.
I still can't understand why neither Be or UKO enable SRA as default. At least on UKO you can turn it on but I just don't understand Be/O2 :(
-
On reflection I think I know what it is. Be had a few tones blocked for some reason up around tone 456 or so IIRC. That'd be enough to explain the difference I think.
Yes, that struck me after I'd posted actually, after seeing Kitz's SNR graph with a nice big gap, I take it UKO don't have the same gap - and if that's the case I really can't understand Be's reasoning behind it.
SRA seems like a very useful feature that's disabled. It must be disabled for a reason... but I can't think why, and I don't really know enough about how it works (and any potential pitfalls!)
On the surface it does seem daft that it's disabled by default, and quite annoying that it simply isn't an option on Be. I did at first think it might be that some cheaper routers with a dodgy ADSL2+ implementation had been found not to handle SRA very well, but then of course Be and O2 send you a router, which you'd hope they might have tested to see how well SRA works.
So it remains a mystery - answers on a postcard!! ;)
-
UKO don't have the same gap now but I'm sure they did when I first joined. Hmmm I wonder if that was just on the Speedtouch and not the Netgear. I can't remember now.
-
>> I think I know what it is. Be had a few tones blocked for some reason up around tone 456 or so IIRC.
I bet without a doubt that it is - hence me mentioning it earlier (http://forum.kitz.co.uk/index.php?topic=2141.msg67575#msg67575) in the thread that Be/o2 block tones 476-499. I'm not aware of any other LLU2+ provider doing this (UKO/Sky/Bulldog etc).
Those blocked tones are now whats stopping me from getting the full 24Mb down now Im on Annex-M, which I could when on Annex-A. The additional upstream to 2680kbps has meant my down is limited to 23Mbps.
Bit bleeding pointless because theres no real reason I can see why on earth they are blocked... the excuse of "those frequencies cause problems" doesnt wash, because anyone on a decent line now gets tail off at even higher frequencies .. which are even more susceptible to noise than those blocked frequencies. :-X
-
Those blocked tones are now whats stopping me from getting the full 24Mb down now Im on Annex-M, which I could when on Annex-A. The additional upstream to 2680kbps has meant my down is limited to 23Mbps.
Oh you poor, unfortunate individual, having such a slow internet connection - you have my sympathies :lol: :-X
-
>> Oh you poor, unfortunate individual, having such a slow internet connection - you have my sympathies
lol :P
I know youre jealous :D
-
Bit bleeding pointless because theres no real reason I can see why on earth they are blocked
I do. They are right in the middle of a bit of spectrum used by the UK military - in fact they are having to use this more now due to new equipment that simply doesn't work as specced.
I can't in fact see how the other providers are permitted to use these tones and I think that Be/O2 are correct to block them.
-
There was a rumour at one point saying that they were allocated to emergency marine frequencies or something.. but I'm sure it was later found that that was a red herring.
I cant remember where it was I read that - I'll see if I can find it and post back the link.
-
Unfortunately I cant link to the thread where I saw the discussion since you have to be an (ISP) member to login and view.
Theres a bit of info here (http://bbs.adslguide.org.uk/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=technical&Number=3258846&page=11&view=expanded&sb=5&o=0&vc=1).. that predeceeds the real discussion going on in the Be Forum.
The first answer from Be was the Maritime frequencies but when that was disapproved..
(2174·5 kHz Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (GMDSS) distress and safety traffic by NBDP.)
.... they later came back with this
We carry out extensive testing with our network vendor to produce a fast, stable network. As part of this testing, we have identified a number of frequencies that commonly affect the stability of broadband lines, usually due to significant fluctuation of noise in these frequencies. This can affect the stability of a broadband line. This results in certain frequencies which have been identified as causing significant stability or noise issues being masked out - tones 476 to 499 fall into this category.
Theres been several "debates" as to why that doesnt stand up (the original thread was locked and others opened).
It has been ascertained that other LLU ISPs dont block it.
As yet there has been no response from Be.
--------
Edit - apologies there was a reply in another thread from Brett after users asked if individual lines could request removal of this block..
We have all had the update from the Network manager and take is our stand on this issue "we will not be unblocking these gaps on request" this is not a service we can offer.
Now this does not mean that we can not revisit this topic later in the year but as for now our road map is full, full of exciting new "services/tools" which have assigned resource’s to launch them.
-
You need to look at the UK frequency allocation chart, not any international ones.
Try looking at this one - http://www.onlineconversion.com/downloads/uk_frequency_allocations_chart.pdf
Zoom in to 400% and you'll find a little slot from 2173.5kHz to 2190.5kHz labelled "Mobile". Rather disingenuous that ;)
-
Was looking at the UK Frequency Allocation Table http://www.ofcom.org.uk/radiocomms/isu/ukfat/ukfat07.pdf
>> Zoom in to 400% and you'll find a little slot from 2173.5kHz to 2190.5kHz labelled "Mobile". Rather disingenuous that
If there is something at 2173.5 to 2190.5kHz (which would possibly include the Global Maritime Distress), ....
then why block 2053kHz to 2156kHz?... Because Im using the frequencies both before and after the blocked range.
-
Sorry I'm obviously having a brainstorm - I saw you mentioning 2174.5kHz, saw mobile on the graph and didn't read much further as I'd looked at this ages ago :lol:
The band affected is obviously 2045-2160kHz which as your link (page 22) shows :
a) is exclusively for military use;
b) doesn't appear to have any specific exemptions for low-power devices (it might have - I didn't look too closely);
c) has a nice little entry called "Land Mobile"
Footnotes 2 & 11 apply as does 19. You'll note that Ofcom is quite happy to license maritime mobile stations in this band which by a process of deduction should lead you all to realise that the UK military uses this band exclusively for land-based communications. With a little bit of digging you might even work out exactly what its used for but I'm afraid I can't tell you as (many years ago) I signed the Official Secrets Act :(
Now either Be are right and everyone else is wrong or there's something odd about the Speedtouch which requires them to block this band.
Its my opinion that Be are right not to be using the band and everyone else is wrong. If it does cause a problem then we'll find out as WBC rolls out.
-
It's an interesting one - like you say rizla, I think a few of us will be interested to see what BT do.
-
lol @ rizla agreeing with Be :lol:
>> Now either Be are right and everyone else is wrong or there's something odd about the Speedtouch which requires them to block this band.
I wish you could see the numerous threads on the "discussion" of the subject that went on a few months back, but reading between the lines it appears Be were caught out with this one.
- First of all they werent even aware they were blocked.
- Then they came up with the maritime frequencies - which was later disproved.
- Then they said it was down to the equipment vendor - but some exchanges arent configured this way and arent blocked... and theres been no real answer as to why no other LLU provider blocks them.
- The latest is that they reakon it causes instability issues and its a Be profile "We believe, with our equipment vendor, that we have selected the best profile that we can use through the UK".
So yep will be interesting to see what BT does.