Print

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

[kitz]

Yeah but then it means there are two different thresholds one for Interleaved and non Interleaved and still both of those values are still in the grey area,

No theres just the one.   If you breach the MTBE whilst non Interleaved, then you get interleaved.  If you breach the same MTBE when interleaved then it applies a further depth of interleaving/INP applied.  If you breach it again then you get capped, etc etc.

[kitz]

I notice that this morning my connection went interleaved.     I am surprised at this.  It was running along with about 250ES/per day and one or two SES. I can't see any obvious reason at all in my stats which are now 24/7.

Ive had a quick look too.   How strange because I cant see any obvious reason either. 

[kitz]

Well les-70 I left my sync speed cap at 26000 kbps for 14 days and still not interleaved, so have given up hope so reset the HG612 (power off for 30 mins) there is no point in trying to fool the DLM 

A little known fact is that before DLM is reduced your SNRm appears to be monitored. Depending on circumstance, you also have to satisfy a period of time with a steady SNRm of 'x'.

[NewtronStar]

Talking about reduced SNRm it looks like Starman is in that area his/her DS SNRm is 0.9dB at the moment this is one facinating line to watch.

[burakkucat]

Yes, indeed. I have just taken a look and see that the DS SNRM appears to be hovering around 1 dB. 

If the last three days are displayed, it is clear that some event has occurred . . . probably during the time when no data was being uploaded to MDWS.

Three days ago: DS a little above 6 dB, US a little below 7 dB. The delta (difference between DS & US) was ~0.7
Now: DS a little above 1 dB, US a little below 5 dB. The delta is ~3.8

[NewtronStar]

It's just a guess could Starman be is using the sync capping commands to sync higher than the attainable sync this would have a massive negative effect on the downstream SNRm 

[NewtronStar]

A little known fact is that before DLM is reduced your SNRm appears to be monitored. Depending on circumstance, you also have to satisfy a period of time with a steady SNRm of 'x'.

Thankyou Kitz have read your topic on DLM and you did mention the SNRm could be monitored if a line like my own swings alot over 24 hours, as you know there is nothing I can do to stop my SNRm fluctuating so the x could be 1dB variation threshold on the SNRm.

Though I have been seeing many large OprenReach vans working close to our premises over the last month, they seem to be working on two manhole covers and there was one yesterday at 12pm this caused the line to become unresponsive for 45 minutes.

[burakkucat]

It's just a guess could Starman be is using the sync capping commands to sync higher than the attainable sync this would have a massive negative effect on the downstream SNRm 

That certainly is worth a thought . . . but I am not sure if you can use the command to set a cap greater than the maximum.

[Chrysalis]

the attainable sync is not a cap so no.

[NewtronStar]

the attainable sync is not a cap so no.

Don't understand your answer ?
Can you set --Maxdatarate higher than attainable, for example say my DS attainable is 35000kbps and US attainable is 6000

would --maxdatarate 38000 7000 40000 work ?

[Ixel]

the attainable sync is not a cap so no.

Don't understand your answer ?
Can you set --Maxdatarate higher than attainable, for example say my DS attainable is 35000kbps and US attainable is 6000

would --maxdatarate 38000 7000 40000 work ?

I have tried this on the HG612 in the past, it didn't seem to work. However, on the ASUS DSL-AC68U I am able to specify a higher sync rate than the one set on the DSLAM, as well as change the minimum INP and maximum delay on the downstream (can't modify the upstream however). It's the only device I've found so far which can do this type of thing, unfortunately finding the stable soluiton to it is a tricky matter (for fastpath). I am persisting though.

[les-70]

 With BCM devices e.g. HG612 the cap is just a cap you can't beat the attainable.

[NewtronStar]

With BCM devices e.g. HG612 the cap is just a cap you can't beat the attainable.

say no more  I know what your upto but you can't beat the DLM 

[Chrysalis]

the attainable sync is not a cap so no.

Don't understand your answer ?
Can you set --Maxdatarate higher than attainable, for example say my DS attainable is 35000kbps and US attainable is 6000

would --maxdatarate 38000 7000 40000 work ?

The cap is what the banding is set to.

By default on a new line the banding will match the product spec so e.g. 80/20.

The attainable speed reported by the modem has no relation to the banding, it is simply estimating what the line can achieve on current noise margin and target snrm.

e.g. A line can have an attainable of 110mbit even tho its capped to 80mbit by the banding.

My line is capped to 80 yet its attainable is only 72-73.

There is nothing stopping you set a cap of say 90mbit on the modem, but I would think the DSLAM's own banding would come first and as such you wouldnt sync over 80mbit.

[les-70]

  I thought I would use this thread to add an observation concerning roseways's connection.  Starting in early Jan his line started getting extra errors and then exactly 20 days ago while he was in process of changing modem/routers his line went interleaved downstream.

 Since then he has had only 1-5 ES/day downstream.  His snrm has varied a little by ~0.5db and it puzzles me why the DLM has not backed off.  This is especially true as the level of interleaving is quite high and at the least a change back to lower interleaving would be  expected given the very low ES rates.  If nothing happens on his line soon I may be joining the FEC conspiracy theories.