Print

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

[kitz]

There will still be some lines that have to 'catch up' ie those that were reset/new lines/ and even migrated lines.   
Those will go straight to Mk2 - I should imagine these will be done when all the Mk1 -> Mk2 updates have been completed.

[kitz]

On a Huawei cabinet here,with a HG612, & I just had major work done on my line,finally got rid of the aluminum cable,  gone from 9Mb to 65MB, been up four days & I'm still waiting for a resync to see if speed creeps up a bit.
I now find G.INP is no longer active on my line. ,  So , I presume it's G.INP MK2 has kicked in, which is a shame, as with G.INP MK1, I was getting around a extra 6Mb plus with it.

Sounds more like you've had a reset and you will have to wait for the catch-ups.    If you've lost 6Mbps from the downstream then it sounds like you havent got Mk2, but the 'old profile' pre g.inp Mk1.   I havent looked at your stats to confirm whats going on with your line... but Mk2 should still apply downstream g.inp by default.

[KIAB]

On a Huawei cabinet here,with a HG612, & I just had major work done on my line,finally got rid of the aluminum cable,  gone from 9Mb to 65MB, been up four days & I'm still waiting for a resync to see if speed creeps up a bit.
I now find G.INP is no longer active on my line. ,  So , I presume it's G.INP MK2 has kicked in, which is a shame, as with G.INP MK1, I was getting around a extra 6Mb plus with it.

Sounds more like you've had a reset and you will have to wait for the catch-ups.    If you've lost 6Mbps from the downstream then it sounds like you havent got Mk2, but the 'old profile' pre g.inp Mk1.   I havent looked at your stats to confirm whats going on with your line... but Mk2 should still apply downstream g.inp by default.

Sorry Kitz, I was abit lacking in information, engineer did a DLM reset with his jdsu tester, doing so, it completely removed G.INP Mk1  , which had given me around a 6Mb increase previously.
Since Friday, only had one maybe two resync's & a loss of power, my fault that, but connection has stayed rock solid at around 65Mb, no changes,no speed increase, no G.INP Mk1 or Mk2 applied to my connection.

[lf2k]

@KIAB: looking on MDWS is looks like the reason you don't have G.INP is because you don't need it.  Before, you needed G.INP to get what you had and for it to be stable (before then you would've been interleaved which is why you'd have lost 6Mbps) - now you have a more stable line, you don't need interleaving or G.INP.

69/17.5 is a significant improvement compared to 45/8! 

[KIAB]

@KIAB: looking on MDWS is looks like the reason you don't have G.INP is because you don't need it.  Before, you needed G.INP to get what you had and for it to be stable (before then you would've been interleaved which is why you'd have lost 6Mbps) - now you have a more stable line, you don't need interleaving or G.INP.

69/17.5 is a significant improvement compared to 45/8! 

Well, it's taken nearly 5 years of complaining to higher powers in BT & OR, to finally get the aluminum replaced.
Made myself very, very unpopular , but I had no intention of backing down & letting them walk over me.
Very please with speed increase from 9-14Mb to 65Mb DL, & UL now 15Mb, previously around 3-5Mb.
I was hoping DLM would up the speed a bit more, but nothing so far, but I'm very satisify with what I now have.

Stats recorded 24 Jun 2015 14:18:52

DSLAM/MSAN type:           BDCM:0xa44f / v0xa44f
Modem/router firmware:     AnnexA version - A2pv6C038m.d24j
DSL mode:                  VDSL2 Profile 17a
Status:                    Showtime
Uptime:                    22 hours 47 min 39 sec
Resyncs:                   0 (since 24 Jun 2015 14:18:46)
         
            Downstream   Upstream
Line attenuation (dB):     17.8      0.0
Signal attenuation (dB):   Not available on VDSL2      
Connection speed (kbps):   68906      17350
SNR margin (dB):           6.3      6.1
Power (dBm):               13.8      7.4
Interleave depth:          1      1
INP:                       0      0
G.INP:                     Not enabled      

RSCorr/RS (%):             N/A      0.0808
RSUnCorr/RS (%):           N/A      0.0000
ES/hour:                   0      0

[loonylion]

I just got mk.IIed a few hours ago, I'm pretty peed off at the loss of upstream G.INP and consequential loss of upstream sync. And I'm still banded on downstream. my downstream SNR is almost 9 and has been high since MK.I was applied back in March. This line absolutely needs G.INP in both directions, what the hell are BT playing at?

[NewtronStar]

I just got mk.IIed a few hours ago, 

Once you've tasted the Mk1 in both directions nothing else comes close a good bit of technology and the fix is to cripple one part of the technology thats not a fix it's a downgrade.

[andyfitter]

And I'm still banded on downstream.

.

Same here. Been stuck at 66999 down since G.INP MK I  applied in March with around 8dB snrm. Bah

[Dray]

Same here. Been stuck at 66999 down since G.INP MK I  applied in March with around 8dB snrm. Bah

using what modem?

[andyfitter]

Unlocked HG612 with latest firmware - my stats are posted as andyf

Before G.INP I was using a shonky DSL-AC68U for many months and I think it got some very sticky banding added to my line.

[WWWombat]

My line swapped G.INP from Mk.I to Mk.II this morning.

Downstream, the INP setting went from 46 to 48, and some queue sizes changed, but otherwise all framing parameters stayed the same.

Upstream, bearer 0 reverted to INP=0, delay=0 (so will match a named line profile of "No Protection"). The framing changed to remove interleaving, but the FEC remained - now consuming about twice the bandwidth as in Mk.I, and back to identical values as pre-G.INP. My attainable speed dropped by 2Mbps (34.5 to 32.5), which was probably all explained by the extra FEC.

According to the Samknows tests, my UDP latency dropped after the resync, by about 0.5ms ... but it must be stressed that I've seen lower latency values while Mk.I has been in place (the Samknows tests can move around somewhat).

[mikelj]

And I'm still banded on downstream.

.

Same here. Been stuck at 66999 down since G.INP MK I  applied in March with around 8dB snrm. Bah

My DS has been banded at 60000 with a SNRM of 9dB since G.INP Mk 1 applied around March too. My Billion router regularly reports attainable as around 70000 and my ES are around 12 per week. Still don't understand why I'm banded.

[kitz]

Thanks for the updates.

@wombat.  Yep what I would have expected to see (and as usual) you're correct as to the reasons why upstream attainable has decreased and also about the delay.   I would expect that Mk.I should have slightly increased your downstream latency, but very minimally so not noticeable. I would also expect it to be slightly less on Mk.II but due to the small values I really cant see anyone noticing or them being able to say its affecting their line on a day to day basis.

>>> my UDP latency dropped after the resync, by about 0.5ms ... but it must be stressed that I've seen lower latency values while Mk.I

hmmm 

btw can you do me a favour please and see if you can check things like your R value from pre-INP to now that you are on G.INP Mk2.   Ive seen someone imply that theirs has increased.. and that they are now getting more FEC overheads.    I'd be interested on your line because I know its very stable and has no need for DLM intervention,  therefore should give a very good indication if there are differences or not.


----
PS.    Whats your upstream throughput like.  Have you experienced any loss in actual throughput speed.    I usually get circa 73.5/18.7. 

[WWWombat]

btw can you do me a favour please and see if you can check things like your R value from pre-INP to now that you are on G.INP Mk2.   Ive seen someone imply that theirs has increased.. and that they are now getting more FEC overheads.    I'd be interested on your line because I know its very stable and therefore should give a very good indication if there are differences or not.

Absolutely identical. It was one of the parameters I meant when I talked about framing, and I most certainly would have said something!

Before G.INP	---	Mk.I G.INP	---	Mk.II G.INP
Bearer 0 MSGc:           18              26 B:              239             237 M:              1               1 T:              23              42 R:              0               16 S:              0.0955          0.3781 L:              20104           5374 D:              1               1 I:              240             127 N:              240             254	---	Bearer 0 MSGc:           -6              -6 B:              130             97 M:              1               1 T:              0               0 R:              8               8 S:              0.0518          0.1554 L:              21468           5457 D:              16              8 I:              139             106 N:              139             106 Q:              16              8 V:              14              2 RxQueue:                57              39 TxQueue:                19              13 G.INP Framing:          18              18 G.INP lookback:         19              13 RRC bits:               24              24	---	Bearer 0 MSGc:           -6              26 B:              130             237 M:              1               1 T:              0               42 R:              8               16 S:              0.0518          0.3781 L:              21468           5374 D:              16              1 I:              139             127 N:              139             254 Q:              16              0 V:              14              0 RxQueue:                60              0 TxQueue:                20              0 G.INP Framing:          18              0 G.INP lookback:         20              0 RRC bits:               0               24
Bearer 0 INP:            0.00            0.00 INPRein:        0.00            0.00 delay:          0               0	---	Bearer 0 INP:            46.00           47.00 INPRein:        0.00            0.00 delay:          0               0	---	Bearer 0 INP:            48.00           0.00 INPRein:        0.00            0.00 delay:          0               0

Hope that layout works for everyone.

I would expect that Mk.I should have slightly increased your downstream latency, but very minimally so not noticeable. I would also expect it to be slightly less on Mk.II but due to the small values I really cant see anyone noticing or them being able to say its affecting their line on a day to day basis.

I remember estimating that the downstream interleaving settings probably amounted to 0.2ms; the framing parameters above suggest the extra upstream latency (in Mk.I) would have been worth half that (16*139 down vs 8*106 up), so 0.1ms.

I can't say that I am sure I can validly compare upstream and downstream in this way - I'd be happier calculating from a line that had a real "INP=3, delay=8" upstream setting.

However, I agree that it probably isn't noticeable.

I've attached the latency test results over the last month, so the variation can be seen. There were only 2 resyncs in that period, and I've highlighted both of them; the latter is the activation of Mk.II

[kitz]

Absolutely identical. It was one of the parameters I meant when I talked about framing, and I most certainly would have said something!

Thank you very much for providing those figures.  Layout works fine thanks
 
I'd suspected that any differences on other lines may have been more something to do with the stability of the line and why I was so interested in seeing yours.   As I can quite clearly see the MKII R,I,N values are the same pre-g.inp.. so that puts to bed any theories that as long as the modem is g.inp compatible then with Mk.II g.inp, the line does NOT experience any degradation or additional overheads than what they would have seen prior to the roll out.

Thanks also for the latency graph.  If Ive read it correctly, then a very rough guestimate would put your average latency at 13-13.25 and now it appears to be at about 12.5ms  As you say it is variable and early days, but on the face of it it does so far look like there perhaps has been a slight improvement?


You may have also missed by edit in my last post about throughput speed. I would be interested to see if you now have trouble reaching anything over 18Mbps on the upstream.  tyvm for all your input.