Print

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

[William Grimsley]

Hi guys!

Again, I apologise for being out of order the other day. I will try to be a little less "idiotic".

12 CRC's have occured on my line since we had a really squally and heavy snow shower here with a rumble of thunder earlier on. Do you think this is due to the thunder or due to high winds causing the trees to rub on my line?



Thanks!

William

[burakkucat]

Very difficult to give a satisfactory answer without being there, at the time.

If asked to give an opinion without knowing anything else about the circuit, I would say that the lightning discharge was the probable cause of the observed CRC errors.

[William Grimsley]

Just had a LOS.

[William Grimsley]

Oh, and another. I've turned off PhyR, is this the reason?

[ejs]

We can see that G.INP has been switched back on for the upstream.

I'm not sure if the PhyR settings have any effect, if you enable something that's not enabled or supported by the equipment at the other end, it will make no difference.

However, what got my attention was that bitswap and SRA aren't ticked. Bitswap and SRA should be enabled.

[William Grimsley]

However, what got my attention was that bitswap and SRA aren't ticked. Bitswap and SRA should be enabled.

They were on but apparently turning them off makes it more stable?

[Weaver]

@williamgrimsley - no the opposite of what you wrote. Bitswap and SRA improve reliability and performance, so should both be ticked. Unfortunately BT doesn't support SRA but there are LLU ISPs that do. Bitswap is an absolute must, unticking it will be very detrimental.

[William Grimsley]

@williamgrimsley - no the opposite of what you wrote. Bitswap and SRA improve reliability and performance, so should both be ticked. Unfortunately BT doesn't support SRA but there are LLU ISPs that do. Bitswap is an absolute must, unticking it will be very detrimental.

Oh my, whoops! With the amount of CRC's that have occured on my line, the banding will never release...

[gt94sss2]

@williamgrimsley - no the opposite of what you wrote. Bitswap and SRA improve reliability and performance, so should both be ticked. Unfortunately BT doesn't support SRA but there are LLU ISPs that do. Bitswap is an absolute must, unticking it will be very detrimental.

No harm enabling them both and as you say Bitswap should really be on.

Worth remembering though William has FTTC not ADSL so that all the cabinets are controlled by Openreach - its only an ADSL LLU ISP who can support SRA on their own DSLAMS - and there may only be one which actually does.

@williamgrimsley: I suggest you stop worrying about your ES or CRC count [they are very low and are likely to have been lower if you hadn't disabled bitswaps] and quit fiddling with your settings to maximise the chances of the banding going...

[William Grimsley]

@williamgrimsley: I suggest you stop worrying about your ES or CRC count [they are very low and are likely to have been lower if you hadn't disabled bitswaps] and quit fiddling with your settings to maximise the chances of the banding going...

I'm sorry.

[gt94sss2]

I'm sorry.

No need too  - you haven't done anything wrong but life is too short to worry about every since error.

From memory, before you induced DLM you had a decent line - you just need to let the DLM correct itself over time..

[ejs]

SRA is a mandatory requirement specified in BT SIN 498. No, BT don't appear to be doing anything with it currently on FTTC, but I don't think there's any reason not to enable it now anyway.

[William Grimsley]

I'm sorry.

No need too  - you haven't done anything wrong but life is too short to worry about every since error.

From memory, before you induced DLM you had a decent line - you just need to let the DLM correct itself over time..

Yeah, I sort of regret doing it now, because the line isn't in it's "correct" state. lol

SRA is a mandatory requirement specified in BT SIN 498. No, BT don't appear to be doing anything with it currently on FTTC, but I don't think there's any reason not to enable it now anyway.

That's interesting. Doesn't SRA stabalise the sync rate on resync?

[ejs]

SRA (Seamless Rate Adaptation) is for changing the line rate without the re-sync. It might be useful, along with SOS, for decreasing the line rate to avoid having to re-sync, to avoid interrupting things currently using the broadband. I suppose you could say it stabilises the sync rate, by decreasing it if necessary, at some later time after the connection is established.

[William Grimsley]

SRA (Seamless Rate Adaptation) is for changing the line rate without the re-sync. It might be useful, along with SOS, for decreasing the line rate to avoid having to re-sync, to avoid interrupting things currently using the broadband. I suppose you could say it stabilises the sync rate, by decreasing it if necessary, at some later time after the connection is established.

Oh right, surely to change the line rate the line has to resync?