Print

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

[skyeci]

Any chance of an updated sheet?

AyeAye and Jasonkruys have also been enabled today.   Ive updated the list to show the values for data that we have so far.

We'd need to see a lot more of the before and after raw framing data to figure that out.

Ive added in the R & N values for those that have provided it.  Using the R&N values Ive also shown the  % of RS overhead.  Unfortunately we only have that data for 3 people.


-----
PS

If any of the guys who dont use MDWS want to give me their data in the same format so I can add to the list - please do.

Might be worth removing me for now as not g.inp enabled at the mo. Cheers

[kitz]

All those errors that caused the bursts of CRCs and ES's (upstream) that triggered the DLM intervention have now become FEC's, leaving a zero ES rate. That means DLM has deployed a solution that successfully defeats the noise, but it doesn't mean the noise itself has gone.

Ive tried to put some data together for SkyECI's line.  The only thing I note is that on the 19th he had 1071 Err Secs which should still be ILQ Amber (Sky use Standard profile).
I think Ive pondered before if on g.inp lines it is just the Err/Secs that are monitored.  By its nature, the use of g.inp should in theory reduce ErrSecs - however these are upstream which g.inp for the ECI's doesnt do and even if ILQ red had been triggered then the penalty seems rather harsh.      I asked last year if any of the parameters which are monitored have changed since g.inp - but the question was glossed over.   Since the ASSIA court-case they seem to have become really tight lipped on what they disclose and the only thing you can seem to obtain if you push is the MTBE and MTBR rate

From what Ian said last year, the default profiles are harsher.   Even the open profile now has interleaved applied.   We can see this is indeed the case as SkyECI's line is now interleaved despite the reset this morning.

Anyhow attached a breakdown of SkyECI's stats.

[kitz]

Might be worth removing me for now as not g.inp enabled at the mo. Cheers

Our above posts crossed.

Im leaving yours in - because it shows what happened immediately afterwards. 
Yours got worse, and particularly now that you have managed to get a reset then your line is one that is worth watching closer and hence me starting a spreadsheet showing any of your changes.

[skyeci]

Might be worth removing me for now as not g.inp enabled at the mo. Cheers

Our above posts crossed.

Im leaving yours in - because it shows what happened immediately afterwards. 
Yours got worse, and particularly now that you have managed to get a reset then your line is one that is worth watching closer and hence me starting a spreadsheet showing any of your changes.

Lol ok. New pair as well. Base sync rates are 57/20 for now. So will see how things progress

[kitz]

Hopefully mine will switch over at some point as well

Neither of mine have switched over yet either 

Nor me.  Our representation of members on ECI cabs is comparatively low, so it will be harder to gauge progress than it was with the Huawei's.   At one point the ECI cabs almost took over in popularity but since BT have only been installing Huaweis over the past year or so, there are now more Huaweis out in the field.

From MDWS there are 29 active members who are on ECI cabs yet only 9 are so far active.

Bearing in mind it took Openreach just over a month to apply the profile to the Huawei cabs, then took them another few weeks to catch up with the newer Huawei's then there's still another few weeks to go yet.

[atkinsong]

Ive added in the R & N values for those that have provided it.  Using the R&N values Ive also shown the  % of RS overhead.  Unfortunately we only have that data for 3 people.


-----
PS

If any of the guys who dont use MDWS want to give me their data in the same format so I can add to the list - please do.

Attached is my HG612 stats from this morning, before I switched to the Vigor.

Cheers

[Quotes corrected by roseway]

[tbailey2]

Nor me.

The Gods must have heard you - congratulations!  You are now a member of the club, I'm not yet though.

[daleski75]

So if I have read this correctly all cabinets will pretty much get g.inp but it's up to DLM if it's activated on your line?

[underzone]

Xmas has come early for kitz 

[kitz]

The Gods must have heard you - congratulations!  You are now a member of the club, I'm not yet though.

Gosh that is late in the day!  I cant recall any Huaweis being done at this time.  If they are doing them this late in the day, then that could speed things up quite a bit

Jeffers has also been enabled, so attached update.

So if I have read this correctly all cabinets will pretty much get g.inp but it's up to DLM if it's activated on your line?

Its a 2 stage process.   First of all the cabs are enabled.  Then the DLM is updated.   

TBH I suspect the ECIs were done a while ago and its only more recently that they decided to apply the DLM profiles.
Im still on IFTN:0xb204 / v0xb204 so it shows that the 206 update wasnt anything to do with g.inp.

[kitz]

Xmas has come early for kitz 

It's not really affected my line as Im not interleaved.   In theory its those who previously had interleaving who should benefit the most.
Ive just tested my latency and its practically the same - pinging the bbc previously gave me 11ms now Im getting 12ms

More interestingly I realise I must be on the Plusnet's new dedicated WBMC network.   4 ms to the RAS - nice!
I do seem to have lost the direct peering to my server though :/

Code: [Select]

C:\Users\kitz>tracert www.bbc.co.uk

Tracing route to www.bbc.net.uk [212.58.244.66]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  192.168.1.1
  2     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  3     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  4     4 ms     4 ms     4 ms  172.17.8.77
  5    12 ms    11 ms    11 ms  172.17.12.2
  6    12 ms    11 ms    11 ms  be2.pcn-ir01.plus.net [195.166.129.164]
  7    11 ms    11 ms    11 ms  195.99.125.136
  8    12 ms    11 ms    12 ms  peer2-et-1-3-0.telehouse.ukcore.bt.net [195.99.127.23]
  9    12 ms    12 ms    12 ms  194.74.65.42
 10     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 11     *     ^C
C:\Users\kitz>tracert kitz.co.uk

Tracing route to kitz.co.uk [185.24.98.37]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  192.168.1.1
  2     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  3     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  4     4 ms     4 ms     4 ms  172.17.8.77
  5    11 ms    11 ms    11 ms  172.17.12.2
  6    11 ms    11 ms    11 ms  be2.pcn-ir01.plus.net [195.166.129.164]
  7    11 ms    11 ms    11 ms  195.99.125.136
  8    11 ms    11 ms    11 ms  core1-hu0-1-0-1-1.colindale.ukcore.bt.net [195.99.127.8]
  9    11 ms    12 ms    11 ms  peer5-hu0-1-0-1.telehouse.ukcore.bt.net [195.99.127.21]
 10    11 ms    11 ms    11 ms  t2c4-et-3-3-0-0.uk-lon1.eu.bt.net [166.49.211.246]
 11    12 ms    11 ms    12 ms  82.112.101.73
 12    13 ms    14 ms    12 ms  ae-15.r02.londen03.uk.bb.gin.ntt.net [129.250.3.30]
 13    13 ms    12 ms    14 ms  ae-2.r02.londen01.uk.bb.gin.ntt.net [129.250.3.1]
 14    14 ms    13 ms    13 ms  ae-1.r03.londen01.uk.bb.gin.ntt.net [129.250.3.37]
 15    12 ms    12 ms    13 ms  62.73.179.150
 16    14 ms    14 ms    13 ms  switch-004.sl5.misp.co.uk [185.52.26.251]
 17    13 ms    12 ms    12 ms  kitz.servers.eqx.misp.co.uk [185.24.98.37]

Trace complete.
This (the PN network) probably explains the short downtime I had about a week or so ago that I mentioned.  I was so busy looking for something g.inp related that I never thought to check my Plusnet routing. 

[rp00]

I think I've joined G.INP club as well!

I'm still at work so can't get the exact stats but graph looks promising:)

https://i.imgur.com/GobXILY.png

[kitz]

PS - should mention with my stats, that my SNRm is currently at 7.4 dB.  For a while its been 7.2db   

7.4 dBis the best its been for a while barring one of my crosstalkers messing about.  I'm not quite sure how any of the g.inp settings could have affected my SNRM.
Im not sure if one of my crosstalkers has come back up yet.  Most of my crosstalk is and always has been across the adsl frequencies  (U0) and having just looked at this -  there's a chance that someone hasnt come back online.

[kitz]

All those errors that caused the bursts of CRCs and ES's (upstream) that triggered the DLM intervention have now become FEC's, leaving a zero ES rate. That means DLM has deployed a solution that successfully defeats the noise, but it doesn't mean the noise itself has gone.

Ive tried to put some data together for SkyECI's line.  The only thing I note is that on the 19th he had 1071 Err Secs which should still be ILQ Amber (Sky use Standard profile).
I think Ive pondered before if on g.inp lines it is just the Err/Secs that are monitored.  By its nature, the use of g.inp should in theory reduce ErrSecs - however these are upstream which g.inp for the ECI's doesnt do and even if ILQ red had been triggered then the penalty seems rather harsh.      I asked last year if any of the parameters which are monitored have changed since g.inp - but the question was glossed over.   Since the ASSIA court-case they seem to have become really tight lipped on what they disclose and the only thing you can seem to obtain if you push is the MTBE and MTBR rate

From what Ian said last year, the default profiles are harsher.   Even the open profile now has interleaved applied.   We can see this is indeed the case as SkyECI's line is now interleaved despite the reset this morning.

Anyhow attached a breakdown of SkyECI's stats.

---
ETA

I'm assuming that unless anything drastic happens with skyeci's line, then he will get g.inp again once all the other updates have been done.  In a similar way to how the Huawei catchups for DLM resets didnt start to occur until about a month or so afterwards.

[NewtronStar]

Kitz has a G symbol on MDWS  and those DS errored seconds are going to disappear off the graph after 24 hours.