Kitz ADSL Broadband Information
adsl spacer  
Support this site
Home Broadband ISPs Tech Routers Wiki Forum
 
     
   Compare ISP   Rate your ISP
   Glossary   Glossary
 
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Pages: 1 2 [3]

Author Topic: Lost 1.1 dB on US  (Read 6310 times)

S.Stephenson

  • Reg Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 575
Re: Lost 1.1 dB on US
« Reply #30 on: July 03, 2016, 01:00:06 PM »

Distances will probably be up to 400m for G.Fast.
Logged

j0hn

  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 4098
Re: Lost 1.1 dB on US
« Reply #31 on: July 03, 2016, 01:36:28 PM »

I read up to 500-550m for G-Fast.
In some circumstances the copper length could be considerably longer on G-Fast than an ADSL based service. a graph posted a couple weeks ago suggests around (or just over) half of homes are within 500m of their local cabinet, within the scope for G-Fast from the cabinet. I know that I'm a bit of a pessimist, but I'm not as confident as others on OR going deeper into the network, from a DP, on the scale others are hoping.

If the majority of homes on a PCP cab are within G-Fast range, I fear the minority will be missing out. I also don't see BDUK style funding for when G-Fast doesn't make commercial sense. In those circumstances, I'd certainly still be monitoring my connection.

Actually thinking about it, if in my best case G-Fast scenario the only copper on my line was around 20-30m from my nearest underground DP, I'd still very much want to monitor my connection the same way I do now.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2016, 01:39:05 PM by j0hn »
Logged
Talktalk FTTP 550/75 - Speedtest - BQM

William Grimsley

  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1489
    • Newton Poppleford Weather
Re: Lost 1.1 dB on US
« Reply #32 on: July 03, 2016, 02:11:13 PM »

I'm 800 m, so I'm screwed anyway, maybe Openreach will have to install new cabinets eventually! :D
Logged

gt94sss2

  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1281
Re: Lost 1.1 dB on US
« Reply #33 on: July 03, 2016, 03:36:32 PM »

Apologies, just thought because distances may be very small, it's less likely for issues to go wrong?

In some ways, the speed achieved is going to be much more sensitive to copper line conditions with g.fast than FTTC
Logged

William Grimsley

  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1489
    • Newton Poppleford Weather
Re: Lost 1.1 dB on US
« Reply #34 on: July 03, 2016, 03:40:41 PM »

Really, I always thought that the less line length you had, the more reliable the connection was going to be. I didn't think that transmitting more data through a copper wire was going to cause it to degrade more?
Logged

gt94sss2

  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1281
Re: Lost 1.1 dB on US
« Reply #35 on: July 03, 2016, 03:43:08 PM »

g.fast etc. uses more frequencies to achieve the higher data rates so its more susceptible to external interference
Logged

William Grimsley

  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1489
    • Newton Poppleford Weather
Re: Lost 1.1 dB on US
« Reply #36 on: July 03, 2016, 03:44:20 PM »

Oh, I see. Is that why having an internal wiring fault on FTTC is more problematic than on ADSL both due to that and the higher throughput?
Logged

burakkucat

  • Respected
  • Senior Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 38300
  • Over the Rainbow Bridge
    • The ELRepo Project
Re: Lost 1.1 dB on US
« Reply #37 on: July 03, 2016, 09:01:43 PM »

The following list is ordered (left to right) in terms of increasing bandwidth --

G.992.1 < G.992.3 < G.992.5 < G.993.2 < G.9700/G.9701

The increasing bandwidth implies the usage of higher frequencies and the usage of higher frequencies requires us to consider broadband circuits as radio frequency transmission lines, not audio circuits.
Logged
:cat:  100% Linux and, previously, Unix. Co-founder of the ELRepo Project.

Please consider making a donation to support the running of this site.
Pages: 1 2 [3]
 

anything