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: DLM put me back on fast path after 4 months  (Read 7778 times)

Interceptor121

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 61
DLM put me back on fast path after 4 months
« Reply #30 on: August 05, 2016, 10:03:27 PM »

I don't think this makes sense. G.INP uses physical retransmission and therefore needs another bearer for retransmitted data. This bearer shows zero sync rate at the time you run the stats because it is usually idle. The bearer is not interleaved as it needs to transmit fast but it has a lot of error correction so that data is always received. The reason why received packets shows zero in bearer 1 could have to do with the fact that data is merged in the single buffer that is used to receive both errored and retransmitted data. Looking at newton stats the FEC overhead according to the formula of wwwombat is 4.2% but is not included in the data rate. The bearer one is never active unless retransmitting so generally the value can be neglected. Those overhead in the stats may be related to transmission and not to error correction. Anyway this drifting off topic

« Last Edit: August 05, 2016, 10:16:05 PM by Interceptor121 »
Logged

WWWombat

  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1674
Re: DLM put me back on fast path after 4 months
« Reply #31 on: August 05, 2016, 11:58:45 PM »

@ejs is right.

Original user data is broken into DTUs (as per @kitz's description page, for which a link was provided by @b*cat), and sent on bearer 0. Any DTUs that require retransmission are sent on the same bearer, with the same amount of FEC and interleaving protection as the original DTU.

Bearer 1 *only* carries management data between the two modems - no user data whatsoever.

Look at those statistics from @ejs again, for bearer 1. The "OR" (overhead rate) is 47.81 kbps down, 31.87 kbps up. Note that the "AgR" (aggregate rate, ie the sum of the overhead rate and the user data rate) is the same value. That is because the user rate is zero.

Bearers 0 and 1 can (and do) have independent levels of FEC, interleaving and retransmission defined. However, I am like most others, and lazily refer to the settings of bearer 0 alone. These are the ones that apply to our user data, and are the ones we care about. And, frankly, account for the biggest volume.

In @ejs' example, bearer 0 runs at 40,368kbps, while bearer 1 runs at just 48kbps - around 0.1% of the total bandwidth. It isn't worth talking about bearer 1. Not unless there is a very specialist topic under discussion.

That last number should offer a further pause for thought. If bearer 1 was used for retransmission, the whole scheme would fall apart if ever more than 0.1% of data needed retransmitting.
Logged

Interceptor121

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 61
Re: DLM put me back on fast path after 4 months
« Reply #32 on: August 06, 2016, 11:42:47 AM »

I found this that explains the protocol fairly complicated

https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-G.998.4-201501-I/en


9 PMS-TC function
The PMS-TC functional model consists of two latency paths. However, the multiplexing of overhead data and user data shall be restricted as described below.
Latency path #0 shall contain only the overhead channel and no user data (i.e., B0n=0). This latency path supports FEC and interleaving. Only a reduced number of combinations of L, N, R, and D shall be allowed for this latency path. These combinations are specified in the respective annexes.
Latency path #1 shall carry user data only for bearer #0 (i.e., B1n=0 for n≠0) and shall be protected by retransmission. Latency path #1 shall use the DTU framing as described in clauses 8.1 and 8.2.


9.2 FEC
For operation per Annex C, the FEC shall be the same as in [ITU-T G.993.2]. The interleaving used on Latency path #0 shall be the same convolutional interleaving as defined in [ITU-T G.993.2].

Now in consideration of all of this it seems to me that FEC is counted in the actual data rate reported by the modem is not considered overhead
So in the case of R=8 and N=147 FEC rate=5.4% if sync rate is 40000 and overhead is zero then is available data after FEC removal 94.6% of sync rate i.e. 37840?
Logged

ejs

  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2078
Re: DLM put me back on fast path after 4 months
« Reply #33 on: August 06, 2016, 12:39:00 PM »

No, the "sync speed" reported by the modem is the net data rate, it's net in that it's like your net pay, you don't need to subtract tax and national insurance, they've already been taken off. Unlike a payslip though, the modem does not report the "gross" rate like a payslip that shows your gross pay before deductions.

We've discussed two different overheads, the FEC, and a very small overhead for management messages. Neither should be subtracted from the net data rate reported by the modem.
Logged

Interceptor121

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 61
Re: DLM put me back on fast path after 4 months
« Reply #34 on: August 06, 2016, 03:20:40 PM »

Maybe you could make a judgment on my line with the OR values below

Code: [Select]
                        Bearer 0
INP:            51.00           0.00
INPRein:        1.00            0.00
delay:          0               0
PER:            0.00            9.84
OR:             0.01            26.00
AgR:            40048.20        6397.59

                        Bearer 1
INP:            2.50            0.00
INPRein:        2.50            0.00
delay:          0               0
PER:            16.06           0.01
OR:             47.81           0.01
AgR:            47.81           0.01

[Moderator edited to fix the broken [code][/code] tags.]
AgR=40096 Gross data rate without TCM=L(10496)*4000=41968 FEC overhead would seem 1872
I think there is also a trellis overhead but is negligible?
Logged

digitalnemesis

  • Reg Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 403
Re: DLM put me back on fast path after 4 months
« Reply #35 on: August 19, 2016, 03:50:15 PM »

Now my stats are:

Quote
B:              191             238
M:              1               1
T:              27              31
R:              2               16
S:              0.1219          0.9227
L:              12736           2211
D:              1               1
I:              194             255
N:              194             255
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]
 

anything