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 ... 13 14 [15] 16 17

Author Topic: G.Inp on ECI Possibly Delayed  (Read 55941 times)

skyeci

  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1383
    • Line stats
Re: G.Inp on ECI Possibly Delayed
« Reply #210 on: February 20, 2018, 05:18:43 PM »

I'm hoping to get it first again  :P

It'll go live the week after I get it obviously.


lol.. ;D pigs might fly first  :D

Ornum

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16
Re: G.Inp on ECI Possibly Delayed
« Reply #211 on: February 22, 2018, 04:48:05 PM »

So is G.inp being rolled out right now for ECI cabs? Has anyone got it yet?
Logged

j0hn

  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 4098
Re: G.Inp on ECI Possibly Delayed
« Reply #212 on: February 22, 2018, 05:09:39 PM »

No news. No confirmed G.INP on ECI since the trial began.
Logged
Talktalk FTTP 550/75 - Speedtest - BQM

Chrysalis

  • Content Team
  • Addicted Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 7388
  • VM Gig1 - AAISP L2TP
Re: G.Inp on ECI Possibly Delayed
« Reply #213 on: February 24, 2018, 06:29:07 AM »

Wait till march 4th week.
Logged

GaryW

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 96
Re: G.Inp on ECI Possibly Delayed
« Reply #214 on: February 24, 2018, 12:12:11 PM »

Wait till march 4th week.

Beware the INPs of March?   :)

But seriously, is there a specific reason you mention that week?
Logged
EE 4G - Huawei B618s-22d - BT WHWF

underzone

  • Reg Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 442
Re: G.Inp on ECI Possibly Delayed
« Reply #215 on: February 24, 2018, 12:30:05 PM »

Chrysalis has a Kitz verified 'inside source'.

Take it as gospel...  :)
Logged

MrMike

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 41
Re: G.Inp on ECI Possibly Delayed
« Reply #216 on: February 24, 2018, 08:42:54 PM »

Instead of making a new thread, I thought I'd ask the question here. Can someone explain the 3db margin that BT has moved some connections on to. How does going from a target of 6dB down to 3dB help increase the throughput? Does it help reduce crosstalk across connections on the cabinet as connections will be quieter?
Logged

Zico

  • Reg Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 132
Re: G.Inp on ECI Possibly Delayed
« Reply #217 on: February 24, 2018, 10:20:13 PM »

Going from 6db to 3db would potentially increase the connection speed (and should subsequently mean a higher throughput). The lower margin won't decrease crosstalk (that's vectoring).
Logged

j0hn

  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 4098
Re: G.Inp on ECI Possibly Delayed
« Reply #218 on: February 24, 2018, 10:41:20 PM »

A lower target snrm is unrelated to crosstalk. As Zico mentions what you describe (lower noise acroos the whole cabinet, increasing speed) is Vectoring. It requires all or most lines to cooperate.
Lower snrm targets are done on an individual line basis.

A lower target SNRM basically allows more bits per tone to be used. M is Margin, or tolerance/threshold level.
If you look at my attached screenshot you can see the purple line (SNR per tone) above the bits.
In plain English, a lower SNR Margin increases the threshold at what tones are useable.

With a 6dB target SNRM all the tones on my line in U2 and D3 are unusable and empty.
My line is currently on a 3dB target SNRM.
Logged
Talktalk FTTP 550/75 - Speedtest - BQM

smallal

  • Reg Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
Re: G.Inp on ECI Possibly Delayed
« Reply #219 on: March 05, 2018, 12:10:55 AM »

Could be that G.INP was activated around 05:30 this morning on my line as it reset itself for the first time in months.
Old stats were:      Max. down 74615 - actual 73445 - S/N 6.3db
Today's new stats: Max. down 78889 - actual 73997 - S/N 9db
Now all it needs is for the DLM to get it's finger out and tweak the speed up & the target S/N down.
Pity they didn't do a DLM reset automatically so as to speed the improvement up.
Looks like G.INP wasn't activated, but probably a firmware update to the CAB (as reported elsewhere) was.
My improvement lasted a few days before the DLM had a total meltdown.
The max speed went up again by over 10mbps but the actual connection speed dropped like a stone to below 60mbps, with nightly resyncs (between 5 & 6am) just making things worse.
A call to BT resulted in an engineer callout, he tried 2 DLM resets but then gave up, then he did a lift & shift which sorted the problem.
Since the I'm stable, up time is over 9 days, no nightly resyncs and an acceptable speed.
                                 Upstream Downstream
Current Rate (kbps)    20000      77186
Max Rate (kbps)         29553      78363
SNR Margin (dB)           12.2          6.3
Line Atten (dB)               8.5          3.1

Still an improvement on my old connection speeds so worth the effort I suppose.
Let's see what happens later this month, if G.INP does get turned on again, will I get my old 80mbps profile back (after 2+ years)?
Logged

smallal

  • Reg Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
Re: G.Inp on ECI Possibly Delayed
« Reply #220 on: March 07, 2018, 04:29:50 PM »

The race is on! A G.FAST pod was bolted onto the side of my local street cabinet cabinet today.
Which will be live first - G.FAST or G.INP!
Logged

MrMike

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 41
Re: G.Inp on ECI Possibly Delayed
« Reply #221 on: March 07, 2018, 06:19:37 PM »

@smallal Had there been a prior announcement regarding G.Fast coming to your area, or are these pods appearing a complete surprise?
Logged

burakkucat

  • Respected
  • Senior Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 38300
  • Over the Rainbow Bridge
    • The ELRepo Project
Re: G.Inp on ECI Possibly Delayed
« Reply #222 on: March 07, 2018, 07:54:25 PM »

The race is on! A G.FAST pod was bolted onto the side of my local street cabinet cabinet today.
Which will be live first - G.FAST or G.INP!

G.998.4 (a.k.a. G.Inp) is a mandatory requirement for G.9700/G.9701 (a.k.a. G.Fast).  :)
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.

ejs

  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2078
Re: G.Inp on ECI Possibly Delayed
« Reply #223 on: March 07, 2018, 08:12:55 PM »

Strictly speaking, retransmission is an integral part of G.9701. It may well have been based on the scheme defined in G.998.4 (G.INP), but it is not actually G.998.4.
Logged

Ronski

  • Helpful
  • Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4302
Re: G.Inp on ECI Possibly Delayed
« Reply #224 on: March 07, 2018, 10:07:14 PM »

G.998.4 (a.k.a. G.Inp) is a mandatory requirement for G.9700/G.9701 (a.k.a. G.Fast).  :)

Not sure if BC is a little sleepy but I believe he was referring to g.inp on the ECI cabinet.
Logged
Formerly restrained by ECI and ali,  now surfing along at 550/52  ;D
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15] 16 17
 

anything