Print

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

[bbargh219]

Hi All, long time reader, first time poster here. I've battled with issues with my broadband for years and settled on it never being up to scratch but have made some efforts in the past few months to improve things with connecting to master socket, using ethernet etc However I thought I had sorted it completely until a few weeks ago when interleaving was applied so manually capped my speed at 40 Mbps and good news 3 days later, it was removed and I removed the cap.

However, 2 days following this, interleaving applied again so manually capped the speed again but this time there has been no change for 14 days. I was after some advice as to when to expect interleaving to be removed again. My stats are which i'll post here only indicate 1 ES error on the downstream after 14 days which I think was generated on the resync anyway and no SES errors which I take as the main drivers behind interleaving being applied or removed. My question is, do I need to be stricter with the cap or do I need to give it more time, I don't understand how it was 3 days the first time but now 2 weeks and counting.

xdslcmd: ADSL driver and PHY status
Status: Showtime
Retrain Reason: 1
Last initialization procedure status:   0
Max:    Upstream rate = 27086 Kbps, Downstream rate = 73300 Kbps
Bearer: 0, Upstream rate = 20000 Kbps, Downstream rate = 39994 Kbps

Link Power State:       L0
Mode:                   VDSL2 Annex B
VDSL2 Profile:          Profile 17a
TPS-TC:                 PTM Mode(0x0)
Trellis:                U:ON /D:ON
Line Status:            No Defect
Training Status:        Showtime
                Down            Up
SNR (dB):        13.1            9.7
Attn(dB):        10.8            0.0
Pwr(dBm):        13.0           -0.2
                        VDSL2 framing
                        Bearer 0
MSGc:           18              150
B:              31              236
M:              1               1
T:              64              5
R:              10              16
S:              0.0255          0.3771
L:              13200           5410
D:              1283            1
I:              42              255
N:              42              255
                        Counters
                        Bearer 0
OHF:            500112132               350419
OHFErr:         2               2526
RS:             3064342815              4092996
RSCorr:         163797          12568
RSUnCorr:       2               0

                        Bearer 0
HEC:            0               0
OCD:            0               0
LCD:            0               0
Total Cells:    4090246533              0
Data Cells:     3659243280              0
Drop Cells:     0
Bit Errors:     0               0

ES:             816             201079
SES:            52              12744
UAS:            1006            12811862
AS:             1226885

                        Bearer 0
INP:            3.50            0.00
INPRein:        0.00            0.00
delay:          8               0
PER:            2.45            6.15
OR:             78.26           202.87
AgR:            40072.04        20203.27

Bitswap:        350120/350120           199/200

Total time = 1 days 6 hours 50 min 30 sec
FEC:            306855          18608
CRC:            17560           3808
ES:             816             201079
SES:            52              12744
UAS:            1006            12811862
LOS:            5               27
LOF:            47              27
LOM:            0               0
Latest 15 minutes time = 5 min 30 sec
FEC:            107             5
CRC:            0               0
ES:             0               0
SES:            0               0
UAS:            0               0
LOS:            0               0
LOF:            0               0
LOM:            0               0
Previous 15 minutes time = 15 min 0 sec
FEC:            18              7
CRC:            0               1
ES:             0               1
SES:            0               0
UAS:            0               0
LOS:            0               0
LOF:            0               0
LOM:            0               0
Latest 1 day time = 6 hours 50 min 30 sec
FEC:            1647            285
CRC:            0               56
ES:             0               51
SES:            0               0
UAS:            0               0
LOS:            0               0
LOF:            0               0
LOM:            0               0
Previous 1 day time = 24 hours 0 sec
FEC:            7256            801
CRC:            0               159
ES:             0               151
SES:            0               0
UAS:            0               0
LOS:            0               0
LOF:            0               0
LOM:            0               0
Since Link time = 14 days 4 hours 48 min 3 sec
FEC:            163797          12568
CRC:            2               2526
ES:             1               25140
SES:            0               1416
UAS:            0               1423895
LOS:            0               3
LOF:            0               3
LOM:            0               0

[meritez]

@bbargh219,

Welcome to kitz forum.

Who's your ISP?

[Weaver]

Welcome to the forum! Is interleave such a bad thing? Presumably you’re going to say ‘yes’

[bbargh219]

Hey all, ISP is BT, it's probably not that important for most applications but does reduce download speed to the 64 range with it applied but is in the 70 range without it which is useful for large downloads. I do a bit of online gaming also and it's definitely noticeable with it on. The other thing I noticed is that the attainable rate increases when interleaving applied, is that a known quirk? Attainable 74 with interleaving but only 70 without, seems odd.

[g3uiss]

Attainable is a theoretical figure calculated by the modem interleave changes this. So yes it is a quirk but meaningless really.

[Weaver]

> but does reduce download speed to the 64 range with it applied but is in the 70 range without it which is useful for large downloads.

Does this mean that you see a lower downstream sync rate when downstream interleave is on ? Or are you talking about measurements with a speed tester app? Just trying to make it very clear to myself. If it’s the former, then that says to me that when the sync rate is high conditions have improved quite a lot, and that is why DLM coincidentally feels it doesn’t need interleave, and when things do deteriorate then that’s when DLM feels the need to apply interleaving but then it happens to be running at a slower downstream sync rate anyway due to the worsened noise environment. I can’t see why there’s any link between sync rate and interleave on/off. Perhaps there is something there, but I’ve never heard of it.

[bbargh219]

Hi there,

So when it's running well sync rate is approx 70 Mbps and interleaving is off. However when interleaving applied sync rate drops to 64 Mbps. These are sync rates reported by Telnet cmd.

As mentioned I've manually capped downstream to 40 mpbs which produces very stable conditions but do far have not seen any sign of interleaving being removed after 2 weeks.

[tubaman]

I'm assuming that as there is no sign of G.INP in your stats that you are connected to an ECI cabinet? As interleaving was applied again very soon after you managed to remove it then DLM must have seen sufficient errors to reapply it, and I think you are likely to get stuck in that ping-pong situation even if you can persuade it to remove interleaving again.
You are also getting a significant number of ES on the upstream side so I wonder if that is why DLM is being stubborn and refusing to remove the interleaving this time?

[bbargh219]

ECI cab unfortunately. I don't know what is going on with upstream but never budges from maximum 20 Mbps so not worrying about it. Are errors on the upstream likely to impact interleaving being applied on the downstream or are they strictly independent from one another?

[g3uiss]

They are supposed to be independent and I have seen evidence of that, but it’s all mysterious as the DLM parameters changed from what was know originally. It’s quite normal in my experience for it to take over a month even with very low error rates. It’s contentious but I believe the DLM takes FEC into account as well.

[bbargh219]

Ok thanks. I do still get a number of FEC errors even when manually capped, in people's experience is 3000 to 7000 a day anything to be worried about, is that high or about average? Maybe internal wiring is an issue or the rj11 connecting socket to modem possibly?

[RealAleMadrid]

@bbargh219 FEC stands for Forward Error Correction, they are errors that haven't happened, they have been corrected. I had over 12 million a day on my 80/20 FTTC line since my last resync 28 days ago (mains power outage). I am not worried.

[bbargh219]

Ok so I've been fiddling around with this today (I know I should leave it be but couldn't resist). Removed the forced cap this evening and not sure if I've broken it even further by trying to be too clever.

Modem Resynced around 64 Mbps with an attainable of 74. Interleaving depth dropped from 1283 to 1251, not sure what this number means.

However running the BT Wholesale Speed Test indicated that the IP profile of my line was now in the 42 Mbps range  , not really sure what's going on here now.

[bbargh219]

Panic over. Power cycled my modem and IP profile now matches sync speed. Much lower error rate now as well compared with capped speed. Let's see what happens

[g3uiss]

Strongly suggest you leave it unless you believe there is a fault. Doesn’t sound like it though. Glad it’s back to where it was. It’s a good speed can’t be much you can’t do with that.