In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

If you had to change a light bulb who would you trust more? A qualified electrician or a document on the internet.

Awkward question...
Considering I regularly deal with qualified electricians (and a good chunk of my job involves me diagnosing and fixing what the "electricians" have screwed up) I'd rather my Mother change the light bulb

Of course; the qualified electrician, but it's rather a weak analogy.
If you're trying to compare your "facts" (only in quotes as we don't yet know they're facts, as you still refuse to corroborate them) with stuff posted on the internet (and that you're the "qualified electrician" and the "document on the internet" is a document released by BT group, as required by Ofcom, there are a few problems: -
1. You haven't yet stated how you're qualified to make these claims (to the point we should take your statements over and above those in BT documentation).
2. All you've told us is you're a "computer engineer who fixes people's computers". That means nothing. I, along with hundreds on these forums, can "fix" computers, that means nothing. Being able to build or fix computers no more qualifies me to make wild or accurate claims about how BT group companies operate their xDSL networks than if I were a qualified lion-tamer.
3. Now if you were to tell us you're a senior systems or development engineer at BT's research facility near Ipswich, that would be a different matter. For now the only thing you've told us qualifies you to make claims refuting those made by Andrew (etc.) is that you're a "computer engineer who fixes people's computers".
4. I know several people who "fix computers" and not one of them knows the first thing about xDSL (other than what I've told them - and I'm no more qualified than the next person).
And lastly;
5. You expect us to believe the BT documentation is somehow flawed or misses out great big chunks of information. Are BT that devious (or incompetent) that they should deliberately publish erroneous documentation?

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

No I don't work for Plusnet either and I don't live near Sheffield.

See folks; he has at least two redeeming characteristics

I deactivated that. I think I covered all the tips and tweaks in the modem it's self. He did leave the old 2b here (which is fine) so I do have a spare.

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

"Supplied" is the key word, If somebody would like to scan documents from BT and post them, then that would be supplied, otherwise it's just posted.

I suppose it depends on whether the links (and many of them do) point to BT documents hosted on BT's web-servers.
If it's a BT document, and it's hosted by BT, I'd think it to be fairly trustworthy and factual (unless you subscribe to the theory BT are deliberately publishing erroneous documentation).

Do you use the HH3?

In reply to a post by adebov:

In reply to a post by robertcrowther:

"Supplied" is the key word, If somebody would like to scan documents from BT and post them, then that would be supplied, otherwise it's just posted.

I suppose it depends on whether the links (and many of them do) point to BT documents hosted on BT's web-servers.
If it's a BT document, and it's hosted by BT, I'd think it to be fairly trustworthy and factual (unless you subscribe to the theory BT are deliberately publishing erroneous documentation).

Upto a point it's trustworthy, but most of the BT documents do not contain the full information and therefore can't be used as primary sources. BT are well known for not sharing information pertaining to their core network. It's just a case of people looking at these documents and saying 2 + 2 = 5 , and as we know that's wrong.

No cus it a box of fail

I have a netgear WNDR 3700, but I do use the HH3 as a wireless AP on the third floor, but I chopped his balls off before I did this

What, if any, are your qualifications to "fix" computers?

So it's just congestion then?

To stop the tit for tat battle that has developed