adsl2+ ip profiles

Since getting switched over to 21cn recently(ish) I've noticed that the old ip profiles seem not to apply (judging by speed tests).

It wasn't obvious at first as I tend to resync till I get a speed above and close to one of the cut off speeds.

Today for reasons unknown after years with interleave I got put back on to fast - causing a lower sync which is currently just below one of the (old?) cutoffs - 7220 then 7339 which in the past would have just missed 6500 and given 6000. I can still get more than 6meg downloading - so I did a bt speed test and it shows my profile as 6474.

Here's a screenshot - has this recently changed or is it normal for adsl2? (ignore the achieved speeds there was other traffic at the time - I can get tests to show throughput > 6meg.

http://www.andyqos.ukfsn.org/speedtest-bt.png

Edited by legume (Sun 17-Jul-11 23:10:28)

Speedtest's are not a conclusive method of knowing your throughput, so if you have no idea of what your sync was and is now then the rest is irreverent really as any speedtester site can be at max load at the time of testing as can the peering/routing used , if you sync is lower than it was before ,is the SNR lever higher? is how dlm works , that would also cause you to see a lower speed result

Edited by tommy45 (Sun 17-Jul-11 22:13:44)

In reply to a post by tommy45:

Speedtest's are not a conclusive method of knowing your throughput, so if you have no idea of what your sync was and is now then the rest is irreverent really as any speedtester site can be at max load at the time of testing as can the peering/routing used ,

I agree speed tests are not conclusive, but I have other methods as well that show the same.

I am not thinking my speed is too low - rather it's higher than I expect, it seems ip profiles have changed from what they used to be. As I have only recently switched to 21cn I am asking if this is normal for adsl2 or a recent change by BT.

I also have every 10 minute detailed stats from my router going back years - so I do know what my syncs are/were.

Looks like BT have indeed changed things - no more banded ip profiles

http://forum.kitz.co.uk/index.php/topic,9462.0.html

In reply to a post by tommy45:

Speedtest's are not a conclusive method of knowing your throughput, so if you have no idea of what your sync was and is now then the rest is irreverent

As an aside, I think you mean "irrelevant". "Irreverent" is subtly different .

To the meat of it. The OP was using the BT speed tester as he is talking about the IP profile it shows. It also gives the sync speed. .

As I'm sure you know. Just you didn't fully register what he was saying.

In reply to a post by legume:

Since getting switched over to 21cn recently(ish) I've noticed that the old ip profiles seem not to apply (judging by speed tests).

It wasn't obvious at first as I tend to resync till I get a speed above and close to one of the cut off speeds.

Today for reasons unknown after years with interleave I got put back on to fast - causing a lower sync which is currently just below one of the (old?) cutoffs - 7220 then 7339 which in the past would have just missed 6500 and given 6000. I can still get more than 6meg downloading - so I did a bt speed test and it shows my profile as 6474.

Here's a screenshot - has this recently changed or is it normal for adsl2? (ignore the achieved speeds there was other traffic at the time - I can get tests to show throughput > 6meg.

http://www.andyqos.ukfsn.org/speedtest-bt.png

http://community.plus.net/forum/index.php/topic,9552...

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

http://community.plus.net/forum/index.php/topic,9552...

Thanks for the link - good news.

It is indeed.

I am told by an even more reliable source that the new DLM also has a much less aggresive noise margin policy. I wasn't given any details though.

As long as there are no great bugs, it greatly decreases the arguments against BT Wholesale connections. I have always been vociferous in condemning the "old" DLM.

It seems to be along the lines of the Openreach one running on FTTC, which appears relatively unobtrusive compared to what we are used to.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

As an aside, I think you mean "irrelevant". "Irreverent" is subtly different .

Pedants of the English language, unite!

In reply to a post by burakkucat:

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

As an aside, I think you mean "irrelevant". "Irreverent" is subtly different .

Pedants of the English language, unite!

Your post is unreliable .