General Discussion
  >> Fibre Broadband


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.


Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | (show all)   Print Thread
Anonymous
(Unregistered)Thu 04-Oct-12 14:10:17
Print Post

Interleaving on FTTC lines


[link to this post]
 
Can ISPs request BT to force interleaving on or off on FTTC lines?
Standard User kasg
(experienced) Thu 04-Oct-12 14:31:41
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: Anonymous] [link to this post]
 
No - it is all decided by the DLM. An Openreach engineer can request that this be reset, which may turn interleaving off for a time, but DLM may well just switch it back on again after a day or two.

Kevin

plusnet Extra Fibre (80/20)
Using OpenDNS
Domains and web hosting with TSOHOST

Edited by kasg (Thu 04-Oct-12 14:32:57)

Standard User tommy45
(knowledge is power) Thu 04-Oct-12 15:22:01
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: Anonymous] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by Anonymous:
Can ISPs request BT to force interleaving on or off on FTTC lines?
Unfortunately Isp's are given very little or no real control over FTTC connections I agree that they should be able to control things , the customer should be given the option of having their line config controlled by DLM or it being set up by their isp and DLM not used ,
short sightedness from openreach management if you ask me, requiring an engineer to reset DLM, lol Is an option that should be available to all Isp's via a control panel and done remotely

Edited by tommy45 (Thu 04-Oct-12 15:23:44)


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.

Standard User Chrysalis
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Thu 04-Oct-12 16:26:44
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: tommy45] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by tommy45:
In reply to a post by Anonymous:
Can ISPs request BT to force interleaving on or off on FTTC lines?
Unfortunately Isp's are given very little or no real control over FTTC connections I agree that they should be able to control things , the customer should be given the option of having their line config controlled by DLM or it being set up by their isp and DLM not used ,
short sightedness from openreach management if you ask me, requiring an engineer to reset DLM, lol Is an option that should be available to all Isp's via a control panel and done remotely


indeed a huge benefit of LLU was the lack of DLM.

when I get FTTC I will defenitly want fast path and if I dont get it then tech support are in for a hard time.
Standard User Ignitionnet
(knowledge is power) Thu 04-Oct-12 16:49:25
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: Chrysalis] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by Chrysalis:
indeed a huge benefit of LLU was the lack of DLM.

when I get FTTC I will defenitly want fast path and if I dont get it then tech support are in for a hard time.


Can I ask why fast path is such an issue? Jitter is far more important than an extra few ms of baseline latency whatever the application, I speak as a guy who runs interactive applications, ssh, VoIP, etc, via the west coast USA on a nearly 200ms RTT link with sub-4ms jitter.
Standard User simon194
(member) Thu 04-Oct-12 17:10:22
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: Ignitionnet] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:
In reply to a post by Chrysalis:
indeed a huge benefit of LLU was the lack of DLM.

when I get FTTC I will defenitly want fast path and if I dont get it then tech support are in for a hard time.


Can I ask why fast path is such an issue? Jitter is far more important than an extra few ms of baseline latency whatever the application, I speak as a guy who runs interactive applications, ssh, VoIP, etc, via the west coast USA on a nearly 200ms RTT link with sub-4ms jitter.

I get 10-15ms pings with interleaving on and it wasn't much lower when the line was on fastpath so I don't really see what the probem is.
Standard User Ixel
(member) Thu 04-Oct-12 18:10:46
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: Chrysalis] [link to this post]
 
Interleaving on VDSL2 is no where near as bad as it was on ADSLx (1, 2, 2+). Unless interleaving is quite high (e.g. INP 5 or greater) pings are still quite low in my view. I'm currently on INP 3, delay 8, depth hovering around 1000, and I am getting 16ms-18ms to bbc.co.uk.
Standard User jchamier
(knowledge is power) Thu 04-Oct-12 19:06:31
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: Ixel] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by Ixel:
Interleaving on VDSL2 is no where near as bad as it was on ADSLx (1, 2, 2+). Unless interleaving is quite high (e.g. INP 5 or greater) pings are still quite low in my view. I'm currently on INP 3, delay 8, depth hovering around 1000, and I am getting 16ms-18ms to bbc.co.uk.


I'm getting pings of 17-18ms to bbc.co.uk and my jitter is around 0.22ms on BT Infinity 2 - I believe interleave has turned itself on here too. Dropped from 51meg on install to 46meg and seems to be holding.

(Jitter measured by Samknows box)

James BT Infinity 2 19/09/2012 - Estimate 44.6/6.5 - Install 52/12 - Actual 46 / 8 Mbps
13 years of broadband - ntl:(512k/1M)/BTbusiness(2M)/Metronet(2M)/Bulldog(8M/16M)/BE(16M)/BT FTTC(50M)
Standard User RobertoS
(sensei) Thu 04-Oct-12 19:32:42
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: Ixel] [link to this post]
 
Billford's BQM could be seen swapping interleaving on and off, and it happened to me once or twice on 40/10. Mostly fast path. Both on IDNet.

IIRC the difference was about 5ms, from 13 going up to 18.

Which reminds me, for a fiver I can now have a static IP again and see how mine is. Could be useful!

My broadband basic info/help site - www.robertos.me.uk
Domains,website and mail hosting - Tsohost. Connection - Plusnet Extra Fibre (FTTC). Sync ~ 56.0/13.9Mbps @ 600m.

"Where talent is a dwarf, self-esteem is a giant." - Jean-Antoine Petit-Senn.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Allergy information: This post was manufactured in an environment where nuts are present. It may include traces of understatement, litotes and humour.
Standard User jchamier
(knowledge is power) Thu 04-Oct-12 20:04:18
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: RobertoS] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by RobertoS:
Billford's BQM could be seen swapping interleaving on and off, and it happened to me once or twice on 40/10. Mostly fast path. Both on IDNet. IIRC the difference was about 5ms, from 13 going up to 18.
Which reminds me, for a fiver I can now have a static IP again and see how mine is. Could be useful!


Yeah, the only downside of BT Infinity and Sky is the lack of static IP - and the only place I've noticed this lack is on the BQM !! Everything else I thought I used it for is happy with a DynDns.

James BT Infinity 2 19/09/2012 - Estimate 44.6/6.5 - Install 52/12 - Actual 46 / 8 Mbps
13 years of broadband - ntl:(512k/1M)/BTbusiness(2M)/Metronet(2M)/Bulldog(8M/16M)/BE(16M)/BT FTTC(50M)
Standard User tommy45
(knowledge is power) Thu 04-Oct-12 20:04:38
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: Ixel] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by Ixel:
Interleaving on VDSL2 is no where near as bad as it was on ADSLx (1, 2, 2+). Unless interleaving is quite high (e.g. INP 5 or greater) pings are still quite low in my view. I'm currently on INP 3, delay 8, depth hovering around 1000, and I am getting 16ms-18ms to bbc.co.uk.
Thing worrying thing is that DLM is able and capable of basically borking things on that front, as well as stealing sync too,
The end user who is paying should be given the choice of having a connection free from DLM and having fast path if they so desire it , Apart from one or two of the mass market Isp's insisting on it, I see no reason why those smaller ISP's could not do this once openreach recovered from their senior moment or three ,

Standard User jchamier
(knowledge is power) Thu 04-Oct-12 20:36:16
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: tommy45] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by tommy45:
Thing worrying thing is that DLM is able and capable of basically borking things on that front, as well as stealing sync too, The end user who is paying should be given the choice of having a connection free from DLM and having fast path if they so desire it , Apart from one or two of the mass market Isp's insisting on it, I see no reason why those smaller ISP's could not do this once openreach recovered from their senior moment or three ,


You're assuming DLM is there to break things. In fact its there because 99% of end users actually want a working internet connection - rather than one that is unusable for most of the day.

James BT Infinity 2 19/09/2012 - Estimate 44.6/6.5 - Install 52/12 - Actual 46 / 8 Mbps
13 years of broadband - ntl:(512k/1M)/BTbusiness(2M)/Metronet(2M)/Bulldog(8M/16M)/BE(16M)/BT FTTC(50M)
Standard User Ixel
(member) Thu 04-Oct-12 21:16:02
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: jchamier] [link to this post]
 
Still, if you accept responsibility you should have the option of being able to override DLM, e.g. a fixed profile. For example, I would rather have 12dB SNRM target on downstream and no interleaving, as opposed to INP 3, depth 1000~ and delay 8.

The best I've come to modifying the target SNRM (by offset or by specifying a maximum sync rate on DS and US) is using the Fritz!Box 7390, it has options which appear to do what they state, even though the HG612 isn't able to (I don't think the HG612 --snr parameter was designed for VDSLx anyway, only ADSLx). In my brief testing the only thing I will say is that this does temporarily alter your minimum and maximum sync rate set by the DLM. I didn't really spend long enough with testing this though as I found the HG612 still syncs far better (more speed) and is far more stable compared to the FB 7390 modem chip.
Standard User RobertoS
(sensei) Thu 04-Oct-12 22:15:45
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: Ixel] [link to this post]
 
Yes re how the Fritz box does it. Uses a command it has to limit the rate, which indirectly alters the noise margin. In the same was as ADSL Max would normally give high noise margins once an 8128kbps sync was achieved.

I searched around for any way to rate limit on the HG612 but failed miserably.

My broadband basic info/help site - www.robertos.me.uk | Domains,website and mail hosting - Tsohost.
Connection - Plusnet Extra Fibre (FTTC). Sync ~ 56.0/13.9Mbps @ 600m. - BQM

"Where talent is a dwarf, self-esteem is a giant." - Jean-Antoine Petit-Senn.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Allergy information: This post was manufactured in an environment where nuts are present. It may include traces of understatement, litotes and humour.
Standard User asbokid
(member) Thu 04-Oct-12 22:21:44
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: Ixel] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by Ixel:
The best I've come to modifying the target SNRM (by offset or by specifying a maximum sync rate on DS and US) is using the Fritz!Box 7390, it has options which appear to do what they state

Any chance of some proof of this, please?!
even though the HG612 isn't able to (I don't think the HG612 --snr parameter was designed for VDSLx anyway, only ADSLx).

By all accounts (except yours), the DLM algorithm in the MSAN firmware sets the target SNR margin. This cannot be over-ridden by the VDSL2 CPE. Not by the Lantiq, not by the Ikanos, not by the Broadcom.. none of them can over-ride the DLM wink
I didn't really spend long enough with testing this though as I found the HG612 still syncs far better (more speed) and is far more stable compared to the FB 7390 modem chip.

What happened with the Cisco 887VA VDSL2 modem-router you were heralding a few months ago?

Back in June you were claiming that it was notably superior in performance to the Huawei (in spite of sharing the same chipset). This was your claim:
In the speed test the Cisco 887VA gets around 1Mbps better speed [than the HG612] on both download and upload.

The depressing thing is that some people might follow your advice. Only to squander £200, £300, maybe even £500 on a replacement VDSL2 modem.
And almost certainly it won't function any better than the modem supplied free by BT!

Cui bono? wink

cheers, a

Edited by asbokid (Thu 04-Oct-12 22:22:49)

Standard User RobertoS
(sensei) Thu 04-Oct-12 22:32:36
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: asbokid] [link to this post]
 
I went through an earlier post of his with fairly good proof. That's where I picked up on the Rate Limiting command, which is what he uses. See my previous post.

I'm sure he is right. As are you when you say trying to set the sync-time SNRM on the HG612 doesn't work. In fact in my experiments it really messes (in a small way) your syncs.

The rate limiting parameter is absent in xdslcmd frown. Which probaly means it isn't available on the chipset. But you're the guy who will find it if it does exist!

Deprecated in the current OR SIN of course - newly introduced as it wasn't there before they added the self-install modem or modem/router specs.

My broadband basic info/help site - www.robertos.me.uk | Domains,website and mail hosting - Tsohost.
Connection - Plusnet Extra Fibre (FTTC). Sync ~ 56.0/13.9Mbps @ 600m. - BQM

"Where talent is a dwarf, self-esteem is a giant." - Jean-Antoine Petit-Senn.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Allergy information: This post was manufactured in an environment where nuts are present. It may include traces of understatement, litotes and humour.
Standard User tommy45
(knowledge is power) Thu 04-Oct-12 22:36:08
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: jchamier] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by jchamier:
In reply to a post by tommy45:
Thing worrying thing is that DLM is able and capable of basically borking things on that front, as well as stealing sync too, The end user who is paying should be given the choice of having a connection free from DLM and having fast path if they so desire it , Apart from one or two of the mass market Isp's insisting on it, I see no reason why those smaller ISP's could not do this once openreach recovered from their senior moment or three ,


You're assuming DLM is there to break things. In fact its there because 99% of end users actually want a working internet connection - rather than one that is unusable for most of the day.
Well for me it would break things, as the latency would increase, by an unknown quantity , But as said the customers should be given the choice as we all use our Internet connections in different ways , As for not being able to use the connection most of the day, that is no longer the case and hasn't been for ages, The broadcom chipset seems able to handle the interference better than the other conexant netgear router did if that was the reason, but i'm on a 3db profile and fastpath , oh and when interleave and INP was applied that made little difference So it IMO borks the connection

Standard User Ixel
(member) Thu 04-Oct-12 22:41:10
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: asbokid] [link to this post]
 
I did post some proof on the kitz forum. But I didn't continue testing for reasons as stated, but I can't say I was encouraged to continue testing given your replies either.

If people wish to try this, that's their perogative, but I found from the small testing period that it didn't influence DLM to increase my profile (reduce interleaving) any quicker, or at all. Perhaps if I had given it more time it may have.

Can you explain why my IP profile was lower, my speed was lower, and my min rates accordingly adjusted, when I was performing a sync rate cap on my FB7390 during the testing? Matching what I virtually set the rates to. I know you're still going to doubt me whatever I post, even if I went back to testing to try and give you more and more proof, so I won't waste my time.

As for my Cisco 887VA, I sold it. I don't have to justify my reasons why. Perhaps it's best that I avoid any further participation on forums with any information I find and share, in future.

Thanks for your reply.

Edited by Ixel (Thu 04-Oct-12 22:48:50)

Standard User jchamier
(knowledge is power) Thu 04-Oct-12 23:14:29
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: tommy45] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by tommy45:
Well for me it would break things, as the latency would increase, by an unknown quantity ,


On ADSL the latency increase could be 5ms or even more with interleaving. I've read here that on VDSL the difference is 1ms or less.

Really can anyone tell the difference in 1ms latency? Especially if a specific server you connect to has a CPU load issue (due to faulty code) is more likely to be late in replying by upto 1 or 2 seconds?

James BT Infinity 2 19/09/2012 - Estimate 44.6/6.5 - Install 52/12 - Actual 46 / 8 Mbps
13 years of broadband - ntl:(512k/1M)/BTbusiness(2M)/Metronet(2M)/Bulldog(8M/16M)/BE(16M)/BT FTTC(50M)
Standard User tommy45
(knowledge is power) Fri 05-Oct-12 00:05:35
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: jchamier] [link to this post]
 
But that was the personal experience of one FTTC customer & in all fairness only is representative of that lines characteristics ,

As for the remainder it will be a "Post code lottery "so to speak,So they could well see a very different picture

And "base latency" ,s also Dependant on where in the country you happen to live or work, and of course the ISP's Peering as well as it's backhaul transits will play a significant part also in cases where BTwholsale wbc backhaul/peering isn't used

But the point remains the bill paying customer should be given the choice of what they want ,is that really asking too much, considering that VDSL is supposed to be the future?

Edited by tommy45 (Fri 05-Oct-12 00:08:12)

Standard User DrTeeth
(knowledge is power) Fri 05-Oct-12 04:18:14
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: Ixel] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by Ixel:
As for my Cisco 887VA, I sold it. I don't have to justify my reasons why. Perhaps it's best that I avoid any further participation on forums with any information I find and share, in future.

Thanks for your reply.

If you unable to take criticism or partake in valid discussion your withdrawal is probably for the best.

DrT

Stress - the condition brought about by having to resist the temptation to beat the living daylights out of someone who richly deserves it.
Standard User jchamier
(knowledge is power) Fri 05-Oct-12 08:14:54
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: tommy45] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by tommy45:
But the point remains the bill paying customer should be given the choice of what they want ,is that really asking too much, considering that VDSL is supposed to be the future?


I see your point - but its to a price. Adding more options (and more complex options such as interleave) complicates the product. Its possible in a few years when the rollout is complete that Openreach may offer more choices. Who knows.

There is still choice if you have money, as there always was, with "leased lines" - or EFM products.

James BT Infinity 2 19/09/2012 - Estimate 44.6/6.5 - Install 52/12 - Actual 46 / 8 Mbps
13 years of broadband - ntl:(512k/1M)/BTbusiness(2M)/Metronet(2M)/Bulldog(8M/16M)/BE(16M)/BT FTTC(50M)
Standard User Ixel
(member) Fri 05-Oct-12 09:02:22
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: DrTeeth] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by DrTeeth:
If you unable to take criticism or partake in valid discussion your withdrawal is probably for the best.

DrT


Thanks, but I wasn't actually replying to you. If you wish to discuss further on the topic though please keep it to a PM, and not drag this thread off-topic further. Criticism I can take, but when people ignore some proof and still criticise as if I never had submitted any proof is a bit idiotic. I feel as if I'm being treated as either untrusted or that I don't know what I'm doing. If anyone else wishes to pick at my previous reply then please, don't reply on this thread, send me a PM instead, thanks smile.

In reply to a post by jchamier:
I see your point - but its to a price. Adding more options (and more complex options such as interleave) complicates the product. Its possible in a few years when the rollout is complete that Openreach may offer more choices. Who knows.

There is still choice if you have money, as there always was, with "leased lines" - or EFM products.


I agree. But people who pay and accept responsibility should be given the option to override some of the line profile settings at their own risk (for example, requesting a fixed cap in order to increase SNRM which in turn would reduce ES (error seconds) and perhaps eventually influence DLM to remove interleaving. That's one thing I liked when I was with BE. Like the first ADSL rollout, options were limited and engineers were coming out to install and activate your service, and FTTC is no different really. Given time I imagine it will become more flexible and self-install.
Standard User kasg
(experienced) Fri 05-Oct-12 09:21:41
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: jchamier] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by jchamier:
On ADSL the latency increase could be 5ms or even more with interleaving. I've read here that on VDSL the difference is 1ms or less.

It varies. Without interleaving my pings are around 10ms, with interleaving, around 20ms.

Kevin

plusnet Extra Fibre (80/20)
Using OpenDNS
Domains and web hosting with TSOHOST

Edited by kasg (Fri 05-Oct-12 09:22:16)

Standard User RobertoS
(sensei) Fri 05-Oct-12 09:25:18
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: Ixel] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by Ixel:
Like the first ADSL rollout, options were limited and engineers were coming out to install and activate your service, and FTTC is no different really. Given time I imagine it will become more flexible and self-install.
See Section 2.4. There seems to be no expectation however of all lines being preconnected at the cabinet, so an enginer visit for that will be necessary for initial install. (Just like it is for ADSLx at the exchange).

There is also the following in Section 3.2.2:-
Note : It is the DLM system that sets the line profile, and this should not be interfered with by CPs/users setting rates, SNR margins etc. at the modem.


My broadband basic info/help site - www.robertos.me.uk | Domains,website and mail hosting - Tsohost.
Connection - Plusnet Extra Fibre (FTTC). Sync ~ 56.0/13.9Mbps @ 600m. - BQM

"Where talent is a dwarf, self-esteem is a giant." - Jean-Antoine Petit-Senn.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Allergy information: This post was manufactured in an environment where nuts are present. It may include traces of understatement, litotes and humour.
Standard User Ixel
(member) Fri 05-Oct-12 11:41:33
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: RobertoS] [link to this post]
 
Yes, but what I meant by self-install is that the engineer will not need to turn up at the premises, just the cabinet.
Standard User BatBoy
(legend) Fri 05-Oct-12 11:55:19
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: Ixel] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by Ixel:
In reply to a post by DrTeeth:
If you unable to take criticism or partake in valid discussion your withdrawal is probably for the best.

DrT


Thanks, but I wasn't actually replying to you. If you wish to discuss further on the topic though please keep it to a PM, and not drag this thread off-topic further. Criticism I can take, but when people ignore some proof and still criticise as if I never had submitted any proof is a bit idiotic. I feel as if I'm being treated as either untrusted or that I don't know what I'm doing. If anyone else wishes to pick at my previous reply then please, don't reply on this thread, send me a PM instead, thanks smile.
You seem at least surprised that people don't believe your claims to have had every VDSL2 modem/router under the sun. This isn't helped by your sudden desire to move the discussion to PM. I think valid concerns have been raised and if you do indeed have experience of all these devices, then that is very valuable and worthy of further exploration.

Am I right in thinking you're now using the supplied Openreach modem? And if so, is it unlocked and has it been modified from the default configuration?


_____________________________________________________________________________________________ this is not usenet __________________
Standard User Ixel
(member) Fri 05-Oct-12 12:21:36
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: BatBoy] [link to this post]
 
I just thought it would be better to keep any debates from possibly overwhelming this thread. I don't mind if people think I'm lieing or what not, that's their opinion and I openly accept that. If most people feel the information I'm sharing is just lies then I will happily keep future findings to myself.

Anyway, yes, I am now using the HG612 as a modem again, with the Fritz!Box 7390 connected to it as a router. The HG612 is unlocked, QoS disabled, firewall disabled, backdoor 301 connection disabled, and I am using the graph scripts to monitor the connection.

I feel the HG612 handles the connection stability better than the FB7390 and it does actually attain a slightly higher rate. I am having a few issues with my FB at the moment which is another reason for this switch back, things such as ghost calls, or when I end a landline call my phone rings again with nobody there, also crashes every few days. I am using the latest firmware too.
Standard User kitcat
(member) Fri 05-Oct-12 12:36:32
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: RobertoS] [link to this post]
 
RobertoS

The SIN link was a very interesting read.

Gives a very detailed view of the 'mechanics' of the whole FTTC system and the potentials for ISP and users to affect their own service if they try to stream more than the prioritised rate.

Also the effects of setting packet size differently.

I'm sure Batboy and others will find it a worthwhile read as well.

The parts about self install ISP modems makes you think the Openreach modem install actually looks quite neat and reasonable. Although I can understand those that think they could optimise it better for themselves and also the potenitals to mess it up.
Standard User RobertoS
(sensei) Fri 05-Oct-12 13:07:01
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: Ixel] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by Ixel:
Yes, but what I meant by self-install is that the engineer will not need to turn up at the premises, just the cabinet.
Which is what that SIN covers smile. Just not available for ISPs to order yet.

Then there is the problem of finding suitable modems or modem/routers. The ones "illegitimately" used by some people all appear to have drawbacks of one kind or other, as well as their advantages.

My broadband basic info/help site - www.robertos.me.uk | Domains,website and mail hosting - Tsohost.
Connection - Plusnet Extra Fibre (FTTC). Sync ~ 56.0/13.9Mbps @ 600m. - BQM

"Where talent is a dwarf, self-esteem is a giant." - Jean-Antoine Petit-Senn.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Allergy information: This post was manufactured in an environment where nuts are present. It may include traces of understatement, litotes and humour.
Standard User BatBoy
(legend) Fri 05-Oct-12 13:15:34
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: RobertoS] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by RobertoS:
Then there is the problem of finding suitable modems or modem/routers. The ones "illegitimately" used
The BT VDSL Line Interface Network Termination Point (NTP) is clearly shown to be before the modem in Figure 4 on page 15.


_____________________________________________________________________________________________ this is not usenet __________________
Standard User RobertoS
(sensei) Fri 05-Oct-12 14:06:03
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: BatBoy] [link to this post]
 
There are no devices other than the OR modems licensed/approved for connection to the Openreach VDSL2 supply from the cabinet.

You are as well aware as I of the specification required for that approval, which will not be relevant anyway until the VDSL2 system is opened to third-party modem connection.

Specifically,the first three paragraphs of Section 2.4 of this SIN. All SINs being primarily for CP information.

The contract for the supply is between the CP and Openreach. As such, Openreach are no doubt empowered in that contract to remove service from a line with equipment they have not themselves tested for compliance, if they become aware of such equipment being used. The SIN in itself is not part of any contract, so the absence in it of a ban on other equipment is not indicative of permission.

The seeming absence of any stipulation about this at the moment by ISPs to their end users is a matter between them and the user if service is withdrawn by Openreach. I accept this eventuality is highly unlikely.

I submit you already fully understood this, and think you are just playing games of no benefit whatsoever to other forum users looking for realistic advice on what they can and cannot do.

My broadband basic info/help site - www.robertos.me.uk | Domains,website and mail hosting - Tsohost.
Connection - Plusnet Extra Fibre (FTTC). Sync ~ 56.0/13.9Mbps @ 600m. - BQM

"Where talent is a dwarf, self-esteem is a giant." - Jean-Antoine Petit-Senn.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Allergy information: This post was manufactured in an environment where nuts are present. It may include traces of understatement, litotes and humour.
Standard User BatBoy
(legend) Fri 05-Oct-12 14:34:37
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: RobertoS] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by RobertoS:
There are no devices other than the OR modems licensed/approved for connection to the Openreach VDSL2 supply from the cabinet.

You are as well aware as I of the specification required for that approval, which will not be relevant anyway until the VDSL2 system is opened to third-party modem connection.

Specifically,the first three paragraphs of Section 2.4 of this SIN. All SINs being primarily for CP information.
That is for the "CP provided modem Product Variant" which isn't available yet. The figure I pointed to is for the currently available "Openreach Provided modem Product Variant" and clearly shows where the Network Termination Point is, which is before the modem. There is no requirement to use the Openreach Provided modem stated in that SIN.


_____________________________________________________________________________________________ this is not usenet __________________
Standard User RobertoS
(sensei) Fri 05-Oct-12 16:29:29
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: BatBoy] [link to this post]
 
You miss the point. The position of the demarcation point is irrelevant.

It is not permissible to connect non-BT-certified equipment to the network. Period. Always has been. Quite independent of broadband.

Go look at any phone handset available from reputable shops. All have certification.

If you can show that the equipment currently in use by some here, to replace the OR modem, has OR certification, then I agree with you it should be OK to attach.

My broadband basic info/help site - www.robertos.me.uk | Domains,website and mail hosting - Tsohost.
Connection - Plusnet Extra Fibre (FTTC). Sync ~ 56.0/13.9Mbps @ 600m. - BQM

"Where talent is a dwarf, self-esteem is a giant." - Jean-Antoine Petit-Senn.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Allergy information: This post was manufactured in an environment where nuts are present. It may include traces of understatement, litotes and humour.
Standard User BatBoy
(legend) Fri 05-Oct-12 17:02:20
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: RobertoS] [link to this post]
 
What certification?


_____________________________________________________________________________________________ this is not usenet __________________
Standard User panda
(committed) Fri 05-Oct-12 17:18:05
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: BatBoy] [link to this post]
 
The SIN is simplistically a technical description. The contractual T&C's of the service can be different.

The BTW contract says:
A VDSL2 modem will be supplied and connected to the data port of the service specific front plate. [...] The active NTE must be within reach of a power supply, and must remain connected to the power and data port of the service specific front plate at all times.
and
The Openreach physical network demarcation point within the End Userís premises is the NTE5 although Openreach will also install and maintain the active NTE.

How strictly it is enforced or whether the ISP passes this requirement on to the End User is another matter, but the contractual obligation exists.

Eats shoots and leaves.
Standard User simon194
(member) Fri 05-Oct-12 17:18:44
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: BatBoy] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by BatBoy:
What certification?

I was wondering that. I remember the green sticker things years ago but I though that was dropped. None of my phones have any mention of BT certification anywhere on the phone, base station or documentation.
Standard User simon194
(member) Fri 05-Oct-12 17:41:07
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: simon194] [link to this post]
 
I've worked it out now. It was the old BABT thing which is now TUV Sud certification.

Now the CE certification which comes under the TUV Sud certification means that a product meets all applicable EU directives so that means that my BiPAC 8200N which has the CE mark is certified to be used on a BT VDSL2 connection.
Standard User BatBoy
(legend) Fri 05-Oct-12 17:42:31
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: simon194] [link to this post]
 
I agree, I think it's the CE mark too.


_____________________________________________________________________________________________ this is not usenet __________________

Edited by BatBoy (Fri 05-Oct-12 17:43:13)

Standard User jchamier
(knowledge is power) Fri 05-Oct-12 17:55:29
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: RobertoS] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by RobertoS:
It is not permissible to connect non-BT-certified equipment to the network. Period. Always has been. Quite independent of broadband.


Wrong. It was never BT it was BABT (which is now part of Ofcom). It cannot be the operator certifying what is essentially a safety discussion - especially when the point of privatising BT was to allow competition.

Go look at any phone handset available from reputable shops. All have certification.


I believe BABT approval marks gone (green circle and the red triangle) - essentially replaced by the EU's CE mark, due to single market rules. BABT still exists as an organisation and is owned by the Germans according to wikipedia.

Even a BT branded telephone I have the box for here doesn't visibly have the green circle anymore - the unit itself has a CE mark on the base.

James BT Infinity 2 19/09/2012 - Estimate 44.6/6.5 - Install 52/12 - Actual 46 / 8 Mbps
13 years of broadband - ntl:(512k/1M)/BTbusiness(2M)/Metronet(2M)/Bulldog(8M/16M)/BE(16M)/BT FTTC(50M)

Edited by jchamier (Fri 05-Oct-12 17:58:07)

Standard User RobertoS
(sensei) Fri 05-Oct-12 18:12:07
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: simon194] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by simon194:
In reply to a post by BatBoy:
What certification?
I was wondering that. I remember the green sticker things years ago but I though that was dropped. None of my phones have any mention of BT certification anywhere on the phone, base station or documentation.
I've got a nasty feeling about that as well. The Telecomms Act 2003 repealed a whole load of stuff.

I'm not sure that BABT certification isn't what is needed now. Possibly it isn't, and I'm just out of date on the point.

More importantly, and in my opinion the clincher, are the opening four paragraphs of Section 2.4, of the SIN linked to earlier. If OR find equipment connected that they deem not to be compliant with their requirements for network connection, they reserve the right to withhold service.

We can be sure that equipment supplied by ISPs will have been through the OR testing. It is probable that externally obtained examples of the same products will also comply, but at this point in time that is hypothetical. It cannot be guaranteed that CP-modified firmware will not be needed.

We have no idea about the compliance of the kit currently being used by some people. We do know that all (both, or are there three modem/routers being used?) of them seem to have advantages and disadvantages. At this point in time they are not known to be compliant so should be considered illegitimate.

That being my statement the questioning of which by BatBoy is the basis of this sub-discussion.

I'm off to Homebase!

My broadband basic info/help site - www.robertos.me.uk | Domains,website and mail hosting - Tsohost.
Connection - Plusnet Extra Fibre (FTTC). Sync ~ 56.0/13.9Mbps @ 600m. - BQM

"Where talent is a dwarf, self-esteem is a giant." - Jean-Antoine Petit-Senn.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Allergy information: This post was manufactured in an environment where nuts are present. It may include traces of understatement, litotes and humour.
Standard User BatBoy
(legend) Fri 05-Oct-12 18:46:51
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: panda] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by panda:
The SIN is simplistically a technical description. The contractual T&C's of the service can be different.

The BTW contract says:
A VDSL2 modem will be supplied and connected to the data port of the service specific front plate. [...] The active NTE must be within reach of a power supply, and must remain connected to the power and data port of the service specific front plate at all times.
and
The Openreach physical network demarcation point within the End Userís premises is the NTE5 although Openreach will also install and maintain the active NTE.

How strictly it is enforced or whether the ISP passes this requirement on to the End User is another matter, but the contractual obligation exists.
There's nothing about that in my contract for BT Infinity.


_____________________________________________________________________________________________ this is not usenet __________________
Standard User BatBoy
(legend) Fri 05-Oct-12 19:10:08
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: RobertoS] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by RobertoS:
If you can show that the equipment currently in use by some here, to replace the OR modem, has OR certification, then I agree with you it should be OK to attach.
There you go, I think they all have the CE mark.


_____________________________________________________________________________________________ this is not usenet __________________
Standard User RobertoS
(sensei) Fri 05-Oct-12 19:35:18
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: BatBoy] [link to this post]
 
Nope!

The CE mark means it is approved for use in Europe. Agreed.

However, I was led astray by your "What certification" into half-remembering the now defunct BABT stuff applicable when the forerunner of the current BT was a nationalised company.

The BT network is now privately owned, and the owners have every right to specify what is or is not compliant with or connected to their network, subject to their network and its requirements being CE compatible. To this end, they will be providing a certification service to CPs.

Back to the SIN. If they don't like your kit they can tell you to disconnect it from their NTE. The fact it has a CE mark is nothing to do with it. If it doesn't have a CE mark, then obviously it shouldn't be in use here anyway.

As I said earlier in another post, the fact that ISPs are not communicating any restrictions to their customers does not mean the restrictions do not exist. In the (also previously stated) unlikely event that a user gets service withdrawn by Openreach, this becomes a civil matter between the user and the ISP.

My broadband basic info/help site - www.robertos.me.uk | Domains,website and mail hosting - Tsohost.
Connection - Plusnet Extra Fibre (FTTC). Sync ~ 56.0/13.9Mbps @ 600m. - BQM

"Where talent is a dwarf, self-esteem is a giant." - Jean-Antoine Petit-Senn.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Allergy information: This post was manufactured in an environment where nuts are present. It may include traces of understatement, litotes and humour.
Standard User BatBoy
(legend) Fri 05-Oct-12 19:42:52
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: RobertoS] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by RobertoS:
In reply to a post by BatBoy:
In reply to a post by RobertoS:
If you can show that the equipment currently in use by some here, to replace the OR modem, has OR certification, then I agree with you it should be OK to attach.
There you go, I think they all have the CE mark.

Nope!
So, I'll ask again - what certification?


_____________________________________________________________________________________________ this is not usenet __________________
Standard User RobertoS
(sensei) Fri 05-Oct-12 19:57:37
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: jchamier] [link to this post]
 
Basically yes, but the acceptability of user-purchased VDSL2 routers being connected does not automatically follow. See my reply a few seconds ago to BatBoy.

My broadband basic info/help site - www.robertos.me.uk | Domains,website and mail hosting - Tsohost.
Connection - Plusnet Extra Fibre (FTTC). Sync ~ 56.0/13.9Mbps @ 600m. - BQM

"Where talent is a dwarf, self-esteem is a giant." - Jean-Antoine Petit-Senn.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Allergy information: This post was manufactured in an environment where nuts are present. It may include traces of understatement, litotes and humour.
Standard User RobertoS
(sensei) Fri 05-Oct-12 20:22:29
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: BatBoy] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by BatBoy:
So, I'll ask again - what certification?
The near synonym, to wit the resultant documentation to the CP(s) in some normally accepted form, of the successful "compliance verification" of a particular model of VDSL2 modem or modem/router. One or more of said CPs having submitted such a model for such verification.

My broadband basic info/help site - www.robertos.me.uk | Domains,website and mail hosting - Tsohost.
Connection - Plusnet Extra Fibre (FTTC). Sync ~ 56.0/13.9Mbps @ 600m. - BQM

"Where talent is a dwarf, self-esteem is a giant." - Jean-Antoine Petit-Senn.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Allergy information: This post was manufactured in an environment where nuts are present. It may include traces of understatement, litotes and humour.
Standard User BatBoy
(legend) Fri 05-Oct-12 21:04:47
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: RobertoS] [link to this post]
 
Oh you mean this
2.4 CP provided modem Product Variant

Openreach intend to introduce a GEA-FTTC product variant that allows the CP to provide and be responsible for the users VDSL2 modem. Typically, this modem will be integrated with IP gateway functionality within a single device and connected to a single mains power source. CPs or their EUs will be responsible for maintaining the firmware of their modems and monitoring their connectivity and performance, typically via a TR-69[20] interface using CPE WAN Management Protocol (CWMP).

The CP provided modem and filtering devices must meet the requirements of this specification in order to provide reliable operation and to avoid harm to other VDSL2 lines sharing the same cable binder. Openreach reserves the right to withhold or limit service where potential violation of the Access Network Frequency Plan (ANFP)[10] or impact to another customerís service is detected.

In support of the technical requirements of CPE specified in this section, a test plan is in preparation to be used for compliance verification. Details of the test plan and supporting facilities are expected to be available Q4 2012.
So it doesn't currently exist
smile


_____________________________________________________________________________________________ this is not usenet __________________
Standard User Chrysalis
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Thu 13-Dec-12 17:35:14
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: Ignitionnet] [link to this post]
 
just seen this post sorry, I would probably be ok if interleaving was at a low level and as you say only a few extra ms.

But if my base latency was say doubled to over 30ms then I would consider that a problem.

Indeed I noticed that it seems I have 2 different gateways/routes available when I connect to ppp and one has a lower base latency but has visibly more jitter (not extremely high but is noticeable when running pings), the other much more stable but higher base latency and I did choose the latter. So in principle I agree with you as long as the base latency jump isnt large.
Standard User twds
(newbie) Thu 28-Aug-14 20:14:18
Print Post

Re: Interleaving on FTTC lines


[re: Anonymous] [link to this post]
 
My VDSL2 line suffered from noise, and after about ten disconnection interleaving was switch on.

It eventually stabilised, and then as written elsewhere, the DLM system resynched the line at around 0430, and it was removed.

The DLM system does seem very on the ball.

I am just waiting now for the max speed to reprofile at higher rate.
Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | (show all)   Print Thread

Jump to