|
|
Hi,
I have today been connected to Zen broadband on the "up to 80Mbit" connection, which was promised to be around 50Mbit. However, having been connected, I am only getting 42Mbit.
Here are the modem stats:
| Text | 1
23
45
67
| Type VDSL
Status UpUptime 0 days 1 hours 16 mins 49 secs
Line Rate (Down / Up) 42551 kbps / 8079 kbpsNoise Margin (Down / Up) 5.8 dB / 6.1 dB
Attenuation (Down / Up) 17.3 dB / 8.5 dBPower (Down / Up) 11.8 dBm / -1.1 dBm |
Are these acceptable?
The one that I think it affecting my connection is the poor state of the master socket, or at least the wiring leading up to it. The BT line is actually coming in inside the garage on the opposite side of the house wall, which then goes through some junction box, over the ceiling into the living on the other there.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/82c5ne6olw5r2ra/2015-09-08...
https://www.dropbox.com/s/gseqzccow3fwcng/2015-09-08...
Once there, it goes through another junction box before going into a master socket.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/odqyh0gbedobagj/2015-09-08...
From what I can see, only two wires are connected from the point of entry in the garage to the master socket. Can I just replace it myself, leaving the master socket where it is? Or better yet, have the master socket moved to the garage. I can then run a CAT5 cable from the modem back to the house into switches etc.
Now I know I am not legally allowed to do it but... will anyone notice? If it's a big no-no, can I get Zen (they also supply the line for me, but it's BT's anyway) or Openreach to relocate the socket for £? Or will they refuse to do this?
Thanks
CJ
|
|
|
Might be noise pickup from running alongside the power distribution board
The junctions in themselves look clean and dry and so should not be leading to massive issues, location of joints may be increasing noise pickup i.e. rf noise from mains
Master socket relocate if £125+ (exact figure escapes mind at the moment)
The black insulation tape and a junction box hanging in the air suggests someone has already had a go at some DIY on that wiring anyway
|
|
The author of the above post is a thinkbroadband staff member. It may not constitute an official statement on behalf of thinkbroadband.
|
|
|
|
If the OP is compentant and has the right tools then yes, relocating the master in the garage and away from the mains would be a good idea. Obviously need to heed warnings of imminent death/injury/prosecution/termination of service, but as long as they manage not to wire line ( or themselves) to the mains I doubt anyone or openreach will bother them.
|
|
Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.
|
|
|
|
Thanks Andrew. Blimey, that's expensive... I am going to try and put a new socket in place, leaving the existing extension/wiring in place (in case I break it!). I'll also move the main thick cable away from the wall as, like you say, it's very close to the power cables.
Regarding the sync speed with my stats - do these look OK? I know there are a lot of calculators for line attenuation in ADSL/ADSL2+ but none for VDSL, so I am not sure how these compare.
|
|
|
|
Noting all the warnings above, on a nice sunny day, I think I would temporarily install a socket at the Electricity Head junction (disconnecting the current internal wiring), plugging the modem/router in and seeing if that makes a difference.
John
|
|
|
The wiring in those junction boxes is fine even though it looks a little rough.
You almost certainly have a lot of noise pick up being that close to the incoming supply. Try taking out the fixing screw and moving it across the wall as far away as possible and seeing what you get.
WARNING: Nothing apart from the incoming fuses, cut-out, isolators and meter should ever be fitted to that backboard. I can be 99.99% certain that a BT Technician did not do that and it really should be moved.
As you ask and others agree with: Get your master moved to the garage and install te modem on a shelf close by with Cat5e across to a router and switch.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
M H C
taurus excreta cerebrum vincit
|
|
|
|
The grey cable coming up looks like armoured cable - the black insulating tape probably covering up the spiky bits where the armour has been stripped back.
Connection might be improved by remaking the connections with gel crimps (and moving away from the electricity service head).
|
|
|
|
They don't look a huge difference to mine, except for your attenuation figures, although maybe a HH5 which I have reports them differently. I'm about 400-500m from the cabinet with a line that goes to my roof from a post the opposite side of the road, comes down and then goes about 20m to a junction box and then ~2m to the master socket.
6. Data rate: 8848 / 55667
7. Maximum data rate: 8848 / 55981
8. Noise margin: 6.1 / 6.1
9. Line attenuation: 30.9 / 20.3
10. Signal attenuation: 30.3 / 18.6
I presume from what you say you could install a master socket in the garage and have the modem next to it, and presumably a cordless phone master. Then wire ethernet back to your switch or whatever.
Whether that would make any difference, who knows, it may be worth a try but leave the option of converting back to the old wiring as OR will probably not want to touch it if they think you've messed with it...
|
|
|
| Text | 1
23
45
67
| Type VDSL
Status UpUptime 0 days 1 hours 16 mins 49 secs
Line Rate (Down / Up) 42551 kbps / 8079 kbpsNoise Margin (Down / Up) 5.8 dB / 6.1 dB
Attenuation (Down / Up) 17.3 dB / 8.5 dBPower (Down / Up) 11.8 dBm / -1.1 dBm |
Are these acceptable?
On MyDSLWebstats, all comparable lines with 17-18dB of attenuation are getting speeds of 49-80Mbps, with the majority seeming to be in the middle. It likely means you aren't doing very well.
Your power seems a little low too. Whether this is a cause or an effect is debatable.
|
|
|
I have today been connected to Zen broadband on the "up to 80Mbit" connection, which was promised to be around 50Mbit. However, having been connected, I am only getting 42Mbit.
Was this an engineer install? Did they do any line testing?
What result do you get from the standard BTW DSL checker? For both A and B ranges...
http://www.dslchecker.bt.com/
A speed of 42Mbps might be low enough for Zen to call out Openreach, who likely would investigate your master socket for free.
Openreach will likely only get involved if your speed is well below the bottom of the speed estimates though.
|
|
|
This was a self-install. No checks were done - just plug and play at the cabinet by BTO engineer and I plugged in the modem supplied by Zen.
I'll do a quick test by moving the cables away from the power lines and go from there. Will get Zen involved if that doesn't help.
Here's what BT thinks I should have:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/y05ucmtlgmc3wen/Screenshot...
|
|
|
|
Whilst not disagreeing with the others, try simply slackening the termination/wire screws slightly, then re-tightening, to ensure clean metallic joints - particularly as they appear to have been installed several/many years back.
Also, you should try the Quiet Line Test etc.
|
|
|
|
So your downstream range is withing the 'impacted' limits. The BT checker gives *exactly* the same readings as I get, although my ADSL was much better.
I suspect it's just your line length/condition and there's probably little you can do about it. I think I'm lucky to get the speed I do, living in rural Oxfordshire where even getting a mobile signal is sometimes tricky....
|
|
|
|
A strange combination from Zen, then. If they quoted a 50Mbps speed, they are using the bottom of the A range - which would normally go with an engineer install.
Certainly worth doing a check to move cables away from the mains. If you do as the other poster suggests, and re-make the joint to be sure of shiny cable, can I suggest a subtle alteration too?
You should probably ensure the two wires of the pair stay twisted as close up to the screws as possible. Those twists help reject RF interference.
Beyond such simple things, it is probably worth calling Zen.
|
|
|
|
Well, I would have thought it's all plug and play but.. hmm.. I've contacted Zen but the order is not yet "fulfilled" on BT system (even though I am using it), so they can't do any line tests or whatever else they need to do.
Hopefully, tomorrow the order will be completed.
I've moved the phone cable as far away as I could but no difference following the router reboot. Haven't played with the connections yet as the wife was nurturing her Internet withdrawal symptoms! I've noticed that one of the ring circuit power cables was jammed right on top of the phone extension one - hmm!
Zen did suggest that if they are not able to resolve the issue, then they could move me down to their 40/10 product.. but I want more speed! Hope they are not going to be difficult...
|
|
|
You may have to accept that some lines are significantly noisier than others for various reasons and you just cannot get much faster. The range of "impacted speeds" is to show that all lines are different.
If that is the case you should think about the offer to move to a 40/10 package. I always recommend that if the impacted speeds are pointing towards a speed under 55Mbos then to consider initially going for a 40/10 package whilst making sure that provider will upgrade you to 80/20 without penalty if you can see the line has significant potential - easier to move up than down!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
M H C
taurus excreta cerebrum vincit
|
|
|
|
Welp, Zen were not helpful. They said it's "within the predefined limits" and will not be getting BT to look at it. Only if it was below 25mbps(!) that they would consider it... Thanks, Zen.
So, I am left to my own devices and will be installing a brand new master socket in the garage at the point of entry. Will keep you posted.
|
|
|
Sadly, 42Mbit isn't enough for Zen to call out an engineer. Apparently, it would have to be below 25Mbit before they would look into anything..
Sadly, since it was first installed, the sync speed has gone from 42Mbit to 38Mbit  I'll be asking for a downgrade to Unlimited 1 product, so that I am not paying for extra speed I cannot use.
I've been looking at TBB speed test results around my area and none are above 40Mbit, so perhaps that really is the highest that can be achieved in my area? Also, my line attenuation of 17dB seems to suggest that I am around 700m from my cabinet and some VDSL2 calculators on the web say that at that distance, I should be getting no more than 25Mbit. It's all very confusing.
|
|
|
17db
My line is at 16.7dB and currently synced at 79999kbps - I have had max achievable up at 83Mbps for a short while. And line length is approx 420m.
Can you install DSL stats and host some snapshots of the graphs for the full range of tones.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
M H C
taurus excreta cerebrum vincit
|
|
|
That's... annoying then.
Sadly, DSLStats doesn't support TG589vn modem when in VDSL2 mode. I did login to telnet and executed some commands - not sure how helpful these are.
| Text | 1
23
45
67
89
1011
1213
1415
1617
1819
2021
2223
2425
2627
2829
3031
3233
3435
3637
3839
4041
4243
4445
4647
4849
5051
5253
5455
5657
5859
6061
6263
6465
6667
6869
7071
7273
7475
7677
7879
8081
8283
8485
8687
8889
9091
9293
9495
| {Administrator}=>:xdsl info expand=enabled
Physical Layer Statistics:
Modem state: up Up time (Days hh:mm:ss): 0 days, 1:58:25
xDSL Standard: ITU-T G.993.2 Annex B (VDSL2) Channel Mode: Interleaved
Number of reset: 0
Chipset Vendor info (G.994.1): Local Remote
Country code: B500 B500 ID: BDCM BDCM
Specific: 0000 A48C
System Vendor info (showtime): Local Remote Country code: 0F00 0000
ID: TMMB ---- Specific: 3C61 0000
Bearers generic info DS US
Payload rate [kbps]: 38003 8170 Attenuation [dB]: 17.4 8.5
Margins [dB]: 6.2 5.9 Output power [dBm]: 11.9 -0.9
Number of bearers: 1
Bearer 0 DS US INP [DMT symbols]: 3.00 0.00
Delay [ms]: 8.00 0.00 Depth []: 743 0.00
R: 12 0
G.997.1 Statistics (Current):
Failures: Line failures Near end
Loss of signal (LOS): 0 Loss of frame (LOF): 0
Loss of power (LPR): 0
Performance monitoring: Line PM: Near end
Error second (ES): 13
Channel PM: Near end Far end Bearer 0:
Code Violation (CV): 106 17 FEC: 89746 0
ATM data path PM: Near end Far end
Bearer 0: HEC violation count (HEC): 1620 N/A
G.997.1 Statistics (last 15 minutes):
Failures:
Line failures Near end Loss of signal (LOS): 0
Loss of frame (LOF): 0 Loss of power (LPR): 0
Performance monitoring:
Line PM: Near end Error second (ES): 1
Channel PM: Near end Far end
Bearer 0: Code Violation (CV): 106 17
FEC: 89746 0
ATM data path PM: Near end Far end Bearer 0:
HEC violation count (HEC): 1620 N/A
G.997.1 Statistics (last 24 hours):
Failures: Line failures Near end
Loss of signal (LOS): 0 Loss of frame (LOF): 0
Loss of power (LPR): 0
Performance monitoring: Line PM: Near end
Error second (ES): 13
Channel PM: Near end Far end Bearer 0:
Code Violation (CV): 106 17 FEC: 89746 0
ATM data path PM: Near end Far end
Bearer 0: HEC violation count (HEC): 1620 N/A |
|
|
|
There is a Technicolor TG589vn - are you saying it will only work for ADSL?
The only point that actually jumps out is the attenuation and speed. If the DS atten is correct, then with the 6.2dB margin (SNR) the speed is correct - which points to a very noisy environment and if others close by are seeing similar speeds then there may be a localised noise source causing teh problems and very little you can do.
The graphs can give pointers to where problems may lie.
Can you borrow an HG612? (or buy a cheap one) to get additional stats and graphs?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
M H C
taurus excreta cerebrum vincit
|
|
|
Yeah, DSLStats will only work for ADSL/ADSL2 on this modem. You can check on this page - http://www.s446074245.websitehome.co.uk/routers.html
Note 2: TG589vn is VDSL2 capable, but DSLstats doesn't support it fully in VDSL2 mode.
Also, if you go to TBB BB Map and type in Yatton as town name, you'll see that all speed tests south of the station (where I am) never go above 40Mbit, though there are a few north of town that do. Either the lines here are extremely noisy or the cabinet doesn't support above 40Mbit speeds (is that still the case in certain places?)
|
|
|
|
By the way, I also have a BT HH v3 from the previous house owner if you think that's worth a try?
|
|
|
All fttc cabinets support the 80/20 product just your distance from it being the deciding factor mainly
|
|
The author of the above post is a thinkbroadband staff member. It may not constitute an official statement on behalf of thinkbroadband.
|
|
|
"Does not support fully" - can you try it and see what it does give.
All cabinets should support 80Mb - I don't know of any reason why any would be restricted.
How for to your cabinet - as the crow flies and by road.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
M H C
taurus excreta cerebrum vincit
|
|
|
That was my initial thought - however 17dB should be giving a lot better than high 30s.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
M H C
taurus excreta cerebrum vincit
|
|
|
|
I did - it just says "No data returned for last sample" or something along those lines.
I don't know where my cabinet is. All I know is that that's Cabinet P4 in Yatton but I haven't seen near by. Any way to find out? It's all underground cabling here, nothing is coming over the poles.
|
|
|
Walk or drive around ... either physically or on Google Maps. Start with: https://www.telecom-tariffs.co.uk/codelook.htm?xid=2... which gives a good approximation, then home in on it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
M H C
taurus excreta cerebrum vincit
|
|
|
Here's cab 3:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.3840107,-2.8130715...
I would guess cab 4 is not too far away but you'd have to look around to find it. Your exchange is to the SE off Wood Hill Road.
|
|
|
|
Cab3 is quite a distance from me. Certainly more than a mile. Cab4 seems to cover a good bit of town and I am on the edge of it... which suggests that it is a bit of a distance. Need to hunt for it.
|
|
|
Try looking around Grace Close, Shiners Elms, Mendip Road ...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
M H C
taurus excreta cerebrum vincit
|
|
|
|
Here's a list of postcodes that cab4 supports. Not sure if it helps. Alas even if you do find it, I doubt that it will help except to give an idea of the exact distance; the only thing that could can really try is rewiring the internal connection as mentioned.
Postcode Status
BS494EZ Live
BS494EF Live
BS494BY Live
BS494BX Live
BS494BZ Live
BS494ET Live
BS494EB Live
BS494EH Live
BS494QX Live
BS494DR Live
BS494DP Live
BS494DY Live
BS494DG Live
BS494DE Live
BS494DL Live
BS494DH Live
BS494DS Live
BS494DF Live
BS494DN Live
BS494QY Live
BS494QZ Live
BS494QU Live
BS494DU Live
BS494DQ Live
BS494DJ Live
BS494DT Live
BS494ED Live
BS494DX Live
BS494EL Live
BS494DW Live
BS494HU Live
|
|
|
|
Yeah, my post code is in the list. Will need to walk around but like you say, there's sweet sod-all I can do about it.
Would another provider (say AAISP) be more willing to troubleshoot or would be in the hands of BTO?
|
|
|
|
Don't know... I'm with BT and when I last had a problem (before FTTC) they sent out OpenReach engineers who spent an hour or two reworking the internal line (for free) and fixed the problem. Not sure if Zen has the clout to get that done.
Zen's unlimited 1 package seems quite pricey, although their unlimited 2 is the same price as BT.
|
|
|
|
To be honest, the price difference between Fibre 1 and 2 products is only £3... but it's £3 in their pockets, which they are getting for "free".
I am still within their 14 day cool-off period, so I can go elsewhere but wondering if it's worth the hassle or not.
|
|
|
|
did you have the faceplate changed when you had the fibre - so did an engineer come to the house ?
|
|
|
|
if you a pcp install and not faceplate change likey then you are then assumed to your line to be impacted rather than ckean as you could have had the faceplate change via a managed instal but chose not to -- so the upshot is the line is doing what it is supposed to do at the NTE -but because the faceplate and backwiring need attention you are where the service provider expects you to be
|
|
|
Cab 4 is > here < (near 96 high street)... this is the PCP; the fibre enabled evil twin will be nearby...
In order to find it...
- I went to http://www.telecom-tariffs.co.uk/codelook.htm
- I typed in Yatton and did a locality search
- On the result page I clicked on the "fibre cabinets" link at the top
- In the list of cabinets (scroll down) I found the postcode for Cabinet P4 (this is approximate)
- I then pasted the postcode in to this page which normally gives a more precise location
- On the map, click "more options" then you get a full screen which you can streetview from - I dropped the little yellow chap on the red marker and looked around... bingo!
(pasting this here for those that don't know how to find their cabinet)
rob | PlusNet
|
|
|
|
Good bit of detective work there MLP. I missed it when looking on streetview, however it has a pole next to it serving a number of lines, and 3 inspection covers beside it. I'm guessing it will have a replacement or an adjacent FTTC box put next to it? At least that's what ahapped to my original cab - it's still there but a new one installed a few metres away.
|
|
|
The problem with street view is that it's out of date... I'd guess looking around, that the paths are quite narrow, so the new fibre cabinet is probably near the "cork and fork" off licence.
I'm not sure how far the cabinet will be from the OP but if he types in his own postcode in to the PCP checker I linked to, he'll get a better idea. Likewise, if he uses the telephone checker on the same site and follow the link, they'll have a good idea of what speeds they can expect.
There are lots of useful tools and resources out there if you're prepared to dig through pages and pages of Google search results... 
rob | PlusNet
|
|
|
|
Nice work! I found another cab nearby on Elm Close but only the FTTC box, not the main one. Either way, these are about 0.5-0.7km away from my house, which ties in with the attenuation I am getting.
|
|
|
If the attenuation ties in with the distance then it certainly does point towards a "noisy line". As for the cause - there are many including cross talk which can be worse for a line underground for most of the route.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
M H C
taurus excreta cerebrum vincit
|
|
|
|
Well, it does sound like the issue is with the line from the cabinet (which is 450m away by road - less as the crow flies) is knackered/noisy etc. I have now taken everything out of the equation - the power line, by moving the wiring away from there, new VDSL faceplate, no extensions, a successful quiet test... nothing... still "slow".
Oh well, at least it's much tidier now than it was before.
|
|
|
I would not say "knackered" ... it is just that some lines will be a lot noisier than others due to various sources.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
M H C
taurus excreta cerebrum vincit
|
|
|
|
Larry desperate attempt before I ask for the line to be reduced to 40/10... Bought a Billion 880NL router so we'll see how it fares.
|
|
|
Here are my tones stats from the newly acquired Billion router:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/43025045/stats.JPG
What does that tell me/you?
|
|
|
In DSLStats, select <Configuration>, then <Items to Monitor>. Under Others, tick <SNR per tone> and <Include with bitloading>
Then there will be a graph under Bitloading - which has teh SNR and Bitloading included - it tells a little more.
The dip from tone150ish is to be expected although I would have hoped it would recover by the time tone 300 is in use but that could be the power mask. I am surprised it cuts off around 1950 too.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
M H C
taurus excreta cerebrum vincit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are a few nasties in the Tone 211 to 350 region. 211 is 909kHz - a BBC radio frequency! and the other notches are too. They appear on others but yours is quite drastic. Do you live close to a radio transmitter?
What I can never understand is why the top end cuts off ... you are still seeing 6 bits per tone and even 1 bit is usable. I wonder if there is a lot of noise at the top end?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
M H C
taurus excreta cerebrum vincit
|
|
|
To me it looks more like the chart is cut-off rather than the bit loading. A function of how it has been scaled and captured. If the bit-loading had been cut-off, then wouldn't we just have seen those frequency bins at the top end with 0 bit loading?
nb. the low bit loading from about 210 to 350 might not be because of a local source of interference. It could easily be down to the power mask being applied, very possibly to prevent interferences to the BBC radio channel. Without knowing what power density is being used at the cabinet end, it's difficult to say. However, I'm minded to think it's primarily a function of the power masking, not interference.
*** update ***
This may be worth look at. It's the ANFP for VDSL from street cabinets (in an early form, so might not be completely up-to-date). However, what it does show as that there is a big cut in the power mask applied which is there primarily to prevent interference with exchange-based ADSL services. However, the profile varies according to distance from the exchange with the logic being that ADSL2 frequencies become more degraded with distance and, by the time attenuation drops to 68dB then the VDSL2 service might as well reuse that frequency.
See around page 27
http://www.niccstandards.org.uk/files/current/ND1602...
If the cabinet is close to the exchange, then that power roll-off can extend all the way up to about 1.5Mhz. (The result of this is, perhaps perversely you might think, the worse you ADSL2 service the better you might expect your VDSL to be for any given subloop length).
I'd also add that there may even be some "notching" applied for very specific frequencies, perhaps to minimise radio interference. I have heard talk of such things being done. That might explain the places where bit loading drops to zero.
It also means that simple broadband speed estimates based on distance from cabinet alone could be misleading, especially for slightly longer subloops with cabinets a long way from the exchange.
Edited by deleted (Wed 16-Sep-15 09:42:24)
|
|
|
Have a look at the link in an earlier post: http://forums.thinkbroadband.com/fibre/t/4434799-re-...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
M H C
taurus excreta cerebrum vincit
|
|
|
|
Hm yes... Well, what I can tell you is that with a corded phone connected to the test socket on master, I get an unbelievable amount of static during quiet test. I can actually hear it during the dial tone as well, it's so loud.
Thankfully, Zen/BTO have identified a fault somewhere along my line and are on it. Strangely, the Billion router has been syncing at higher speeds that the Technicolor router - it's now at 39500kbit vs 38500 over the past few days.
Let's hope that once they fix the noisy line (on voice level anyway), BB issues will go away. That said, the BB itself is quite stable with not drops.
|
|
|
There are a few nasties in the Tone 211 to 350 region. 211 is 909kHz - a BBC radio frequency! and the other notches are too. They appear on others but yours is quite drastic. Do you live close to a radio transmitter?
What I can never understand is why the top end cuts off ... you are still seeing 6 bits per tone and even 1 bit is usable. I wonder if there is a lot of noise at the top end?
I broadly agree with both of these points being sources for slower speeds than expected.
My previous line had an attenuation of 16.7dB, and had bit loading like this, with usable SNR continuing up to near tone 4000:
http://postimg.org/image/xuzqz9p0n/
The matching bitloading:
http://postimg.org/image/o3093jt9z/
These graphs only really show us the "effect", not the "cause". For that, we might get some ideas from seeing Hlog and QLN graphs:
http://postimg.org/image/g3g9m6qax/
http://postimg.org/image/5bait1t8f/
Hlog and/or QLN might suggest why the top-end tones are being cut off prematurely.
Of course, they might be perfectly explained by the recently-discovered audible fault...
|
|
|
|
I'd already look at that. It tells me that there's a fairly broad band about 600Khz wide ending at about 1.5Mhz where the SNR is considerably reduced. You cannot tell from that chart alone whether that reduction in SNR is due to an increase in noise or a reduction in the power density. However, given the ANFP it seems obvious that the great majority of it is due to the PSD. There are some very distinct "notches" in that area too. I'm not privy to the details, but I think it far more likely that it's power notching and not narrow band interference.
It's also clear that the SNR is measured up to a bit over 7MHz. I know that VDSL2 can go up to 30MHz, but it was my understanding that the maximum in the UK is around that 7Mhz signal. I'll make a guess now that it was cutoff early to allow room for g.fast. gfast in it's first version goes up to 106Mhz but, presumably BT will want it to extend reasonably far down the spectrum to extend its useful reach.
|
|
|
|
Hm, well, not sure why it's reporting 0 SNR above 2MHz - maybe I am missing some setting in DSL stats?
Zen came back today to say that there's a battery contact fault on my line, so hopefully with that being cleared, I'll get my crackle free line back and decent net speeds.
|
|
|
If the cabinet is close to the exchange, then that power roll-off can extend all the way up to about 1.5Mhz. (The result of this is, perhaps perversely you might think, the worse you ADSL2 service the better you might expect your VDSL to be for any given subloop length).
I think there is a balance... the further the cabinet is from the exchange, the smaller the band of affected frequencies is, but the deeper the power cutback. The closer the cabinet to the exchange, the broader the band, but the shallower the power reduction.
At one extreme, you'll notice that, for CAL=0 (cabinet is *really* close to the exchange, or within 100m), there is no power reduction at all.
We saw some graphs on here recently, with a very tiny notch at 2.2MHz. That may have been a CAL of 2.
I reckon that around CAL=20 is the worst case, which I guess is for cabinets around 2km from the exchange. The ANFP graph suggests a broad and deep disruption.
A proper mathematical integration of the formulae would probably give us the answer...
|
|
|
It's also clear that the SNR is measured up to a bit over 7MHz. I know that VDSL2 can go up to 30MHz, but it was my understanding that the maximum in the UK is around that 7Mhz signal. I'll make a guess now that it was cutoff early to allow room for g.fast. gfast in it's first version goes up to 106Mhz but, presumably BT will want it to extend reasonably far down the spectrum to extend its useful reach.
Back in the days of profile 8c, the UK limit used to be 7.05MHz, even though the profile allowed up to 8MHz. But with the current ANFP allowing profile 17a since 2011, we ought to be able to use up to 17.664MHz. I think your link goes to the 2007 version.
This might be better:
http://www.niccstandards.org.uk/files/current/ND1602...
The Huawei cabs seem to top out at tone 3970, which is 17.1MHz
|
|
|
|
That's not 2Mhz. Those are tone numbers and they are approximately 4K buckets so multiply by about 4 to get the rough frequency.
|
|
|
|
I suspected my link was going to be a bit out of date, and the cut-off does seem to be closer to 8Mhz than 7MHz.
As far as extending beyond that it concerned, then if the ANFP allows for it, then that's fine but I would still maintain that OpenReach might have chosen not to exploit that as it does allow more space and longer reach for g.fast. That might take preference over allowing higher speeds n VDSL2 lines.
Of course the ANFP will need reviewing for g.fast anyway and, in theory at least, that's not something BT can dictate. However, given that the overwhelming majority of VDSL2 in the UK is provided by BT, then they will be in a better position to argue g.fast can start lower down the frequency range than would be the case if the VDSL2 frequency plans are extended higher up the range.
Of course, some of this might just be down to limitations in line cards at particular locations.
One thing is very clear, and that is the simple minded modelling of possible VDSL2 speeds based solely on the project attenuation of the sub-loop via the proxy of cabinet distance is far too simple. It looks very much like the speed that might be expected will also depend heavily on the details of the frequency plan and psd at any one cabinet location.
It would be wonderful to have stats on all this available, but unfortunately I think such information will only be available to OpenReach, assuming they can collect things like bit loading profiles, attenuation and so on by line. It would, of course, be a huge amount of data but would surely be very useful in working out coverage and even might what be projected into g.fast coverage (from the existing cabinet locations). I suspect that this is information BT would consider highly confidential though.
|
|
|
|
Welp, the BT engineer has been - unannounced (why do they never say they are coming?) - but the problem is unresolved. He spent a while looking for the other end of my cable - he isn't a local - and after two hours said that the problem is with the underground cable between my house and the next connection point. He tried swapping the wire-pair to the unused one in my cable but that didn't work.
So, apparently, someone else will need to come out and find where the fault actually lies along the length of the cable, dig down and correct the fault.
Anyone have any experience with this kind of underground wire fault?
|
|
|
I have experience of one case where the speed was "acceptable" however another issue was causing a problem. The problem was always going to be at a joint rather than a random point in an unstressed cable. A BT Technician actually located a chamber that was totally overgrown and had probably not been opened for 20 years or more and found a joint there was causing problems. Using the TDR capability he knew there had to be a joint box somewhere and started digging and prodding in the verge. He actually remade quite a few whilst the chamber was open.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
M H C
taurus excreta cerebrum vincit
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I am not sure mine went into that sort of trouble! He pointed at a hole in the ground and said my cable runs through there but he couldn't find a joint there. Apparently, it was one solid run from my house, past a few hole covers to the next street where it joins to another run. The joints there seem OK and the line tests OK from that point. So it points to my cable.
Whether he is right or not, I couldn't tell you. But I hope they find and fix it.
|
|
|
|
I certainly did. A few years ago my line had erratic problems, usually after rain. The problem was that it was intermittent (the worst sort of fault to track down). Of course the problem was never there when the engineer came albeit remote line tests when the problem occurred showed it. Occasionally there would be some pair swaps and then, perhaps a month or two later it would recur.
Eventually it failed so badly that the line was virtually unusable. After a couple of visits with increasingly sophisticated kit it was established how far the fault was away from the house (about 8 metres). Unfortunately at the time my house was built, the then-GPO used what's called "direct buried cable". In essence, the distribution cable for the local houses was buried in the earth under the footpath and a couple of pairs T'd off to each house. There was no footbox. The cable, joint and all was just buried in the ground.
The result was a contractor had to dig up the junction, and engineer remade the joint with a great big plastic waterproof joint and the whole thing reburied (they wanted to put in a footbox, but there were other utilities which got in the way).
If your is like that it will take somebody with some cable tracing gear to find the joint before its dug up.
I did have other issued with slow VDSL2 later which turned out to be problems with the E-side pair (which took about 2 hours to resolve by pair swapping further towards the distribution point).
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the response. Yep, my guy also said that the cable was directly buried - without trunking in place. It's a pretty hefty cable that comes in, with some serious shielding around it. Like you say, it must be a joint, rather than fault of the cable itself.
How long did it take them to resolve it?
|
|
|
|
In may case about 10 days, but as they didn't actually identify where the fault was until Christmas Eve (and hence where to dig the hole) that went some way to explain the length of time.
The hole was dug by a contractor of course (and filled in afterwards). Fortunately I didn't have to be in whilst it was done, although as it happened over the holidays I was actually around. Sitting in a muddy, wet hole remaking a connection did not look like fun.
|
|
|
One such fault in this area recently was caused by mice
Edited by deleted (Thu 17-Sep-15 15:06:07)
|
|
|
Welp, another set of engineers arrived and did some work remotely, which, happily, has now resolved the noise with the voice line (moved me to a different set of wires between two junction points?).
However, this did little to improve my internet speeds. My latest xDSL stats:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/43025045/Screens...
And here are some graphs from DSLStats:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/43025045/SNRpert...
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/43025045/Bitload...
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/43025045/HLog-20...
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/43025045/QLN-201...
Should I go back to Zen for more troubleshooting or just get them to downgrade me to a lower product?
Thanks
Alex
|
|
|
At the top end there is now some of U2 in use which was not there before. It does suggest that you may not get much of an improvement and you may be right to consider moving to a 40/10 product - and saving a little.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
M H C
taurus excreta cerebrum vincit
|
|
|
|
You may be right. I am looking at MyDSLStats page and those with my downstream attenuation seem to be comparable to what I get.
A shame.. but still better than ADSL2 I had before, especially the upload.
|
|
|
As a last try, power off the modem tonight and then disconnect the line a few minutes later. Tomorrow morning, reboot the modem and then after 5 minutes remake the connection. Then see what you get.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
M H C
taurus excreta cerebrum vincit
|
|
|
|
Thanks - will try!
I started uploading my stats to mydslstats page. My username is mrjack there.
One thing that's it's highlighting is the high rate of FEC - surely that's not a good thing?
|
|
|
|
It's interesting you mention this thing. When I first went live, my sync speed was 42500kbps. However, after I rebooted the router the following day, I couldn't get more than 38000-ish. Today, when BT engineers were working, my line was down for 1 hour. Afterwards, I was syncing at almost 41000kbps, however, it's gone down now after a few reboots.
What does this trick do?
|
|
|
|
Sorry, another question - what is G.INP? Looks like it can offer substantial speed increases but I can see that it's not active on my line.
How would I get it activated?
|
|
|
What does this trick do?
The 'trick' is to reboot in the morning when the noise floor is lower, as that can give a higher sync speed. Do NOT keep rebooting your router. as this could persuade DLM that your line is unstable and lead to a lower speed or, worse still, a capped profile being applied.
G.INP may well activate after a few days if you are on a Huawei cabinet, which may well offer you a higher sync speed. I'm not sure whether G.INP is working on ECI cabinets yet. If G.INP is activated on your line, it will resync with G.INP enabled automatically.
|
|
|
It's interesting you mention this thing. When I first went live, my sync speed was 42500kbps. However, after I rebooted the router the following day, I couldn't get more than 38000-ish. Today, when BT engineers were working, my line was down for 1 hour. Afterwards, I was syncing at almost 41000kbps, however, it's gone down now after a few reboots.
What does this trick do? Ugh !
You should not be doing frequent router reboots, particularly if in the first two days of connection or an engineer reset, which sounds to have happened.
Your original speed was very likely to fall within a short period from the first connection. That is common, as the error rates on the line are assessed and the speed lowered if they are too high.
The indispensable man or woman passes from the scene, and what happens next is more or less the same thing as was happening before.
My broadband basic info/help site - www.robertos.me.uk. Domains, site and mail hosting - Tsohost.
Connection - AAISP Home::1 80/20. Sync 59999/14372kbps @ 600m. - BQM
|
|
|
You should not be doing frequent router reboots, particularly if in the first two days of connection or an engineer reset, which sounds to have happened. I know, I know... Too tempting to just see if it syncs at a faster speed if I reboot.
Welp, the "trick" worked - I am getting 40700kbps sync now with attainable rate of 49000kbps. Ah, if only G.INP was enabled soon...
|
|
|
You should not be doing frequent router reboots, particularly if in the first two days of connection or an engineer reset, which sounds to have happened. I know, I know... Too tempting to just see if it syncs at a faster speed if I reboot.
Welp, the "trick" worked - I am getting 40700kbps sync now with attainable rate of 49000kbps. Ah, if only G.INP was enabled soon...
Took 29 days before G.INP kicked in here, after work on my line.
|
|
|
|
You have interleaving turned on. If the line becomes stable for a long enough period, it will get switched off.
|
|
|
|
Will G.INP never kick in until interleaving is switched off? I was under the impression that G.INP removed the need for interleaving.
|
|
|
As others have said - do not disconnect or reboot too often.
BY powering the modem OFF the DSLAM is sent a message to say there is a power failure and will treat the loss of connection as such. A reboot or removal of the line suggests to te DSLAM a line fault or noise. So, power off, wait, disconnect - A clean way to do it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
M H C
taurus excreta cerebrum vincit
|
|
|
When G.INP kicks in the speed normally increases a lot, but not as high as the existing "Attainable", which will fall. A slight residual interleaving may remain but without the usual increased latency. See mine below. Bearer 1 is what G.INP introduces, D: line is the interleaving depth, delay: line is the addition to latency from Fast Path.
# xdslcmd info --show
xdslcmd: ADSL driver and PHY status
Status: Showtime
Retrain Reason: 1
Last initialization procedure status: 0
Max: Upstream rate = 14015 Kbps, Downstream rate = 58076 Kbps
Bearer: 0, Upstream rate = 14372 Kbps, Downstream rate = 59999 Kbps
Bearer: 1, Upstream rate = 0 Kbps, Downstream rate = 0 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): 5.3 6.1
Attn(dB): 19.8 0.0
Pwr(dBm): 13.5 7.4
VDSL2 framing
Bearer 0
MSGc: -6 26
B: 174 237
M: 1 1
T: 0 62
R: 8 16
S: 0.0928 0.5267
L: 15775 3858
D: 16 1
I: 183 127
N: 183 254
Q: 16 0
V: 3 0
RxQueue: 33 0
TxQueue: 11 0
G.INP Framing: 18 0
G.INP lookback: 11 0
RRC bits: 0 24
Bearer 1
MSGc: 122 -6
B: 0 0
M: 2 0
T: 2 0
R: 16 0
S: 8.0000 0.0000
L: 32 0
D: 1 0
I: 32 0
N: 32 0
Q: 0 0
V: 0 0
RxQueue: 0 0
TxQueue: 0 0
G.INP Framing: 0 0
G.INP lookback: 0 0
RRC bits: 0 0
Counters
Bearer 0
OHF: 0 844233
OHFErr: 88 43
RS: 1203312224 3158407
RSCorr: 1997394 588
RSUnCorr: 0 0
Bearer 1
OHF: 45341260 0
OHFErr: 0 0
RS: 362729587 0
RSCorr: 24 0
RSUnCorr: 0 0
Retransmit Counters
rtx_tx: 8945 0
rtx_c: 78592 0
rtx_uc: 40994 0
G.INP Counters
LEFTRS: 1194 0
minEFTR: 59987 0
errFreeBits: 92407352 0
Bearer 0
HEC: 0 0
OCD: 0 0
LCD: 0 0
Total Cells: 2428138872 0
Data Cells: 121146367 0
Drop Cells: 0
Bit Errors: 0 0
Bearer 1
HEC: 0 0
OCD: 0 0
LCD: 0 0
Total Cells: 0 0
Data Cells: 0 0
Drop Cells: 0
Bit Errors: 0 0
ES: 59 159
SES: 13 0
UAS: 300 289
AS: 728311
Bearer 0
INP: 47.00 0.00
INPRein: 0.00 0.00
delay: 0 0
PER: 0.00 8.19
OR: 0.01 31.23
AgR: 60106.73 14403.64
Bearer 1
INP: 2.00 0.00
INPRein: 2.00 0.00
delay: 0 0
PER: 16.06 0.01
OR: 63.75 0.01
AgR: 63.75 0.01
Bitswap: 509468/509469 10137/10166
#
The indispensable man or woman passes from the scene, and what happens next is more or less the same thing as was happening before.
My broadband basic info/help site - www.robertos.me.uk. Domains, site and mail hosting - Tsohost.
Connection - AAISP Home::1 80/20. Sync 59999/14372kbps @ 600m. - BQM
Edited by RobertoS (Fri 18-Sep-15 10:57:14)
|
|
|
|
Fi g.inp then interleaving (at least to any great depth) isn't an issue, but I thought you were implying you were on a cabinet where interleaving wasn't currently implemented as I believe some of the older ones have problems in that area.
In any event, my advice would be to leave well alone for a few days and let it settle down. I would not try and force change through manually induced resyncs.
|
|
|
The whole batch of recent posts on here needs a more carefully considered response from me, but I have to go out...
Welp, another set of engineers arrived and did some work remotely, which, happily, has now resolved the noise with the voice line (moved me to a different set of wires between two junction points?).
However, this did little to improve my internet speeds. My latest xDSL stats:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/43025045/Screens...
If I read that rightly, your downstream attenuation has gone up by about 5dB. This latest report says over 22dB, while the earlier one was 17dB (which is the reason I compared it to my previous 16.7dB line).
Whatever they've done to get rid of the noise, they've added the equivalent of 100m of cable!
Of course, it could be longer, thinner, or made of aluminium. Or just harbouring a new fault, ready to pounce later.
Something's not quite right, anyway
|
|
|
That's because I replaced my router. Technicolor one, if I reconnect it, will report 17dB attenuation, while this Billion reports 22dB. The increase happened even before BT did anything.
Billion seems to report the attenuation more accurately than Technicolor one, as it seems to match what my line speed is.
Going to go for a walk to my cabinet to see which one it is. If it's Huawei, I am hoping for G.INP to be enabled soon (wishful thinking perhaps). Oh, and get a nice pasty from the bakers
|
|
|
One such fault in this area recently was caused by mice
On a ducted cable run maybe, but if a dig is required it's not a ducted route is it !
|
|
|
Saw WWW reply and went back to do some work. Then it occurred to me - is it the same modem? Which it is not and you have already found out the difference.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
M H C
taurus excreta cerebrum vincit
|
|
|
My cabinet - looks like a Huawei 288 to me. So, G.INP should be enabled sooner or later...
https://www.dropbox.com/s/l25vdxw4r98fw92/2015-09-18...
|
|
|
Sorry, should've said earlier when explaining how to find your cabinet, the codelook website will tell you the cabinet vendor - all cabinets in Yatton are Huawei.
It seems your cabinet went live April 9th, meaning it should be capable of G.INP now - it just takes a while to kick in. Probably be all sorted by next weekend, if not before.
Obviously your Billion needs the right firmware in order to do G.INP, so I'd check that out whilst waiting for the DLM.
rob | PlusNet
|
|
|
|
Thanks, yep, found the cabinet physically, thanks to your top off and its twin about 50 metres away - definitely a Huawei. Will wait for G.INP to kick in and my Billion does support it. Actually, so does the Technicolor router so if that doesn't work, I can always try the other.
Been on nearly 41000kbps sync since Thursday, though it did resync once on Saturday morning to the same speed.
Also hoping that my interleaving drops as it's introducing an 8msec delay to downstream...
|
|
|
|
It took about a week for interleaving to be dropped in favour of g.inp when my local cabinet was upgraded to support it. Oddly, before it was enabled for g.inp, I didn't have interleaving on the line (at least to any great depth), but the line would drop out about once a day. After the Huwai cabinets were enabled it resynced at a lightly higher speed and then, after a couple of days it resynced at much lower speed with interleaving enabled (when it was wholly bulletproof). Then, after a week or so it resynced back to the higher speed and now goes about a week or more between resyncs (as I write it's over 11 days since the last one).
|
|
|
|
No changes yet. Interleaving still on 799 and have been connected for 10 days without a resync. So pretty stable but would still like my G.INP switched on at some point...
|
|
|
Welp, the modem resynced this morning to 43.5Mbit - the highest I've had! I thought G.INP had been turned on but it's still showing as disabled. What has changed is my interleave depth has been changed from 799 to 1.
Also, attainable rate has reduced from 48Mbit-ish to the same as my sync speed. I guess G.INP might not take it up any higher than that then?
| Text | 1
23
45
67
89
1011
1213
1415
1617
1819
2021
2223
2425
2627
2829
3031
3233
3435
3637
3839
4041
4243
4445
4647
4849
5051
5253
| DSLAM/MSAN type: BDCM:0xa48c / v0xa48c
Modem/router firmware: AnnexA version - A2pv6F039g1.d24mDSL mode: VDSL2 Profile 17a
Status: ShowtimeUptime: 2 hours 2 min 25 sec
Resyncs: 2 (since 05 Oct 2015 07:01:34)
Downstream UpstreamLine attenuation (dB): 22.2 0.0
Signal attenuation (dB): Not available on VDSL2Connection speed (kbps): 43506 8489
SNR margin (dB): 6.3 6.1Power (dBm): 11.9 2.7
Interleave depth: 1 1INP: 0 0
G.INP: Not enabled
RSCorr/RS (%): N/A 0.0000RSUnCorr/RS (%): N/A 0.0000
ES/hour: 0 0
adsl info --statsadsl: ADSL driver and PHY status
Status: ShowtimeLast Retrain Reason: 1
Last initialization procedure status: 0Max: Upstream rate = 8489 Kbps, Downstream rate = 43637 Kbps
Bearer: 0, Upstream rate = 8489 Kbps, Downstream rate = 43506 Kbps
Link Power State: L0Mode: VDSL2 Annex B
VDSL2 Profile: Profile 17aTPS-TC: PTM Mode(0x0)
Trellis: U:ON /D:ONLine Status: No Defect
Training Status: Showtime Down Up
SNR (dB): 6.2 6.1Attn(dB): 22.2 0.0
Pwr(dBm): 11.9 2.7
VDSL2 framing Bearer 0
MSGc: 18 26B: 239 239
M: 1 1T: 64 44
R: 0 0S: 0.1756 0.8985
L: 10936 2137D: 1 1
I: 240 120N: 240 240 |
|
|
|
Also, attainable rate has reduced from 48Mbit-ish to the same as my sync speed. I guess G.INP might not take it up any higher than that then?
It is a common issue that, when old-style DLM intervened, the attainable speed often rose by around the same amount as the actual speed reduced ... with both changes being reversed when DLM removed the intervention.
That looks to have happened to you - with no sign of G.INP arriving.
Some sync speeds have improved with the switch-on of G.INP, even beyond the speed attained with no DLM intervention.It isn't obvious why this has happened.
|
|
|
|
OK, that makes sense. Is it safe to say that even if G.INP ever gets enabled on my line, I am unlikely to benefit? Except maybe make it more stable...
|
|
|
Correct re the speed. Not really re improving stability.
G.INP is basically an alternative mechanism to Interleaving, using Bearer 1 to retransmit corrupted packets. It looks as though DLM has decided your line can, at the moment, run on Fast Path. As such, it will be connecting as fast as it can.
The indispensable man or woman passes from the scene, and what happens next is more or less the same thing as was happening before.
My broadband basic info/help site - www.robertos.me.uk. Domains, site and mail hosting - Tsohost.
Connection - AAISP Home::1 80/20. Sync 59999/14372kbps @ 600m. - BQM
|
|
|
|
Yep. Another improvement is the latency. Gone from 25ms-ish to 15ms-ish, so that's nice too.
|
|
|
Aaaand I am back to interleaving!
Reason: 1 Remote Defect Indicator/DLM
Current Downstream Sync Rate is now 39838kbps
Current Upstream Sync Rate is now 8537kbps
Blah
|
|
|
G.INP has been enabled this morning!  Download speed is over 46Mbit, so just 4Mbit under Zen's predicted speed.
Let's hope it keeps.
|
|
|
|
Is that the sync speed?
|
|
|
|
Yes, sync speed as opposed to actual download, which will be a little lower.
|
|
|
Very strange. For a good few weeks my sync speed has been slowly decreasing to around 40Mbit from 46Mbit. Last night, however, I had two resyncs with the last one being at 54Mbit  Very odd... not sure why there's such a huge variation but I am guessing BTO may have been doing some work.
|
Pages in this thread: 
Print Thread
deleted
