In reply to a post by craski:

Its shocking to think Openreach are happy to fit these sub-standard ECI modems on managed installs.

The Kelly "engineer" who turned up for my second installation appointment failed to do anything but deliver an ECI modem for the Huawei All In One cabinet on the footpath by the exchange. Probably the first he fished out of his van, or perhaps the only type he had. Either way, pretty shoddy. That it took at least 6 weeks from order to successful installation did not please me either.

I had been expecting this, and had already bought a second hand HG612 and flashed it, connecting it shortly after the real BTOR engineer who arrived for the third and last installation attempt had left. After a month upstream G.INP kicked in.

My attainable rates are impressive. A pity that they cannot be reached.

With upstream G.INP, speed tests, Samknows and real world use all show delightfully high transfer rates, especially as this is the same short EO line that behaved so poorly with ADSL2+ Annex M.

Text

1 23 45 67 89 1011 1213 1415 1617 1819 2021 2223 2425 2627 2829 3031 3233 3435 3637 3839 4041 4243 4445 46

Max:    Upstream rate = 41657 Kbps, Downstream rate = 134328 Kbps Bearer: 0, Upstream rate = 19999 Kbps, Downstream rate = 79999 KbpsBearer: 1, Upstream rate = 0 Kbps, Downstream rate = 0 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):        21.4            23.3Attn(dB):        9.3             0.0 Pwr(dBm):        13.9           -8.2                        VDSL2 framing                         Bearer 0MSGc:           -6              26 B:              130             237M:              1               1 T:              0               42R:              8               16 S:              0.0518          0.3781L:              21468           5374 D:              16              1I:              139             127 N:              139             254Q:              16              0 V:              14              0RxQueue:                60              0 TxQueue:                20              0G.INP Framing:          18              0 G.INP lookback:         20              0RRC bits:               0               24                         Bearer 1MSGc:           186             -6 B:              0               0M:              2               0 T:              2               0R:              16              0 S:              5.3333          0.0000L:              48              0 D:              3               0I:              32              0 N:              32              0Q:              0               0 V:              0               0

As I understand HG612 stats those show downstream G.INP, but not upstream. See lower down your output, as here:-

# xdslcmd info --show
xdslcmd: ADSL driver and PHY status
Status: Showtime
Retrain Reason: 1
Last initialization procedure status: 0
Max: Upstream rate = 16289 Kbps, Downstream rate = 59812 Kbps
Bearer: 0, Upstream rate = 15142 Kbps, Downstream rate = 59997 Kb
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): 5.9 6.7
Attn(dB): 19.7 0.0
Pwr(dBm): 13.6 7.4
VDSL2 framing
Bearer 0
MSGc: -6 25
B: 243 237
M: 1 1
T: 0 64
R: 10 16
S: 0.1295 0.5000
L: 15691 4064
D: 8 1
I: 254 127
N: 254 254
Q: 8 0
V: 0 0
RxQueue: 48 0
TxQueue: 16 0
G.INP Framing: 18 0
G.INP lookback: 16 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 2097145
OHFErr: 47 1108
RS: 1303019440 4294559
RSCorr: 13025391 10531
RSUnCorr: 0 0
Bearer 1
OHF: 480623190 0
OHFErr: 0 0
RS: 3844985027 0
RSCorr: 623 0
RSUnCorr: 0 0

Retransmit Counters
rtx_tx: 324285 0
rtx_c: 344707 0
rtx_uc: 98185 0

G.INP Counters
LEFTRS: 3675 0
minEFTR: 60008 0
errFreeBits: 3394949551 0

Bearer 0
HEC: 0 0
OCD: 0 0
LCD: 0 0
Total Cells: 1657296495 0
Data Cells: 831218580 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: 135 1507
SES: 38 1
UAS: 333 311
AS: 7720179

Bearer 0
INP: 48.00 0.00
INPRein: 0.00 0.00
delay: 0 0
PER: 0.00 8.03
OR: 0.01 30.87
AgR: 60058.37 15172.73

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: 5942289/5942289 26126/26170

The Bearer 1 upstream figures are essentially zero.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

It's also shocking to see the fanbois roaming the forums claiming that ECI modems and HH5As support G.INP when all the available experience says that they don't. Presumably this is done at the behest of BT who refuse to admit they have fouled up.

Long answer? Short answer? Long answer? Short answer?

Oh, go on then. Short answer it is ....

[censored]

I have no idea what you're trying to say - sorry, perhaps?

Bzzzt. Try again.

I guess you have no intention of halting your mis-information campaign

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

As I understand HG612 stats those show downstream G.INP, but not upstream.

Agreed.

Upstream has FEC turned on, using 6% of bandwidth as overhead (16 bytes out of 254). Neither interleaving nor G.INP retransmission are turned on.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

I guess you have no intention of halting your mis-information campaign

My "campaign" is merely to stop your mis-information from being taken seriously.

Your experience of your HH5A is welcomed into the collective. But your experience isn't any more valid than anyone else's.

When you respond with answers that put your experience in context, I have no problem. When you respond with a context that implies your truth is the only one, then I do have a problem.

Bluntly, there are some people whose trouble-shooting abilities, and logic, I trust more than yours. Failure to understand, and acknowledge, the broader context merely reduces this trust.

If I don't trust your posts, why should I leave some poor suffering newbie to trust it?

I'm waiting for evidence, proof, call it what you will. Is there any? All the experience is that the ECI modem and the HH5A don't support G.INP.

Wrong. "ALL" the experience does not show this. You've been told, in very recent days, of someone whose experience of HH5 modems (both A and B) is the exact opposite to yours. You've ignored this.

I trust his abilities more than I trust yours. But that isn't enough to make me believe his experience is any more proof than yours is proof.

You kindly produced a link earlier, to a post by BuckleZ, where the one useful phrase was "I guess". The rest of the thread was full of people getting equivocal results: for some, the firmware upgrade had a good result. For others it didn't.

None are proof.

Because we can't see enough detail, we don't know why those who have good experiences, have them. Equally we don't know why those who have bad experiences, have those. I suspect there is some other interaction going on with DLM settings, but we can't see that either.

The one incontrovertible fact is this: The Lantiq VRX268 chipset is capable of supporting G.INP downstream. And that a firmware fix was necessary to get this support working.

The chipset has been seen to fail in the same way as the ECI and HH5A, with a bug found in the firmware. The firmware fix has been seen to fix the fault - such that the chipset properly supported downstream G.INP. All seen with the TP-Link W9980

Context?

This chipset is the same one used in the ECI modems and in the HH5A.

That tells me there is the potential for both the ECI and the HH5A to be fixed to support downstream G.INP. And it may have happened already. But we cannot tell - not to a level of "proof".

At this point, I differ between the two models. While both share the same potential, I believe it more likely that the HH5A firmware has actually been updated, and less likely that the ECIs' firmware have been updated. That difference comes from the balance of posts of I have seen.

I remain open on the issue. In the presence of equivocal evidence in both directions, and the permanent potential, I believe others should remain open too.