User comments on ISPs
  >> EE (Everything Everywhere) and Orange


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


Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | (show all)   Print Thread
Standard User XRaySpeX
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Sat 11-Feb-12 20:45:47
Print Post

BrightBox: Can We Believe It?


[link to this post]
 
Whenever I re-sync the BrightBox it always give me the same 19661 Kbps sync speed:
Status:
Configured Current
Line Status --- SHOWTIME
Link Type --- Interleaved Path
Operation Mode Automatic G992.5(ADSL2+)

Data Rate Information:
Stream Type Actual Data Rate
Upstream 888 (Kbps.)
Downstream 19661 (Kbps.)

Defect/Failure Indication:
Operation Data Upstream Downstream
Noise Margin 15.0 dB 4.3 dB
Line Attenuation 12.6 dB 25.5 dB
These speeds never vary unlike my other Netgear routers which sync about a varying 1.5 Meg less.

Could Orange have coded a look-up table in the router of sync speeds against attenuations, so that when you phone up complaining about the speed they can counter claim that router is reporting the correct speed for your line?

Anybody else notice this?

1999: Freeserve 48K Dial-Up => 2005: Wanadoo 1 Meg BB => 2007: Orange 2 Meg BB => 2008: Orange 8 Meg LLU => 2010: Orange 16 Meg LLU => 2011: Orange 19 Meg WBC
Standard User glossywhite
(newbie) Sat 11-Feb-12 23:27:02
Print Post

Re: BrightBox: Can We Believe It?


[re: XRaySpeX] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by XRaySpeX:
Whenever I re-sync the BrightBox it always give me the same 19661 Kbps sync speed:
Status:
Configured Current
Line Status --- SHOWTIME
Link Type --- Interleaved Path
Operation Mode Automatic G992.5(ADSL2+)

Data Rate Information:
Stream Type Actual Data Rate
Upstream 888 (Kbps.)
Downstream 19661 (Kbps.)

Defect/Failure Indication:
Operation Data Upstream Downstream
Noise Margin 15.0 dB 4.3 dB
Line Attenuation 12.6 dB 25.5 dB
These speeds never vary unlike my other Netgear routers which sync about a varying 1.5 Meg less.

Could Orange have coded a look-up table in the router of sync speeds against attenuations, so that when you phone up complaining about the speed they can counter claim that router is reporting the correct speed for your line?

Anybody else notice this?


Maybe they just made an excellent router, did you consider that? smile
Standard User XRaySpeX
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Sun 12-Feb-12 00:41:35
Print Post

Re: BrightBox: Can We Believe It?


[re: glossywhite] [link to this post]
 
No! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZymBti7700

1999: Freeserve 48K Dial-Up => 2005: Wanadoo 1 Meg BB => 2007: Orange 2 Meg BB => 2008: Orange 8 Meg LLU => 2010: Orange 16 Meg LLU => 2011: Orange 19 Meg WBC


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

Standard User glossywhite
(newbie) Sun 12-Feb-12 17:38:27
Print Post

Re: BrightBox: Can We Believe It?


[re: XRaySpeX] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by XRaySpeX:
No! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZymBti7700

??
Standard User GeeTee
(committed) Sun 12-Feb-12 18:11:40
Print Post

Re: BrightBox: Can We Believe It?


[re: XRaySpeX] [link to this post]
 
Maybe that is the upper synch speed cap and your line is capable of more so you consistently achieve the same number?

No idea if Orange do that, never used them.
Standard User XRaySpeX
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Sun 12-Feb-12 18:41:23
Print Post

Re: BrightBox: Can We Believe It?


[re: GeeTee] [link to this post]
 
FYI: Orange don't do anything! The BB is completely run by BT.

Your hypothesis contradicts the "Actual" as in "Actual Data Rate" and, as I stated, my line is capable of less according to all other routers.

1999: Freeserve 48K Dial-Up => 2005: Wanadoo 1 Meg BB => 2007: Orange 2 Meg BB => 2008: Orange 8 Meg LLU => 2010: Orange 16 Meg LLU => 2011: Orange 19 Meg WBC
Standard User glossywhite
(newbie) Sun 12-Feb-12 18:57:19
Print Post

Re: BrightBox: Can We Believe It?


[re: XRaySpeX] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by XRaySpeX:
FYI: Orange don't do anything! The BB is completely run by BT.

Your hypothesis contradicts the "Actual" as in "Actual Data Rate" and, as I stated, my line is capable of less according to all other routers.


Your "other" routers could be wrong; did you consider that? Maybe Bright Box *IS* the good router that it seems to be. Keep an open mind. Bias doesn't progress you in these matters.

Edited by glossywhite (Sun 12-Feb-12 18:57:46)

Standard User XRaySpeX
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Sun 12-Feb-12 19:39:44
Print Post

Re: BrightBox: Can We Believe It?


[re: glossywhite] [link to this post]
 
Probabilities and manufacturer experience and reputation?

Various assorted other "wrong" routers vs. One "correct" router?

Netgear, a well-known and reputable manufacturer of networking products since 1996, vs. as you stated 'Orange "Bright Box", manufactured by "Astoria Networks" (whoever they are)'?

Why are you so pro-BrightBox just cuz you are able to hack its hardware? It seems you are the one with the blinkered mind and are completely unscientific as you've shown in the past. I have no bias towards any router, but can observe those that behave realistically. As I pointed out to you previously nobody or nothing can be completely perfect!

This thread was raised as an observation on a surprising behaviour of the BrightBox; nothing more.

1999: Freeserve 48K Dial-Up => 2005: Wanadoo 1 Meg BB => 2007: Orange 2 Meg BB => 2008: Orange 8 Meg LLU => 2010: Orange 16 Meg LLU => 2011: Orange 19 Meg WBC
Standard User glossywhite
(newbie) Sun 12-Feb-12 20:10:48
Print Post

Re: BrightBox: Can We Believe It?


[re: XRaySpeX] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by XRaySpeX:
Probabilities and manufacturer experience and reputation?

Various assorted other "wrong" routers vs. One "correct" router?

Netgear, a well-known and reputable manufacturer of networking products since 1996, vs. as you stated 'Orange "Bright Box", manufactured by "Astoria Networks" (whoever they are)'?

Why are you so pro-BrightBox just cuz you are able to hack its hardware? It seems you are the one with the blinkered mind and are completely unscientific as you've shown in the past. I have no bias towards any router, but can observe those that behave realistically. As I pointed out to you previously nobody or nothing can be completely perfect!

This thread was raised as an observation on a surprising behaviour of the BrightBox; nothing more.


I hardly think that personal insults are the way to gain friendship or prove any kind of points. Remember, this is just a light hearted discussion, regarding technology. Attacking someone is unfriendly, and I have to be honest with you - I don't appreciate your tone, but nevertheless, I forgive you.

Remember; you know me, no more than I know you. As such, you have zero basis upon which to substantiate your comments of my being "completely unscientific" or "blinkered". I hope your inevitable remorse will allow us to carry on, and be friendly.

Don't take it so seriously!

God bless you smile

Edited by glossywhite (Sun 12-Feb-12 20:11:52)

Standard User XRaySpeX
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Sun 12-Feb-12 20:35:27
Print Post

Re: BrightBox: Can We Believe It?


[re: glossywhite] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by glossywhite:
Keep an open mind. Bias doesn't progress you in these matters.
And I'll remind you of your unfortunate episode with the MTU limitation.

You showed you had no software engineering ability when you coded and published to the world something that you never tested properly. Tho' I hope you will learn.

You showed yourself not amenable and resistant to any peer review of your work.

You knew nothing about MTUs when you started; yet you rejected any advice on it.

Finally, I do not require your blessings and forgiveness. Keep faith systems out of this forum.

1999: Freeserve 48K Dial-Up => 2005: Wanadoo 1 Meg BB => 2007: Orange 2 Meg BB => 2008: Orange 8 Meg LLU => 2010: Orange 16 Meg LLU => 2011: Orange 19 Meg WBC
Standard User glossywhite
(newbie) Sun 12-Feb-12 20:58:31
Print Post

Re: BrightBox: Can We Believe It?


[re: XRaySpeX] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by XRaySpeX:
In reply to a post by glossywhite:
Keep an open mind. Bias doesn't progress you in these matters.
And I'll remind you of your unfortunate episode with the MTU limitation.

You showed you had no software engineering ability when you coded and published to the world something that you never tested properly. Tho' I hope you will learn.

You showed yourself not amenable and resistant to any peer review of your work.

You knew nothing about MTUs when you started; yet you rejected any advice on it.

Finally, I do not require your blessings and forgiveness. Keep faith systems out of this forum.


I doubt any of us are perfect, and it would be foolish of me to let you affect me, as you don't mean any harm, but please; if you persist to cause tension, I have no choice but to report you. I am sorry if I came across as big-headed and unwilling to improve my HTTP method - that was stubborn of me, and I was just excited that I'd managed to get at least that far smile

You are not my judge, nor am I yours. I forgive and bless you, regardless. You're a good man - we all are, and we're all human, as much as you reject me. This is not a religious battle, this is me giving you blessings; you could do a lot worse than to receive blessings smile

Take care.
Standard User XRaySpeX
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Sun 12-Feb-12 21:21:31
Print Post

Re: BrightBox: Can We Believe It?


[re: glossywhite] [link to this post]
 
Report away! And while you are at it report yourself for imposing your religious babble upon others who have no need for it.

If you wish to bring up religion go to Free Chat. Your faith beliefs have no bearing upon technical issues here and can be considered Off Topic.

1999: Freeserve 48K Dial-Up => 2005: Wanadoo 1 Meg BB => 2007: Orange 2 Meg BB => 2008: Orange 8 Meg LLU => 2010: Orange 16 Meg LLU => 2011: Orange 19 Meg WBC
Standard User glossywhite
(newbie) Sun 12-Feb-12 21:28:32
Print Post

Re: BrightBox: Can We Believe It?


[re: XRaySpeX] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by XRaySpeX:
Report away! And while you are at it report yourself for imposing your religious babble upon others who have no need for it.

If you wish to bring up religion go to Free Chat. Your faith beliefs have no bearing upon technical issues here and can be considered Off Topic.


May we start again please? You seem like a good chap, and I don't hold unforgiveness against anyone. I would like to be united with you, not divided from you. I have no intention of reporting you, because it achieves nothing.

The router may well be at fault. What were your readings? Remember, we're not *all* "ADSL geeks" ^_^ and I have much to learn!

Thank you smile

Edited by glossywhite (Sun 12-Feb-12 21:43:46)

Standard User Bmwman1982
(newbie) Thu 29-Mar-12 22:25:11
Print Post

Re: BrightBox: Can We Believe It?


[re: XRaySpeX] [link to this post]
 
Actually Orange use a backbone network that is run by BT between the exchanges using leased lines. From the DSLAM in the exchange to your house is also BT. Technically the WAN from exchange to Exchange is Orange. The only bit that BT hs responsibility for is the local loop.
Standard User Bmwman1982
(newbie) Thu 29-Mar-12 22:28:43
Print Post

Re: BrightBox: Can We Believe It?


[re: XRaySpeX] [link to this post]
 
In response to this post, it is actually the Netgear router that is a problem. Before the bright box orange would give you a £60 bill credit to go buy another router.

And just because Netgear have experience and a good reputation doesn't mean that they are incapable of screwing up.
Standard User BatBoy
(legend) Thu 29-Mar-12 22:39:56
Print Post

Re: BrightBox: Can We Believe It?


[re: Bmwman1982] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by Bmwman1982:
Actually Orange use a backbone network that is run by BT between the exchanges using leased lines.
Technically the WAN from exchange to Exchange is Orange.
That's confusing. Do you mean BT or Orange? you appear to say both confused



______________________________________________________________________________. __________________
Administrator MrSaffron
(staff) Thu 29-Mar-12 22:44:28
Print Post

Re: BrightBox: Can We Believe It?


[re: Bmwman1982] [link to this post]
 
By leased lines you mean the WBC IP fibre backbone, which is very different to a leased line

Andrew Ferguson, [email protected]
www.thinkbroadband.com - formerly known as ADSLguide.org.uk
The author of the above post is a thinkbroadband staff member. It may not constitute an official statement on behalf of thinkbroadband.
Standard User XRaySpeX
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Thu 29-Mar-12 22:57:35
Print Post

Re: BrightBox: Can We Believe It?


[re: Bmwman1982] [link to this post]
 
Did you miss the news about a year ago that Orange gave up running their own network and now sell, but not run or own, BT Wholesale White Label products?

Orange own nothing; it is all run by BT.

1999: Freeserve 48K Dial-Up => 2005: Wanadoo 1 Meg BB => 2007: Orange 2 Meg BB => 2008: Orange 8 Meg LLU => 2010: Orange 16 Meg LLU => 2011: Orange 19 Meg WBC
Standard User XRaySpeX
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Thu 29-Mar-12 23:05:03
Print Post

Re: BrightBox: Can We Believe It?


[re: Bmwman1982] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by Bmwman1982:
In response to this post, it is actually the Netgear router that is a problem. Before the bright box orange would give you a £60 bill credit to go buy another router.
You are referring to the Orange-supplied Netgear DGN1000 which does have bad reports and seems to be a rogue amongst Netgears.

I was actually referring to a clutch of DG834GT and DG834G v4 Broadcom routers which have a good reputation for reliability and holding the line.

1999: Freeserve 48K Dial-Up => 2005: Wanadoo 1 Meg BB => 2007: Orange 2 Meg BB => 2008: Orange 8 Meg LLU => 2010: Orange 16 Meg LLU => 2011: Orange 19 Meg WBC
Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | (show all)   Print Thread

Jump to