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

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

Take care.

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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

By leased lines you mean the WBC IP fibre backbone, which is very different to a leased line

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.

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.