Broadband connection problem with two different routers

I've been trying to diagnose a problem with a customer's Dlink DSL-G604T
router which fails to connect to his newly-activated line.

The ISP says that as far as they can tell, the line has been activated for
several days. However they are doing a full line test right now.

In the meantime, can I check that my deductions are correct:

- I've confirmed both with the ISP (Wanadoo) and with Dlink that the
settings (VPI/VCI, Encapsulation, Multiplex, MTU) are correct.

- The DSL light flashes and does not stay on permanently.

- The status page shows 0 Mbps for the up/down link.

- The system log shows repeated DSL Down and DSL training events, but it
never gets to CHAP authentication. So I presume trying with the
bt_test@startup_domain user won't help.

- Plugging into a non-activated phoneline causes the DSL light to remain
permanently off, so the activated line has *something* there.

- A different router (Netgear DG834G) with a different microfilter and DSL
cable also fails to connect: its DSL light flashes amber and never goes
steady green; its log says LCP Down / LCP is coming up / LCP failed


This suggests that there is a problem with the line which either the ISP or
BT need to attend to. Is this correct?

If the ISP's line test comes back with no fault found, is there anything
else that I can check?

The customer says that the phone line has no other extensions. Plugged into
the socket that I was using were a dial-up modem and a fax machine, but I've
tried with only the router plugged into the microfilter. Is there any sort
of test that can be carried out to determine whether the wiring to the
socket is good. Now I think about it, I don't *think* the socket had BT
stamped on it, so it may not be the master socket...

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
Martin Underwood <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I've been trying to diagnose a problem with a customer's Dlink
> DSL-G604T router which fails to connect to his newly-activated line.
>
> The ISP says that as far as they can tell, the line has been
> activated for several days. However they are doing a full line test
> right now.
>
> In the meantime, can I check that my deductions are correct:
>
> - I've confirmed both with the ISP (Wanadoo) and with Dlink that the
> settings (VPI/VCI, Encapsulation, Multiplex, MTU) are correct.
>
> - The DSL light flashes and does not stay on permanently.
>
> - The status page shows 0 Mbps for the up/down link.
>
> - The system log shows repeated DSL Down and DSL training events, but
> it never gets to CHAP authentication. So I presume trying with the
> bt_test@startup_domain user won't help.
>
> - Plugging into a non-activated phoneline causes the DSL light to
> remain permanently off, so the activated line has *something* there.
>
> - A different router (Netgear DG834G) with a different microfilter
> and DSL cable also fails to connect: its DSL light flashes amber and
> never goes steady green; its log says LCP Down / LCP is coming up /
> LCP failed
>
>
> This suggests that there is a problem with the line which either the
> ISP or BT need to attend to. Is this correct?
>
> If the ISP's line test comes back with no fault found, is there
> anything else that I can check?
>
> The customer says that the phone line has no other extensions.
> Plugged into the socket that I was using were a dial-up modem and a
> fax machine, but I've tried with only the router plugged into the
> microfilter. Is there any sort of test that can be carried out to
> determine whether the wiring to the socket is good. Now I think about
> it, I don't *think* the socket had BT stamped on it, so it may not be
> the master socket...

In order to eliminate any possible dodgy extension wiring, you need to
connect to the test socket behind the faceplate on the master (with the
faceplate removed). If possible, use a BT to RJ11 adapter cable with *no*
filter. If it still doesn't work, it's very likely a line problem (unless
*both* bits of kit of duff - which is unlikely). If that *does* work, you
have a problem with extension wiring and/or filters.

If you have *any* suspicions about the extension wiring, use a filtered
faceplace (from Solwise or Clarity) and, if necessary, run a *digital*
extension to the location where the router will be.
--
Cheers,
Tim
______
Please reply to newsgroup. Reply address is invalid.

"Tiscali Tim" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
> Martin Underwood <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> I've been trying to diagnose a problem with a customer's Dlink
>> DSL-G604T router which fails to connect to his newly-activated line.
>>
>> This suggests that there is a problem with the line which either the
>> ISP or BT need to attend to. Is this correct?
>>
>> If the ISP's line test comes back with no fault found, is there
>> anything else that I can check?
>>
>> The customer says that the phone line has no other extensions.
>> Plugged into the socket that I was using were a dial-up modem and a
>> fax machine, but I've tried with only the router plugged into the
>> microfilter. Is there any sort of test that can be carried out to
>> determine whether the wiring to the socket is good. Now I think about
>> it, I don't *think* the socket had BT stamped on it, so it may not be
>> the master socket...
>
> In order to eliminate any possible dodgy extension wiring, you need to
> connect to the test socket behind the faceplate on the master (with the
> faceplate removed). If possible, use a BT to RJ11 adapter cable with *no*
> filter. If it still doesn't work, it's very likely a line problem (unless
> *both* bits of kit of duff - which is unlikely). If that *does* work, you
> have a problem with extension wiring and/or filters.

Yes, I've got a BT to RJ11 cable with the Netgear router. It's only about 5
cm long, but it will do!

I presume the test socket is the one that the faceplate plugs into. Is there
any legal problem with removing the faceplate and plugging into the test
socket - do BT regard it as interfering with their wiring?

The customer is confident that there's nothing plugged into the other socket
on his ADSL/fax line - the (master?) socket in the house - but stranger
things have happened. Certainly it's the next thing to try if the ISP says
that the line is working; unfortunately their test, which they anticipated
would take two hours, is now forecast to take up to 72 hours :-(



> If you have *any* suspicions about the extension wiring, use a filtered
> faceplace (from Solwise or Clarity) and, if necessary, run a *digital*
> extension to the location where the router will be.

Unfortunately he needs analogue as well on that line in order to drive a fax
machine. Laying a new cable is going to be very difficult because the cable
goes from one building to another (not sure whether it's overhead or
underground). If he only needed digital, I'd suggest fitting a wireless card
in his desktop PC (as he has in his laptop) and driving them both from the
router in the main house, and dispense with the line to his office over the
garage. But he needs his fax line. Let's hope it's not a wiring problem
because I'm not up to re-laying phone cable, feeding it up through ducts
within the plaster etc. Leave that sort of thing to BT!

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
Martin Underwood <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
> Yes, I've got a BT to RJ11 cable with the Netgear router. It's only
> about 5 cm long, but it will do!
>
> I presume the test socket is the one that the faceplate plugs into.

Yes.

> Is there any legal problem with removing the faceplate and plugging
> into the test socket - do BT regard it as interfering with their
> wiring?

No. You are allowed to wire your extensions into the back of the faceplate.
The effective interface between BT's responsibility and yours is the test
socket behind the faceplate.

>
> The customer is confident that there's nothing plugged into the other
> socket on his ADSL/fax line - the (master?) socket in the house - but
> stranger things have happened. Certainly it's the next thing to try
> if the ISP says that the line is working; unfortunately their test,
> which they anticipated would take two hours, is now forecast to take
> up to 72 hours :-(
>
>> If you have *any* suspicions about the extension wiring, use a
>> filtered faceplace (from Solwise or Clarity) and, if necessary, run
>> a *digital* extension to the location where the router will be.
>
> Unfortunately he needs analogue as well on that line in order to
> drive a fax machine. Laying a new cable is going to be very difficult
> because the cable goes from one building to another (not sure whether
> it's overhead or underground). If he only needed digital, I'd suggest
> fitting a wireless card in his desktop PC (as he has in his laptop)
> and driving them both from the router in the main house, and dispense
> with the line to his office over the garage. But he needs his fax
> line. Let's hope it's not a wiring problem because I'm not up to
> re-laying phone cable, feeding it up through ducts within the plaster
> etc. Leave that sort of thing to BT!

Well, you've pretty much answered your own question there. The BT master
socket is in the house - and then there is wiring of unknown
specification/quality/route which ends up in another building - where you
expect this BB equipment to work!

You could still possibly use a wireless solution, though. If you install a
filtered faceplate in the master and wire the analog extension wiring (for
the fax etc.) into the back, you can plug a wireless router into the ADSL
socket on the front. Even if the extension wiring is too dodgy to carry the
ADSL signal reliably, the filter in the faceplate will isolate it from the
digital side - so it shouldn't prevent the wireless router from working.
--
Cheers,
Tim
______
Please reply to newsgroup. Reply address is invalid.

On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 20:41:38 +0100, "Martin Underwood"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Unfortunately he needs analogue as well on that line in order to drive a fax
>machine.

note that "digital extension" is a bit of a misnomer - the ADSL socket
is "unfiltered" so the fax machine, phone et al would all work via a
microfilter on the end of an extension taken from the ADSL side of a
filtered faceplate.

The advantage is that the digital extension is just a twisted pair
without the 3rd bell wire and its seperated from all the other wiring
by a filter in the faceplate.

Phil
--
Tiscali - dialup speeds at Broadband prices, see
http://bbs.adslguide.org.uk/postlist...&Board=tiscali

AOL - the unlimited ISP of choice for heavy downloaders.

"Martin Underwood" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:1118425422.4f5a3eb100f4212c80cb43298c4e0f76@t eranews...
> I've been trying to diagnose a problem with a customer's Dlink DSL-G604T
> router which fails to connect to his newly-activated line.
>
> The ISP says that as far as they can tell, the line has been activated for
> several days. However they are doing a full line test right now.
>
> In the meantime, can I check that my deductions are correct:
>
> - I've confirmed both with the ISP (Wanadoo) and with Dlink that the
> settings (VPI/VCI, Encapsulation, Multiplex, MTU) are correct.
>
> - The DSL light flashes and does not stay on permanently.
>
> - The status page shows 0 Mbps for the up/down link.
>
> - The system log shows repeated DSL Down and DSL training events, but it
> never gets to CHAP authentication. So I presume trying with the
> bt_test@startup_domain user won't help.
>
> - Plugging into a non-activated phoneline causes the DSL light to remain
> permanently off, so the activated line has *something* there.
>
> - A different router (Netgear DG834G) with a different microfilter and DSL
> cable also fails to connect: its DSL light flashes amber and never goes
> steady green; its log says LCP Down / LCP is coming up / LCP failed
>
>
> This suggests that there is a problem with the line which either the ISP
> or BT need to attend to. Is this correct?
>
> If the ISP's line test comes back with no fault found, is there anything
> else that I can check?
>
> The customer says that the phone line has no other extensions. Plugged
> into the socket that I was using were a dial-up modem and a fax machine,
> but I've tried with only the router plugged into the microfilter. Is there
> any sort of test that can be carried out to determine whether the wiring
> to the socket is good. Now I think about it, I don't *think* the socket
> had BT stamped on it, so it may not be the master socket...

Find master, take off faceplate, plug router into the socket, it isolates
the line from the household extensions. if you get a sold light, you need a
wall filter, if not, it will not work without BT doing some malarky with the
exchange and the line;.

Gaz