Networking Forums

Networking Forums > Computer Networking > Broadband > Will these specs take 1MB

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes

Will these specs take 1MB

 
 
Paul Landregan
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      10-10-2004, 01:25 PM
I know the attenuation is 5dB over, but there is sufficient SNR margin to
accommodate the 6-8dB drop when moving from 512 to 1MB.
www.thedragon.co.uk/adsl_stats.htm


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Phil Thompson
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      10-10-2004, 02:14 PM
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 14:25:17 +0100, "Paul Landregan"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> but there is sufficient SNR margin to
>accommodate the 6-8dB drop when moving from 512 to 1MB.


looks to be, also its ignoring more than half the available spectrum !
Be outside BT's limits though, so don't hold your breath.

Phil
--
spamcop.net address commissioned 18/06/04
Come on down !
 
Reply With Quote
 
Paul Landregan
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      10-10-2004, 02:48 PM

"Phil Thompson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 14:25:17 +0100, "Paul Landregan"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> but there is sufficient SNR margin to
>>accommodate the 6-8dB drop when moving from 512 to 1MB.

>
> looks to be, also its ignoring more than half the available spectrum !
> Be outside BT's limits though, so don't hold your breath.
>
> Phil
> --
> spamcop.net address commissioned 18/06/04
> Come on down !


I cant understand this either. Why not spread the BIN's out instead of
cramming them at the bottom. Maybe thats what the firmware has told it to
do.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Phil Thompson
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      10-10-2004, 03:40 PM
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 15:48:54 +0100, "Paul Landregan"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I cant understand this either. Why not spread the BIN's out instead of
>cramming them at the bottom. Maybe thats what the firmware has told it to
>do.


either its strategy is to make best use of fewest bins, or there's
some horrendous noise / interference / loss at the higher levels.

Phil
--
spamcop.net address commissioned 18/06/04
Come on down !
 
Reply With Quote
 
TheDragon
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      10-10-2004, 04:33 PM

"Phil Thompson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 15:48:54 +0100, "Paul Landregan"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>I cant understand this either. Why not spread the BIN's out instead of
>>cramming them at the bottom. Maybe thats what the firmware has told it to
>>do.

>
> either its strategy is to make best use of fewest bins, or there's
> some horrendous noise / interference / loss at the higher levels.
>
> Phil
> --
> spamcop.net address commissioned 18/06/04
> Come on down !


Maybe the latter as I am 6.4km from the exchange.



 
Reply With Quote
 
Phil Thompson
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      10-10-2004, 08:14 PM
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 15:48:54 +0100, "Paul Landregan"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I cant understand this either. Why not spread the BIN's out instead of
>cramming them at the bottom. Maybe thats what the firmware has told it to
>do.


what version - is this the "long distance" firmware or whatever they
call it, for dodgy lines ?

Phil
--
spamcop.net address commissioned 18/06/04
Come on down !
 
Reply With Quote
 
TheDragon
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      10-11-2004, 04:52 PM

"Phil Thompson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 15:48:54 +0100, "Paul Landregan"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>I cant understand this either. Why not spread the BIN's out instead of
>>cramming them at the bottom. Maybe thats what the firmware has told it to
>>do.

>
> what version - is this the "long distance" firmware or whatever they
> call it, for dodgy lines ?
>
> Phil
> --
> spamcop.net address commissioned 18/06/04
> Come on down !


No, its the regular version 2.5.5


 
Reply With Quote
 
TheDragon
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      10-29-2004, 02:54 PM

"Phil Thompson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 14:25:17 +0100, "Paul Landregan"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> but there is sufficient SNR margin to
>>accommodate the 6-8dB drop when moving from 512 to 1MB.

>
> looks to be, also its ignoring more than half the available spectrum !
> Be outside BT's limits though, so don't hold your breath.
>
> Phil
> --
> spamcop.net address commissioned 18/06/04
> Come on down !


Just got a call from a lovely BT manager called Stacey. By order has been
accepted, and the activation date is the 3rd of November.

So with current SNR margin at 21dB, 6db give 15dB after the re-grade. Still
plenty to spare.




 
Reply With Quote
 
TheDragon
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      11-06-2004, 04:32 PM
Forgot to update once service was enabled. Hapilly running at 1 Meg. SNR
Margin 13.5 dB, slightly lower that expected but still perfectly acceptable.
Error Rate is around 99.998% again perfectly aceptable.
Stats avalable on my website. www.thedragon.co.uk/adsl_stats.htm


 
Reply With Quote
 
Phil Thompson
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      11-06-2004, 06:26 PM
On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 17:32:52 -0000, "TheDragon" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Forgot to update once service was enabled. Hapilly running at 1 Meg.


cool. It still doesn't like high fequencies I see :-)

Phil
--
spamcop.net address commissioned 18/06/04
Come on down !
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DD-WRT? tomato? specs? mike Network Routers 9 02-13-2010 04:02 PM
wireless specs William Andersen Wireless Internet 9 02-27-2008 12:20 AM
Plusnet specs anth Broadband 1 06-22-2004 02:10 PM
801.11g Specs Fred Atkinson Wireless Internet 1 09-28-2003 07:52 PM
802.11 specs waldman Wireless Internet 1 09-05-2003 09:20 PM



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11