Hi-

I have a Plusnet "up to 2Mb/s" ADSL package. ADSL has just become
available where I live, and we are a long way from the exchange, so I
didn't expect 2Mb/s! According to RAC site, it's a 6.5km drive, and
since the phone lines usually follow the road, that's probably the
line length too.

I'm getting a reported speed of 576Mb/s from the modem, and the speed
test at adslguide gives much the same - about 520 IIRC.

My BT drop cable from the pole has been recently replaced btw.

I'm just wondering if there is likely to be anything I can do to
increase this speed a little?

The main things I was thinking of were perhaps a different modem (I
currently have an Alcatel USB Speedtouch modem) as I wonder if some
handle long lines better, or perhaps looking at quality of the
internal extension socket wiring in my house, which is quite old.

I'm not sure the house cabling will be significant when compared to
several km of telephone cable. I guess I could test by temporarily
disconnecting all other wiring, and plugging into the master socket.

I really want to know before I start fiddling.. is it worth it? Or is
this value probably the best I'm going to get?

Thanks in advance.

"John Carlyle-Clarke" <john.cc@nospam.europlacer.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Xns967775F09747Ejohncceuroplacercouk@192.168. 1.69...
line length. Don't underestimate the route that some lines go. My home is
approx 2km from the exchange, but 17070 reports that the line length is
3.8km (don't know where the wires are routed, probably via timbucktoo).

Also line speed is not just about distance from the exchange. It is also to
do about the quality of the pair used to feed your house. Old wires (or
wires made from something other than copper) will affect the max line speed.

ABC <simonbray@nospamemail.afraid.org> wrote:
: >
: There's not a lot you can do. You could dial 17070 and find out an approx
: line length.

This has been disabled in most areas (in fact I had though *ALL* areas!)

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 11:00:06 GMT, "John Carlyle-Clarke"
<john.cc@nospam.europlacer.co.uk> wrote:

that'll be 576 kbps ie you have a Home500 connection on account of the
line length.

no. The systems are set up to connect at either 500, 1000 or 2000 and
if they can't manage it they fail to connect.

If you have line statistics you may be able to make a case for a 1M
connection, see http://www.pipexsupport.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?t=3408
for how to get them. BT limit for 1M is 60 dB downstream attenuation,
you need a Noise / SNR margin of 15 or more now if 1M is to work.

Phil

On 16 Jun 2005 11:00 GMT, "John Carlyle-Clarke" wrote:

Didn't know anyone had a fast enough PC to handle 576 Mb/s :-)
but anyway, on the assumption that the connection has only recently been
activated, Plus.Net would have asked for the highest workable speed, and
BT may have made some check, and found that losses/distance would likely
render higher speeds unreliable. Not sure whether you can easily get to
see line attenuation figures from the ADSL modem you are using, but that
would be a starting point. Use <http://groups.google.com/> and you will
see figures which are the maximum that BT currently allow for speeds (at
a guess, you'd need attenuation below 43dB for 2000 kbps, and 60db for a
connection at 1000 kbps, but also see www.ADSLguide.org for specifics if
they are mentioned - I did start looking but have some e-mail to answer).

Also try <http://www.bt.com/broadband/> which indicate what might work:

For Telephone Number 01xxxxxxxx on Exchange XXXXXXX

Your exchange has ADSL broadband.

Our initial test on your line indicates that you should be able to have
an ADSL broadband service that provides 2Mbps, 1Mbps, 512Kbps or 256Kbps
download speed.

(That's the text I see... it doesn't mention, because it's the BT check,
that Bulldog is now offering 8064 kbps at my exchange :-) However, one
can get wider information from www.samknows.com (though I don't know if
there's any mention of how up-to-date the data is - some recent posts
did suggest some info might be old). Good luck ! Peter M.

--

UK ADSL <http://tinyurl.com/dghgq> - Happy to save cash with Plus.Net!!
E-mail + files - 30 day free trial - <http://web.vfm-deals.com/runbox/>
USENET news service? <http://tinyurl.com/3rjw4> (plans from under US$5)

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
John Carlyle-Clarke <john.cc@nospam.europlacer.co.uk> wrote:

If you have an NTE5 master socket with removeable faceplate, temporarily
remove the faceplate (which will disconnect all your extension wiring) and
plug your ADSL kit into the test socket behind the faceplate. If this
results in an increase in speed, you would benefit from fitting a filtered
faceplate - such as the modifed one from Clarity
http://www.clarity.it/telecoms/adsl_faceplate.htm - and wiring a digital
extension (preferably with CAT5 cable) from it to a point near to where your
ADSL kit needs to connect.
--
Cheers,
Tim
______
Please reply to newsgroup. Reply address is invalid.

Peter M <us-mail@rocketmail.com> wrote in
news:spq2b1tqtbn3o5bql5suk4vkpbdhl441h2@212.159.2. 85:

FWIW, Mb = megabit, MB = megabyte

--
Phil
http://www.philipchung.co.uk/

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 13:33:07 +0100, "Tiscali Tim" <tele@privacy.net>
wrote:

since when have BT been doing downstream rate adaption ? it has synced
at 578k and that isn't going to change by goofing around with the
customers wiring, surely ?

Phil

Phil Thompson <cynical_observer@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:a4r2b1lkr857mrmuamfvfo6rnc94mer4i3@4ax.com:

That's interesting. I'll see if I can borrow a modem or router that
will give this info, as according that page, mine won't.

So the line rates are fixed to one of those values you mention? I
assumed they'd be more like a PSTN modem which can switch up and
down depending on line quality. I imagine that one can lose
*effective* speed as a result of poor line quality due to errors and
retries - is that right? But if the speed tester measures my
effective rate as very near to the reported rate, then I imagine
there's nothing I can really improve, unless I can make the case for
a 1Mb/s line.

"Tiscali Tim" <tele@privacy.net> wrote in news:3hd9rrFgik5hU1
@individual.net:

Great link.. thanks!

Peter M <us-mail@rocketmail.com> wrote in
news:spq2b1tqtbn3o5bql5suk4vkpbdhl441h2@212.159.2. 85:

D'oh!

"Our initial test on your line indicates that you may be able to have
an ADSL broadband service that provides 512Kbps or 256Kbps download
speed. However, due to the length of your line, an engineer visit may
be required, who will, where possible, supply the broadband service."

Interesting.. thanks!

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 13:58:08 GMT, "John Carlyle-Clarke"
<john.cc@nospam.europlacer.co.uk> wrote:

correct, that is current BT practice

the kit is capable of this, BT use that method for the upstream on
512k lines and Bulldog and UKOnline use it for their downstream. When
IPStream HomeMAX comes along it'll do it toom probably.

yes, error counters will show that. But if you download over 50
kbytes/s on a Home500 link you're doing OK.

agreed. Speed tests are generally well over 90% of the rated line
speed unless something is wrong or the exchange is over-congested.

Phil

Phil <pylchung@hotmail.com> wrote in news:Xns96778F2B143CBpelhamnet@
127.0.0.1:

As I'm sure everyone guessed, I meant kb/s

"John Carlyle-Clarke" <john.cc@nospam.europlacer.co.uk> wrote in
news:Xns96779B58B34B1johncceuroplacercouk@192.168. 1.69:

Yeah, and I misread it here too :-)

--
Phil
http://www.philipchung.co.uk/

On 16 Jun 2005 13:58 GMT, "John Carlyle-Clarke" wrote:

While that tester is sometimes in error, it does seem unlikely that you
can expect *reliable* higher speeds. Without knowing the loss on the
line, it's difficult to be sure, of course. Peter M.

--

UK ADSL <http://tinyurl.com/dghgq> - Happy to save cash with Plus.Net!!
E-mail + files - 30 day free trial - <http://web.vfm-deals.com/runbox/>
USENET news service? <http://tinyurl.com/3rjw4> (plans from under US$5)

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 15:00:58 GMT, "John Carlyle-Clarke"
<john.cc@nospam.europlacer.co.uk> wrote:

<pedantic mode>

That'll be Kb/s

</pedantic mode>

--
Cheers,

Guy

** Stress - the condition brought about by having to
** resist the temptation to beat the living daylights
** out of someone who richly deserves it.

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 08:58:53 +0100, Dr Teeth
<no.email.here.please@tardis.com> wrote:

debatable, k is the SI prefix for 1000. K is ill-defined.

Kib/s is the IEC standard version for 1024 bits/s

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilobyte

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.

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 10:52:01 +0100, Phil Thompson
<phil.thompson@spamcop.net> wrote:

There is no debate about SI units at all. [ :-) ]
k is the SI *prefix* for 1000 (10 to the power 3).
K is the *abbreviation* assigned to the SI *fundamental* unit of
temperature.

Wikipedia is, as usual, wrong. Discussing M and m it says:

"Higher-order SI prefixes are therefore used with either decimal
(powers of 1000) or binary (powers of 1024) values, depending on
context".

M and m are two of (at least) 20 SI defined prefixes and any attempt
to pretend they mean something else, hinting at SI approval depending
on context, is hubris.

--
cerberus

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 11:44:58 +0100,
do.not.waste.your.time.emailing.me@t...s.it .is.invalid wrote:

yes I slept through that Kelvin connection.

The IEC approach seems to meet all needs, providing pedants with
binary multipliers and avoiding screwing up a good system.

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.

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 11:44:58 +0100,
do.not.waste.your.time.emailing.me@t...s.it .is.invalid wrote:

Got it now.

Got confused between all the other 'd' and 'D' instances, for example.

--
Cheers,

Guy

** Stress - the condition brought about by having to
** resist the temptation to beat the living daylights
** out of someone who richly deserves it.