Author Topic: FTTC (VDSL2) and G Vector  (Read 74 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mervl

  • Grand Netter
  • ******
  • Posts: 593
  • Karma: 6
FTTC (VDSL2) and G Vector
« on: Oct 11, 2019, 16:49:49 »
Old hat I know but we're always behind . . .

G Vector (Correction) has just  been enabled at the DSLAM and I have a modem (Fritz) able to take full advantage running on FTC/VDSL2, apparently. (Nothing faster available).

Since installation many moons ago I've been blessed, and stuck, with dropping throughputs, I suspect due to the ever growing local impact of crosstalk on the congested estate, reinforced by the fact they've now fully recovered to where I'm hitting the profile limit I'm paying for. I considered moving to the next 55/10 tier, which the modem now reports as attainable, for a couple of quid more but IDNet are insistent I'd hit the 43 limit they say my line is capable of rather than the 57 attainable now reported by the modem. So far my experience is that throughputs have tracked the modems reported attainable closely, but of course at a much lower (and ever declining) level.

Anyone experience of this with G Vector? I'm thinking that as the error correction is negotiated locally, I'm not sure what IDNet rely on,  presumably an OR formula? It is really just for devilment, rather than necessity I have to admit, to get my line doing the best it can, though I hope it'll now have less dropouts and major errors too, with or without a profile change.

Just out of interest the upload throughputs seem to have halved with G Vector, though I hope this is temporary whilst the DSLAM settles down again. Or they've not adjusted it right yet - the upload SNR is reported as 6, and the download 16, and the upload attenuation has also doubled. I'm  reported by the modem as 750m from the Cab, which seems about right walking it, so I suspect not doing too badly if the modem is right, with our decrepid suburban infrastructure.

I know the standard reply is that FTTP (and Boris) will sort out everything, but we've no demand for it (like most people, I suspect; except those who frequent the forums!)
« Last Edit: Oct 11, 2019, 17:05:59 by mervl »

Offline mervl

  • Grand Netter
  • ******
  • Posts: 593
  • Karma: 6
Re: FTTC (VDSL2) and G Vector
« Reply #1 on: Oct 12, 2019, 09:55:48 »
A further thought. To my (very simple) mind isn't the point of vectoring to eliminate virtually all noise on the line (by counter noise). If so, is there no remaining reason (apart from interference in the premises - only me here + dog, who doesn't generate the right, or wrong, sort of noise) for  the throughput to be less than the attainable - as long as  IDNet's backhaul is up to the job!

Why we've suddenly got vectoring - not a BDUK cab, I have no idea. I thought OR had other priorities and things to spend our money on these days! Perhaps desperation to  deal with the ever increasing drops in throughputs, which were threatening our superfast status, and their local performance stats?

Offline Simon

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 59793
  • Karma: 1071
    • PC Pals Forum
Re: FTTC (VDSL2) and G Vector
« Reply #2 on: Oct 12, 2019, 21:57:37 »
Sorry, Merv, I've no idea on this, but hopefully someone else will. 
This post reflects my own views, opinions and experience, not those of IDNet.

Show unread posts since last visit.

Any information and links published in the forum are posted in good faith, but the forum staff and
owners cannot and do not accept responsibility for the content and accuracy of external websites.