![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
alphabet: Thanks for all the comments. Chorus guy arrived after dark tonight and took a look. Tested at the ETP and confirmed that the problem was on the network, not internally. Went to trace the line and left a message to say there is an issue affecting the whole cabinet and that he would resolve it tomorrow. Fingers crossed it sorts out the VDSL speed issues as well...
Sideface
DSL synchronization status:Up
Connection status:Showtime
Upstream line rate (kbit/s):467
Downstream line rate (kbit/s):14235
Maximum upstream rate (kbit/s):486
Maximum downstream rate (kbit/s):14684
Upstream noise safety coefficient (dB):12
Downstream noise safety coefficient (dB):13.1
Upstream interleave depth:0
Downstream interleave depth:0
Line standard:VDSL
Upstream line attenuation (dB):0
Downstream line attenuation (dB):0
Upstream output power (dBmV):2.8
Downstream output power (dBmV):18.6
Downstream interleave depth:None
DSL up time:5 days 21 hours 43 minutes 33 seconds
Jaxar: It isn't unusual for phone lines to not take a direct route. My understanding a lot of it has to do with the infrastructure being designed pre-xDSL.
At 960m I would not expect an optimal VDSL experience and I would expect your attenuation to be higher than 0.
#include <std_disclaimer>
Any comments made are personal opinion and do not reflect directly on the position my current or past employers may have.
alphabet: ... I walked the line over the weekend, direct path to the Mt Albert exchange is 680m. But the tech thinks the line goes out of my street to a small cabinet (don't think it has equipment in it, just connectors) the wrong way up New North road before looping back to the exchange - making it more like 960m once you include the loop.
Is such poor performance expected over this distance? ...
Sideface
|
![]() ![]() ![]() |