cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Highlighted
Sage
864 Views
Message 21 of 42

Re: Noise Margin Reduced.

Go to solution
Only Openreach.
0 Ratings
Highlighted
Distinguished Sage
Distinguished Sage
859 Views
Message 22 of 42

Re: Noise Margin Reduced.

Go to solution

.........and they are not telling!! Smiley Happy

0 Ratings
Highlighted
Expert
853 Views
Message 23 of 42

Re: Noise Margin Reduced.

Go to solution

It was a silly question, I knowSmiley LOL

0 Ratings
Highlighted
Distinguished Sage
Distinguished Sage
851 Views
Message 24 of 42

Re: Noise Margin Reduced.

Go to solution

Didn't like to say Smiley LOL

0 Ratings
Highlighted
Expert
819 Views
Message 25 of 42

Re: Noise Margin Reduced.

Go to solution

Ooops, just by chance a posting on another site.

"The phased roll-out should complete by September."

 

 

0 Ratings
Highlighted
781 Views
Message 26 of 42

Re: Noise Margin Reduced.

Go to solution

@RogerB wrote:
Underground ducting for cables is far better than overhead external cables as they don't fall into the environmental impulse noise gap as such ... but even then what becomes more difficult to handle is any crosstalk in the bundles. And why after much expense on same ... BT have implemented G.INP (Phyr technology). Which presently is only running downstream.

Interesting comment you have made.

It's only by deduction that the user can determine if g.inp is enabled.

From the broadband availability check, my cabinet details show that "retransmission" is present, which is presumably related to g.inp.

You can't find a direct, definitive statement:- "g.inp is enabled".

Also transpires that the HH5a, (my previous hub) could not support g.inp fully. Hence the improvement with the HH6.

(I must be one of the fortunate few to have had, or have reported, success with the HH6). Smiley Indifferent

Downstream noise margin is now at 1.8db - now 3 days.

0 Ratings
Highlighted
Expert
769 Views
Message 27 of 42

Re: Noise Margin Reduced.

Go to solution

The following links gives a clue as to when this will be happening:

 

www.thinkbroadband.com/news/7668-openreach-appears-to-be-taking-lower-noise-margin-trail-national.ht...

 

Can't wait until Monday or sometime before September!

 

0 Ratings
Highlighted
Guru
755 Views
Message 28 of 42

Re: Noise Margin Reduced.

Go to solution
Don't shoot the messenger ... but there's an irony to all this. The implementation of G.INP for those that can have it only maybe a "bonus" in part. My thinking is this .... yes you may get to sync higher, at roughly 3mbits for every 20 mbits of "original" sync rate you previously had, but in real terms performance wise you'd not notice the difference in real terms. What's important is THROUGHPUT not sync speed rates. You can have a higher sync rate, but if the line can't sustain the data flow without DLM increasing the error correction rates to counterbalance the effects ... it means little, unless your line is in pristine condition with little or no added impulse noise or REIN. So what's the point? In my mind it serves only to give a minority an extra bit of performance from connections that are already high bandwidth capable, and to satisfy those who think the highest possible sync speed is the golden fleece ... when in fact that's not the case, and given the laws of physics, that cannot be changed and never will be. The prominent word is THROUGHPUT ... that's what counts most. High bandwidth data will only traverse copper wires with complex algorithms ... and you can never get something for nothing, unless of course you are willing to flood the backhaul with corrupted data and that'll not happen. The only real way of reducing error rates, increasing linespeed is by massive investment in national FTTP infrastructure, funded by government. Get rid of the wires and you get rid of the problems. Tiime for government to wake up to that fact.
0 Ratings
Highlighted
Expert
745 Views
Message 29 of 42

Re: Noise Margin Reduced.

Go to solution

RogerB

Good post, thank you.

Being a cynic I could suggest a marketing slant.

The overall stats across the country will, I think, show an increase in speed of some sort.

Plenty of room for advertising.

 

0 Ratings
Highlighted
Distinguished Sage
Distinguished Sage
741 Views
Message 30 of 42

Re: Noise Margin Reduced.

Go to solution

G.Inp will have absolutely no impact on a perfect line, it doesn't increase speed, it restores speed lost to error correction. Throughput will be improved if G.Inp is implemented on a bursty noisy line as the error correction will be performed at the physical layer as and when needed rather than continuously at the TCP layer as before.

0 Ratings