POTS line quality help
in [Design]
|
From: JosephKK on 27 Apr 2010 21:52 On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 12:06:25 -0700, Robert Baer <robertbaer(a)localnet.com> wrote: >JosephKK wrote: >> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:29:17 -0700, Robert Baer <robertbaer(a)localnet.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Once upon a time, a long time ago, there was only analog modems and >>> nice paper manuals came with them. >>> Some of those manuals, in the back discussed that for best use, one >>> should order a specific quality of phone line and disclosed the BELLCO >>> designation to use when ordering the line. >>> As i remember it, that designation was something simple like (making >>> this up) Z9. >>> I think that the TekCom modem manual at that time was one that gave >>> that info. >>> Question: What is that designation? >>> Thanks. >> >> The last i heard you wanted a 3002 line. Should be able to provide 56k >> on typical current modems. > THANK YOU!!!!! > I will see if that works here with Qwest in as much as they are >rather customer hostile; they only want money and care less about >anything else. > You make a call and find the line busy; an *automated* voice prompts >"for _only_ eightyfive cents we will try your call for later delivery" >(price something like that) Never Mind that it _costs_ them NOTHING to >do this; it is a way of extracting money from captive customers. > I could cite a fair number of other examples like the phone line >problem i have. > Up to about 6 months ago (roughly) i could reliably connect at 45K to >48+Kbaud and then all of a sudden i got 28.8Kbaud and now am at 26.4K >and who knows how more it will sink? > The have been actively pushing DSL like crazy (3-5 inserts in monthly >bills, newspaper ads, etc) and PURPOSELY choking modem bandwidth to >"force" a change in $pending (= = ca$h to them). > Too bad the internet does not connect by way of semaphore flags... Have you seen the RFC on carrier pigeons?
From: Michael A. Terrell on 27 Apr 2010 21:55 Martin Brown wrote: > > denali wrote: > > On Apr 27, 12:08 am, Martin Brown <|||newspam...(a)nezumi.demon.co.uk> > > wrote: > >> denali wrote: > >>> FYI, RE: JB's post.. leased line parameters are in no way applicable > >>> to switched services. Forget about 3002 channels, etc. > >>> Since you had better data service that has become degraded, something > >>> is clearly wrong somewhere. > >> Not wrong. Different. He should force a V34+ connection and see if that > >> behaves any better - but he doesn't listen to advice. > >> > >> Most likely one of his neighbours has moved to ADSL and the engineers > >> have pinched his real copper circuit for that. Multiplexed local lines > >> do not carry 56k signals at all well. The older analogue technology > >> modems are a bit more robust in that environment. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Martin Brown > > > > Your 56k comment is correct, but the point here is that he can't even > > to 28.8, which narrows the likely problem/solution. Nothing is gained > > by considering your point. > > > > D > > The telco frees up a real copper circuit for a higher value customer, > and puts the cheapskates with basic phone only onto shared multiplexed > lines. That destroys 56k and derivatives functioning at anything like > full speed. V34+ will work better if the problem is as I describe. Real copper? A lot of the US has gone to Fiber optics to within a mile or two of your home. I haven't seen much copper in Florida for close to 20 years, except for the 'last mile'.
From: krw on 27 Apr 2010 23:37 On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 21:55:53 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > >Martin Brown wrote: >> >> denali wrote: >> > On Apr 27, 12:08 am, Martin Brown <|||newspam...(a)nezumi.demon.co.uk> >> > wrote: >> >> denali wrote: >> >>> FYI, RE: JB's post.. leased line parameters are in no way applicable >> >>> to switched services. Forget about 3002 channels, etc. >> >>> Since you had better data service that has become degraded, something >> >>> is clearly wrong somewhere. >> >> Not wrong. Different. He should force a V34+ connection and see if that >> >> behaves any better - but he doesn't listen to advice. >> >> >> >> Most likely one of his neighbours has moved to ADSL and the engineers >> >> have pinched his real copper circuit for that. Multiplexed local lines >> >> do not carry 56k signals at all well. The older analogue technology >> >> modems are a bit more robust in that environment. >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Martin Brown >> > >> > Your 56k comment is correct, but the point here is that he can't even >> > to 28.8, which narrows the likely problem/solution. Nothing is gained >> > by considering your point. >> > >> > D >> >> The telco frees up a real copper circuit for a higher value customer, >> and puts the cheapskates with basic phone only onto shared multiplexed >> lines. That destroys 56k and derivatives functioning at anything like >> full speed. V34+ will work better if the problem is as I describe. > > > Real copper? A lot of the US has gone to Fiber optics to within a >mile or two of your home. I haven't seen much copper in Florida for >close to 20 years, except for the 'last mile'. I had four miles of copper between my house and the CO in VT, on one line (the other went to an extender/mux in the neighborhood). Here, it's more like three (just at the limit of DSL, according to AT&T).
From: Michael A. Terrell on 27 Apr 2010 23:48 "krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" wrote: > > On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 21:55:53 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell" > <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > > > > >Martin Brown wrote: > >> > >> denali wrote: > >> > On Apr 27, 12:08 am, Martin Brown <|||newspam...(a)nezumi.demon.co.uk> > >> > wrote: > >> >> denali wrote: > >> >>> FYI, RE: JB's post.. leased line parameters are in no way applicable > >> >>> to switched services. Forget about 3002 channels, etc. > >> >>> Since you had better data service that has become degraded, something > >> >>> is clearly wrong somewhere. > >> >> Not wrong. Different. He should force a V34+ connection and see if that > >> >> behaves any better - but he doesn't listen to advice. > >> >> > >> >> Most likely one of his neighbours has moved to ADSL and the engineers > >> >> have pinched his real copper circuit for that. Multiplexed local lines > >> >> do not carry 56k signals at all well. The older analogue technology > >> >> modems are a bit more robust in that environment. > >> >> > >> >> Regards, > >> >> Martin Brown > >> > > >> > Your 56k comment is correct, but the point here is that he can't even > >> > to 28.8, which narrows the likely problem/solution. Nothing is gained > >> > by considering your point. > >> > > >> > D > >> > >> The telco frees up a real copper circuit for a higher value customer, > >> and puts the cheapskates with basic phone only onto shared multiplexed > >> lines. That destroys 56k and derivatives functioning at anything like > >> full speed. V34+ will work better if the problem is as I describe. > > > > > > Real copper? A lot of the US has gone to Fiber optics to within a > >mile or two of your home. I haven't seen much copper in Florida for > >close to 20 years, except for the 'last mile'. > > I had four miles of copper between my house and the CO in VT, on one line (the > other went to an extender/mux in the neighborhood). Here, it's more like > three (just at the limit of DSL, according to AT&T). A large scale phase out of copper started in this area about 20 years ago. The large CO buildings are gone, and replaced with facilities that look like a two car garage. Between all the lakes, low lying land with standing water part of the year & lightning, they have reduced the outages quite a bit. There is a group of Century Link cabinets less than a mile from here that convert from fiber to copper. There was no DSL in this area until the conversion to fiber truck to the nearest switching center. Now there is so much 'last mile' copper that the DSL can be installed on a separate pair.
From: JosephKK on 28 Apr 2010 00:26
On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 11:39:06 -0700, Robert Baer <robertbaer(a)localnet.com> wrote: >Martin Brown wrote: >> Robert Baer wrote: >>> Martin Brown wrote: >>>> denali wrote: >>>>> FYI, RE: JB's post.. leased line parameters are in no way applicable >>>>> to switched services. Forget about 3002 channels, etc. >>>>> >>>>> Since you had better data service that has become degraded, something >>>>> is clearly wrong somewhere. >>>> >>>> Not wrong. Different. He should force a V34+ connection and see if >>>> that behaves any better - but he doesn't listen to advice. >>>> >>>> Most likely one of his neighbours has moved to ADSL and the engineers >>>> have pinched his real copper circuit for that. Multiplexed local >>>> lines do not carry 56k signals at all well. The older analogue >>>> technology modems are a bit more robust in that environment. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Martin Brown >>> Well,now if i KNEW how to force V34+ i would try. >> >> You should pay more attention to the postings in this thread and also >> ask on comp.modems and/or us.telecom or whatever it is called. They will >> know where you can dial into for a DIY line bandwidth test. Assuming >> that end users are allowed to do such things in "the land of the free". >> >> You might find a prehistoric early 56k UK FAQ helpful in trying to >> configure your modem to work retro style. >> >> http://www.pierrot.demon.co.uk/faq/dtm.faq >> >> (it is well out of date and UK based but still has good hints) >> >> Regards, >> Martin Brown > I have that UK reference and it is interesting and a bit informative. > I have TerraTerm Pro but i cannot use it with my ISP to do any testing. > If i ATDTetc in, that works and see the prompt for username but +++ >does not escape to modem; if i am online like now, TerraTerm barfs. > So _that_ type of testing is out unless there is another number or >alternate to try. > One of the suggested tests was with >http://www.whichvoip.com/voip/speed_test/ppspeed.html and jitter was >610mSec, packet loss of 0%, MOS score (whatever that is) of 2.9, >download speed 26.2K, upload speed of 21.5k and QOS at 92%. > Measured loop current 35mA, different US Robotics modem acts the same. OK. It seems that TerraTerm Pro is part of the problem. XP comes with a properly primitive terminal program though. You might try that. |