Hmm, Sky BB unstable above 8MB ?

mrk · 25 Jun 2007 at 23:24

I have just sent Sky this email:

...Hi, I have contacted Sky BB support a few times before for poor connection stability and would like to again report poor connectivity. Please find an update below.
1:
- I cannot connect faster than 8.2MB - the most stable connection I am able to retain for any amount of days or weeks has been around 7.6MB.
- If the line syncs at 8MB or above the connection is unstable and randomly websites timeout.
2:
- After monitoring it appears that 7.6MB is the nominal stable speed I can sustain without timeouts or connection issues.
- I am happy to keep paying for an up to 16MB but would like to know if you can lock the speed this connection syncs at to 7.6MB downstream so that I can monitor at 7.6MB for a several weeks?

3:
- I have no issues at all with upload speeds.
Regards....

Has anyone else experienced anything like this? our local exchange is not ADSL2+ enabled yet IIRC hence why I cannot connect faster than 8MB but at 7.6 I have had it weeks without problem, only when the line syncs at 8MB do the problems occur!

I will wait the years contract out I think then move back to NTL 20MB or BE 24MB depending on who can offer the best speed/price!

tolien · 25 Jun 2007 at 23:35

It almost certainly depends on your line, and without the actual sync rate, SNR margin et al it's hard to comment beyond the generic point that increasing sync rate will decrease SNR margin and so increase the chance of instability.

mrk · 25 Jun 2007 at 23:40

The noise margins and rates remain constant regardless of what speed I sync at.

I'll just end up going back to Virgin really I think, had 4 trouble free years on cable, was there from 150kbps all the way to 4MB and connection only went down a few times a year due to regional outages.

Meeeeh! guess ADSL is cheap for a reason!

Edit*

Would it be worth buying a professional quality ADSL filter at all? I'm using the free bundled ones at the moment. I'm guessing only the pro one for the router is needed as no data sections of the line go to handsets etc?

tolien · 25 Jun 2007 at 23:53

mrk said:
Meeeeh! guess ADSL is cheap for a reason!

It's cheap? Barring the Sky/TT cheap deals, it's no cheaper than cable...

I'm guessing only the pro one for the router is needed as no data sections of the line go to handsets etc?

You're guess is a bit flawed - the ADSL side of a filter is a wire. Better quality filters might help, but might not.

There's definitely something odd going on if it's getting another ~500kbps with no change in the SNR margin, though it could be achieved through different bit loading (more bits in lower, higher SNR, bins would give an overall higher SNR margin for a given sync rate), but AFAIK the Netgear won't give bit loading graphs so you can't definitively tell.

Dave85 · 25 Jun 2007 at 23:56

Yup tier 3 can stabilise your line, if not possible at 8mb can cap it to whatever you wish, 7 is the default noise margin for the downstream.

so 7.6mb at 7.2 db seems fine, 8 is probably making your noise margin hit 5-6dbs and dropping the line at peak times.

Just seen your edit: more than likely dropping due to other factors. same applies changes can be made to stabilise it.

mrk · 26 Jun 2007 at 00:03

Hi there, thanks for the responses guys, I will get in contact with Tier 3

Stable 8MB would be awesome indeed

When the line was first activated I was getting random disconnections at any speed but after a call someone the other side regraded the line which fixed it for several weeks, only recently have I had to reboot the router due to moving hardware around and noticed it's unstable at 8MB which was my reason for emailing in.

mrk · 26 Jun 2007 at 00:34

Just did a final speed check for the night too:

And real world download rate:

Hmm

Clarkey · 26 Jun 2007 at 01:13

you know you don't need a filter going to the router, only to the phone recievers.

mrk · 26 Jun 2007 at 01:16

Clarkey said:
you know you don't need a filter going to the router, only to the phone recievers.

Yes you do because the phone cable that plugs into the router does not have a standard phone line plug on either end so a filter needs to be used.

Clarkey · 26 Jun 2007 at 01:30

use a BT plug to RJ11 terminated wire then.

NathP · 26 Jun 2007 at 10:38

Your noise margin is low, this is down to the wiring not being connected properly. I did some rewiring on my master socket and I got the noise margin from 6 to 9.

You can also use this tool to change your noise margin but it will give yourself a slower sync speed but it should be more stable for the time being

http://dg834gt.mognuts.com/NetgearRouterUtility.html

tolien · 26 Jun 2007 at 12:02

FGZ said:
this is down to the wiring not being connected properly

Always? No, it isn't.

mrk · 26 Jun 2007 at 12:57

I can assure you the wiring here is perfectly fine

GSDog · 26 Jun 2007 at 13:03

mrk said:
I can assure you the wiring here is perfectly fine

I would recommend you take a look inside you're mastersocket and check to make sure only wires 2 and 5 are connected. There are some old ring wires (3 and 4 I think) that are no longer needed, when I disconnected these my sync rate went from 7456kbps to 8128kbps and my SNR is now stable at 10db all the time.
It's deffo worth a try.
Also, try plugging the modem directly into the test socket behind the mastersocket's faceplate and see if your sync improves.

mrk · 26 Jun 2007 at 13:05

I will give that a look tonight dude, always worth checking just in case!

GSDog · 26 Jun 2007 at 13:06

mrk said:
I will give that a look tonight dude, always worth checking just in case!

There is a good guide here: http://www.dslzoneuk.net/socket.php

mrk · 26 Jun 2007 at 13:14

Cool cheers, Example 3 is how ours is set up here

mrk · 26 Jun 2007 at 13:27

btw am I right in assuming that if I buy a terminated by RJ11 master socket and attach that I will not need to filter any number of handsets connected to the normal phone socket and just bung the router on the RJ11 ?

because the extension is as in Example 3 on the above link I will need to put the RJ11 socket on the extension BT socket and the master socket too.

Trip to homebase/Focus today I think ;o

GSDog · 26 Jun 2007 at 13:30

mrk said:
btw am I right in assuming that if I buy a terminated by RJ11 master socket and attach that I will not need to filter any number of handsets connected to the normal phone socket and just bung the router on the RJ11 ?

because the extension is as in Example 3 on the above link I will need to put the RJ11 socket on the extension BT socket and the master socket too.

Trip to homebase/Focus today I think ;o

You can buy a filtered faceplate which fits onto the BT NTE5 mastersocket, but you will need to use the modem/router at the mastersocket, but it does mean you will no longer need those annoying dangly, ugly, filters on each of you're phones.

This is my favourite:
Competitor removed
You need to make sure you have the BT NTE5 mastersocket first, because it doesn't fit on the older ones.
I would suggest you first try the modem in the test socket, if you don't see any improvements then it probably isn't worth buying one. If you do see improvements using the test socket, then it will probably make a nice difference.

mrk · 26 Jun 2007 at 13:41

I've tried the test socket before and the difference with not noticable at all really.

Perhaps not worth buying in that case :/

I will keep the wiring as it is as it all works but i hav e a feeling that the additional wires as well as 2 and 5 may be connected on each master/extension socket.