cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Disconnect Issues, now Speed Reductions, waaay past annoyed now

tonyb55
Grafter
Posts: 29
Thanks: 3
Registered: ‎31-10-2016

Re: Disconnect Issues, now Speed Reductions, waaay past annoyed now

Disconnection Problem appears to be back also

Oct 9 21:00:39 pppd[359]: Hangup (SIGHUP)
Oct 9 21:00:39 pppd[359]: Connect time 2953.6 minutes.
Oct 9 21:00:39 pppd[359]: Sent 1049210326 bytes, received 640198253 bytes.
Oct 9 21:00:39 miniupnpd[969]: Failed to get IP for interface ppp0
Oct 9 21:00:39 miniupnpd[969]: SendNATPMPPublicAddressChangeNotification: cannot get public IP address, stopping
Oct 9 21:00:39 pppd[359]: Terminating on signal 15
Oct 9 21:00:39 pppd[359]: Connection terminated.
Oct 9 21:00:39 pppd[359]: Sent PADT
Oct 9 21:00:40 dnsmasq[223]: read /etc/hosts - 5 addresses
Oct 9 21:00:40 dnsmasq[223]: read /etc/hosts.dnsmasq - 19 addresses
Oct 9 21:00:40 dnsmasq[223]: using nameserver *.*.*.*#53
Oct 9 21:00:40 dnsmasq[223]: using nameserver *.*.*.*#53
Oct 9 21:00:40 pppd[359]: Terminating on signal 15
Oct 9 21:00:40 pppd[359]: Exit.
Oct 9 21:00:40 kernel: Attempt to kill tasklet from interrupt
Oct 9 21:00:40 kernel: et1: et_mvlan_netdev_event: event 9 for vlan1 mvlan_en 0
Oct 9 21:00:40 kernel: device eth0 left promiscuous mode
Oct 9 21:00:40 kernel: br0: port 1(vlan1) entering forwarding state
Oct 9 21:00:40 kernel: br0: topology change detected, propagating
Oct 9 21:00:40 kernel: et1: et_mvlan_netdev_event: event 2 for vlan1 mvlan_en 0
Oct 9 21:00:40 kernel: et1: et_mvlan_netdev_event: event 13 for vlan1 mvlan_en 0
Oct 9 21:00:40 kernel: device eth0 entered promiscuous mode
Oct 9 21:00:40 kernel: br0: topology change detected, propagating
Oct 9 21:00:40 kernel: br0: port 1(vlan1) entering forwarding state
Oct 9 21:00:40 kernel: br0: port 1(vlan1) entering forwarding state
Oct 9 21:00:40 kernel: et1: et_mvlan_netdev_event: event 1 for vlan1 mvlan_en 0
Oct 9 21:00:40 kernel: et1: et_mvlan_netdev_event: event 13 for vlan2 mvlan_en 0
Oct 9 21:00:40 kernel: et1: et_mvlan_netdev_event: event 1 for vlan2 mvlan_en 0
Oct 9 21:00:40 kernel: et1: et_mvlan_netdev_event: event 4 for vlan1 mvlan_en 0
Oct 9 21:00:42 wan: [wan0_hwaddr] == [**:**:**:**:**:**]
Oct 9 21:00:42 pppd[24976]: Plugin rp-pppoe.so loaded.
Oct 9 21:00:42 pppd[24976]: RP-PPPoE plugin version 3.11 compiled against pppd 2.4.7
Oct 9 21:00:42 pppd[24978]: pppd 2.4.7 started by ************, uid 0
Oct 9 21:00:42 pppd[24978]: PPP session is 8063 (0x1f7f)
Oct 9 21:00:42 pppd[24978]: Connected to f*:**:**:**:f*:** via interface eth0
Oct 9 21:00:42 pppd[24978]: Using interface ppp0
Oct 9 21:00:42 pppd[24978]: Connect: ppp0 <--> eth0
Oct 9 21:00:45 pppd[24978]: CHAP authentication succeeded: CHAP authentication success
Oct 9 21:00:45 pppd[24978]: CHAP authentication succeeded
Oct 9 21:00:45 pppd[24978]: peer from calling number f*:**:**:**:f*:** authorized
Oct 9 21:00:45 miniupnpd[969]: Failed to get IP for interface ppp0
Oct 9 21:00:45 miniupnpd[969]: SendNATPMPPublicAddressChangeNotification: cannot get public IP address, stopping
Oct 9 21:00:45 miniupnpd[969]: Failed to get IP for interface ppp0
Oct 9 21:00:45 miniupnpd[969]: SendNATPMPPublicAddressChangeNotification: cannot get public IP address, stopping
Oct 9 21:00:45 miniupnpd[969]: Failed to get IP for interface ppp0
Oct 9 21:00:45 miniupnpd[969]: SendNATPMPPublicAddressChangeNotification: cannot get public IP address, stopping
Oct 9 21:00:45 pppd[24978]: local IP address 51.*.***.**
Oct 9 21:00:45 pppd[24978]: remote IP address 172.**.**.***
Oct 9 21:00:45 miniupnpd[969]: ioctl(s, SIOCGIFADDR, ...): Cannot assign requested address
Oct 9 21:00:45 miniupnpd[969]: ioctl(s, SIOCGIFADDR, ...): Cannot assign requested address
Oct 9 21:00:45 miniupnpd[969]: Failed to get IP for interface ppp0
Oct 9 21:00:45 miniupnpd[969]: SendNATPMPPublicAddressChangeNotification: cannot get public IP address, stopping
Oct 9 21:00:45 rc_service: ip-up 24983:notify_rc start_firewall
Oct 9 21:00:45 dnsmasq[223]: read /etc/hosts - 5 addresses
Oct 9 21:00:45 dnsmasq[223]: read /etc/hosts.dnsmasq - 19 addresses
Oct 9 21:00:45 dnsmasq[223]: using nameserver *.*.*.*#53
Oct 9 21:00:45 dnsmasq[223]: using nameserver *.*.*.*#53
Oct 9 21:00:46 miniupnpd[969]: shutting down MiniUPnPd
Oct 9 21:00:46 nat: apply nat rules (/tmp/nat_rules_ppp0_eth0)
Oct 9 21:00:46 wan: finish adding multi routes
Oct 9 21:00:46 miniupnpd[25026]: HTTP listening on port 52536
Oct 9 21:00:46 miniupnpd[25026]: Listening for NAT-PMP/PCP traffic on port 5351
Oct 9 21:00:47 rc_service: ip-up 24983:notify_rc stop_upnp
Oct 9 21:00:47 rc_service: ip-up 24983:notify_rc start_upnp
Oct 9 21:00:47 rc_service: waitting "stop_upnp" via ip-up ...
Oct 9 21:00:47 miniupnpd[25026]: shutting down MiniUPnPd
Oct 9 21:00:48 miniupnpd[25031]: HTTP listening on port 48884
Oct 9 21:00:48 miniupnpd[25031]: Listening for NAT-PMP/PCP traffic on port 5351
Oct 9 21:01:03 rc_service: zcip 25068:notify_rc start_firewall
Oct 9 21:01:03 dnsmasq[223]: read /etc/hosts - 5 addresses
Oct 9 21:01:03 dnsmasq[223]: read /etc/hosts.dnsmasq - 19 addresses
Oct 9 21:01:03 dnsmasq[223]: using nameserver *.*.*.*#53
Oct 9 21:01:03 dnsmasq[223]: using nameserver *.*.*.*#53
Oct 9 21:01:03 zcip_client: configured 169.***.***.***
Oct 9 21:01:04 miniupnpd[25031]: shutting down MiniUPnPd
Oct 9 21:01:04 nat: apply nat rules (/tmp/nat_rules_ppp0_eth0)
Oct 9 21:01:04 miniupnpd[25094]: HTTP listening on port 43628
Oct 9 21:01:04 miniupnpd[25094]: Listening for NAT-PMP/PCP traffic on port 5351
Oct 10 00:07:01 pppd[24978]: No response to 10 echo-requests
Oct 10 00:07:01 pppd[24978]: Serial link appears to be disconnected.
Oct 10 00:07:01 pppd[24978]: Connect time 186.3 minutes.
Oct 10 00:07:01 pppd[24978]: Sent 193113880 bytes, received 3226494655 bytes.
Oct 10 00:07:01 miniupnpd[25094]: Failed to get IP for interface ppp0
Oct 10 00:07:01 miniupnpd[25094]: SendNATPMPPublicAddressChangeNotification: cannot get public IP address, stopping
Oct 10 00:07:01 dnsmasq[223]: read /etc/hosts - 5 addresses
Oct 10 00:07:01 dnsmasq[223]: read /etc/hosts.dnsmasq - 19 addresses
Oct 10 00:07:01 dnsmasq[223]: using nameserver *.*.*.*#53
Oct 10 00:07:01 dnsmasq[223]: using nameserver *.*.*.*#53
Oct 10 00:07:05 WAN_Connection: Fail to connect with some issues.
Oct 10 00:07:05 DualWAN: skip single wan wan_led_control - WANRED off
Oct 10 00:07:07 pppd[24978]: Connection terminated.
Oct 10 00:07:07 pppd[24978]: Sent PADT
Oct 10 00:07:07 pppd[24978]: Modem hangup
Oct 10 00:07:52 pppd[24978]: Timeout waiting for PADO packets
Oct 10 00:09:07 pppd[24978]: Timeout waiting for PADO packets
Oct 10 00:10:22 pppd[24978]: Timeout waiting for PADO packets
Oct 10 00:11:37 pppd[24978]: Timeout waiting for PADO packets
Oct 10 00:12:52 pppd[24978]: Timeout waiting for PADO packets
Oct 10 00:13:27 pppd[24978]: PPP session is 2140 (0x85c)
Oct 10 00:13:27 pppd[24978]: Connected to f*:**:**:**:f*:** via interface eth0
Oct 10 00:13:27 pppd[24978]: Using interface ppp0
Oct 10 00:13:27 pppd[24978]: Connect: ppp0 <--> eth0
Oct 10 00:13:27 pppd[24978]: CHAP authentication succeeded: CHAP authentication success
Oct 10 00:13:27 pppd[24978]: CHAP authentication succeeded
Oct 10 00:13:27 pppd[24978]: peer from calling number f*:**:**:**:f*:** authorized
Oct 10 00:13:27 miniupnpd[25094]: Failed to get IP for interface ppp0
Oct 10 00:13:27 miniupnpd[25094]: SendNATPMPPublicAddressChangeNotification: cannot get public IP address, stopping
Oct 10 00:13:27 miniupnpd[25094]: Failed to get IP for interface ppp0
Oct 10 00:13:27 miniupnpd[25094]: SendNATPMPPublicAddressChangeNotification: cannot get public IP address, stopping
Oct 10 00:13:27 miniupnpd[25094]: Failed to get IP for interface ppp0
Oct 10 00:13:27 miniupnpd[25094]: SendNATPMPPublicAddressChangeNotification: cannot get public IP address, stopping
Oct 10 00:13:27 pppd[24978]: local IP address 146.***.***.***
Oct 10 00:13:27 pppd[24978]: remote IP address 172.**.**.***
Oct 10 00:13:27 miniupnpd[25094]: ioctl(s, SIOCGIFADDR, ...): Cannot assign requested address
Oct 10 00:13:27 miniupnpd[25094]: ioctl(s, SIOCGIFADDR, ...): Cannot assign requested address
Oct 10 00:13:27 miniupnpd[25094]: Failed to get IP for interface ppp0
Oct 10 00:13:27 miniupnpd[25094]: SendNATPMPPublicAddressChangeNotification: cannot get public IP address, stopping
Oct 10 00:13:27 rc_service: ip-up 30918:notify_rc start_firewall
Oct 10 00:13:27 dnsmasq[223]: read /etc/hosts - 5 addresses
Oct 10 00:13:27 dnsmasq[223]: read /etc/hosts.dnsmasq - 19 addresses
Oct 10 00:13:27 dnsmasq[223]: using nameserver *.*.*.*#53
Oct 10 00:13:27 dnsmasq[223]: using nameserver *.*.*.*#53
Oct 10 00:13:28 miniupnpd[25094]: shutting down MiniUPnPd
Oct 10 00:13:29 nat: apply nat rules (/tmp/nat_rules_ppp0_eth0)
Oct 10 00:13:29 wan: finish adding multi routes
Oct 10 00:13:29 miniupnpd[30960]: HTTP listening on port 38318
Oct 10 00:13:29 miniupnpd[30960]: Listening for NAT-PMP/PCP traffic on port 5351
Oct 10 00:13:29 rc_service: ip-up 30918:notify_rc stop_upnp
Oct 10 00:13:29 rc_service: ip-up 30918:notify_rc start_upnp
Oct 10 00:13:29 rc_service: waitting "stop_upnp" via ip-up ...
Oct 10 00:13:29 miniupnpd[30960]: shutting down MiniUPnPd
Oct 10 00:13:30 WAN_Connection: WAN was restored.
Oct 10 00:13:30 dnsmasq[223]: read /etc/hosts - 5 addresses
Oct 10 00:13:30 dnsmasq[223]: read /etc/hosts.dnsmasq - 19 addresses
Oct 10 00:13:30 dnsmasq[223]: using nameserver *.*.*.*#53
Oct 10 00:13:30 dnsmasq[223]: using nameserver *.*.*.*#53
Oct 10 00:13:31 miniupnpd[30967]: HTTP listening on port 59392
Oct 10 00:13:31 miniupnpd[30967]: Listening for NAT-PMP/PCP traffic on port 5351

tonyb55
Grafter
Posts: 29
Thanks: 3
Registered: ‎31-10-2016

Re: Disconnect Issues, now Speed Reductions, waaay past annoyed now

Looking forward to the excuse for the deleted post.

 

I think you had better move this issue up the chain of seniority please and have them contact me.

Plusnet Help Team
Plusnet Help Team
Posts: 14,324
Thanks: 4,468
Fixes: 730
Registered: ‎21-04-2017

Re: Disconnect Issues, now Speed Reductions, waaay past annoyed now

@tonyb55 we don’t delete posts. Posts however can get stuck in the automated spam filter which works in odd ways Wink I’ve asked our mods to check the filter and release it. Would you be free for a call today? Happy to call you back to discuss this further when I’m in the office.
If this post resolved your issue please click the 'This fixed my problem' button
 Anoush Mortazavi
 Plusnet Help Team
Plusnet Help Team
Plusnet Help Team
Posts: 14,324
Thanks: 4,468
Fixes: 730
Registered: ‎21-04-2017

Re: Disconnect Issues, now Speed Reductions, waaay past annoyed now

@tonyb55 Our mods have checked the spam filter and there’s nothing there from yourself. Difficult to advise what happened to it because a. we don’t delete posts, there’s no delete function enabled for us and b. the post isn’t in the hidden thread storage board (This is where we keep posts which have been removed for one reason or another).

As you’ve said you’ve got a copy of the post, can you repost it?

If this post resolved your issue please click the 'This fixed my problem' button
 Anoush Mortazavi
 Plusnet Help Team
tonyb55
Grafter
Posts: 29
Thanks: 3
Registered: ‎31-10-2016

Re: Disconnect Issues, now Speed Reductions, waaay past annoyed now

Well let me try again.......

 

Plusnet Help Team
Plusnet Help Team
Posts: 14,324
Thanks: 4,468
Fixes: 730
Registered: ‎21-04-2017

Re: Disconnect Issues, now Speed Reductions, waaay past annoyed now

Thanks for getting back to us @tonyb55  and for providing your throughput results. The BT speedster is fine in the majority of cases but I just thought it prudent to double check and cross reference. Were there any other devices using your broadband at the time you got the slow speeds and no background applications open I take it?

With regards to submitting a remote DLM reset, as per my previous response:

Finally with regards to submitting a DLM reset, we can only submit a remote DLM reset if our testing shows your sync speed to be restricted by banding, which has never been the case and isn't the case now. 

Your sync rate isn't 67mbps or anywhere close so it's not restricted by banding. This means that we can't request a remote DLM reset. An engineer may be able to request this themselves but we cannot. Even if we could, removing a 67mbps speed restriction wouldn't affect your sync rate as that's way lower and your sync speed isn't restricted at the level it is at.

I have demonstrated there are drops in download speeds to or below the MGALS

There have been 2 service disconnections with the same (or so similar to effectively be the same) pattern as previously

There is Banding applied to my line

Openreach consider an intermittent fault to be 3 drops in 24 hours, or 6 drops in 72 hours. If your speeds are fluctuating like you've illustrated and there was nothing running in the background at the time of running the test, then I'd recommend we arrange another engineer escalating this with Openreach to investigate this further.

Happy to arrange this tomorrow if you'd want to go ahead?

Thanks.

[edit]

Actually looking at your speed test results again, the tests completed on 3rd party speedtesters show a consistent speed that's on target for your sync speed that's in turn within expectations for your line. It wouldn't be wise arranging an engineer based on the slow speeds the BT speedtester is giving when other ones are showing a much higher result.

If this post resolved your issue please click the 'This fixed my problem' button
 Anoush Mortazavi
 Plusnet Help Team
Plusnet Help Team
Plusnet Help Team
Posts: 14,324
Thanks: 4,468
Fixes: 730
Registered: ‎21-04-2017

Re: Disconnect Issues, now Speed Reductions, waaay past annoyed now

@tonyb55 Just to add as I’m now past the 20 minute time limit to edit a post. We shouldn’t get in the habit of forcing a DLM reset by downgrading you to 40/10 and back again. This is because it can cause further issues as you’d be on the 40/10 product albeit briefly while your account is still fibre extra, from a compliance perspective the two packages should always match.

It can also cause further issues with the account billing. I understand we’ve done this in the past but isn’t something we should do again, I’ve passed feedback onto a previous adviser about that.

While in theory we can change your account type to basic fibre and then back to fibre extra, that’ll likely cause complications with your account billing if it’s done in such a small space of time. 

If this post resolved your issue please click the 'This fixed my problem' button
 Anoush Mortazavi
 Plusnet Help Team
tonyb55
Grafter
Posts: 29
Thanks: 3
Registered: ‎31-10-2016

Re: Disconnect Issues, now Speed Reductions, waaay past annoyed now

BT TAP1 Testing 11_10_2019_0922am.png

tonyb55
Grafter
Posts: 29
Thanks: 3
Registered: ‎31-10-2016

Re: Disconnect Issues, now Speed Reductions, waaay past annoyed now

BT WHolesale "TAP1" Further Testing below Handback Threshold, again.

Organise an Engineer, any day, any time, I can arrange for someone to be in.

Plusnet Help Team
Plusnet Help Team
Posts: 14,324
Thanks: 4,468
Fixes: 730
Registered: ‎21-04-2017

Re: Disconnect Issues, now Speed Reductions, waaay past annoyed now

Hi @tonyb55 Before we arrange an engineer can you confirm the following:

  • You’re testing on a direct ethernet connection with no powerline adapters or switches in place
  • There were no background applications open on the computer or laptop you were using
  • No other devices were switched on
  • You ran a speed test on a 3rd party website as well under the above conditions and also got a slow throughput below expectations
If this post resolved your issue please click the 'This fixed my problem' button
 Anoush Mortazavi
 Plusnet Help Team
tonyb55
Grafter
Posts: 29
Thanks: 3
Registered: ‎31-10-2016

Re: Disconnect Issues, now Speed Reductions, waaay past annoyed now

Hi @tonyb55 Before we arrange an engineer can you confirm the following:

You’re testing on a direct ethernet connection with no powerline adapters or switches in place

YES

There were no background applications open on the computer or laptop you were using

By the nature of a computer there are ALWAYS background applications running (for reference please click on your taskbar on the computer you are using, select TASK MANAGER and peruse your running PROCESSES)

If you are specifically referring to USER run programs, then please be much more concise and ask that question.
I always reboot my PC BEFORE running a BT WHOLESALE SPEED TEST & FURTHER TESTING
So for example I WAS NOT running multiple instances of Chrome, any other USER run programs. BUT was running antivirus software and programs that operate the software of my mouse and keyboard automatically etc

No other devices were switched on

I can confirm that my TV was on, the kettle/mcirowave/washing machine etc were off, seriously stop being so disingenuous and talking COMPLETE "GUBBINS" for lack of a non swear word, ask me another stupid question.........


You ran a speed test on a 3rd party website as well under the above conditions and also got a slow throughput below expectations



Nope, nor will I do so any more.

As you have clearly indicated Pusnet are simply a reseller of BT Wholesale Services, consequently it makes sense to ONLY RELY on the results utilising the speedtest created and operated by your supplier.
Beside this falls in line with 99% of the advice given by your other Customer Service Agents in both my own experience and based on the advice being seen on these forums.

Additionally the BT Wholesale Further Testing procedure is the ONLY end user service that carries out a TAP 1 Test that is returned to BT Wholesale, yourselves and Plusnet. This means that you can view the results of the test directly and where indicated (other than a speed fault) can make informed decisions to ensure an Engineer knows what the isue is.

This is not the 1st, 2nd nor even the 3rd test that has thrown out results below the MGALS that I have provided and that includes additional tests on other Speed Test Providers which has elicited NO RESPONSE

Not once on any of the recent occasions, or at any time in the past that I have enountered speed issues, have I been asked such inane questions.

Speed Test Table Part 1.pngSpeed Test Table Part 2.pngSpeed Test Table Part 3.png

Plusnet - "We'll do you proud"

Frankly, with the current level of service you should be ashamed

 

 

Moderators Note: Indicated quotes for readability

tonyb55
Grafter
Posts: 29
Thanks: 3
Registered: ‎31-10-2016

Re: Disconnect Issues, now Speed Reductions, waaay past annoyed now

Dennis - CSC Analyst
10:34am, Friday 11 Oct 2019

 

Dear Mr B,

I tried to contact you today but was unable to get through to you and I'm sorry to hear you are having issues with your speed.

Can you please confirm that you have connected your router to the BT Master socket, or if available, the BT Test socket. Below is a guide to the different types of faceplate and how to access the test socket.

Face Plate Test Socket What to do...
single 5c closed.jpg single 5c open.jpg

1) Press the 2 buttons either side of socket and the faceplate will come off.

2) Connect the router directly to the socket in the middle using the Microfilter supplied with the router.

double 5c closed.jpg single 5c open.jpg

1) Press the 2 buttons either side of socket and the faceplate will come off.

2) Connect the router directly to the socket in the middle using the Microfilter supplied with the router.

ssfp_socket (2).png Fibre SSFP exploded.jpg  

1) Using a screw driver, remove the front of the faceplate and see if the issue persists.

2) Remove the 2nd set of screws to remove the Pre-filtered Faceplate.

3) Connect the router directly to the socket in the bottom right using the Microfilter supplied with the router. You should only have 1 socket on the faceplate at this point.

nte5 (2).png 1697 - NTE5 Test Socket.jpg  

1) Using a screw driver, remove the front of the faceplate and see if the issue persists.

2) Connect the router directly to the socket in the bottom right using the Microfilter supplied with the router.

nonnte5 (2).png   1) Connect the router directly to the BT Master socket, remove all equipment from any additional extension sockets in the property and see if the problem persists.

 

Please ensure you are testing over a wired connection and not using any usage on any devices connected to your router.


If the speed improves at this point, it will usually indicate that something within your house is causing the broadband to not connect correctly and you may need to get someone to check your internal connections before reverting back to your original setup and if the speed is still the same then please feel free to get back in touch should you require further assistance.



Kind regards,

[CSA Removed]
 
It seems that no one is able to get through to me on the mobile telephone recently............... if you only let it ring twice then hangup I can be fairly  certain that not even Hussain Bolt would be able to get to his mobile phone in time.

PLEASE STOP blaming equipment failure within my household. There is absolutely NOTHING faulty to be found here.

NEW MASTER SOCKET, NEW MODEM, ROUTER IS OPERATING WITHOUT ISSUE, EVEN THE CABLE THAT CONNECTS MY MODEM TO THE MASTERSOCKET IS CAT 6 SHIELDED CABLE WITH THE RELEVANT TERMINATIONS TO FIT INTO THE MODEM & MASTERSOCKET (rather than the flimsy standard P.O.T. cable). THE CABLES FROM THE MODEM INTO THE ROUTER AND ALL CONNECTIONS FROM THE ROUTER ARE CAT 7 OR CAT 6a.

OTHER THAN THE MODEM NOTHING NEW HAS BEEN INSTALLED.
 

 


Moderators Note: CSA name removed as per Forum rules

Plusnet Help Team
Plusnet Help Team
Posts: 14,324
Thanks: 4,468
Fixes: 730
Registered: ‎21-04-2017

Re: Disconnect Issues, now Speed Reductions, waaay past annoyed now

@tonyb55 I’m only trying to help and look at this realistically. If your speeds are within expectations on 3rd party speed-testers but not on the BT one, why arrange an engineer? As it’d be obvious the issue lies with that particular speed-tester. 
I’m just trying to avoid a 4th engineer going out and reporting back no fault found by ensuring that it’s absolutely necessary to arrange another.

The speed test results you’ve shown since the 4th are on target. You’ve said you’ve got an anti-virus running in the background, that’s common for causing throughput issues. What happens if you switch it off temporarily? If you’ve not tried, can you replicate the issue on a different device?

I’m sorry if you were promised a call and didn’t get one. I offered to call you back myself yesterday to discuss this further, an offer that’s still open. 
As a side note, you really don’t need to increase the font size or post in capital letters. All it does is make things difficult to read (At least for me) Smiley

Happy to look into this further on Monday when I’m back in the office if it’s not picked up sooner. 

If this post resolved your issue please click the 'This fixed my problem' button
 Anoush Mortazavi
 Plusnet Help Team
tonyb55
Grafter
Posts: 29
Thanks: 3
Registered: ‎31-10-2016

Re: Disconnect Issues, now Speed Reductions, waaay past annoyed now

Well it seems the BT WHolesale Speed Test & Further Testing this morning shows the following;

 

BT TAP1 Testing 12_10_2019_0922am.png

 

I should add that it was carried out on the same computer as last time, albeit this time over my WiFi and whilst running ESET Antivirus (which by all accounts is a miracle in itself).

Whilst this is within Plusnets acceptable paramaters (MAGLS) the IP Profile for my line is still below what I was getting before the fault occured.

The only way for this to increase is it to wait and hope for the DLM fairies to remove the conditions that are adversely reducing our speeds being;

  • Banding Profile of 67/17 being applied to our 80/20 line
  • Decrease the SNR 
  • Change the Rentransmission "High" status

    No one other than Openreach can confirm how DLM prioritises retraining but there is anecdotal evidence, assuming there are no faults, that the process takes twice as long as the fault was originally present.

OR for 

Plusnet to organise a manual DLM reset via one of the following methods;

  1. An Openreach Engineer to do so as part of other work
  2. Plusnet to carry out a remote (no engineer requried) Caution Counter Reset (a DLM reset by another name)
  3. or add it to the list that is sent to their supplier BT Wholesale to be carried out by them (remotely)
    It is still unclear whether Plusnet have access to 1 or 2 or possibly both?

Whilst option 1 would cost them money (they have to pay something every time an engineer is arranged) options 2 and 3 do not cost them a penny but, may be limited to a fixed number of times per month (seems to be ~1000), are unwilling to do so as "my line falls within acceptable parameters".

 

 

Frankly we seem to be at an impasse.

I would therefore have to insist that a Deadlock Letter be sent to me and I will move this complaint onto the Watchdog Ofcom and the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) scheme

There are two ADR schemes – Ombudsman Services: Communications, and the Communications and Internet Services Adjudication Scheme (CISAS). All service providers must belong to one of the schemes.

Your provider will tell you which scheme it is a member of.

Additionally, for good measure, I am considering penning complaints to paper to the

Advertising Standards Authority

and

Trading Standards (under the The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations)

regarding the fact that we agreed (i.e. have a contract) for 12 months to pay for an 80/20 package but are being limited to 67/17.

 

Plusnet Help Team
Plusnet Help Team
Posts: 14,324
Thanks: 4,468
Fixes: 730
Registered: ‎21-04-2017

Re: Disconnect Issues, now Speed Reductions, waaay past annoyed now

@tonyb55 For a remote DLM reset, options 2 and 3 are the same. The banding on your line (Sorry once again) isn’t restricting your sync speed. We can’t arrange a remote DLM reset directly, that’s done through our suppliers.

We can arrange an engineer but this would be an appointment with yourself because we can’t arrange an engineer to go out externally if line tests do not show an external fault. 

The result of a line test determines how a fault is progressed in the Openreach system.

I don’t recommend arranging an engineer visit solely for a DLM reset if your speeds are within expectations already because it’d more than likely be deemed a chargeable visit of which we’d pass £65 onto yourself that we’d like to avoid. 

[edit]
Could I ask the reason you feel that a banding of  67mbps is restricting your speeds? Your sync rate is nowhere near that and based on your line expectations it likely never will be unless something big changes in the infrastructure.

If this post resolved your issue please click the 'This fixed my problem' button
 Anoush Mortazavi
 Plusnet Help Team