cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

G.INP Disabled, Interleaving On?

danludlow
Rising Star
Posts: 393
Thanks: 23
Fixes: 1
Registered: 03-12-2014

G.INP Disabled, Interleaving On?

Looking at further speed reduction (since recent firmware update on Asus DSL-AC68U?), I disabled G.INP, and noted that whilst the Speeds Up and Down are almost Identical, (latency increased significantly) perhaps slightly slower, Interleaving was apparently switched on.
It could be that interleaving has been on, but masked somehow when G.INP was enabled? Certainly latency increases with the G.INP disabled on my modem-router, it's more than doubled to 30ms.
Does anyone have any thoughts regarding my findings?
I still have a bee in my bonnet about my reduced speed and the fact that I'm now unable to get Fibre Extra, so have been downgraded to basic 40/20 fibre service. I don't, or can't accept that its all down to crosstalk, it was too much, too sudden IMHO, fast one day, slow the next. I get the feeling that there's a fault although tests seem to show not. A few months ago I had similar and was changed to another port in the cabinet which restored speed. That took 5 engineer visits over some time to sort, the 5th engineer had been the first, all others were new to it each time. Ports are considered sacred it seems and unless there's uncontroversial evidence, they cannot be changed. Maybe one in each cabinet should be live at full speed and set aside specifically for swap testing to prove faults?
Call me an old cynic, (or whatever else you think appropriate!) but I'm not gifted with trust these days, and doubt what doesn't sit well with me.
11 REPLIES
jafreer
Rising Star
Posts: 823
Thanks: 48
Registered: 13-10-2012

Re: G.INP Disabled, Interleaving On?

I had the ECI/Huawei issue and changed to the HG612 modem.
I did have a very high level of interleaving on my line (942 I think or somewhere close to that). I also had the higher pings associated with that depth of interleaving. When G.Inp became active, it immediately reduced the interleaving depth to 8, and pings reduced accordingly. Speed increased a little too.
I have heard some people say that fast path is no longer available when G.Inp is active (I don't know for sure).
I wonder if you had a significant amount of interleaving on your line, but with G.Inp active, it reduced right down. When you put G.Inp off, the interleaving went back up. Whether that is because DLM remembers your interleaving depth I'm not sure.
A high level of interleaving on your line is presumably DLM's way of protecting against what it saw as excessive errors on the line. Now that G.Inp is handling these errors in a new way, the high level of interleaving is not required.
These are all guesses on my part by the way. I am not an expert but I am trying to understand why DLM does what it does.
danludlow
Rising Star
Posts: 393
Thanks: 23
Fixes: 1
Registered: 03-12-2014

Re: G.INP Disabled, Interleaving On?

Thanks jafreer, many thanks for your reply.
I begin to wonder if anyone is on top of the technology, but of course they must be. It should surely not be too much to expect a service to be delivered reliably and for speeds to be consistent? In the 21st century we have reached a point of sophistication in manufacturing and service supply where consistency is so high, that products are generally hard or impossible to tell apart, and most of us are used to this. Over used, if we are signed up to faster broadband services that seem largely a matter of chance.
When I signed up, I was given an indicated speed range, which was met for some months, even exceeded. That same speed range is being offered today when looking at other ISP's, but it is seemingly no longer deliverable. Would you buy a sports car that had slowed down within months of first driving it off the forecourt, and not be damned annoyed? What if you went to drive it away after a service and found that the speedometer which once read up to 100mph had been changed by the workshop for one that topped out at 50mph? If the workshop manager told you that it wasn't covered by warranty because the car managed 45-50, when you'd regularly driven all day at up to 70mph, you might feel like exploding?!
You wouldn't think that you'd imagined it would you, especially not if there were new cars in the window proclaiming the faster speed as a feature. A BTW speed test used to show red lines for my current speed that it now shows as green today. I feel cheated, it looks like cheating by BTW/BTO and I think its wrong. It seems that BT are not treating speed and reliability issues seriously, they are using cheap solutions to generate increased profit, I suspect, and treating their customers with contempt. They will not win friends and customers hearts effectively abusing them, will they?
Sorry to have let off steam here, but I get so annoyed. These dropping speeds are a major failure that I don't believe are being addressed. If a large part of the monthly fee was based upon data transfer speeds, would ISP's sit idly by on their hands?
jafreer
Rising Star
Posts: 823
Thanks: 48
Registered: 13-10-2012

Re: G.INP Disabled, Interleaving On?

You are right to be annoyed. There are a few things going on that are contributing to more and more people feeling annoyed...
1) The copper pairs used to deliver the VDSL from the cabinet to the premises were never designed to carry this sort of data. I think most people readily accept that, but to make it work, the technology has to be highly adaptive. The issue with such adaptive technology is that speeds can change under a whole variety of circumstances (noise, external line faults, internal line faults, poor internal wiring, poor external wiring, atmospheric conditions, crosstalk etc). The issue is that whilst most ISPs do state that speeds are not guaranteed, most people expect that the speed estimate they are given at the outset will be somewhat accurate. More importantly, most people (rightly or wrongly), believe these speeds should be maintained. When they aren't maintained, they get annoyed.
2) Crosstalk is a big issue that is reducing the speeds gradually over time. I don't think the ISPs do a good job of telling people that there is a very real chance that their speeds could reduce over time. When speeds do reduce, people are annoyed. There are technical solutions being worked on (vectoring) but they will take time to introduce.
3) The BT speed estimate system is flawed (in my opinion) because the estimate is adjusted once the line is connected, based on the actual connection speed. So if the line performs worse than the original estimate, the new estimate reflects the poorer performance. So a lot of customers are wondering why the original speed estimate they were given has suddenly changed to a much poorer estimate, after they are connected. This will annoy them. Especially when they raise a fault and are told their line is performing within the estimate (the new estimate - which is based on their current sync speed - so of course it is performing within estimate).
4) Other issues, like peak time slowdowns, and the ECI G.Inp issue are other factors that only serve to annoy people when the issue hits.

So there you have it, plenty to get annoyed about. The thing is, VDSL2 is a pretty neat technology, and it is staggering what it can do to get these kind of speeds over a twisted pair of copper wires. I think the big problem is expectations, and I don't think ISPs, or Openreach, are adequately providing realistic expectations.
Terranova667
Aspiring Pro
Posts: 1,267
Thanks: 63
Fixes: 3
Registered: 19-02-2014

Re: G.INP Disabled, Interleaving On?

@jafreer your statements about the BT estimates are not totally correct estimates are not adjusted once a line is connected but that doesn't mean that estimates don't change i know first hand that they do for example.
Before i Signed up with Plusnet the BT checker gave a estimate of 67Mb down 12Mb up as the top end so i signed up March 2014,  when i was connected i got  65Mb down 10 up the Plusnet Estimate on the members section of the website stated  the same as the BT one, both estimates remained the same they didn't change until i got a fault 3 months later that dropped my speed to 58Mb down the up remained the same, it was then I found that the BT estimate was changed to 38Mb down 8Mb up as the top end and the Plusnet one stated none was set on my line.
Support of course were not able to get BTO / BTW to do anything because i was still way over the new adjusted Estimate as you can imagine i was pretty peeved about that but nothing could be done about it, the past year or so i have had further drops the last of which had me at 51Mb down 5Mb up I did manage to get a engineer out but the best he could do was get the down up to 55Mb but the up has remained the same at 5Mb,  BTO/ BTW have increased the estimate slightly to 42Mb down up has remained at 8Mb both still below what I had when i joined and the three months before the fault,  Plusnet still don't have a estimate set for my line.
jafreer
Rising Star
Posts: 823
Thanks: 48
Registered: 13-10-2012

Re: G.INP Disabled, Interleaving On?

@terranova - the BT speed estimate for my line changed shortly after connection and I didn't have a fault as far as I know. In fact, the Range B impacted high value reflected precisely my current IP profile. Like you say, I am not sure precisely what triggers the BT estimate to change, but I don't believe there has to be a fault for this to happen. So the question is, what is the criteria for the BT speed estimate to change.
Mantaray
Grafter
Posts: 46
Thanks: 2
Registered: 20-09-2013

Re: G.INP Disabled, Interleaving On?

@Danludlow out of curiosity what are your DSL settings and which firmware are you using?
Dodger21
Grafter
Posts: 44
Registered: 02-05-2013

Re: G.INP Disabled, Interleaving On?

There is only one answer (at present) FTTP, I said this 4 years ago and was told it was not necessary.
I also remember being told a computer would never need more than 16meg of memory, that was good while ago.
It would be a big investment by BT but the long term rewards would be large too, they already have the infrastructure (most of anyway) and could take huge amounts of business form Sky and Virgin Media but instead of looking forward they play around trying to get the last once of speed from an part copper based out dated system.
SpendLessTime
Aspiring Hero
Posts: 2,436
Thanks: 622
Fixes: 56
Registered: 21-09-2009

Re: G.INP Disabled, Interleaving On?

Quote from: Dodger21
There is only one answer (at present) FTTP

As one of the lucky FTTP customers, I can tell you that FTTP is not the full answer. This morning my speed tests are all in the 75Mbps down region but watching a on demand program from a wired Freesat box I got the message "warning you have a slow internet connection and may experience issues with playback".  Congestion is the issue for me and the answer will be more bandwidth from Plusnet/Openreach.
danludlow
Rising Star
Posts: 393
Thanks: 23
Fixes: 1
Registered: 03-12-2014

Re: G.INP Disabled, Interleaving On?

@Mantaray  My current DSL F/W is: 1.0.2.4  DSL Driver Version is: FwVer:5.5.1.128_B_A60901 HwVer:T14.F7_0.1
Screen shot of DSL settings attached.
Mantaray
Grafter
Posts: 46
Thanks: 2
Registered: 20-09-2013

Re: G.INP Disabled, Interleaving On?

@danludlow, thanks for that.  We have the same firmware version, but my driver ends with 0.2
I would suggest the following changes purely based on what I have seen elsewhere and it is what I have and an error free connection:
ESNP - enabled
Bitswap ADSL - disabled
VDSL profile - 17a
G. Vector - enabled
Perhaps these will help.  It will also take a while to see a change I suspect.
danludlow
Rising Star
Posts: 393
Thanks: 23
Fixes: 1
Registered: 03-12-2014

Re: G.INP Disabled, Interleaving On?

Thanks, I've altered the settings, nothing to lose. My Firmware was upgraded about a week ago to the current version, at the time, I lost speed, about 10% which has partially returned. I have looked online, in forums, and have raised questions, but nowhere have I found consistent settings for connecting an ASUS DSL-AC68U to VDSL2. Nearly everyone has a different approach to achieving optimum performance.