G.INP

[#1]

Some of the stats are new, so we don't yet fully understand what they signify.
However, the raw stats show this:-

			Bearer 0
D:		16		8             **** Usually indicates Interleaving depth ****

			Bearer 1
D:		3		1             **** Usually indicates Interleaving depth ****

			Counters
			Bearer 0
OHF:		0		0
OHFErr:		0		0
RS:		3492152688		101622
RSCorr:		9832		799                                              
RSUnCorr:	0		0
			Bearer 1
OHF:		30635268		345861
OHFErr:		0		0
RS:		367622475		2759176
RSCorr:		3		1
RSUnCorr:	0		0
			Retransmit Counters
rtx_tx:		2218		43
rtx_c:		638		294
rtx_uc:		0		41690

			Bearer 0
INP:		48.00		47.00         **** These seem to be very high values ******
INPRein:	0.00		0.00
delay:		0		0
PER:		0.00		0.00
OR:		0.01		0.01
AgR:		80614.82	20102.08
			Bearer 1
INP:		4.00		4.00
INPRein:	4.00		4.00
delay:		3		0
PER:		16.06		16.06
OR:		95.62		31.87
AgR:		95.62	31.87

It certainly suggests that some type of interleaving is applied.
I'm not sure whether G.INP replaces Interleaving or supplements it, allowing lower interleaving depths & fewer negative speed/delay effects

All will no doubt become clearer once we can see stats from other users' connections, particularly those from poorer quality and/or lower speed connections..


FWIW, Roseway, the DSLStats program author is waiting until I have fine tuned HG612 Modem Stats to fully accommodate these new stats before he carries out any major updates to DSLStats.

I hope to have my updates more or less completed over this weekend or early next week.

[#2]

Maybe it would be helpful if a plusnet staff member could post what my connection is showing as running on their end. e.g. My profile / interleaving.
However I don't feel like interleave is actually running as i mentioned before that my ping's have remained the same from when both modemstats and dsl stats were reporting that i was on fast path.

If a plusnet staff member sees this could it be possible for you to post what my profile is showing as on your side? thanks.
For example my speedtest showing a 15ms ping from North wales to london. (Note QOS blocks download at 70mbit)

and a ping test result

If my connection was running some kind of interleave surely these would be higher?

[#3]

So to those interested Bald Eagle has been making quite a lot of progress on updating the HG612 modem stat's program for use with G.INP.
Today he notified me that the graph's function is now working (although still in BETA!) and supplied me with the graphs from the logs i had sent him and also the updated .exe for making the graph's myself.
Here are the graphs that where created using modemstats with G.INP running for those that are interested
Please note that the boarders of the graphs follow a colour code as follows:
GREEN  = always present
YELLOW = Bearer 1 data & G.INP specific data
GREY   = Bearer 0 data
https://mega.co.nz/#!KYd1TKTA!N3-bPRBDpgLUDxMS4yuks6fQzV2tSmVeryQnFGylAvI
Bald Eagle informed me that he is hoping the full release of the updated modem stats program will be coming soon.
Id like to thank him for the amount of work and effort he has put into it

[#4]

[tt]Stats recorded 18 Mar 2015 19:18:46
DSLAM/MSAN type:        BDCM:0xa41b / v0xa41b
Modem/router firmware:  AnnexA version - A2pv6C038m.d24j
DSL mode:              VDSL2 Profile 17a
Status:                Showtime
Uptime:                12 hours 56 min 31 sec
Resyncs:                0 (since 18 Mar 2015 12:36:14)

Downstream Upstream
Line attenuation (dB):  24.3 0.0
Signal attenuation (dB): Not monitored
Connection speed (kbps): 39059 6741
SNR margin (dB):        6.0 5.6
Power (dBm):            11.1 2.2
Interleave depth:      8 4
INP:                    46.00 43.00
G.INP:                  Enabled
RSCorr/RS (%):          0.0003 0.3128
RSUnCorr/RS (%):        0.0000 0.0000
ES/hour:                0 0
[/tt]

[#5]

G.INP seems an all win, shame ECI has been left out.

[#6]

Yep seems so messed up that they would ignore those on ECI cabs there is enough of them including me, typical 

[#7]

ECI cabinets have not been left out - it's already been/being rolled out on them.

[#8]

@AndyH really ok that's good news I guess I'll wait to see if and when it gets enabled my way hopefull sometime soon and fingers crossed there is some improvement, maybe it might help enough for the banding to go that would be a good start. 

[#9]

You don't really want it enabled on your line though - it increases latency by 15-30ms.

[#10]

AndyH, do you have a source for you increased latency figures?

[#11]

Is that the case for everyone or becasue my line is banded if it's everyone why then bother with it, doesn't seem a worth while trade in having a big latency increase just for some little noise reduction.  

[#12]

@ w23 - From an OR presentation - not freely available unfortunately.
@ Terranova667 - It's a trade off as you get the faster speeds, but with increased latency. Not ideal for gamers though.

[#13]

Quote from: AndyH

You don't really want it enabled on your line though - it increases latency by 15-30ms.

Does it ?

[#14]

When I say enabled, I mean actually turned on for your connection - it has two levels, low and high (for both downstream and upstream). No idea which ones increase by the quoted figures.

[#15]

Oh yes, my jitter has doubled.