cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

G.INP

fiscelan
Grafter
Posts: 54
Registered: 31-10-2013

G.INP

Hello,
Any way to know if we have G.INP activated on our line? Looks like it is being activated at the moment.
Cheers
1,255 REPLIES
Community Veteran
Posts: 1,841
Thanks: 103
Fixes: 6
Registered: 21-01-2013

Re: G.INP

I believe if your routers stats shows the connection to be fastpath (interleave depth = 1) together with any  FEC errors then it's likely G.INP is active.
If you think it's enabled on your line can you please post your router stats for us all to see.
Some info here http://forum.kitz.co.uk/index.php?topic=14867.0
Terranova667
Pro
Posts: 1,277
Thanks: 70
Fixes: 3
Registered: 19-02-2014

Re: G.INP

with fibre the stats are gotten from the modem in which the BTO modems are locked down, unless you have managed to get hold of a BTO modem that has been unlocked or bought your own all in one you wont be able to see the stats yourself to see if G.INP is active.
someone on the CRT could run a GEA test and see if it's enabled it would say Retransmission Low/High rather than Interleaving if it's enabled ( got that from the think broadband forums) 
I wouldn't mind knowing that myself, i had my ping drop early this morning from 20-24ms down to it's usual 12-15ms could simply be DLM removing interleaving or something else i dont know
Community Veteran
Posts: 1,841
Thanks: 103
Fixes: 6
Registered: 21-01-2013

Re: G.INP

The Huawei modem is very easy to unlock, the ECI modem less so.
My HG635 vdsl modem router shows PhyR is not enabled -- don't know if that gets enabled automatically if / when G.INP gets switched on. There's some confusion whether G.INP and PhyR are the same thing.

Community Veteran
Posts: 1,990
Thanks: 5
Registered: 11-12-2013

Re: G.INP

Quote from: npr
I believe if your routers stats shows the connection to be fastpath (interleave depth = 1) together with any  FEC errors then it's likely G.INP is active.
If you think it's enabled on your line can you please post your router stats for us all to see.
Some info here http://forum.kitz.co.uk/index.php?topic=14867.0

I think I had G.INP during my last fault before I had my pair swapped, was on fastpath with FEC errors on my downstream.
I posted about it on tbb at the time and I am registered on MDWS, check the period for chrysalis on date 1st week of september.
fiscelan
Grafter
Posts: 54
Registered: 31-10-2013

Re: G.INP

Quote from: Terranova667
with fibre the stats are gotten from the modem in which the BTO modems are locked down, unless you have managed to get hold of a BTO modem that has been unlocked or bought your own all in one you wont be able to see the stats yourself to see if G.INP is active.
someone on the CRT could run a GEA test and see if it's enabled it would say Retransmission Low/High rather than Interleaving if it's enabled ( got that from the think broadband forums) 
I wouldn't mind knowing that myself, i had my ping drop early this morning from 20-24ms down to it's usual 12-15ms could simply be DLM removing interleaving or something else i dont know


Yeah cannot access the line stats with my router ASUS. Would need to unlock the modem itself, which I do not intend to do at the moment.
My lowest line ping latency is around 8 ms from ThinkBroadband, this has been a while like that, not sure if G.INP is on.
Community Veteran
Posts: 1,412
Thanks: 4
Registered: 29-01-2009

Re: G.INP

I think this "FEC Errors with fastpath" is a red herring, and is not a sign of G.INP being activated.
It is perfectly possible for the modems to make use of FEC correction without interleaving - they are two different processes, although their usage tends to be interlinked. There is no point in having interleaving without FEC, but there is a point in having FEC without interleaving.
I posted some analysis on one case of this near the end of that Kitz thread linked above. The stats from the modem in that case showed every indication of FEC being turned on, and no indication of G.INP being turned on. And FEC without interleaving was proving to be very effective on that line.
What we don't yet know is *why* the modems end up with FEC configured without interleaving. There is little published, and a lot of guesswork is involved in decoding what BTO are up to.
As for G.INP: I have seen one case of modem statistics that made it clear G.INP was in use - but it wasn't an HG612. That modem showed statistics for G.INP-specific things (with labels that included the text "G.INP"). It also configured the line slightly differently, where "bearer 0" was the standard data channel subject to G.INP retries. However, the modem created an additional "bearer 1" that is used by G.INP to send the re-transmitted packets. Bearer 1 was configured with low speed, but very high FEC and interleaving protection. I think this is to make sure that only a single retry is needed.
Plusnet Customer
Using FTTC since 2011. Currently on 80/20 Unlimited Fibre Extra.
Community Gaffer
Community Gaffer
Posts: 17,646
Thanks: 640
Fixes: 162
Registered: 05-04-2007

Re: G.INP

@fiscelan
Profile Name 0.128M-80M Downstream, Error Protection Off - 0.128M-20M Upstream, Error Protection Off
That's the profile of your line currently.
@Terranova667
And here is your profile:
0.128M-60M Downstream, Error Protection Off - 0.128M-17M Upstream, Interleaving On
If this post resolved your issue please click the 'This fixed my problem' button
 Chris Parr
 Plusnet Staff
Community Veteran
Posts: 1,990
Thanks: 5
Registered: 11-12-2013

Re: G.INP

Quote from: WWWombat
I think this "FEC Errors with fastpath" is a red herring, and is not a sign of G.INP being activated.
It is perfectly possible for the modems to make use of FEC correction without interleaving - they are two different processes, although their usage tends to be interlinked. There is no point in having interleaving without FEC, but there is a point in having FEC without interleaving.
I posted some analysis on one case of this near the end of that Kitz thread linked above. The stats from the modem in that case showed every indication of FEC being turned on, and no indication of G.INP being turned on. And FEC without interleaving was proving to be very effective on that line.
What we don't yet know is *why* the modems end up with FEC configured without interleaving. There is little published, and a lot of guesswork is involved in decoding what BTO are up to.
As for G.INP: I have seen one case of modem statistics that made it clear G.INP was in use - but it wasn't an HG612. That modem showed statistics for G.INP-specific things (with labels that included the text "G.INP"). It also configured the line slightly differently, where "bearer 0" was the standard data channel subject to G.INP retries. However, the modem created an additional "bearer 1" that is used by G.INP to send the re-transmitted packets. Bearer 1 was configured with low speed, but very high FEC and interleaving protection. I think this is to make sure that only a single retry is needed.

not so sure.
I remember you commented on my line at the time and we both agreed it was highly unusual, why else would openreach have profiled my line like that on DLM, it only makes sense if they were testing g.inp.
goldenfibre
Aspiring Pro
Posts: 2,604
Thanks: 48
Fixes: 2
Registered: 01-06-2010

Re: G.INP

Chris - what is the profile of my line currently please - like for example: 0.128M-60M Downstream, Error Protection Off - 0.128M-17M Upstream, Interleaving On
Community Gaffer
Community Gaffer
Posts: 17,646
Thanks: 640
Fixes: 162
Registered: 05-04-2007

Re: G.INP

Here it is:
40M-80M Downstream, Error Protection Off - 10M-20M Upstream, Error Protection Off
If this post resolved your issue please click the 'This fixed my problem' button
 Chris Parr
 Plusnet Staff
goldenfibre
Aspiring Pro
Posts: 2,604
Thanks: 48
Fixes: 2
Registered: 01-06-2010

Re: G.INP

Thanks Chris  Smiley
Terranova667
Pro
Posts: 1,277
Thanks: 70
Fixes: 3
Registered: 19-02-2014

Re: G.INP

Thanks for that Chris, hmm so interleaving is on for the upstream but not down which for me is ok i can live with that, 
does 0.128M-60M Downstream mean  DLM has me banded down to 60Mb rather than allowing for the full 80Mb any reason for that , i'm guessing it's something that cant be done about apart from DLM choosing to remove it if it feels it's good to do so, maybe my last episode with the pusnet profile change was an attempt from DLM to remove the banding but it didn't last, hmm might give me hope another attempt could be possible as i say my ping has lowered so it could be a sign that things are looking better. 
Community Gaffer
Community Gaffer
Posts: 17,646
Thanks: 640
Fixes: 162
Registered: 05-04-2007

Re: G.INP

Until your line is syncing at the top of the band it's not going to be restricting anything. You're right, we can't request the banding is removed, but it's not having any impact at the moment anyway.
If this post resolved your issue please click the 'This fixed my problem' button
 Chris Parr
 Plusnet Staff
Terranova667
Pro
Posts: 1,277
Thanks: 70
Fixes: 3
Registered: 19-02-2014

Re: G.INP

Thanks Chris  Smiley