Looking for a new router
Whoops, just seen I have already commented 
lol... no I wont profess to be an expert. I'm not any where near clever enough to pull things to pieces, get involved in the electronics or hack routers, but I'd like to think I know what I want out of a router and what to look for when it comes to performance. 
If you dont have a modem/router which tells you the type of DSLAM is attached at the other end then the easiest way is probably going looking at your fttc cab. The large Huawei cabs are easy to identify, for the smaller cabs, look for the air vents. Ignore the shape of the top of the cab as that can be angled or flat for all of them.
No Im on an ECI cab, yet the BCMs still perform far better on my line. The vast majority of people on my forum also seem to do better with BCMs than Lantiqs (used by ECI) regardless what type of cab they are on.
The TPlink TD-W9980 contains a Lantiq VRX-268 chipset which is the same as in the ECI modem and the HH. These are good solid stable chipsets, but the BCMs - particulary the BCM6368 - do seem to have a slight edge for most lines regardless of cab type.
The BCM63168 works even better for some lines increasing sync speed & stability in the majority of cases. But I reserve reservation on this only because we have seen a couple of noisy burst type lines where it will give more errors than a BCM6368, the jury is out on this atm as to whether its a more advanced chipset and it expects G.INP to already be in use.
It does seem to depend on the type of noise experienced on the line so all I can say is that most lines it works better but you will have to suck it and see in case you do have a line which gets a heck of a lot of burst type noise. On my line it works perfectly and better than any other and its now the only chipset that allows me the full 80/20 sync.
I shouldnt think so, its a low pass filter.. so in other words the filter is only applied to anything coming out of the telephone side. Shouldnt make any difference to the top socket.
As regards to whether it should have another full MK3 faceplate thats up for debate but it seems to be quite commonplace with FTTC installs fitted by contractors. The contractor who fitted my fttc did the same thing and ripped out my old LJ2. What I wasnt too happy about though is that he also then looped back to the master. ie this.
If you dont have a modem/router which tells you the type of DSLAM is attached at the other end then the easiest way is probably going looking at your fttc cab. The large Huawei cabs are easy to identify, for the smaller cabs, look for the air vents. Ignore the shape of the top of the cab as that can be angled or flat for all of them.
Quote however you mentioned it syncing a good bit lower because it used a different modem chipset to your cabinet.
No Im on an ECI cab, yet the BCMs still perform far better on my line. The vast majority of people on my forum also seem to do better with BCMs than Lantiqs (used by ECI) regardless what type of cab they are on.
The TPlink TD-W9980 contains a Lantiq VRX-268 chipset which is the same as in the ECI modem and the HH. These are good solid stable chipsets, but the BCMs - particulary the BCM6368 - do seem to have a slight edge for most lines regardless of cab type.
The BCM63168 works even better for some lines increasing sync speed & stability in the majority of cases. But I reserve reservation on this only because we have seen a couple of noisy burst type lines where it will give more errors than a BCM6368, the jury is out on this atm as to whether its a more advanced chipset and it expects G.INP to already be in use.
It does seem to depend on the type of noise experienced on the line so all I can say is that most lines it works better but you will have to suck it and see in case you do have a line which gets a heck of a lot of burst type noise. On my line it works perfectly and better than any other and its now the only chipset that allows me the full 80/20 sync.
Quote There is a filter built into that MK3 socket, which is connected to the line (even though I am not using it). So my line basically has 2 filters connected now.
I shouldnt think so, its a low pass filter.. so in other words the filter is only applied to anything coming out of the telephone side. Shouldnt make any difference to the top socket.
As regards to whether it should have another full MK3 faceplate thats up for debate but it seems to be quite commonplace with FTTC installs fitted by contractors. The contractor who fitted my fttc did the same thing and ripped out my old LJ2. What I wasnt too happy about though is that he also then looped back to the master. ie this.
Thanks for all the replies - very interesting stuff.
And thanks Kitz for your input on the additional MK3 extension box.
I have a theory (which may be flawed), that says no filter is perfect, and will attenuate some of the signal even at frequencies it is not supposed to. I know the filter is designed not to impact the VDSL signal, but my guess is that it can't be perfect and a little attenuation will take place. The attenuation may be so small as to not make a visible difference to the VDSL stats (that is the bit I am not sure about).
If this is the case, then having more filters means more attenuation. This is my theory behind the extra MK3 filter at the VDSL extension not helping.
I think I may just order an RJ11 faceplate this coming week, and fit that in place of the extra MK3 box. If nothing else, it will rule out the extra filter having any effect. Of course it may make no difference, in which case I just spent money on an RJ11 faceplate for nothing
Interesting stuff though - I have learned a lot from this thread.
And thanks Kitz for your input on the additional MK3 extension box.
I have a theory (which may be flawed), that says no filter is perfect, and will attenuate some of the signal even at frequencies it is not supposed to. I know the filter is designed not to impact the VDSL signal, but my guess is that it can't be perfect and a little attenuation will take place. The attenuation may be so small as to not make a visible difference to the VDSL stats (that is the bit I am not sure about).
If this is the case, then having more filters means more attenuation. This is my theory behind the extra MK3 filter at the VDSL extension not helping.
I think I may just order an RJ11 faceplate this coming week, and fit that in place of the extra MK3 box. If nothing else, it will rule out the extra filter having any effect. Of course it may make no difference, in which case I just spent money on an RJ11 faceplate for nothing
Interesting stuff though - I have learned a lot from this thread.
Quote from: goldenfibre Thanks Kitz but it pointless to buy MK3. I think it will be no difference really. If Openreach Engineer put MK2 last year then he probably know the best one suit my line is MK2. Otherwise he would put MK3 instead.
The Mk3 plate wasn't widely available to engineers last year when you had your Fibre installed, so it has nothing to do with what he thought best. If you had your install now, you'd get the Mk3. The MK3 has an improved Common-mode filter, how that will affect individual lines will depend on the line and it's own interference issues. Some lines will see no difference. As yours is so short, I doubt you'd see any difference anyway.
Quote from: kitz
Quote There is a filter built into that MK3 socket, which is connected to the line (even though I am not using it). So my line basically has 2 filters connected now.
I shouldnt think so, its a low pass filter.. so in other words the filter is only applied to anything coming out of the telephone side. Shouldnt make any difference to the top socket.
Just in case there is any misunderstanding here, the common-mode filter in the Mk2 & 3 are on the input side of the plate and therefore filters the Modem DSL socket (and it's IDC terminals for any extension) as well as the phone side.
Quote from: kitz .........The contractor who fitted my fttc did the same thing and ripped out my old LJ2. What I wasnt too happy about though is that he also then looped back to the master. ie this.
What's that nasty flat (non-twisted) cable doing at the back of that socket kitz
