Topic 'Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...' in forum 'Acanac users forum' - dslreports.com

Re: Low upload speeds not sync...

Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:57:44 EDT

Acanac PN posted : Alright

Re: Low upload speeds not sync...

Wed, 08 Jul 2009 11:45:43 EDT

T1nART posted : Recently, my sync went down again. And this time a bell tech came found out the problems to the line, and rewired my connection from the demark box to my apartment. Now, the speeds are best as ever and without a bell tech things would not have improved.

My stats are as follows:

ADSL Statistics

Mode: G.DMT
Type: Interleave
Line Coding: Trellis On
Status: No Defect
Link Power State: L0

Downstream Upstream
SNR Margin (dB): 29.4 6.0
Attenuation (dB): 5.0 4.5
Output Power (dBm): 5.6 12.6
Attainable Rate (Kbps): 11008 1088
Rate (Kbps): 5056 800
K (number of bytes in DMT frame): 159 26
R (number of check bytes in RS code word): 8 16
S (RS code word size in DMT frame): 1 8
D (interleaver depth): 0 0
Delay (msec): 0 0

Super Frames: 118765 118763
Super Frame Errors: 0 0
RS Words: 8076086 1009485
RS Correctable Errors: 0 24
RS Uncorrectable Errors: 0 N/A

HEC Errors: 0 0
OCD Errors: 0 0
LCD Errors: 0 0
Total Cells: 24076301 0
Data Cells: 5895685 0
Bit Errors: 0 0

Total ES: 0 0
Total SES: 0 0
Total UAS: 16 0

Thanks to the very nice, and efficient bell tech, things are much better...

Always have a stable line in order to get the proper service.

Cheers!

Re: Low upload speeds not sync...

Sun, 05 Jul 2009 17:41:09 EDT

Acanac PN posted : I dont know about port blocking.
Unfortunately, speed stats are the "optimum" according to them and nothing further could be done at this point.
Note, we have another policy of "slow speed" on working line processing.
There is a dedicated person now, who checks these, before they go on bell queue.
Currently, your DSL service WORKS and you have 4768/256 after recent trouble report + some notes that "this is the max available".
A new ticket for same stuff will be rejected even before going to Bell queue, I think.
Regards.

Re: Low upload speeds not sync...

Sat, 04 Jul 2009 19:58:45 EDT

T1nART posted : ADSL Statistics

Mode: G.DMT
Type: Interleave
Line Coding: Trellis On
Status: No Defect
Link Power State: L0

Downstream Upstream
SNR Margin (dB): 5.8 6.0
Attenuation (dB): 26.0 6.5
Output Power (dBm): 13.6 12.4
Attainable Rate (Kbps): 5376 416
Rate (Kbps): 5056 288
K (number of bytes in DMT frame): 159 10
R (number of check bytes in RS code word): 8 16
S (RS code word size in DMT frame): 1 16
D (interleaver depth): 0 0
Delay (msec): 0 0

Super Frames: 36637 36635
Super Frame Errors: 0 0
RS Words: 2491382 155698
RS Correctable Errors: 31617 0
RS Uncorrectable Errors: 0 N/A

HEC Errors: 0 0
OCD Errors: 0 0
LCD Errors: 0 0
Total Cells: 7427549 0
Data Cells: 187560 0
Bit Errors: 0 0

Total ES: 0 0
Total SES: 0 0
Total UAS: 429 0

What's happening at Bell? Are they not doing anythng aobut my upstream speeds...

And I've been noticing their limiting and blocking ports!

PN: Any word?

Re: Low upload speeds not sync...

Thu, 02 Jul 2009 12:44:58 EDT

T1nART posted : Here are the stats for now:

ADSL Statistics

Mode: G.DMT
Type: Interleave
Line Coding: Trellis On
Status: No Defect
Link Power State: L0

Downstream Upstream
SNR Margin (dB): 5.7 6.0
Attenuation (dB): 26.0 3.0
Output Power (dBm): 13.6 12.4
Attainable Rate (Kbps): 5056 384
Rate (Kbps): 4768 256
K (number of bytes in DMT frame): 150 9
R (number of check bytes in RS code word): 8 16
S (RS code word size in DMT frame): 1 16
D (interleaver depth): 0 0
Delay (msec): 0 0

Super Frames: 13509 13507
Super Frame Errors: 547 0
RS Words: 918678 57404
RS Correctable Errors: 512415 12
RS Uncorrectable Errors: 711 N/A

HEC Errors: 294 0
OCD Errors: 0 0
LCD Errors: 0 0
Total Cells: 2582740 0
Data Cells: 1577 0
Bit Errors: 0 0

Total ES: 109 0
Total SES: 4 0
Total UAS: 68 0

Downstream has now dropped to 4.7 Mb/s
Upstream is now at 256 Kb/s

I'll keep reporting when things change...

Re: Low upload speeds not sync...

Thu, 02 Jul 2009 12:12:21 EDT

Acanac PN posted : I am looking at Bell report on your trouble:

TR number TR***********59
DSL number 416******4
State Cleared
Status (EXT:FWFM) Clear / Resolve
Trouble Type 6 - No synchronization
Description No synchronization
Received Time 6/29/2009 2:35:44 PM
Modified Date 7/1/2009 11:17:43 AM
Resolution BH=xx.xx;XX;repaired line at0-1/Customer accept speed as is-unrepairable MAN MADE TEL-EMPL CAUSED
Dispatch date 7/1/2009
---------------------------------------------------------------
That's for now: "unrepairable"
And your upload speed is low, agree.
NM are still low. Attenuation jumped from 9/19 to 32/26
(32 upstream?)
Still no clarification regarding IKNS-related issue.
Actually, on these support exchanges there are no place for such queries;
I don't think even the tech ppl on the chain know (been/will be ever trained) about details like this.

I will follow-up.
If there are no changes, a new trouble ticket will be opened.
Please report in 2-3 days.

Thanks

Low upload speeds not sync...

Thu, 02 Jul 2009 11:20:06 EDT

T1nART posted : My upload speeds isn't synced at 800 kb/s. It's actually the lowest that it's ever been in the past. Only 288 kb/s.

The ticket that I called into support is: xpf15185.

PN, can you look into this?

ADSL Statistics

Mode: G.DMT
Type: Interleave
Line Coding: Trellis On
Status: No Defect
Link Power State: L0

Downstream Upstream
SNR Margin (dB): 5.6 6.0
Attenuation (dB): 26.0 19.0
Output Power (dBm): 13.6 12.3
Attainable Rate (Kbps): 5344 416
Rate (Kbps): 5056 288
K (number of bytes in DMT frame): 159 10
R (number of check bytes in RS code word): 8 16
S (RS code word size in DMT frame): 1 16
D (interleaver depth): 0 0
Delay (msec): 0 0

Super Frames: 113750 113748
Super Frame Errors: 7 0
RS Words: 7735066 483429
RS Correctable Errors: 397391 0
RS Uncorrectable Errors: 30 N/A

HEC Errors: 4 0
OCD Errors: 0 0
LCD Errors: 0 0
Total Cells: 23059655 0
Data Cells: 375461 0
Bit Errors: 0 0

Total ES: 6 0
Total SES: 0 0
Total UAS: 139 0

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Mon, 29 Jun 2009 16:02:02 EDT

Acanac PN posted : Update:
The Trouble Ticket is sown in Bell System as well.
No Dispatch date or solution fields populated yet

Update 2:
Dispatch date 7/1/2009 Tomorrow

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Mon, 29 Jun 2009 15:07:55 EDT

Acanac PN posted : I see on bell lantern there is no modem hooked.
Could you try another wall jack in meanwhile?

There is a ticket opened already: ICD-34106 (Today 29th)

Thanks

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Sun, 28 Jun 2009 15:49:29 EDT

anon posted : This a friend of t1nart..his dsl link is down no signal from wall jack to modem.(hook it up)

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Sat, 27 Jun 2009 20:13:58 EDT

planiwa posted : Downstream Line Capacity:

5472 2009-06-14 16:10:48
4704 2009-06-25 19:30:00
4931 2009-06-26 11:23:00
4384 2009-06-27 18:15:40
--
»[RFC] Connection / Speed Problems Checklist

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Sat, 27 Jun 2009 18:15:40 EDT

T1nART posted : Here are my stats as of now:

ADSL Statistics

Mode: G.DMT
Type: Interleave
Line Coding: Trellis On
Status: No Defect
Link Power State: L0

Downstream Upstream
SNR Margin (dB): 5.3 6.0
Attenuation (dB): 13.0 23.0
Output Power (dBm): 9.7 12.8
Attainable Rate (Kbps): 4384 1020
Rate (Kbps): 4096 608
K (number of bytes in DMT frame): 129 20
R (number of check bytes in RS code word): 8 8
S (RS code word size in DMT frame): 1 8
D (interleaver depth): 0 0
Delay (msec): 0 0

Super Frames: 9084 9082
Super Frame Errors: 0 0
RS Words: 617778 77197
RS Correctable Errors: 19 3110
RS Uncorrectable Errors: 0 N/A

HEC Errors: 0 0
OCD Errors: 0 0
LCD Errors: 0 0
Total Cells: 1492323 0
Data Cells: 39694 0
Bit Errors: 0 0

Total ES: 22 0
Total SES: 22 0
Total UAS: 594 0

PN: The ticket I sent into support is: UYZ-32866

If you can get my issues resolved asap. That would be great.

Thanks mate!

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Sat, 27 Jun 2009 10:25:08 EDT

planiwa posted : If it were my line, I'd use an ST516 and check at the Demarc.
The presence of a lying IKNS does not protect from actual line noise and errors. But it does make it harder to diagnose such problems.

This is a good illustration of how the IKNS bugs have more serious consequences than generally portrayed by Bell.
--
»[RFC] Connection / Speed Problems Checklist

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Sat, 27 Jun 2009 09:40:26 EDT

Acanac PN posted : Unfortunately, the IKNS originated issues for non-ADSL2+ service are still in the gray zone. As far as I know, the fixing seem to be trying different modems and squeezing the profiles, even at 0db att. :(
I am on IKNS, too (50m from it) and I have no full upload sync neither.

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:44:55 EDT

planiwa posted : Sure looks like wiring, diagnostically aggravated by IKNS.

If T1nART can do modem check at demarc, that would be my recommendation.

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Fri, 26 Jun 2009 11:23:00 EDT

Acanac PN posted : T, Yes, that is the case:
Line Status: In Service UpTime: 0
Line Profile Name: al2_d5056-5056-384_u800-800-256 Last State Change: Fri Jun 26 11:18:30 EDT 2009
Operational Status Speed (Kbs) Relative Capacity Occupation (%) Noise Margin (0..31 dB) Signal Power (0..20 dBm) Attenuation (0..60 dB) Block count
UpStream
608 79 6.0 12.0 5.0 1168962.0
DownStream
4192 85 6.0 10.0 0.0 2814079.0
--------------------------------
Something wrong there.
The attenuation is good 5/0 db, but NM are bad; It could not operate at full profile speed.
Please check at your side again (cables, jack, modem and so on) and if nothing helps, send a request to support@acanac.com, then let me know the ticket number to follow-up.
Thanks

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Fri, 26 Jun 2009 11:17:51 EDT

Acanac PN posted : T1nART,
Is your modem connected? (Jun 26, about 9am)
Lantern displays all zeroes.
I believe, the reason of your trouble is shown here:
"SNR Margin (dB): 5.3 6.0"
Both streams seem to be on syncing at lower speeds because of that.

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Thu, 25 Jun 2009 23:38:50 EDT

planiwa posted :

said by T1nART:

SNR Margin (dB): 5.3 6.0
Attenuation (dB): 12.0 16.5
Rate (Kbps): 4416 608
Super Frames: 88144 88142
RS Correctable Errors: 5353 8338
RS Uncorrectable Errors: 0 N/A

I've tried everything... Rebooting the modem/router, resetting it... Nothing works...

What's going on...

Rain?

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Thu, 25 Jun 2009 19:30:00 EDT

T1nART posted : Acanac PN...Please help!

My download speeds have gone down to 4.4 Mb/s
and my uploads speeds have gone down to 608 Kb/s.

Here are my status:

ADSL Statistics

Mode: G.DMT
Type: Interleave
Line Coding: Trellis On
Status: No Defect
Link Power State: L0

Downstream Upstream
SNR Margin (dB): 5.3 6.0
Attenuation (dB): 12.0 16.5
Output Power (dBm): 9.7 12.5
Attainable Rate (Kbps): 4704 1020
Rate (Kbps): 4416 608
K (number of bytes in DMT frame): 139 20
R (number of check bytes in RS code word): 8 8
S (RS code word size in DMT frame): 1 8
D (interleaver depth): 0 0
Delay (msec): 0 0

Super Frames: 88144 88142
Super Frame Errors: 0 0
RS Words: 5993858 749207
RS Correctable Errors: 5353 8338
RS Uncorrectable Errors: 0 N/A

HEC Errors: 0 0
OCD Errors: 0 0
LCD Errors: 0 0
Total Cells: 15607006 0
Data Cells: 616474 0
Bit Errors: 0 0

Total ES: 0 0
Total SES: 0 0
Total UAS: 31 0

I've tried everything... Rebooting the modem/router, resetting it... Nothing works...

What's going on...

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Mon, 15 Jun 2009 19:26:05 EDT

Acanac PN posted : Good, thanks
--
We Rock

Acanac is pretty good!

Sun, 14 Jun 2009 16:10:48 EDT

T1nART posted : ADSL Statistics

Mode: G.DMT
Type: Interleave
Line Coding: Trellis On
Status: No Defect
Link Power State: L0

Downstream Upstream
SNR Margin (dB): 6.6 6.0
Attenuation (dB): 9.0 29.0
Output Power (dBm): 9.8 12.7
Attainable Rate (Kbps): 5472 1020
Rate (Kbps): 5056 704
K (number of bytes in DMT frame): 159 23
R (number of check bytes in RS code word): 8 16
S (RS code word size in DMT frame): 1 8
D (interleaver depth): 0 0
Delay (msec): 0 0

Super Frames: 65245148 65245146
Super Frame Errors: 96 4
RS Words: 141702834 17712829
RS Correctable Errors: 122224 4720006
RS Uncorrectable Errors: 4905 N/A

HEC Errors: 17 0
OCD Errors: 1 0
LCD Errors: 0 0
Total Cells: 341383910 0
Data Cells: 508749016 0
Bit Errors: 0 0

Total ES: 12 0
Total SES: 2 0
Total UAS: 49 0

My connection has been holding steady at 5Mb/s down, and 700Kb/s up for the past month or so...

The best that it can sync at. Thanks for all the help PN!

Re: IKNS -- DSLAM Vendor Codes

Tue, 26 May 2009 17:21:48 EDT

Acanac PN posted : Thanks

IKNS -- DSLAM Vendor Codes

Sat, 23 May 2009 12:13:55 EDT

planiwa posted :

said by darknestgirl:

47 50 53 4e

Thanks.

47 50 53 4e =
G P S N

Which looks like a typo for GSPN :-) :-)

BTW, the ATUR code is always

54 53 54 43 =
T S T C

Here is a partial list of DSLAM (and modem) Vendor Codes:


41 4C 43 42 = ALCB Alcatel (STMicroelectronics)
41 4E 44 56 = ANDV Analog Devices
42 44 43 4D = BDCM Broadcom 
47 53 50 4E = GSPN Globespan 
49 4b 4e 53 = IKNS Ikanos
49 46 54 4E = IFTN Infineon (Huawei) 
53 54 4D 49 = STMI STMicroelectronics
54 53 54 43 = TSTC Texas Instruments (TX State Technical College)
54 4D 4D 42 = TMMB Thomson Multimedia Broadband

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Sat, 23 May 2009 03:58:44 EDT

darknestgirl posted : Hi planiwa that's what i got when i look at the ATUC vendor code and ghsvid

Re: IKNS

Sat, 23 May 2009 01:18:57 EDT

planiwa posted : The Aztech modems are ADSL2+ capable.
But even a plain ADSL modem should not be given false data from the DSLAM. These DSLAM devices are indeed broken.

Bell reportedly does not consider this a serious problem. Apparently they only see a problem of slight reduction in US rate, and of slightly higher latency. The vast majority of Sympatico customers are unaware of their sync rate and their latency (only with certain modems).

In any case, I would imagine that if a Bell user did actually complain about only getting 736 kb/s instead of 800, he could be persuaded to switch to a higher profile plan. Wholesale ISPs are not allowed to offer faster plans!

So, in a twisted way, if one regards Wholesalers as competition, one might consider it a competitive advantage for Bell to have this problem and not fix it.

I do not see the major problem with IKNS as limited to slightly longer latency and slightly lower US speed. The more serious problem is the confusion and anxiety caused by the false readings of these devices, and the time and money wasted by those who are unaware of the real problem, and who try to fix the problems falsely implied by IKNS. Such efforts may include unnecessarily purchaing modems or trying to fix nonexistent wiring problems. To say nothing of all the time consumed communicating with tech support staff.

If tech support staff are aware of the signature of an IKNS device, the customer needs to suffer none of all that fear, uncertainty, and doubt. :-)

Are Acanac tech support staff aware of this IKNS problem? It's quite simple, really:

Path Mode is Interleaved -- even though the profile says FAST.
US SNRM==6
US Attn == 20 or more
US Attn appears to be similar to DS Margin, while
DS Attn appears to be similar to US Margin.

This tends to result in a situation where the US Attn appears to be greater than the DS Attn. If we understand what Attenuation is, and how both it and US/DS DMT relate to frequency, then we know that it is quite impossible for US Attn. to be larger than DS Attn. Typically, DS Attn. is about twice the US Attn.

Does the Lantern data accessible to Acanac support staff identify the ATU-C device/vendor?

It might be worth following up on that Vendor code that the Aztech modem shows.

So, this afternoon I went to a site that is IKNS-afflicted.

This is how the line looks to the SpeedTouch modem:


Channel Mode                 :  Interleaved 
Total Available Bandwidth           Cells/s           kbit/s 
  Downstream                 :     11924             5056 
  Upstream                   :      1886              800 
 
Intrinsic/Actual and Maximum Bandwidth %              kbit/s
  Downstream                 :        45            11040 
  Upstream                   :        78             1020 
 
Bearer Generic Info               Downstream        Upstream 
Margin       (dB)            :        28.5             6.0 
Attenuation  (dB)            :         7.0             28.0 
OutputPower  (dBm)           :         7.0             12.5 
 
Vendor Chipset                      Local            Remote
  Country                    :        B5               B5 
  Vendor                     :      BDCM             IKNS

For comparison, I connected a Speedstream 6520 to the same line:


Sync Rate                    :        5056             736
Margin       (dB)            :        26.0             6.0 
Attenuation  (dB)            :         7.5            28.0 
OutputPower  (dBm)           :         1.5             6.0

I didn't have a chance to test the latency on the 6520 this time.
Note that the SpeedTouch syncs at 800, whereas the Speedstream only syncs at 736.
The SpeedTouch displays Channel Mode (Interleaved Path), Capacity (RCO), and the DSLAM device vendor: IKNS.
But not the Speedstream.

I do know that despite the fact that all display "Interleaved", none of Aztech, SpeedTouch, or TP-Link experience high latency.
BAS latency is 12ms for the Aztech, SpeedTouch, and TP-Link.

So, can people who have Aztech modems and are connected to IKNS DSLAMS please post their ATUC Vendor Codes and ATUC ghsVid?
Perhaps they are similar to:

ATUC Vendor Code: 4753504E ATUC Revision: 1
ATUC ghsVid: ff b5 47 53 50 4e 00 08

here's how:
telnet 192.168.1.1
root
admin
cat /proc/*/*m_s*
exit

Thanks!

Re: 2Wire & IKNS

Fri, 22 May 2009 15:44:36 EDT

Acanac PN posted : Fergie,
Fortunately, you are on ALCB not IKNS type.
What 2Wires do on IKNS - they perform longer pings.
The whole picture then looks like Interleave, regardless the profile on Bell Lantern is set .
Sometimes the profile in question is Fast Path but 2Wire reports it like interleave and pings ARE like interleave.

2Wire & IKNS

Fri, 22 May 2009 14:32:52 EDT

Fergless posted :

Ironically, the 2Wire modems suffer more than others from IKNS latency.

How do you figure that?
I was under the impression it was just reported that way as 2Wires could actually see the problem, showing the DSLAM.
Clue me in if you will. :)

From my stats:
DSL Connection Details
DSL Line (Wire Pair): Line 1 (inner pair)
Protocol: G.DMT Annex A
Downstream Rate: 5056 kbps
Upstream Rate: 800 kbps
Channel: Interleaved
Current Noise Margin: 16.0 dB (Downstream), 15.0 dB (Upstream)
Current Attenuation: 41.6 dB (Downstream), 26.0 dB (Upstream)
Current Output Power: 19.7 dBm (Downstream), 11.9 dBm (Upstream)
DSLAM Vendor Information: Country: {0x0F} Vendor: {ALCB} Specific: {0x00}
PVC Info: 0/35

The details you got for the Aztech on IKNS, think that's valid?
If so it'd be really helpful. :)

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Fri, 22 May 2009 14:16:59 EDT

T1nART posted : ADSL Statistics

Mode: G.DMT
Type: Interleave
Line Coding: Trellis On
Status: No Defect
Link Power State: L0

Downstream Upstream
SNR Margin (dB): 7.4 6.0
Attenuation (dB): 9.0 19.5
Output Power (dBm): 9.7 12.8
Attainable Rate (Kbps): 5728 1020
Rate (Kbps): 5056 736
K (number of bytes in DMT frame): 159 24
R (number of check bytes in RS code word): 8 16
S (RS code word size in DMT frame): 1 8
D (interleaver depth): 0 0
Delay (msec): 0 0

Super Frames: 2162525 2162523
Super Frame Errors: 0 0
RS Words: 147051766 18381445
RS Correctable Errors: 14582 310476
RS Uncorrectable Errors: 0 N/A

HEC Errors: 0 0
OCD Errors: 0 0
LCD Errors: 0 0
Total Cells: 438369186 0
Data Cells: 32480931 0
Bit Errors: 0 0

Total ES: 4 0
Total SES: 4 0
Total UAS: 62 0

It seems to be the problem that Planiwa has referred to...very informative post. Oh well, I won't fuss with it...

PN: Thanks again for all your work. Do apologize if I seem to be a hardass at times...

Re: IKNS

Fri, 22 May 2009 12:34:57 EDT

Acanac PN posted : Thanks,
There is huge gray zone regarding this stuff planiwa.
Unfortunately not many people know the details.
And I bought new modem for my home DSL, too - just to "fix" the issue.
My old modem is still working fine ... but not on my line :)

I believe these remotes are designed or "ready" for ADSL2+ but I have no information how Bell control these ADSL2+ profiles, are they available for wholesalers and how all management stuff standard ADSL vs ADSL2+ looks like.

In meanwhile we have some cases with similar scenario and only way to handle them is to ask many times Bell people until acceptable speeds are established.
Usually, on first attempt they drop the profile to 512 (you know that the US profile steps are 512 then 800 nothing between) and put AL2 at the same time if it was AL1 initially.
Also, depending of the modem and other things, 800k on US may be tested - but as you said the sync speeds are in 700k range.

T1nART's modem hooks at 768 and lantern displays 4dB NM.

I tested/reported to Bell some modems that not sync at all or sync very low speeds.

I don't think it would be a good idea to start speculating which modem is good which not because all these modems work just fine on other remotes.

Thanks

Re: IKNS

Fri, 22 May 2009 11:45:01 EDT

planiwa posted :

said by Fergless:

Very good post, Planiwa, very informative.
To bad all modems didn't show what DSLAM they're connected to like the 2Wire 2700HG B, saves a lot of guesswork.

Ironically, the 2Wire modems suffer more than others from IKNS latency.

The SpeedTouch modems report the Vendor very clearly.

The Aztech modem says: (For an IKNS DSLAM)
ATUC Vendor Code: 494B4E53 ATUC Revision: 2
ATUC ghsVid: b5 00 49 4b 4e 53 01 00

I wonder if any others are getting those same codes from their Aztech modems --
telnet 192.168.1.1
login: root
Password: admin
cat /proc/*/*m_s*

IKNS

Fri, 22 May 2009 11:02:20 EDT

Fergless posted : Very good post, Planiwa, very informative.
To bad all modems didn't show what DSLAM they're connected to like the 2Wire 2700HG B, saves a lot of guesswork.

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Fri, 22 May 2009 04:11:07 EDT

planiwa posted :

said by Acanac PN:

Update:
As T1nART requested, the case was re-opened again.
Now, 800k Upload is shown on Bell Lantern
The current settings, are as follow:
Profile: Interleave 5056/800
Sync: 5056/768 ----
NM: 8/4 dB !!!
OCC: 77/77%
. . .
Hope, this 4db margin is much higher in reality, but only displayed by the equipment (some "known" bug or particularity of the remote itself).

Best regards.

I have just read the entire thread. The precise nature of the problem was clear to me the moment I read the OP's first posting of his DSL line data.

There is no doubt that this user is connected to a Bell Lucent IKNS DSLAM. The most significant proof of that fact is in the Lantern data, but curiously Acanac PN's latest posting of that lantern data leaves out the Attenuation! Acanac PN is much less harsh than he might be, for understandable reasons.

An understanding reading of the line stats clearly shows that this has nothing whatever to do with wiring issues.

Furthermore, ADSL profiles are not adjusted automatically. They are an administrative limit, always controlled by and set by Bell. It is important not to confuse sync rates and profiles.

To the OP:

1. Please post your current DSL line data. I'm curious whether your modem maintains sync at 800/5056, and I'd like to verify that there are no US line errors.

2. What you need to know is that there is one single reason for your problem. Your DSL line is connected to an IKNS (remote?) DSLAM. These devices falsely report exceedingly low US noise levels and impossibly high US signal losses. This can result in high latency and lowered US sync rates. This problem is well known to Bell. Some modems are better than others at syncing at the full 800 kb/s. Others will sync at 768, 736, or 704.

3. The Aztech modem is actually pretty good. That doesn't mean that none fail, of course. To be perfectly fair, I must tell you that after carefully reading your account, I cannot find any evidence that your original modem was faulty. The trouble is that IKNS cards deceive, and Bell techs who believe them naturally assume that if it's not the wire, it must be the modem. Why would they even dream of thinking that the DSLAM is lying to them? [Anyone please correct me if you think I am wrong in any part of this!]

4. The switch nearest you is indeed TOROON09 Toronto Dufferin aka 53–LEnnox, etc. And yes, 53 Lennox St. is 1.6 km away. But what 53-LEnnox actually refers to is the old numbering convention, where a phone number such as 532-1098 would be rendered as LEnnox 2-1098. The switch is actually located at 1040 Dufferin, just South of Bloor, which is 1 km from you.

Anyone interested in learning more about this situation may want to Google: ikns vdsl2+

What I find interesting is that it is often said that that the problems of lower US sync rates and higher latency caused by these IKNS cards are so insignificant that few people notice them.

I see that much frustration and ill will against wholesaler ISPs results, and many people unnecessarily buy new modems or hire someone to "fix" their inside wiring, when there is nothing wrong with either.

Finally, it should be understood that a DSL link comprises a modem, inside wiring, Bell wiring, and a DSLAM. No part of a DSL link is under the control of a (Bell wholesaler) ISP. At best an ISP can advise the customer and make requests to Bell on behalf of the customer. But every part of the link is owned (or rented) by the customer or owned, maintained, and controlled by Bell.

Bell holds a privileged monopoly. Acanac, as a Bell wholesaler, depends on Bell's good will. It pays Bell more for a new customer, than it receives from that customer. Isn't it amazing that it has any technical support at all, and money to spend on network infrastructure in addition?

Acanac PN

Fri, 22 May 2009 02:33:01 EDT

Fergless posted : Well Done. :)

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Thu, 21 May 2009 21:04:17 EDT

Acanac PN posted : Hope, this 4db margin is much higher in reality, but only displayed by the equipment (some "known" bug or particularity of the remote itself).

Best regards.

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Thu, 21 May 2009 19:57:18 EDT

anon posted : Well done :D

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Thu, 21 May 2009 18:42:15 EDT

T1nART posted : Thank you PN.

You've been quite helpful.

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Thu, 21 May 2009 16:25:47 EDT

Acanac PN posted : Update:
As T1nART requested, the case was re-opened again.
Now, 800k Upload is shown on Bell Lantern
The current settings, are as follow:
Profile: Interleave 5056/800
Sync: 5056/768 ----
NM: 8/4 dB !!!
OCC: 77/77%

Thanks

PEBKAC.

Tue, 19 May 2009 19:54:53 EDT

Fergless posted : Maybe your own PEBKAC issues.

LOL too funny.

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Tue, 19 May 2009 14:52:15 EDT

anon posted : Actually you paid for.

Upto 5Mbit download and upto 800Kbit upload

If you want to get a real 5Mbit at all, you don't get dsl, because there is always PPPOE overhead, which means you will never , ever, see 5Mbit download after PPPOE overhead on a 5056 profile.

Next, you'll never see that 800Kbit upload, due PPPOE overhead also.

Since your SNR ratio is soo damn low, your issues are 100% due to line issues.

Maybe your own PEBKAC issues.
Is your modem connected at the DSLAM? or as close to the dslam as possible once entering the house?

I connect my modem to the main phone jack that enters the house, with an under 5 foot phone cord, to get the best possible signal, then send a cat5e cable from the modem to my computer.

I hope you can figure you issues out and if you can't and choose to cancel, that you go with a cable internet provider.

Because you won't be getting any better from any DSL provider. Maybe Bell, but thats only due to it most likely being a ADSL2+ / VDSL remote your connected to, being the cause of most of your issues.

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Mon, 18 May 2009 23:12:48 EDT

T1nART posted : Inc...

All I really care about is getting what I paid for...And that's the bottom line!

It seems that when there's some kind of trouble, I have to wrestle with a bunch of your tech savvy support, and also with what Bell is doing to my service.

You must appreciate the service industry is a bare-knuckle fight for what customers want, deserve, and paid for, cause in the end, the customer is always right...and if you can't deliver what you say you're going to, then you're not as good as you claim to be...

Meditate on that...and let it sync in to everyone who reads these long winded threads...

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Mon, 18 May 2009 21:51:53 EDT
Acanac Inc posted :
said by T1nART:

Well, I paid for 5Mb/s down, and 800Kb/s up...

I should expect that my profile will remain that way for the entirety of the contract.

Now that it's past my first month, I no longer can cancel the service and have to stay it.

However, I will not accept any less than what I'm supposed to get when the potential on my line is 10Mb/s down, and at least 1Mb/s up.

These problems that keep occuring is a result of poor attention to detail.

And obviously you couldn't care less about quality customer service. PN, your comments seems to just exacerbate the problem and does not help to resolve any issues.

I am sure our staff will do all they can to assit you, howerver if for what ever reason they are not able to help you can still cancel service. Your never locked in. You would just be charged are regular rate for the time you used and returned the rest.

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Mon, 18 May 2009 20:54:43 EDT
T1nART posted : Here they are:

Mode: G.DMT
Type: Interleave
Line Coding: Trellis On
Status: No Defect
Link Power State: L0

Downstream Upstream
SNR Margin (dB): 6.8 6.0
Attenuation (dB): 9.0 22.0
Output Power (dBm): 9.8 12.3
Attainable Rate (Kbps): 5696 1020
Rate (Kbps): 5056 512
K (number of bytes in DMT frame): 159 17
R (number of check bytes in RS code word): 8 8
S (RS code word size in DMT frame): 1 8
D (interleaver depth): 0 0
Delay (msec): 0 0

Super Frames: 548049 548047
Super Frame Errors: 0 0
RS Words: 37267398 4658399
RS Correctable Errors: 2905 0
RS Uncorrectable Errors: 0 N/A

HEC Errors: 0 0
OCD Errors: 0 0
LCD Errors: 0 0
Total Cells: 111099445 0
Data Cells: 7189087 0
Bit Errors: 0 0

Total ES: 183 0
Total SES: 9 0
Total UAS: 167 0

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Mon, 18 May 2009 19:59:16 EDT
Fergless posted : Could you please post your modem stats, besides just your sync rate. :)

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Mon, 18 May 2009 19:41:23 EDT
T1nART posted :
said by Acanac PN:

I apologized, I explained to you what is the normal way to deal with problems and requests but you keep complaining.
OK, i understand you have lower upstream.
I will do my best to request returning of you profile back to the original one. There is no guaranty your modem will synchronize at that speed, probably not.

Thanks

It was synced when it was orginally set by a bell tech.

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Mon, 18 May 2009 18:49:40 EDT
T1nART posted : The downstream has just jumped back up to 5Mb/s.
But upstream got worse.

Line Rate - Upstream (Kbps): 512
Line Rate - Downstream (Kbps): 5056
LAN IP Address: 192.168.1.1
Default Gateway: 67.212.8.1
Primary DNS Server: 67.55.0.11
Secondary DNS Server: 66.49.220.95
Date/Time: Mon May 18 18:48:18 2009

Seems like it's a losing battle....

But the war is far from over...

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Mon, 18 May 2009 18:35:35 EDT
Acanac PN posted : I apologized, I explained to you what is the normal way to deal with problems and requests but you keep complaining.
OK, i understand you have lower upstream.
I will do my best to request returning of you profile back to the original one. There is no guaranty your modem will synchronize at that speed, probably not.

Thanks

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Mon, 18 May 2009 18:06:15 EDT
T1nART posted : Well, I paid for 5Mb/s down, and 800Kb/s up...

I should expect that my profile will remain that way for the entirety of the contract.

Now that it's past my first month, I no longer can cancel the service and have to stay it.

However, I will not accept any less than what I'm supposed to get when the potential on my line is 10Mb/s down, and at least 1Mb/s up.

These problems that keep occuring is a result of poor attention to detail.

And obviously you couldn't care less about quality customer service. PN, your comments seems to just exacerbate the problem and does not help to resolve any issues.

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Mon, 18 May 2009 17:37:21 EDT
Acanac PN posted :
said by T1nART:

Dude, the profile has been fluctuating and has been changed to a lower connection. There lies the problem.

It should be at 5Mb/s Down, and 800Kb/s Up. Which it was at when the bell technician came and set it to that/ Obviously, you guys can't get the message to bell accordingly, and anything only gets done when an actual bell tech comes to the house. That has been the case with my whole experience which is all documented in this entire thread...

Just read all the messages I've left in this thread and get back to me with some proper answers.

OK dude.
Your profile WAS 5M/800 but you called the support.
Profile WAS 5M !!!
But the equipment setup cannot sync at 800k.
My DSL neither!
I made 6 trouble tickets and I changed 5 modems - different brands.
I am 50M to CO.
And I am still not getting 800 upstream.
That's it.
This is the Canadian DSL reality and it is not my or Acanac's fault, dude.

Thanks

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Mon, 18 May 2009 17:19:47 EDT
T1nART posted : Dude, the profile has been fluctuating and has been changed to a lower connection. There lies the problem.

It should be at 5Mb/s Down, and 800Kb/s Up. Which it was at when the bell technician came and set it to that/ Obviously, you guys can't get the message to bell accordingly, and anything only gets done when an actual bell tech comes to the house. That has been the case with my whole experience which is all documented in this entire thread...

Just read all the messages I've left in this thread and get back to me with some proper answers.

Re: Is Acanac as good as they claim to be...

Mon, 18 May 2009 15:59:01 EDT
Acanac PN posted : Ok T1nART, today is holiday, but tomorrow a new request could be made.
Just let me know, please, if you go trough Acanac Support phone to reopen the case - I will follow up with the state of your request.
Make sure, this time you explain what your problem is.

(Actually, what is the problem - don't you have a stable and working connection?)

I don't want to do any improvisations on your case, unless you explain me exactly what you want. In this case, please be patient and do not call the Support phone at the same time.

Best regards.
--
We Rock