| Can I get some opinions on my 2WIRE training history. I had a 5 month fiasco with AT&T last year
»IP-DSLAM 3.0 and continuing loss of sync issue..
that finally seemed to be resolved, and has behaved for quite some time, but recently feels like it's starting up again.
A U-verse care person that I've been emailing back and forth with first changed me to interleaving, then put it back to fast path, but had to upgrade it the next speed to change it back, and it's been a 6mbps since. It seems I'm getting more drops in the signal now, and the U-verse care guys has seen some of them, but this morning I emailed him right after it had lost the signal, and he emailed back he said "When you sent this last email I ran my tests to see if I could pick up anything and nothing showed up in the tests", but I see a bunch of drops in the training log, so I can't understand why he isn't seeing the same thing.
Just curious what some of you think about my bit loading graph and training log.
They are sending me a Motorola NVG510, but I don't think that will clear this up, but who knows? |
|
| This is what the U-verse care person said:
"The actual signal isn’t dropping but the amount of code violations being on the fast path is enough for the signal to be interrupted without dropping."
Wasn't doing this at 3mbps, and my question is, what is causing the "code violations"? |
|
| In other words instead of fixing the problem they're just going to throw you on interleaving. |
|
1 edit | said by WhyMe420:In other words instead of fixing the problem they're just going to throw you on interleaving.
That's what I get out of it. They're not putting me on interleaving until I say I'm willing to do it as a last resort, and I told them that. I'm not done with them yet, but I learned last year how they are to deal with......it was a joke. |
|
| reply to Ukiah Jim
Nothing looks out of the ordinary. Compare that 8 Mbps max rate with what you get after having the NVG 510 synced up for an hour. |
|
| said by Forosnai:Nothing looks out of the ordinary. Compare that 8 Mbps max rate with what you get after having the NVG 510 synced up for an hour.
You think it will improve by just swapping out the 2WIRE?
Something is causing the interruptions though.......that can't be the modem, when it just started with the frequency you see, after the upgrade to the 6mbps. Or could it?
Another thing......do you happen to know if the NVG510 has all the diagnostics and whatnot, like the 2WIRE? |
|
| reply to Forosnai
said by Forosnai: Compare that 8 Mbps max rate with what you get after having the NVG 510 synced up for an hour.
I sure am curious what that comparison is, now that the NVG510 is synced up, but they don't show those type of stats inside it, like the 2WIRE. |
|
| reply to Ukiah Jim
You have too many errors on the line. You need a tech to clean up your IW and create a ticket for an outside guy to cut off some extra wiring branching off yours. |
|
3 edits | said by PremTechLife:You have too many errors on the line. You need a tech to clean up your IW and create a ticket for an outside guy to cut off some extra wiring branching off yours.
The IW is fine.........all done last year. New pedestal, new NID, new whole house filter, Shielded Cat5 home run straight to the modem, etc. etc. They looked high and low for bridge tap........none found.
The only solution AT&T seems to have is to put it on interleaving.
The easy way out. |
|
| I would check grounding at nid, outlet. That really, really sucks. The shielded cat5 could cause problems too. |
|
| said by PremTechLife:I would check grounding at nid, outlet. That really, really sucks. The shielded cat5 could cause problems too.
How can shielded Cat5 cause problems? The whole idea of it is to keep out interference. Especially when this supposedly elite Tier II guy was adamant about me using shielded Cat5 for the home run. |
|
| lol, sorry, but PremTechLife  demonstrates about the same amount of knowledge that almost every other premises tech I have met has had, slim-to-nil. They'll come up with any excuse not to do actual work and come up with off-the-wall crap such as this, lol. I think AT&T trains them to be that way. |
|
1 edit | said by WhyMe420:lol, sorry, but PremTechLife demonstrates about the same amount of knowledge that almost every other premises tech I have met has had, slim-to-nil. They'll come up with any excuse not to do actual work and come up with off-the-wall crap such as this, lol. I think AT&T trains them to be that way.
Well, especially when I had 20+ techs here last year, and even though a few said the shielded Cat5 was overkill, none said it could cause problems. Defeats the entire reason it's shielded if it does. |
|
|
|
1 edit | Here are the line stats with the Motorola NVG510, after a little over 48 hours. I hate the limited stats you can get out of this modem, but whatever. It's still getting errors. |
|
| Your downstream attenuation is certainly high, but your SN Margin is still sorta decent. Doesn't leave much room for line variations though, possibly why there are so many CRC errors. If there is nothing that they can/will do about the attenuation then your only options are either interleaving or ideally (in terms of latency and stability) dropping the profile down to 3Mbps. |
|
| said by WhyMe420:Your downstream attenuation is certainly high, but your SN Margin is still sorta decent. Doesn't leave much room for line variations though, possibly why there are so many CRC errors. If there is nothing that they can/will do about the attenuation then your only options are either interleaving or ideally (in terms of latency and stability) dropping the profile down to 3Mbps.
Well, if you look back at my first post, and the stats from the 2WIRE, my attenuation was about the same with the 3mbps, does that mean anything?
Also, last year, after this 5 month long fiasco
»IP-DSLAM 3.0 and continuing loss of sync issue.
with 20+ tech visits, my almost daily loss of sync issue was pretty much resolved. It would drop once in a few months, or whatever, so it was no big deal. Then last month I noticed it lost the signal about 4 or 5 times, so I emailed the U-verse care team, just to see if they saw anything weird. Naturally, the guy put me on interleaving right away.....typical. I emailed back and said I didn't want it on interleaving, so he put it back on fast path, but he said he had to upgrade me to 6mbps to do so, and would put it back to 3mbps, after the system reset.....something like that. He did put a nice promotion in place, and said his tests showed that all the numbers were good enough for the 6mbps to run smooth and stable, if I wanted to keep it there. Naturally I said keep it that way, especially since my 3mbps promotion would end in December.
So, I start getting more ERR_SIG_INTERRUPT, with the 6mbps, as opposed to ERR_LOS_LIMIT, with the 3mbps. Now, I don't claim to be an expert on this stuff, or anything close, but it seems I'd get more loss of sync when going to a higher speed, not just the signal being interrupted. The Tier II guys says it's getting enough code violations to interrupt it, but not lose it. WTF?? Seems odd to me, but what do I know....I'm just trying to use logic.
All that being said, I wonder what's better.....switch back to the 3mbps, no interleaving, and possibly get loss of sync once a day, or whatever, or put it on interleaving, and get latency, or leave just the way it is right now....6mbps, so far, not dropping the signal, just getting "interrupted", and have no latency??
The ideal thing would be AT&T actually resolving the real issue, but that's wishing for a lot.
|
|
| reply to WhyMe420
I am sorry you have had a bad experience, and that you feel the need to gain retribution by lashing out at me. I don't appreciate the extreme over-exaggeration. In order for a network to be shielded, the cable, the jack, and the connector on the cable must all be shielded. Thats all I was referring to. With a nmr and max rate like I see here, I would not want to drop from 6 meg if it was my internet.
--
I do not speak on behalf of At&t. Everything I write should be considered opinion and fiction; and in no way a reflection on At&t, its empoyees, or partners. |
|
| said by PremTechLife:I am sorry you have had a bad experience, and that you feel the need to gain retribution by lashing out at me. I don't appreciate the extreme over-exaggeration. In order for a network to be shielded, the cable, the jack, and the connector on the cable must all be shielded. Thats all I was referring to. With a nmr and max rate like I see here, I would not want to drop from 6 meg if it was my internet.
Sorry but that's also not true. The shielded cat5e will NOT cause issues with the line, PERIOD. What you are describing is what is necessary to make the shielding MORE EFFECTIVE. It doesn't mean that if EVERYTHING isn't shielded that it will cause issues. Simply having the entire IW shielded accounts for 90% of the shielding. Shielding everything else is just extra shielding. Considering that much of IW isn't even twisted pair, shielded cat5e even without everything else being shielded is still a HUGE step up.
AT&T really has it down pat with all the techs and such blaming the IW at any chance they can get. It is their way of placing the blame on the CUSTOMER, and making the CUSTOMER either pay the EXTORTION fee for "Inside Wire Maintenance" or suffer charges for IW work that won't even FIX THE PROBLEM.
It is RARE for IW to go wrong, and chances are SLIM that a shielded cat5e homerun will cause issues with xDSL. FACE IT. The problem is OUTSIDE, AS ALWAYS in cases like this.
There is either simply too much distance between OP and the RT, or there are line ISSUES somewhere in between OP and the RT, OUTSIDE.
WHO WOULD want to drop their Internet to a lower speed? Not many. FACT OF THE MATTER IS that those stats are on the EDGE of 6Mbps service. NO ROOM FOR VARIANCES WHATSOEVER. Therefore the options are INTERLEAVING, DROP THE PROFILE RATE, or AT&T could actually FIX THE PROBLEM (if possible.)
THE PROBLEM IS, that AT&T is QUICK to LIE to you and BLAME YOU THE CUSTOMER for all problems. THEN if you don't fall for it, THEY SIMPLY TURN ON INTERLEAVING OR LOWER THE PROFILE RATE, without ACTUALLY DETERMINING if it is an OUTSIDE ISSUE (PAST the POLE DROP.)
They are CHEAP with the outside lines. They REFUSE to do ANY work on the outside lines, when AT ALL POSSIBLE.
Yes I know I am ranting, this is nothing PERSONAL with YOU, just AT&T's craptacular cheap tactics. AT&T is great WHEN IT WORKS, but lo-and-behold, if you have issues, DON'T expect AT&T to help you without a fight. |
|
| reply to PremTechLife
said by PremTechLife: In order for a network to be shielded, the cable, the jack, and the connector on the cable must all be shielded.
Just to clairify......in my case, it is. It's a shielded Cat5 home run, and the ground "tracer" wire is connected to the NID ground. The jack has a shielded keystone, and the patch cable from the jack to the RG is a Belkin shielded Cat5 cable. I've attached a picture, and it's not even the final job on the NID. A new drop from the pedestal to the NID was put in after the picture, and it was cleaned up even more, but you get the idea. |
|
1 edit | reply to WhyMe420
said by WhyMe420
Sorry but that's also not true. The shielded cat5e will NOT cause issues with the line, PERIOD. What you are describing is what is necessary to make the shielding MORE EFFECTIVE. It doesn't mean that if EVERYTHING isn't shielded that it will cause issues. Simply having the entire IW shielded accounts for 90% of the shielding. Shielding everything else is just extra shielding. Considering that much of IW isn't even twisted pair, shielded cat5e even without everything else being shielded is still a HUGE step up.
AT&T really has it down pat with all the techs and such blaming the IW at any chance they can get. It is their way of placing the blame on the CUSTOMER, and making the CUSTOMER either pay the EXTORTION fee for "Inside Wire Maintenance" or suffer charges for IW work that won't even FIX THE PROBLEM.
It is RARE for IW to go wrong, and chances are SLIM that a shielded cat5e homerun will cause issues with xDSL. FACE IT. The problem is OUTSIDE, AS ALWAYS in cases like this.
There is either simply too much distance between OP and the RT, or there are line ISSUES somewhere in between OP and the RT, OUTSIDE.
WHO WOULD want to drop their Internet to a lower speed? Not many. FACT OF THE MATTER IS that those stats are on the EDGE of 6Mbps service. NO ROOM FOR VARIANCES WHATSOEVER. Therefore the options are INTERLEAVING, DROP THE PROFILE RATE, or AT&T could actually FIX THE PROBLEM (if possible.)
THE PROBLEM IS, that AT&T is QUICK to LIE to you and BLAME YOU THE CUSTOMER for all problems. THEN if you don't fall for it, THEY SIMPLY TURN ON INTERLEAVING OR LOWER THE PROFILE RATE, without ACTUALLY DETERMINING if it is an OUTSIDE ISSUE (PAST the POLE DROP.)
They are CHEAP with the outside lines. They REFUSE to do ANY work on the outside lines, when AT ALL POSSIBLE.
Yes I know I am ranting, this is nothing PERSONAL with YOU, just AT&T's craptacular cheap tactics. AT&T is great WHEN IT WORKS, but lo-and-behold, if you have issues, DON'T expect AT&T to help you without a fight.
Thank you. I couldn't describe AT&T better if I tried. The Tier II guy I've been emailing hasn't responded to the last few emails I sent over the last few days, and it's for the reason you mentioned........they just want to take the easy way out......interleaving. |
|
