 reub2000Premium
join:2001-12-28
Evanston, IL | One qustion. I currently get 1.2Mbps on earthlink dsl capped at 1.5Mbps. If I got this 1.5Mbps-3Mbps, would I just get 1.2Mbps, or something higher? |
|
 lxAstrosxlPremium
join:2000-10-13
Carol Stream, IL
kudos:1 | said by reub2000:
I currently get 1.2Mbps on earthlink dsl capped at 1.5Mbps. If I got this 1.5Mbps-3Mbps, would I just get 1.2Mbps, or something higher?
you would prolly get higher....its the overhead thats keeping u at 1.2 since ur cap is 1.5.. |
|
 dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | reply to reub2000
said by reub2000:
I currently get 1.2Mbps on earthlink dsl capped at 1.5Mbps. If I got this 1.5Mbps-3Mbps, would I just get 1.2Mbps, or something higher?
Depends on the conditions of your line, your distance etc...
Just because its offered doesnt mean you can get it. do you know how far you are away from your CO?
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth |
|
|
|
reub2000Premium
join:2001-12-28
Evanston, IL | Acording to the CO from covad, I'm 10619 feet from the CO. I have no idea if they are correct or not. |
|
| You are not 10,000+ feet and getting 1.2 Mbps on
a 1.5 Mbps cap class. That tells me that Covad
only has the basic CO information and not the
distance to the RT you are on.
In example, I've got a client who shows up over
34,000+ feet on all the distance readings but
that is actually to the CO. They are actually
running off of an RT about 1,500 feet away and
get full maximum data rates.
Those distance reports can often be very deceptive. |
|
 koitsuPremium,MVM
join:2002-07-16
Mountain View, CA
kudos:14 | I'm _not_ on an RT and I'm 11900 feet from the CO, getting 1.5mbit down and 384kbit up (via Covad). My distance shows up as 10500 feet on an MLT test, and a little bit more on a pre-qual. And yes, when I say 1.5mbit down, I do mean pulling approximately 130KB/sec.
I can't seem to get Covad to get SBC to switch me to an RT that's 2000 feet away. The few SBC people I've talked to say either the RT isn't open/available for use, or it's full (weird that they don't know which...)
Anyways, just letting you know that his distance should "probably" (again, no idea about line quality) handle 1.5mbit without any trouble.
--
Making life hard for others since 1977. |
|
reub2000Premium
join:2001-12-28
Evanston, IL | Whoa! What's an RT? MLT? |
|
| RT= a remote terminal, kind of like a mini central office at the end of a fiber unbilical cord flug out to the farther ends of the subdivisions, etc.
MLT = an electronic test that gives the basic facts about the line quality,etc. Distance ballpark figures is one. |
|
reub2000Premium
join:2001-12-28
Evanston, IL
1 edit | said by copperdoctor:
RT= a remote terminal, kind of like a mini central office at the end of a fiber unbilical cord flug out to the farther ends of the subdivisions, etc.
MLT = an electronic test that gives the basic facts about the line quality,etc. Distance ballpark figures is one.
Thanks
quote:
And yes, when I say 1.5mbit down, I do mean pulling approximately 130KB/sec.
130*8=1040K
1040/1024=1.015625Mbps
1.0156225 != 1.5Mbps
|
|
lxAstrosxlPremium
join:2000-10-13
Carol Stream, IL
kudos:1 | 1.5mbps = 187.5k/sec |
|
koitsuPremium,MVM
join:2002-07-16
Mountain View, CA
kudos:14 | reply to reub2000
Same difference. When you take into mind TCP, IP, and ATM overhead, you'll pull a flat 1.5mbit if your sync rate is higher. Me personally, I don't like rate-adaptive ADSL, so...
--
Making life hard for others since 1977. |
|
| reply to koitsu
said by koitsu:
I'm _not_ on an RT and I'm 11900 feet from the CO, getting 1.5mbit down and 384kbit up (via Covad). My distance shows up as 10500 feet on an MLT test, and a little bit more on a pre-qual. And yes, when I say 1.5mbit down, I do mean pulling approximately 130KB/sec.
That kind of distance from a CO would be extremely
rare to push that kind of data rates. An RT at that
distance possibly but not likely from a CO.
If you are actually on a CO and your wire distance is
actually that far than you are doing very good. You
either have a very clean line or at least part of your
wire distance is actually fiber which doesn't count.
Given those numbers though, I'm more inclined to
believe that you are actually already on that
nearby RT you are trying to get switched to.
Don't count on pre-qual tests or even SBC to have
accurate information. They setup new RTs all the
time and most of the time, they don't bother to
update their network maps. Most of their distance
maps are still based upon the old "Project Pronto"
deployment locations that aren't being setup anymore.
This is a bit ironic since SBC is now the one doing
the RT deployment directly since the project is
no more.
In example, SBC lists my own connection officially
as somewhere close to 11,000 feet on their network
maps and pre-qual tests yet the RT I'm running off of
is physically only about 400 feet behind my house
and is so new that SBC isn't even aware it's there
officially. SBC thinks I'm running off of
another RT (an old pronto RT) that is roughly
about 2 miles away.
I get over maximum data rates at 6.1 Mbps and that
is even after any packet overhead. I also have
better test equipment than SBC and my equipment
also confirms that I'm indeed running off of the
RT by my house. SBC's network records are verifiable
a little bit out of date.
Point in fact, I wouldn't put too much faith in
the pre-qual and distance numbers that SBC gives you.
The good news is that if you are running at maximum
on your current 1.5 Mbps account at your current provider
taking into account overhead, I can just about guarantee
that you will do just as well with any account class at SBC.
(They're actually routed through the same equipment) |
|
army5
join:2002-04-30
Oklahoma City, OK | It might be possible. I know that I am approx. 10,500ft and I am at 1.5. Of course the extra 1400ft could make a difference.
--
To fill the hour, that is true happiness - Ralph Waldo Emerson |
|
koitsuPremium,MVM
join:2002-07-16
Mountain View, CA
kudos:14 | reply to Cybertoad
I'm 100% positive I'm NOT on the RT. My SNRs are absolutely horrible for 1.5/384 (something like 15dB / 9dB), which explains why I occasionally see some dropped packets to my uplink gateway. If I was on the RT, I'd have SNRs that would support 1.5/768, which is what I'd *REALLY* love to have.
I originally was sold 1.5/768, but the SNRs were so bad that I'd lose sync pretty often. I went through hell getting SE/Covad to drop me to 1.5/384, which they did and the line stablised.
In addition, after Covad did their MLT test, it was confirmed with SBC that there's a bridge tap on the copper between here and the CO somewhere. So, as far as "my line being excellent quality", I'm not so sure  .
You can see an actual electrical run (this is what the MLT test also showed) of what goes where here. SBC should honestly be shot for this kind-of topology, especially since my side of the town is where all of the large companies are (Verisign, Veritas, Netscape/AOL, Microsoft, Pinnacle, etc.).
--
Making life hard for others since 1977. |
|
| reply to Cybertoad
I work on DSL lines everyday and I would have to say that if you are under 12kft and you are NOT getting 1.2Megs then you have a line problem of some sort. |
|
