A Broadband and ADSL forum. BroadbanterBanter

Welcome to BroadbanterBanter.

You are currently viewing as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today.

Go Back   Home » BroadbanterBanter forum » Newsgroup Discussions » uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) (uk.telecom.broadband) Discussion of broadband services, technology and equipment as provided in the UK. Discussions of specific services based on ADSL, cable modems or other broadband technology are also on-topic. Advertising is not allowed.

Extra bandwidth without voice?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 3rd 11, 08:37 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Mike Tomlinson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 285
Default Extra bandwidth without voice?


Was thinking in the shower today (dangerous, I know)

ADSL is predicated on data signals being added to a voice line, with the
DSL frequencies being filtered so that a human doesn't hear them on the
phone.

Since the vast majority of people don't use their landlines and rely on
their mobiles, what's stopping providers from offering data-only lines,
dropping the portion of the spectrum used for voice calls and using that
for data as well? That would result in an increase in bandwidth, but
how much, I don't know.

Thoughts?

--
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")


  #3  
Old July 3rd 11, 10:20 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Roderick Stewart
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 135
Default Extra bandwidth without voice?

In article , Mike Tomlinson wrote:
ADSL is predicated on data signals being added to a voice line, with the
DSL frequencies being filtered so that a human doesn't hear them on the
phone.

Since the vast majority of people don't use their landlines and rely on
their mobiles, what's stopping providers from offering data-only lines,
dropping the portion of the spectrum used for voice calls and using that
for data as well? That would result in an increase in bandwidth, but
how much, I don't know.


ADSL frequencies go up to about 1MHz, while telephone audio is about 3kHz,
so it would give an increase in available bandwidth of about 0.3%.

That's assuming the bandwidth available for ADSL goes all the way down to
3kHz of course, which in practice it probably doesn't, so the available
increase might be a little more than 0.3%, but it still seems hardly worth
the bother.

Rod.
--
Virtual Access V6.3 free usenet/email software from
http://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/

  #4  
Old July 3rd 11, 10:44 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Graham J
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 620
Default Extra bandwidth without voice?


"Mike Tomlinson" wrote in message
...

Was thinking in the shower today (dangerous, I know)

ADSL is predicated on data signals being added to a voice line, with the
DSL frequencies being filtered so that a human doesn't hear them on the
phone.

Since the vast majority of people don't use their landlines and rely on
their mobiles, what's stopping providers from offering data-only lines,
dropping the portion of the spectrum used for voice calls and using that
for data as well? That would result in an increase in bandwidth, but
how much, I don't know.

Thoughts?


The spectrum for telephone audio is from (nearly) zero to about 4khz. The
spectrum used by ADSL starts at about 8kHz and extends to about 1.1MHz. So
by using the zero to 8KHz band the you would gain a further 0.8% bandwidth.
You would of course have to have different equipment (or equipment capable
of switching between the two options).

ISDN uses the spectrum zero to 80 kHz. ADSL Annex B (as used in Germany)
coexists with ISDN and to achieve this the ADSL spectrum uses 138kHz to
1.1MHz. I suspect this has been done because ISDN is a widely-used business
system in Germany. It may also be that from the outset the German PO had
more satellite exchanges in rural areas so that the "last mile" of copper is
really that, and not the "last 8 miles" as is common in UK rural areas.
However, sacrificing nearly 15% of the ADSL bandwidth for ISDN does not look
nearly such a good idea, when you consider that VoIP would probably be a
better choice for the future.

I seriously doubt that "vast majority of people don't use their landlines".
I suspect that the proportion of people for whom this is true is actually so
small that it does not warrant the setup of different equipment.

The solution is to replace all the copper pairs with fibre, and deliver
ethernet to each consumer. Then for a voice service, the user simply plugs
in a VoIP phone. Mobile phones could work the same way - simply arrange for
the mobile system to allocate an IP address to each handset, and you have
VoIP throughout.

--
Graham J



  #5  
Old July 3rd 11, 10:47 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Jono
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,539
Default Extra bandwidth without voice?

Mike Tomlinson submitted this idea :
Was thinking in the shower today (dangerous, I know)

ADSL is predicated on data signals being added to a voice line, with the
DSL frequencies being filtered so that a human doesn't hear them on the
phone.


Surely, that's the other way round. The human, analogue devices, are
filtered to prevent them interfering with the DSL signal.


Since the vast majority of people don't use their landlines and rely on
their mobiles, what's stopping providers from offering data-only lines,


Technically, nothing prevents this.

They already do what you suggest - check out SDSL.

dropping the portion of the spectrum used for voice calls and using that
for data as well?


That would result in an increase in bandwidth, but
how much, I don't know.


Not a lot.


Thoughts?



  #6  
Old July 3rd 11, 10:59 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
George Weston
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 467
Default Extra bandwidth without voice?

On 03/07/2011 08:37, Mike Tomlinson wrote:

Was thinking in the shower today (dangerous, I know)

ADSL is predicated on data signals being added to a voice line, with the
DSL frequencies being filtered so that a human doesn't hear them on the
phone.

Since the vast majority of people don't use their landlines and rely on
their mobiles,


A rather sweeping statement?
I for one prefer to use my landline for voice calls, for two reasons;
speech quality and not wanting to be interrupted with work problems when
I'm off-duty. My work-provided mobile gets switched off after work and
stays that way until I'm on duty again.
It's called work-life balance... ;-)
I've not yet found any compelling reason for having a mobile of my own -
I just borrow my wife's if I really need one.
Then of course, there's TXTing, which to me is a complete waste of time...

George Luddite
  #7  
Old July 3rd 11, 11:31 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Davey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 585
Default Extra bandwidth without voice?

On Sun, 03 Jul 2011 10:59:08 +0100
George Weston wrote:

On 03/07/2011 08:37, Mike Tomlinson wrote:

Was thinking in the shower today (dangerous, I know)

ADSL is predicated on data signals being added to a voice line,
with the DSL frequencies being filtered so that a human doesn't
hear them on the phone.

Since the vast majority of people don't use their landlines and
rely on their mobiles,


A rather sweeping statement?
I for one prefer to use my landline for voice calls, for two reasons;
speech quality and not wanting to be interrupted with work problems
when I'm off-duty. My work-provided mobile gets switched off after
work and stays that way until I'm on duty again.
It's called work-life balance... ;-)
I've not yet found any compelling reason for having a mobile of my
own - I just borrow my wife's if I really need one.
Then of course, there's TXTing, which to me is a complete waste of
time...

George Luddite


Agreed, on most counts.

Since the wife doesn't have a mobile, ("over my dead body"), I got the
cheapest possible for use in the car in case of need. I don't work now,
so no chance of having an employer's one any more.
Texting, don't get me started. It's main purpose, apart from unlearning
how to spell English, seems to be proving that your other half
is involved with another 'amour'.
See: Kwame Kilpatrick, ex-mayor of Detroit, who exchanged 14,000 (yes,
14,000) explicit text messages with his female Chief Of Stuff, sorry,
Staff. He is no longer Mayor of Detroit. They used City-owned 'phones,
the fools, all messages were produced in court. Oops.
--
Davey (semi-Luddite).
  #8  
Old July 3rd 11, 11:43 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Mike Tomlinson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 285
Default Extra bandwidth without voice?

En el artículo , Jono
escribió:

Surely, that's the other way round. The human, analogue devices, are
filtered to prevent them interfering with the DSL signal.


That's what I said... "with the DSL frequencies being filtered so that
a human doesn't hear them on the phone."

--
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")


  #9  
Old July 3rd 11, 11:45 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Mike Tomlinson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 285
Default Extra bandwidth without voice?

En el artículo , Graham J
[email protected]? escribió:

I seriously doubt that "vast majority of people don't use their landlines".
I suspect that the proportion of people for whom this is true is actually so
small that it does not warrant the setup of different equipment.


It's be interesting to see definitive figures. I hardly ever use mine,
and I know very few of my friends do. Most mobile tariffs include a
generous allowance of calls (perhaps it works better for men than women
).

--
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")


  #10  
Old July 3rd 11, 11:47 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Richard Tobin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 276
Default Extra bandwidth without voice?

In article ,
Jono wrote:

Surely, that's the other way round. The human, analogue devices, are
filtered to prevent them interfering with the DSL signal.


That shouldn't be necessary, as the DSL signal processing should
effectively filter it out anyway. Older phones on the other hand
weren't designed to be robust against the frequencies used by DSL.

In practice it appears that phones do interfere with DSL equipment,
but whether this is due to the audio frequencies themselves I
don't know.

-- Richard
 




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Yesterday's extra hot vindaloo Mikey uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 9 June 16th 09 07:45 PM
voip as extra phone Paul McGuinness uk.telecom.voip (UK VOIP) 15 November 22nd 08 09:45 AM
Share extra PC with crossover cable M Jones uk.comp.home-networking (UK home networking) 6 March 7th 06 10:12 PM
How to get extra lines with SPA-3000? Joe Harrison uk.telecom.voip (UK VOIP) 34 December 18th 05 01:49 PM
ISPs which 'throttle' rather than charge extra... Peter M uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 2 January 11th 05 03:12 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright ©2004-2019 BroadbanterBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.