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.

Lies, damned lies and router statistics.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 29th 11, 10:27 PM posted to plusnet.service.customer-feedback,uk.telecom.broadband
Peter Crosland
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,463
Default Lies, damned lies and router statistics.

This might be sub-titled SWMBO technophobia. A friend who is not very
technically minded asked me to recommend a new ADSL router. He was running a
2Wire 2700HGV because he is on a rural exchange and has a long line. This
has given excellent service almost non stop for three years. My friend's
SWMBO does not like wires and is very fussy about the colour of domestic
items. The arrival of SWMBO's shiny new laptop with "N" wireless capability
meant that the means this had to accommodate. I had a suitable "N" wireless
access point but his was rejected because "there are too many wires". Having
successfully used a Netgear D834G with DG Team firmware I decided a Netgear
DGN2000 with DG team firmware might fit the bill. To prove the concept I
took a spare DG834G along and fitted to see how it performed. SWMBO did not
like the white colour but agreed that a black one would be acceptable.



After installing the DG834G I checked the statistics and found that the
reported line attenuation was 8dB more than the 2Wire reported. Despite this
the DG834G synced at the same speed as the 2Wire and remained connected for
more than ten days non stop. Having satisfied myself that the Netgear would
work I obtained a DGN2000 for my friend. When I installed it and it worked
exactly as I had expected. The only puzzling thing is that the DGN2000
reported a line attenuation 8dB less than the DG834G. This has also run non
stop for ten days. So my question is why should two routers from the same
manufacturer with, presumably very ADSL circuitry and software, report such
a different line attenuation? Does the router measure the line attenuation
or does it get measured by the DSLAM and get passed to the router? In the
past I have done comparative tests on two or three router modems on the same
line and the difference between the reported line attenuation has never been
more than a dB or so. Should we really believe what the hardware tells us or
regard it as fiction?



Peter Crosland


  #2  
Old August 30th 11, 10:11 AM posted to plusnet.service.customer-feedback,uk.telecom.broadband
Peter Able
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 114
Default Lies, damned lies and router statistics.


"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
o.uk...
This might be sub-titled SWMBO technophobia. A friend who is not very
technically minded asked me to recommend a new ADSL router. He was running
a 2Wire 2700HGV because he is on a rural exchange and has a long line.
This has given excellent service almost non stop for three years. My
friend's SWMBO does not like wires and is very fussy about the colour of
domestic items. The arrival of SWMBO's shiny new laptop with "N" wireless
capability meant that the means this had to accommodate. I had a suitable
"N" wireless access point but his was rejected because "there are too many
wires". Having successfully used a Netgear D834G with DG Team firmware I
decided a Netgear DGN2000 with DG team firmware might fit the bill. To
prove the concept I took a spare DG834G along and fitted to see how it
performed. SWMBO did not like the white colour but agreed that a black one
would be acceptable.



After installing the DG834G I checked the statistics and found that the
reported line attenuation was 8dB more than the 2Wire reported. Despite
this the DG834G synced at the same speed as the 2Wire and remained
connected for more than ten days non stop. Having satisfied myself that
the Netgear would work I obtained a DGN2000 for my friend. When I
installed it and it worked exactly as I had expected. The only puzzling
thing is that the DGN2000 reported a line attenuation 8dB less than the
DG834G. This has also run non stop for ten days. So my question is why
should two routers from the same manufacturer with, presumably very ADSL
circuitry and software, report such a different line attenuation? Does the
router measure the line attenuation or does it get measured by the DSLAM
and get passed to the router? In the past I have done comparative tests on
two or three router modems on the same line and the difference between the
reported line attenuation has never been more than a dB or so. Should we
really believe what the hardware tells us or regard it as fiction?



Peter Crosland


Hi Peter,

One of the reasons I switched from a DG834Gv3 to a 2700 - apart from your
recommendation - was the crazy way in which Netgear compute the noise
margin. If they've changed their methodology in their newer products, then
it is about time, too!

PA


  #3  
Old August 30th 11, 10:53 AM posted to plusnet.service.customer-feedback,uk.telecom.broadband
Peter Crosland
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,463
Default Lies, damned lies and router statistics.

"Peter Able" [email protected] wrote in message
news

"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
o.uk...
This might be sub-titled SWMBO technophobia. A friend who is not very
technically minded asked me to recommend a new ADSL router. He was
running a 2Wire 2700HGV because he is on a rural exchange and has a long
line. This has given excellent service almost non stop for three years.
My friend's SWMBO does not like wires and is very fussy about the colour
of domestic items. The arrival of SWMBO's shiny new laptop with "N"
wireless capability meant that the means this had to accommodate. I had a
suitable "N" wireless access point but his was rejected because "there
are too many wires". Having successfully used a Netgear D834G with DG
Team firmware I decided a Netgear DGN2000 with DG team firmware might fit
the bill. To prove the concept I took a spare DG834G along and fitted to
see how it performed. SWMBO did not like the white colour but agreed that
a black one would be acceptable.



After installing the DG834G I checked the statistics and found that the
reported line attenuation was 8dB more than the 2Wire reported. Despite
this the DG834G synced at the same speed as the 2Wire and remained
connected for more than ten days non stop. Having satisfied myself that
the Netgear would work I obtained a DGN2000 for my friend. When I
installed it and it worked exactly as I had expected. The only puzzling
thing is that the DGN2000 reported a line attenuation 8dB less than the
DG834G. This has also run non stop for ten days. So my question is why
should two routers from the same manufacturer with, presumably very ADSL
circuitry and software, report such a different line attenuation? Does
the router measure the line attenuation or does it get measured by the
DSLAM and get passed to the router? In the past I have done comparative
tests on two or three router modems on the same line and the difference
between the reported line attenuation has never been more than a dB or
so. Should we really believe what the hardware tells us or regard it as
fiction?


One of the reasons I switched from a DG834Gv3 to a 2700 - apart from your
recommendation - was the crazy way in which Netgear compute the noise
margin. If they've changed their methodology in their newer products,
then it is about time, too!


Agreed. It may be more complex than that. The DG834G I used was a V4 version
that is relatively recent. Netgear presumably had a good reason for
producing four different iterations of their design but I have not had the
opportunity to test all the others. Having said that I am told that the
earlier ones suffered from capacitor degrading that could have a serious
effect on performance and indeed an early DG834G would not stay connected on
my line for more than a few hours before it locked up. I still hold the 2700
in high regard but there are two drawbacks i.e. no "N" capability and no
capability to tweak the SNR ratio. It was the latter that made me switch
because of the ludicrous way the BT DLM system works. What has pleasantly
surprised me is how stable the DG834G V4 and DGN 2000 have been because
previously the only router that would stay connected for a reasonable time
was the 2700. Of course there have been some changes to my line because
three times in the last two months the underground cables serving my village
have been stolen.

Peter Crosland



  #4  
Old August 30th 11, 01:56 PM posted to plusnet.service.customer-feedback,uk.telecom.broadband
Paul Ratcliffe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default Lies, damned lies and router statistics.

On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 10:11:13 +0100, Peter Able [email protected] wrote:

One of the reasons I switched from a DG834Gv3 to a 2700 - apart from your
recommendation - was the crazy way in which Netgear compute the noise
margin. If they've changed their methodology in their newer products, then
it is about time, too!


My V3 showed similar average figures to my V4, although the V3's
granularity was 1dB compared to V4's 0.1 and the excursions were somewhat
larger (don't know if I really believed the V3).
I bought the V4 to get control of the SNR margin.
  #5  
Old August 30th 11, 08:24 PM posted to plusnet.service.customer-feedback,uk.telecom.broadband
Peter Able
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 114
Default Lies, damned lies and router statistics.


"Paul Ratcliffe" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 10:11:13 +0100, Peter Able [email protected] wrote:

One of the reasons I switched from a DG834Gv3 to a 2700 - apart from your
recommendation - was the crazy way in which Netgear compute the noise
margin. If they've changed their methodology in their newer products,
then
it is about time, too!


My V3 showed similar average figures to my V4, although the V3's
granularity was 1dB compared to V4's 0.1 and the excursions were somewhat
larger (don't know if I really believed the V3).
I bought the V4 to get control of the SNR margin.


The problem I had with the v3 was that the reported SNR appeared to be the
worst detected smoothed SNR plus the short term current variance. So after a
reset the SNR would be +6dB plus/minus one or two, and then would degenerate
to, say, +2 plus/minus one or two by about 11pm - but would then STAY at +2
plus/minus one or two. Now this "locking to worst mean case" means that
there is a significantly greater probability of the line being failed -
which it does, again and again! Sooner or later the DLM gets fed up and
raises the SNR inital value to 9dB and your line-speed degrades. The DGTeam
fixed this - but what a poor choice of algorithm by Netgear. OK in theory,
no doubt - OK on short lines - but hopeless on longer lines in the real
world.

Then PlusNet made some change (ADSL2?) and the v3 modems, whether with
Netgear or DGTeam firmware, collapsed. Hopelessly unreliable.


  #6  
Old August 30th 11, 08:39 PM posted to plusnet.service.customer-feedback,uk.telecom.broadband
Peter Able
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 114
Default Lies, damned lies and router statistics.


"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
o.uk...
"Peter Able" [email protected] wrote in message
news

"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
o.uk...
This might be sub-titled SWMBO technophobia. A friend who is not very
technically minded asked me to recommend a new ADSL router. He was
running a 2Wire 2700HGV because he is on a rural exchange and has a long
line. This has given excellent service almost non stop for three years.
My friend's SWMBO does not like wires and is very fussy about the colour
of domestic items. The arrival of SWMBO's shiny new laptop with "N"
wireless capability meant that the means this had to accommodate. I had
a suitable "N" wireless access point but his was rejected because "there
are too many wires". Having successfully used a Netgear D834G with DG
Team firmware I decided a Netgear DGN2000 with DG team firmware might
fit the bill. To prove the concept I took a spare DG834G along and
fitted to see how it performed. SWMBO did not like the white colour but
agreed that a black one would be acceptable.



After installing the DG834G I checked the statistics and found that the
reported line attenuation was 8dB more than the 2Wire reported. Despite
this the DG834G synced at the same speed as the 2Wire and remained
connected for more than ten days non stop. Having satisfied myself that
the Netgear would work I obtained a DGN2000 for my friend. When I
installed it and it worked exactly as I had expected. The only puzzling
thing is that the DGN2000 reported a line attenuation 8dB less than the
DG834G. This has also run non stop for ten days. So my question is why
should two routers from the same manufacturer with, presumably very ADSL
circuitry and software, report such a different line attenuation? Does
the router measure the line attenuation or does it get measured by the
DSLAM and get passed to the router? In the past I have done comparative
tests on two or three router modems on the same line and the difference
between the reported line attenuation has never been more than a dB or
so. Should we really believe what the hardware tells us or regard it as
fiction?


One of the reasons I switched from a DG834Gv3 to a 2700 - apart from your
recommendation - was the crazy way in which Netgear compute the noise
margin. If they've changed their methodology in their newer products,
then it is about time, too!


Agreed. It may be more complex than that. The DG834G I used was a V4
version that is relatively recent. Netgear presumably had a good reason
for producing four different iterations of their design but I have not had
the opportunity to test all the others. Having said that I am told that
the earlier ones suffered from capacitor degrading that could have a
serious effect on performance and indeed an early DG834G would not stay
connected on my line for more than a few hours before it locked up. I
still hold the 2700 in high regard but there are two drawbacks i.e. no "N"
capability and no capability to tweak the SNR ratio. It was the latter
that made me switch because of the ludicrous way the BT DLM system works.
What has pleasantly surprised me is how stable the DG834G V4 and DGN 2000
have been because previously the only router that would stay connected for
a reasonable time was the 2700. Of course there have been some changes to
my line because three times in the last two months the underground cables
serving my village have been stolen.

Peter Crosland




Just to address your original point, I've found DG834Gv3, 2-wire 2700 and BT
Home Hubs to report the same attenuation.

I think that there was quite a significant redesign inbetween DG834Gv3 and
v4. The problem I had with the v3 was that the reported SNR appeared to be
the worst detected smoothed SNR plus the short term current variance. So
after a DLM reset the reported SNR would be +6dB plus/minus one or two, and
then it would degenerate to, say, +2 plus/minus one or two by about 11pm -
but would then STAY at +2 plus/minus one or two. Now this "locking to worst
mean case" means that there is a significantly greater probability of the
line being failed - which it does, again and again! Sooner or later the DLM
gets fed up and raises the SNR inital value to 9dB and your line-speed
degrades. The DGTeam fixed this - but what a poor choice of algorithm by
Netgear. OK in theory, no doubt - OK on short lines - but hopeless on
longer lines in the real world.

Then PlusNet made some change (ADSL2?) and the v3 modems, whether with
Netgear or DGTeam firmware, collapsed. Hopelessly unreliable. Our bain here
is power-cuts, not cable theft (yet!) - but both BT modems hold onto the
line very reliably inbetween such events. I agree that the wireless is no
great shakes and that an SNR tweak would be attractive but, on a -53dB line
the 2700 delivers a 3.5M profile, translating to about 25MByte/minute
delivery rate, day in, day out. Except, that is, about every fortnight when
the DLM has a try at a 4M profile (approx 30MByte/minute) - which last for
about 3 days before a retreat to 3M5!

PA



  #7  
Old August 30th 11, 08:39 PM posted to plusnet.service.customer-feedback,uk.telecom.broadband
Peter Crosland
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,463
Default Lies, damned lies and router statistics.

"Peter Able" [email protected] wrote in message
o.uk...

"Paul Ratcliffe" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 10:11:13 +0100, Peter Able [email protected] wrote:

One of the reasons I switched from a DG834Gv3 to a 2700 - apart from
your
recommendation - was the crazy way in which Netgear compute the noise
margin. If they've changed their methodology in their newer products,
then
it is about time, too!


My V3 showed similar average figures to my V4, although the V3's
granularity was 1dB compared to V4's 0.1 and the excursions were somewhat
larger (don't know if I really believed the V3).
I bought the V4 to get control of the SNR margin.


The problem I had with the v3 was that the reported SNR appeared to be the
worst detected smoothed SNR plus the short term current variance. So after
a reset the SNR would be +6dB plus/minus one or two, and then would
degenerate to, say, +2 plus/minus one or two by about 11pm - but would
then STAY at +2 plus/minus one or two. Now this "locking to worst mean
case" means that there is a significantly greater probability of the line
being failed - which it does, again and again! Sooner or later the DLM
gets fed up and raises the SNR inital value to 9dB and your line-speed
degrades. The DGTeam fixed this - but what a poor choice of algorithm by
Netgear. OK in theory, no doubt - OK on short lines - but hopeless on
longer lines in the real world.

Then PlusNet made some change (ADSL2?) and the v3 modems, whether with
Netgear or DGTeam firmware, collapsed. Hopelessly unreliable.



Noted. I don't think Plusnet would have changed anything. What may have
happened is that BT made some changes to their DSLAM software. It is also
possible that the capacitors in the V3 had degraded or failed. I am told
this is a common problem with them. The symtoms are repeated lockups.

Peter Crosland


  #8  
Old August 30th 11, 09:28 PM posted to plusnet.service.customer-feedback,uk.telecom.broadband
Peter Crosland
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,463
Default Lies, damned lies and router statistics.

"Peter Able" [email protected] wrote in message
o.uk...

"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
o.uk...
"Peter Able" [email protected] wrote in message
news

"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
o.uk...
This might be sub-titled SWMBO technophobia. A friend who is not very
technically minded asked me to recommend a new ADSL router. He was
running a 2Wire 2700HGV because he is on a rural exchange and has a
long line. This has given excellent service almost non stop for three
years. My friend's SWMBO does not like wires and is very fussy about
the colour of domestic items. The arrival of SWMBO's shiny new laptop
with "N" wireless capability meant that the means this had to
accommodate. I had a suitable "N" wireless access point but his was
rejected because "there are too many wires". Having successfully used a
Netgear D834G with DG Team firmware I decided a Netgear DGN2000 with DG
team firmware might fit the bill. To prove the concept I took a spare
DG834G along and fitted to see how it performed. SWMBO did not like the
white colour but agreed that a black one would be acceptable.



After installing the DG834G I checked the statistics and found that the
reported line attenuation was 8dB more than the 2Wire reported. Despite
this the DG834G synced at the same speed as the 2Wire and remained
connected for more than ten days non stop. Having satisfied myself that
the Netgear would work I obtained a DGN2000 for my friend. When I
installed it and it worked exactly as I had expected. The only puzzling
thing is that the DGN2000 reported a line attenuation 8dB less than the
DG834G. This has also run non stop for ten days. So my question is why
should two routers from the same manufacturer with, presumably very
ADSL circuitry and software, report such a different line attenuation?
Does the router measure the line attenuation or does it get measured by
the DSLAM and get passed to the router? In the past I have done
comparative tests on two or three router modems on the same line and
the difference between the reported line attenuation has never been
more than a dB or so. Should we really believe what the hardware tells
us or regard it as fiction?

One of the reasons I switched from a DG834Gv3 to a 2700 - apart from
your recommendation - was the crazy way in which Netgear compute the
noise margin. If they've changed their methodology in their newer
products, then it is about time, too!


Agreed. It may be more complex than that. The DG834G I used was a V4
version that is relatively recent. Netgear presumably had a good reason
for producing four different iterations of their design but I have not
had the opportunity to test all the others. Having said that I am told
that the earlier ones suffered from capacitor degrading that could have
a serious effect on performance and indeed an early DG834G would not stay
connected on my line for more than a few hours before it locked up. I
still hold the 2700 in high regard but there are two drawbacks i.e. no
"N" capability and no capability to tweak the SNR ratio. It was the
latter that made me switch because of the ludicrous way the BT DLM system
works. What has pleasantly surprised me is how stable the DG834G V4 and
DGN 2000 have been because previously the only router that would stay
connected for a reasonable time was the 2700. Of course there have been
some changes to my line because three times in the last two months the
underground cables serving my village have been stolen.

Peter Crosland




Just to address your original point, I've found DG834Gv3, 2-wire 2700 and
BT Home Hubs to report the same attenuation.

I think that there was quite a significant redesign inbetween DG834Gv3 and
v4. The problem I had with the v3 was that the reported SNR appeared to
be the worst detected smoothed SNR plus the short term current variance.
So after a DLM reset the reported SNR would be +6dB plus/minus one or two,
and then it would degenerate to, say, +2 plus/minus one or two by about
11pm - but would then STAY at +2 plus/minus one or two. Now this "locking
to worst mean case" means that there is a significantly greater
probability of the line being failed - which it does, again and again!
Sooner or later the DLM gets fed up and raises the SNR inital value to 9dB
and your line-speed degrades. The DGTeam fixed this - but what a poor
choice of algorithm by Netgear. OK in theory, no doubt - OK on short
lines - but hopeless on longer lines in the real world.

Then PlusNet made some change (ADSL2?) and the v3 modems, whether with
Netgear or DGTeam firmware, collapsed. Hopelessly unreliable. Our bain
here is power-cuts, not cable theft (yet!) - but both BT modems hold onto
the line very reliably inbetween such events. I agree that the wireless
is no great shakes and that an SNR tweak would be attractive but, on
a -53dB line the 2700 delivers a 3.5M profile, translating to about
25MByte/minute delivery rate, day in, day out. Except, that is, about
every fortnight when the DLM has a try at a 4M profile (approx
30MByte/minute) - which last for about 3 days before a retreat to 3M5!


Noted. The problem is that we are not using a fixed and stable reference
because line characteristics can, and indeed do, vary quite a lot. My theory
is that the 2700 is particularly good at dealing with these fluctuations
without resorting to decreasing the sync speed which a number of other
routers do. I found that Draytek range that were otherwise excellent were
dreadful at dealing with unstable lines. The other variable is the chipset
used by the manufacturer. Finally BT do use DSLAMs from a number of
different manufacturers which also muddies the waters

Peter Crosland


  #9  
Old September 1st 11, 08:54 AM posted to plusnet.service.customer-feedback,uk.telecom.broadband
Peter Able
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 114
Default Lies, damned lies and router statistics.


"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
o.uk...

Then PlusNet made some change (ADSL2?) and the v3 modems, whether with
Netgear or DGTeam firmware, collapsed. Hopelessly unreliable.



Noted. I don't think Plusnet would have changed anything. What may have
happened is that BT made some changes to their DSLAM software. It is also
possible that the capacitors in the V3 had degraded or failed. I am told
this is a common problem with them. The symtoms are repeated lockups.

Peter Crosland


Oh, they notified me, Peter, and when I reported the problems I was having
their reply was "DG834Gv3 don't work reliably with ADSL2. We'll send you
one of ours for a fiver and a commitment to stay with us for at least
another year".

Well, I spent the fiver on the 2700, and as that turned out to be the latest
version 5 type, I considered that I'd fallen well and truly on my feet!

PA



 




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
Lies, damn lies and router noise margin statistics Grant uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 17 July 14th 05 03:51 PM
BBC lies! Ian Bland uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 6 April 15th 04 12:00 AM
BBC lies! Jonathan Buzzard uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 1 April 5th 04 01:43 AM
BBC lies! Alex Heney uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 0 April 1st 04 01:31 AM
BBC lies! Anton Gysen uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 0 April 1st 04 01:02 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:55 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.