Telephone Wire

[David58]

I read in the FAQ that internal extension wiring should have "twisted pairs".  Even though my local computer shop and electrical store are dubious about this, I can see some logic and am prepared to rewire to try and get a reliable connection and reasonable speed (currently Home Lite service is giving usually between 0.9 and 2.1M when I am 1km of cable from the exchange - BT profile is at 7M).

Where can I get suitable wiring, all the wiring that I have looked at (and I have stripped back the insulation on quite a lot of "samples") is untwisted?  Is there an applicable standard?

I note by the way that where the BT line reaches my house it goes into a small (BT) junction box on the outside wall from which there is a 4m length of what looks like old (flat untwisted) "twinflex" down the outside wall and through the window frame to the master socket!

TIA
David

[Steve]

Rik, will almost certainly give you the answer tomorrow.

[Den]

Telephone cable should always be in twisted pairs and anything else is not worth doing. Last year we installed a door entry system in four flats. Unknown to me one of my men crossed over from one pair to another and the amount of crosstalk and interference was amazing. When we connected them in pairs the voice line was clear. Imagine what interference you could pick up with flat cable when you are running a voice line and broadband.
You should be able to pick up twisted pair cable from Maplins or any good electrical wholesaler (Denmans will serve non trade).   

[Tacitus]

You could try ADSL Nation.

It's not cheap cable, but it is twisted pair and has a foil shield for good measure.  ADSL Nation have a reputation for good service.  Alternatively Clarity supply white Cate5e which you could use instead. 

[Lance]

I was going to suggest cat5e or cat6 as well, but it might be worthwhile learning some more about your present line. If you have a BT profile of 7mb, it suggests that your line is stable or at least has been for the last few days. If you could post the results of a BT speedtest that would be helpful. From your initial comments, it seems that just your throughput is low and if that is the case it is unlikely rewiring will help.

[Sebby]

David, you ideally want to use something like Cat5. Do you have a BT master socket with a removable lower half, by the way?

[Rik]

Maplin is another source of phone cable, iiec, it's called CW1038.

[David58]

Thanks All,

1) Looks as if ADSLNation may be getting an order soon (unless the references to CAT5 etc. means I can just use some existing Ethernet Cables?)

2) Yes I have a BT Master Socket with a (removed) lower half.  I had the router plugged directly into it for part of this week, but the master socket is in such a position that a wireless router attached to it is almost totally surrounded by stone walls and consequently if my wireless dongle finds a Wireless Network it's not mine (unless I go and sit beside the router)!

3) BT Test results:
DSL Connection Rate 8128 kpbs (Down-stream) 448 kpbs (Up-stream)
IP Profile for my line 7000 kbps (always)
Actual throughput usually around 3-4M but has been less than 1M

At my (Windows XP) machine I usually get (per the thinkbroadband tester) between less than 1M and about 2.1M. (even with the dongle sitting on the router!)  My Linux netbook gives me slightly better speeds (and very occasionally 5M+).  Cabling instead of Wireless gives me better speed (around 4M - but the network connection on the Windows laptop is knacked and has to be manually held in place - hence the "logical" move to Wireless).  However both machines (particularly the Windows one) seems to "drop" my connection like the old dial up connection used to - it is almost as if the DSL has "gone to sleep".  On reconnecting I often get a long delay before an external ping responds. viz:
"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"
8:54:00.72

Pinging 192.168.1.1 with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 192.168.1.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.1.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.1.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.1.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=64

Ping statistics for 192.168.1.1:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 2ms, Maximum = 2ms, Average = 2ms
8:54:04.95 {i.e. about 4 seconds for the whole test}
"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"
8:54:04.99

Pinging idnet.com [212.69.36.10] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=44ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=59

Ping statistics for 212.69.36.10:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 44ms, Maximum = 48ms, Average = 45ms
8:57:06.74 {i.e. about 3 minutes for the whole test}
"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"

Clearly there are multiple problems!  It is a matter of knowing the most appropriate order in which to eliminate them without spending hours doing it (I do occasionally have to got back to my slow and fragile setup to get some work done).  Virus checks etc. done!

David

[Rik]

Hi David

1) Cat 5 is perfect, provided it's single-core and not stranded.

3) It sounds like wireless is costing you a chunk of speed. Try changing the router channel from auto to 1, 6 or 11. Those three have no overlap, so will give you best results. Speed should be OK on a wireless connection, as 54Mbps is way faster than ADSL anyway.

The profile is odd, you should be at 7150. OK it's a small amount, but I'd be looking at why that's happening. Does the router drop sync very often, is interleaving on, is your error count high?

Does the router automatically drop the connection if there's no activity? Can you get your hands on an alternative router to try?

Check in Device Manager, is Windows set to power anything down to save energy?

[David58]

Hi Rik

Thanks

1) I will experiment over the week end with replacing the telephone extension wiring with an ethernet lead

2) Wireless certainly seems to be costing me as part of the problem.  I had switched channel from Auto to 10 (picked at random!); I can try 1, 6 or 11.  Is there anyway I can stop my Windows XP machine picking up "foreign" wireless networks - my Linux netbook does not seem to suffer from this problem; it tells me that they are there but has never logged on to any of them?  I also have the Windows machine on a static IP because, when logging on, it used to hang whilst obtaining an IP address.  Currently my WLAN claims 48M with the router on the landing just outside the door (it was giving me between 0 and 4M when next to the master socket!)

3) I have never seen anything other than 7000 as a profile.
My ADSL Stats (Connection Up Time :     23 hour, 45 min, 20 sec) are as follows:

Mode:    G.DMT
Type:    Interleave <<<<<<<<<<<< So, yes this is on
Line Coding: Trellis On
Status:    No Defect

     Downstream    Upstream
Rate (Kbps):    8064     448

SNR Margin (dB):              9.1  25.0
Attenuation (dB):    23.0     11.5
Output Power (dBm):    12.0     19.8

Super Frames:    5019837     5019835
Super Frame Errors:    238     0
RS Words:    341348946     42668597
RS Correctable Errors:    6477     0
RS Uncorrectable Errors:    77     N/A

HEC Errors:    219     0
OCD Errors:    0     0
LCD Errors:    0     0
Total Cells:    1623016180     0
Data Cells:    2136616     0
Bit Errors:    0     0

Total ES:    122     0
Total SES:    0     0
Total UAS:    12     0

I have no way of knowing if the error count is high as I have nothing to compare to!

How do I tell when sync is lost?

4) I cannot see any any setting that would cause the router to drop the connection (Idle time out = 0 - always on).  I cannot (easily) get my hands on an alternative router (could try to persuade the local shop to lend me one?).

5) Cannot see anything in Device Manager or Control Panel set things to power down (other than the normal non activity - and I lose connection which using the computers).

[Rik]

Hi David

2) Not really, XP will try to connect to strong signals, but you should have a preferred network, your own, selected as the default to which it connects first.

3) The profile could be explained by interleaving. In theory, that stops you achieving a full 8128 sync, but some router/DSLAM combinations allow the full sync.

The error count is trivial at 77/day.

4) It was worth a try. Whereabouts are you? IDNet will lend routers, but not, I suspect in your case, as the line is stable and the profile high, so it's unlikely to be a router issue - it's always worth a swap when you can, though, just to check.

5) Including the wireless adaptors?

Your exchange may be congested, or you may be on a congested VP. Try looking here:

http://usertools.plus.net/exchanges/

but be aware that data is often out of date, or BT haven't yet admitted the problem (which is why IDNet don't offer the lookup).

If the change in wireless channel doesn't fix things, try and do two or three BT speed tests, you'll have to leave 3 hours between. Say morning, afternoon, evening and, if you're up late, night, and let IDNet have the results. They can then do some poking about for you.

[David58]

Rik,

Thanks again, now operating on channel 11.

2) I have my own network set saying "Connect if detected", but I am not aware of a "default" setting.

3) Should I look for a way to be "un-interleaved"?

4) I am in Hexham - if necessary I will explore swapping out the router with my local shop; I bought it from them (more expensive than PC World, but when you take travelling into account ...)

5) Not sure where I would find a setting to control the wireless adaptor (TP-Link TL-WN312G) going into "sleep" mode.  The manual mentions Power Saving Mode, but the screen-shots in the manual do not match the actual software!

The Hexham exchange (Market 2) status: "VP capacity at this exchange is currently showing as Green."
WBC Rollout Status: "BT have announced a ready for service date for this exchange. The estimated go live date is between 1st October 2009 and 31st March 2010."  This may be a long term solution - but I want to fix the current problem.

thanks again
David

[Sebby]

3) Should I look for a way to be "un-interleaved"?

Ideally, yes, as long as your line is good enough to have it switched off. You'll need to speak to IDNet and they can get it done for you.

[Rik]

Hi David

2) Are you using Windows' Zero Config, or the manufacturers software?

3) What Seb said.

4) Bit too far to pop round and borrow my spare, I guess.

5) It should be in Device Manager

[David58]

Rik,

Thanks Again:

2) I have been using the MS software, as the manufacturer's software seems not to want to remember my WEP key - which is a bit of a pain!  (Occasionally though for some reason I don't currently understand, it switches back to the TP-Link software, so "View Available Wireless Networks" won't do anything, so it's a matter of logging on to an Admin a/c and switching it back.)  I have now completed stripped down the wireless configuration and reinstalled the Wireless Adaptor to see if that will make a difference.  Still does not seem very "stable"; - in fact less so; if I open the "Status" (right click) option, the Network name keeps fluttering on (~3 secs) /off (~7 secs) (When on, the  Status icon says Signal Excellent", Speed "54M").  (This message is sent via my Linux netbook after 6 hours of struggle!.)

3) Thanks, Seb - something for Monday

5) OK, had a dig through Device Manager.  "Power Saving mode" was "CAM - Constantly Awake" (OK), but the "CAM on AC Power", was disabled (Not OK?), so I have enabled it.

Obviously still have some (worse) Windows Wireless Problems

David

[Rik]

I think you need to concentrate on (2), David. Something is wrong with the configuration or adaptor. Do you have a spare you could try (or one you could borrow?)

[David58]

Rik,

Agreed, so just before closing on Saturday I got a very ordinary Belkin G adaptor from Argos (later closing than my local computer shop).

Result:  The wireless link once I establish it is now solid (I would say rock solid - if it was not tempting fate).  I have had some trouble getting the adaptor to see my network when coming out of hibernation or rebooting, but once it finds it, it holds on to it.  So one part of the problem seem to be definitely improved (curiously I had identified a problem with the original adaptor and the computer shop tested it and replaced it; they had tested the second one and found no fault over about an hour of testing last week).

Now speed:  Accepting that I still have to improve my "modem wiring" (leaving the router connected adjacent to my BT Faceplate meant that my Windows machine did not have a chance in trying to "see" the network): I have been playing with speed tests:  Over a few minutes I got the following download speeds (kb/s):
From BT Speedtest - 5892 (against a profile of 7000)
From Speedtest.net - 4420
From Speed.io - 2842
From Thinkbroadband - 2179
(I do not get regular significant variation in these figures apart from the BT one: 5892 is higher than usual; occasionally I get a very low figure e.g. 430 by the Thinkbroadband test.  They always seem to report in this order.)

Trying to watch BBC iPlayer, it stutters a bit (and occasionally protests that I do not have adequate speed), so I am inclined to think either that at my machine I am getting a speed that is slow, or that it is variable over a short period.  Looking at my Linux networkbook, I do sometimes get high figures (even had 6302 once on the Thinkbroadband test), but these are highly variable (1574 up to 6000+, normally around 3900).  I would therefore conclude that the quality of the aerial system in the Linux netbook (I think it has a double aerial and at least one of those is vertically oriented) is what permits the high figures, but that in the router to IDNET link (i.e. my "modem cable" and BT's line), there is a quality issue. Therefore I will install the highest quality line between my router and the BT master socket and see what happens.

Thanks for your help.
David

[Rik]

A high quality cable from router to master socket is always going to help, David, but keep it as short as possible.

[David58]

Rik,

Once I have gone from the master socket down to the floor, under the floorboards to the cupboard under the stairs, and up through that cupboard and to an upstairs window sill on the landing, I am talking about 9m (so will buy 10m).  Is that short - or pushing my luck (another more difficult route might be only 7m)?  (I would put the micro-filter on just before the router).

Thanks
David

[Rik]

2m would be better. To give you an example of effect, I have two lines, identical attenuation and NM. One gives me 500k+ more than the other. That's the one which has the master next to the computer, while the slower line is on a BT-installed extension of some 10m.