Re: device for testing UK adsl signal

On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 11:18:59 +0100, "tg" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>in my job fixing internet connections (here in the UK) I constantly collide
>with bad adsl signals and dodgy home telephone wiring and I need a device
>that tests the presence/level/quality of the adsl signal on the line -
>something I can plug into the BT socket and get an accurate reading.

These (DSL) line test systems have existed and do exist. They are
available to industry, but are rather expensive, so you need to reveal
your budget before I'll bother researching and posting a list. We're
talking tens of thousands, IIRC for a reasonable tester.

> I
>specifically want to test for any deterioration in the adsl signal in
>extension sockets coming off the main socket.
>I figured there must be a gadget somewhere that can do this but I've never
>seen one.

Consider a simple signal strength meter, with a 20 KHz high pass
filter.

Study DSL some more. Understand the bands used, the frequencies used.
Then you can come up with something realistic to test with, assuming
your budget doesn't allow for a dedicated tester.

But... Why are you running DSL to multiple sockets? Catch the DSL line
as it enters the premises and run the modem there, then split the POTS
line to the sockets as needed. Don't try to run the DSL places where
it is 'not needed'.


> I've heard the argument about using routers but I'm not
>interested in that,

What does a router have to do with this problem. That's an ethernet
device, and knows zip, zero, nothing, nada about DSL.

>I'd rather get a dedicated device. Does anyone know of
>such equipment?
>thanks for any advice.
>

In uk.telecom.broadband PeterD <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

: What does a router have to do with this problem. That's an ethernet
: device, and knows zip, zero, nothing, nada about DSL.

I had presumed this meant that most routers will give an analysis of the DSL
line (S/N levels, sync speeds etc.) on their control interface.

Brian Mc wrote:
> In uk.telecom.broadband PeterD <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> : What does a router have to do with this problem. That's an ethernet
> : device, and knows zip, zero, nothing, nada about DSL.
>
> I had presumed this meant that most routers will give an analysis of the DSL
> line (S/N levels, sync speeds etc.) on their control interface.

.... If the router is a modem-router (as most are these days used in the
context of ADSL)

--
Adrian C

"PeterD" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 11:18:59 +0100, "tg" <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>>in my job fixing internet connections (here in the UK) I constantly
>>collide
>>with bad adsl signals and dodgy home telephone wiring and I need a device
>>that tests the presence/level/quality of the adsl signal on the line -
>>something I can plug into the BT socket and get an accurate reading.
>
> These (DSL) line test systems have existed and do exist. They are
> available to industry, but are rather expensive, so you need to reveal
> your budget before I'll bother researching and posting a list. We're
> talking tens of thousands, IIRC for a reasonable tester.
>
>> I
>>specifically want to test for any deterioration in the adsl signal in
>>extension sockets coming off the main socket.
>>I figured there must be a gadget somewhere that can do this but I've never
>>seen one.
>
> Consider a simple signal strength meter, with a 20 KHz high pass
> filter.
>
> Study DSL some more. Understand the bands used, the frequencies used.
> Then you can come up with something realistic to test with, assuming
> your budget doesn't allow for a dedicated tester.
>
> But... Why are you running DSL to multiple sockets? Catch the DSL line
> as it enters the premises and run the modem there, then split the POTS
> line to the sockets as needed. Don't try to run the DSL places where
> it is 'not needed'.
>
>
>> I've heard the argument about using routers but I'm not
>>interested in that,
>
> What does a router have to do with this problem. That's an ethernet
> device, and knows zip, zero, nothing, nada about DSL.
>
>>I'd rather get a dedicated device. Does anyone know of
>>such equipment?
>>thanks for any advice.

I see your logic, but most domestic grade routers sold in the UK
are hybrid devices and include a DSL modem and often a wireless
access point too. I suspect you are not in the UK, are things
different where you are?
Oh and we pronounce it "rooter" and not "rawter".

I certainly carry such a device for diagnostic purposes.

--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

Brian Mc wrote:
> In uk.telecom.broadband PeterD <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> : What does a router have to do with this problem. That's an ethernet
> : device, and knows zip, zero, nothing, nada about DSL.
>
> I had presumed this meant that most routers will give an analysis of the DSL
> line (S/N levels, sync speeds etc.) on their control interface.
Well it depends if you mean by router a 'generic device for machining
wood' a ' device that purely routes computer network traffic' or ' A
device thet purely routes ethernet traffic or 'a device that not only
routes IP traffic but also does NAT, and contains a DSL modem as well'

I THINK the definition is a device that maintains a routing state table
of some sort, that connects networks at a layer *above* the transport
address level. This clearly marking where an ethernet switch ends: That
being a device that routes Ethernet packets irrespoective of what
protocol is layered above.

Strictly a 'broadband router' is hardly a router at all. Its a DSL modem
with ATM support and almost (but not quite) a bridge between the CPE and
the ISP termination equipment.

reader443.eternal-september.org wrote:

> Oh and we pronounce it "rooter" and not "rawter".
>

ROWTER shirley?


> I certainly carry such a device for diagnostic purposes.
>
Drilling holes and trepanning into peoples' mind sets perhaps? ;-)

reader443.eternal-september.org wrote:

> Oh and we pronounce it "rooter" and not "rawter".
>

There is a nation of sniggering ozzies having a great and crude time
with the word router and the pronounciation as rooter ...

> I certainly carry such a device for diagnostic purposes.
>

Indeed, you do ;-)

--
Adrian C

"tg" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed). uk...
>
> "reader443.eternal-september.org" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:h2ftd8$j30$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>> I see your logic, but most domestic grade routers sold in the UK
>> are hybrid devices and include a DSL modem and often a wireless
>> access point too. I suspect you are not in the UK, are things
>> different where you are?
>
> I am in the UK

I know you are, my remark was addressed to "PeterD"

--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

"tg" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed). uk...
>
> "PeterD" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 11:18:59 +0100, "tg" <(E-Mail Removed)>
>> wrote:
>>
>> But... Why are you running DSL to multiple sockets? Catch the DSL line
>> as it enters the premises and run the modem there, then split the POTS
>> line to the sockets as needed. Don't try to run the DSL places where
>> it is 'not needed'.
>
> I can't do that. If the customer wants the adsl 'there', I've got to make
> it work there.

Of course you do, but that is not at odds with Peter's advice.
Ideally use a filtered faceplate on the master socket and
connect all the extension sockets to the filtered side.
Only the socket for the router (wherever the customer wants it)
should be direct from the line (use an RJ11 plate to prevent a phone
being plugged in).

Using multiple filters, one on each POTS device is not ideal,
despite what some ISPs might have you believe.

Tackling installations, especially marginal ones, using this
central filter approach is more important than investing in expensive
test equipment.

--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 15:52:21 +0100, "reader443.eternal-september.org"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


>
>I see your logic, but most domestic grade routers sold in the UK
>are hybrid devices and include a DSL modem and often a wireless
>access point too. I suspect you are not in the UK, are things
>different where you are?

US, and they go either way here. I use stand alone DSL modems, and
then feed a router which is a seperate box. Oh, and at least around
here, we say rooter too.

>Oh and we pronounce it "rooter" and not "rawter".
>
>I certainly carry such a device for diagnostic purposes.

I know of some that do give diagnostic information, but I'd be
reluctant to depend on it.

But again, why wire DSL to all the phone jacks, instead do the jack
nearest the entry point, put the DSL modem (or router/modem) there,
and put the rest of the house's sockets on the other side of a DSL
filter.