On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 10:51:43PM +1300, Daniel Omundsen wrote:
>
>
> > supposed to be clever enough to drop bins that are in ranges with
> > interference -- did I get that right, Daniel?
>
> I don't know the exact frequencies, but I do know that there are something
> like 256 discrete carriers each of which takes part of the bit stream. The
> carriers start at frequencies just above voice band and go all the way up
> the the maximum usable frequency of your average several kms of copper. Each
> individual carrier is adjusted to compensate for noise in the cable,
> attenuation, etc so that it carries the maximum amount of data possible in
>
It's all in the text which I am too tired to hun tout of its nox and its been
two years since I 've looked but noise issues should be able to be handled
that rather seemd to m eot be the point of DSL

> >
>
> Yes I totally agree with you that this is a very serious issue for power
> users. But might I respectfully suggest that the contributors to this list
> are not a representative sample of the overall Jetstream user base? We are
> propellorheads guys. There are many many more business and consumer users
> who use Jetstream just for fast web access than there are who need to do

Yep you might, And Telecom might suggest that the reliability is rather less
than say 95% so that the power users who actually know what they are talking
about don't bother o use it.

> something clever like Internet VPNs. And the number of consultants who set
> up and remotely admin those VPNs is even smaller still.
>
> There are over 10,000 lines out there now, and if I recall correctly only
> about 300 people on the list. If all 10,000 customers are spending their
> time sitting up to 3am remotely configuring IPSec on a FreeBSD machine at
> their mates house then NZ is a much sadder country that I thought :-) :-)

At least 1 of those has admitted to 8 lines. If you take that as an
aveerage (bad idea) you could project o ttp 2.5k lines
or 25%
Of course this being a technologially aware group is propbably not
going to report results that can be easily explained
away.
>
> I am not trying to undermine the seriousness of the issue, just putting it
> in perspective.
>
> Would any of you guys prefer to go back to 64k DDS? Its definitely very
> reliable and well suited for mission critical office to office connections.
> But it is slow and will cost you.

Then all telecom really needs to do is to ensure that the
QoS differences are well understood

Personally I think than an unreliale service sudh as jetstream should be
still available 99.9% + of the time to all customers (i.e down to no customer
for more than 1 minut per day)

If telecom can't do so they should say so.

--kit

This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list.
see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ,
and various documents.
To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@unixathome.org
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message
Received on Fri Mar 2 01:20:20 2001