[177387] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: VDSL CPE Mixed Results
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Andrew Carey)
Thu Jan 15 10:04:50 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Andrew Carey <carey@ar-ballbat.org>
In-Reply-To: <CACTmXQWJErZA8wWojAv1xGz7eJ8UqXOhgHW3N_G=ALW=_gKznQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 07:04:34 -0800
To: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Also, what do your stats look like? 6kft is getting beyond the sweet spot fo=
r VDSL2, particularly if you're trying to push 10Mbps on the upstream.=20
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 15, 2015, at 5:36, Shawn L <shawnl@up.net> wrote:
>=20
> I was going to ask if you've tested the cable pair at all. If the pair is=
> bad, or even a little out of balance, bad scotch loks, etc. VDSL isn't
> going to work properly.
>=20
> We have customers that are definitely in-range for VDSL but who cannot get=
> it because there is a 26 gauge insert between two cross-connect cabinets i=
n
> the field
>=20
>> On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 8:15 AM, Scott Helms <khelms@zcorum.com> wrote:
>>=20
>> I'm going to guess you're a CLEC from your website and a common problem
>> I've seen in that scenario is that vectoring doesn't work between DSLAMs
>> because it needs all pairs to be part of the vector group so that the DSL=
AM
>> can mitigate FEXT. DSLAM vendors have been working on system level, rath=
er
>> than DSLAM/binder level, vectoring for a while but cross vendor support i=
s
>> questionable at best.
>>=20
>> Read the section on system level vectoring especially:
>> http://www.adtran.com/web/fileDownload/doc/32362
>>=20
>> If you are sharing binders with the ILEC and potentially other CLECs then=
>> you really need to talk to you ILEC rep and find out what they're doing f=
or
>> system level vectoring to see if there is an option for your DSLAMs to be=
>> included. That benefits everyone and will _greatly_ increase performance=
.
>> VDSL2 speeds will otherwise be unreachable unless the ILEC gives each CLE=
C
>> their own binder, not very practical.
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> Scott Helms
>> Vice President of Technology
>> ZCorum
>> (678) 507-5000
>> --------------------------------
>> http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
>> --------------------------------
>>=20
>> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Stetson Blake <
>> Stetson.Blake@datayardworks.com> wrote:
>>=20
>>> Hey All,
>>>=20
>>> We have been deploying Adtran 838(shdsl) and 868(dsl) units in our metro=
>>> area with mixed results. The devices themselves are reliable and secure
>>> it would seem, but the speeds were are able to get are not. ie. we have
>>> deployed 'vdsl' and needed 3 lines to get up to 10x10 speeds. We are
>>> using an Adtran TA5000 on the other end to terminate our connections.
>>> The distance between the site and CO is not great (under 6k feet). What
>>> gives? Are we provisioning wrong, using the wrong equipment, or a
>>> combination of both?
>>> If we were able to get the speeds others have been reporting from VDSL,
>>> life would be great.
>>> Anyone feel free to contact me off-list or on, this has had me
>>> scratching my head for a while now.
>>>=20
>>> Thanks,
>>>=20
>>> --
>>> Stetson Blake
>>> Network Technician
>>> DataYard
>>> 130 West Second St.
>>> Suite 250
>>> Dayton, OH 45402
>>>=20
>>> http://datayardworks.com
>>=20
