Re: [Bloat] ADSL2+ interleaving (Re: CFP: Workshop on Reducing Internet Latency)

[Neil Davies <neil.davies@pnsol.com>]

Don't have direct access to the DSLAM, but do have access to that information in the modem - and yes and there appears to be a large change in certain frequency buckets.

The loss rates appear to vary with the offered load - i.e the "loss" only occurs if there was real packet data in that frequency band


On 10 Dec 2013, at 08:04, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> wrote:

> On Tue, 10 Dec 2013, Neil Davies wrote:
> 
>> We've seen this even when we've played with the settings through the customer portal (I'm' in the UK - the provisioning portal allows many such changes).
>> 
>> Are you capturing any evidence of DSL modem state when this occurs?
> 
> Well, we saw the problems mostly on medium-short spans, such as 1000-1500 meters. The packet loss wasn't as high as 20%, but it was consistant over time and showed up as errored seconds. I do not work there anymore, and this was 7 years ago.
> 
> Interleaving spans bits over longer period of time, so if you're running fast mode and you get a 1ms "hit" on the link, the FEC (forward error correction) gets too many bits corrupted and gets overwhelmed. If one instead has 16ms interleaving, a lot fewer bits from one packet gets corrupted, and FEC can correct the errors.
> 
> So your theory about line noise on specific frequencies is probably correct, you're not getting a big enough hit to trigger a re-train, but you're getting enough bit errors to cause post-FEC errors and thus packet loss. A re-train probably identifies the noise on those frequencies and uses them less.
> 
> In our DSLAM we could see the frequency band profile via a show command, have you done this?
> 
> -- 
> Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se