[ Date Index ][
Thread Index ]
[ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 05 Feb 2003 12:51 am, Simon Waters wrote: > Neil Williams wrote: > > BTW. Does anyone know what 'No carrier' really means in terms > of the level of line noise? > > Too much noise to work - how much more detail do you need ;-( Some, if poss. I'd like to know whether 'no carrier' is modem dependent (i.e. the linmodem driver) or an absolute measure (which should affect all modems and platforms equally). Before I got these linmodems working, I used a dial on-demand script on an old Pentium with an external modem. That had problems of two main kinds - ppp reported failures to load interface (presumably a PAP/CHAP delay/timeout) but more often, ppp would just comment that the modem had hungup. Sometimes it would take >30 minutes to connect. I thought (then) that it was the fault of the ISP but I may resurrect that system soon and change the chatscript to connect to a different ISP. If 'no carrier' is modem-determined then there should be a way of changing the config to persuade the modem to persist with a less than 100% carrier. I'm aware of how to change a chatscript to redial on busy and no carrier states etc., I am now wondering if there is a way of logging such events - time, date and any relevant data from the modem about the quality or otherwise of the line before disconnection. I won't do this via KPPP but via a bash script running pppd directly so I'll have full control over the config. The old dial on-demand script used -debug but the output wasn't particularly understandable and only related to output AFTER the carrier tone was accepted - - network stuff like asyncmap and mta. (It's been a while since I used that script.) > BT can measure line gain issues automatically from the exchange > - some voodoo in modern exchanges. If it is intermittent I'd > start with cabling your end, and try a different modem (or check > if you have too many phones/answer phones plugged in - that kind > of stuff). > > BT can be good on modems, but I think you are only garanteed > 9600 baud under the USO. Not even that. According to the BT engineer who came today to check the line noise, BT landlines have NO obligation to support data at all. Voice is the only criterion. He said that unless I get noise on voice calls (I don't make many and those I do tend to be on a cheap analogue cordless phone which would get the blame for noise, not the line) then BT will never do anything about the condition of the cable. Modems simply 'don't figure in the evaluation of a fault on the line' and 'modem errors will not cause a report to be passed on to the Special Faults Dept (?) who would authorise a replacement of a part of a BT cable'. Thanks BT. With some decent logs I would consider taking it further with BT. Does anyone here use ISDN? Can you use a router directly onto ISDN and run the LAN over ethernet from there - rather than having to connect the ISDN line to a PC first? Does anyone know if ISDN is more tolerant of line noise than ADSL - - I'd expect it to be so but whether ISDN can cope when 56k can't is more contentious. It doesn't look like I'll get broadband any time soon so I'm getting desperate. - -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.codehelp.co.uk http://www.dclug.org.uk http://www.wewantbroadband.co.uk/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+STXTiAEJSii8s+MRAgbyAJ9ydowLN9NWkoQb67H1ND+778I8XACdEvio UmDz8RGydwJpEEiyH4u67HY= =efJt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the message body to unsubscribe.