Menu
Reply
legacy1
  • 18.21K
  • 761
  • 1.9K
Alessandro Volta
553 Views
Message 11 of 16
Flag for a moderator
Helpful Answer

Re: Forward Path Attenuator


@sprog1033 wrote:

 I realise my levels are still within the -6 & +10 dBmV band, but surely getting them closer to what I believe the optimal level of 0 dBmV would be beneficial? 

 


You get no added benefit if your levels are at 0 its better to be around +6  

---------------------------------------------------------------
0 Kudos
Reply
Tudor
  • 10.83K
  • 840
  • 2.13K
Very Insightful Person
Very Insightful Person
543 Views
Message 12 of 16
Flag for a moderator

Re: Forward Path Attenuator

Optimum level for downstream is 0dBmv. It’s not a case of higher-is-better.


Tudor
There are 10 types of people: those who understand binary and those who don't and F people out of 10 who do not understand hexadecimal c1a2a285948293859940d9a49385a2
0 Kudos
Reply
VM-Jon
  • 1.11K
  • 175
  • 214
Forum Team
Forum Team
534 Views
Message 13 of 16
Flag for a moderator
Helpful Answer

Re: Forward Path Attenuator

Regardless of what is suggested 0 is not the optimal power, the optimal power is between 10 and -6, there will be no Benefit whatsoever from moving levels down a couple of points.

I can only suggest that if you feel there is an issues with your service to give us a call and we can have a technician find the true cause but I can guarantee your power levels are fine.

In terms of the post errors than they are perfectly acceptable. There are only a few hundred which is very minimal. I would only consider it to be a problem once they are in their thousands and over a shortish period of time. If your hub has been online for a while and you’ve only got a couple of hundred post errors then that is nothing to worry about and you really should t see an impact.

Errors are caused by noise which is most likely out of your control and you can check all of your connections are nice and tight. Loose connections can cause ingress.

if you would like me to help you out with a visit from a technician please let me know.

 

 


Here to help! I'm an install manager helping out whilst working from home. Find out more


sprog1033
  • 31
  • 2
  • 2
On our wavelength
501 Views
Message 14 of 16
Flag for a moderator

Re: Forward Path Attenuator

Hi VM-Jon,

Many thanks for your detailed response. It is encouraging to be reassured that any efforts to reduce the downstream power levels wouldn't result in any improvement in signal 'quality'. I guess adding an inline device could well reduce the quality. I appreciate your offer to arrange for a technician to have a look at my connection, however, to be fair my connection BQM is near identical to another property down my street. I don't believe any of my degradation in connection quality during the workday would be caused by my local cable connection. So no, I don't think a technician visit is required.

Thanks again.

0 Kudos
Reply
Corey_C
  • 5.19K
  • 257
  • 446
Moderator
Moderator
445 Views
Message 15 of 16
Flag for a moderator
Helpful Answer

Re: Forward Path Attenuator

Thanks for your reply, sprog1033,

 

Sorry to hear that you have been having connections issues with your broadband. I've run some remote diagnostics on your connections, and it does indicate that you are currently being affected by a local area fault for capacity issues ref#F008841265 and we are working to get this sorted as quickly as possible. The current ETA fix time is 03 JUN 2021 13:00. Apologies again for the inconvenience.

 

Cheers,

Corey C

badwolfe
  • 22
  • 0
  • 5
On our wavelength
438 Views
Message 16 of 16
Flag for a moderator

Re: Forward Path Attenuator

Personally if you are finding that your service is running ok I wouldn't worry about it. Not much point in fiddling around with a stable connection and possibly introducing problems if there isn't really a problem to fix

0 Kudos
Reply