Options for Domestic Wired Networking / Broadband

it isn't an RJ-45 socket
Yeah, I sort of knew that, but CBA to look up the right designation. It's the one in the middle!

BTW: it's hardly worth coding plugs and sockets. I've seen many an adapter cable set up to connect two items that really shouldn't be connected together - naive Joe Public think "why doesn't that plug in there", go to the local store that will sell you anything and they say "sure, here's a cable to do that - £10 please".

I even had somebody try to sell me a cable with phonos (analogue video) on one end and a DVI plug (digital video) on the other when I was looking for a converter rather than an adapter... what do they not understand about the difference between analogue and digital?
 
Last edited:
I even had somebody try to sell me a cable with phonos (analogue video) on one end and a DVI plug (digital video) on the other when I was looking for a converter rather than an adapter... what do they not understand about the difference between analogue and digital?
Don't forget the DVI-I sources have VGA-compatible RGB analog signals on them.
 
Apart from not displaying the road distance and misinterpreting my line as "non-BT", everything else shown confirms knowledge from other research and is a good match for my own measurements. I therefore interpret it as agreeing that 3Mbps is the best I can reasonably expect from my voice circuit, and BT is only willing to guarantee 1Mbps.


I looked at that before I found kitz, but couldn't make it work.

All of which is just a side issue, prompted by prpr's incredulity at my broadband lack-of-speed (which I thought everyone knew about - I've made no secret of it).
Is this solution going to get to you before fttc?
Space X puts up 60 internet satellites
 
Oh yes, like that's going to be cheap (as per a Tesla).

The phone socket arrived Tuesday (quick!) - now to find a slot to install it!
 
I'm surprised you want to run the ADSL any further than necessary. Wouldn't you be better off stuffing it straight into the modem and then distributing Ethernet?
It's already come from the exchange on a couple of dozen hundred metres. Another 10m inside the house isn't going to make any significant difference.
And it's harder distributing ethernet as the cable is thicker and more unsightly and needs active devices at each end. And when I put this in originally, I only had network kit upstairs at the opposite corner of the house to where the line comes in. I had a typical integrated modem/router/switch/wireless AP then as well, which dictates where it's going to go. And it was on a UPS with all the rest of the computer equipment. And I only have one mains socket local to the incoming line (and that was a complete #!*@%~ to put in) which is already in use.
 
It's already come from the exchange on a couple of dozen hundred metres. Another 10m inside the house isn't going to make any significant difference.
That's what I thought, but the advice on here was to keep the house link short. But then, you probably have bandwidth to spare.
 
Another 10m inside the house isn't going to make any significant difference.
When I first had FTTC here I did a quick comparison between having the BT HH plugged directly into the NTE filter via a short RJ45-RJ45 RJ11-RJ11 lead and connected via around 15m of BT CW1720 2-pair Cat5 cable to the network cupboard and the same RJ45 RJ11 lead. There was definite and reproducible but slight drop in speed on the longer cabling.
 
Last edited:
Impressive collection of parts:

4125

4124

4126

(patress and screws supplied but not pictured)

The part on the left obviously goes on first, and has a 2-pin cam-lock IDC on the back labelled "A" and "B" for the incoming line. The unit is sealed, but multimeter says it's wired like this (so what do you call a BT-style connector with 12 contact positions? Let's say "Fred"):

4132

Resistance measurements between accessible nodes are consistent with the standard master socket line termination and bell circuit, so that's what I've assumed (inside the dotted box).

The 12-position connector (Fred) engages with the filter board, but the pins on the filter board are doubled up, so pairs of pins along each row are commoned when plugged in (although with no matching contacts in the socket - all a bit weird). Three conductors come back from the filter board to a 3-pin cam-lock IDC labelled "2", "3", & "5".

The filter unit has a BT631A phone socket and a RJ-45 modem socket on the front, but also a 2-pin cam-lock IDC on the rear labelled "A" and "B". These bleep out directly to Fred's contact pins from the incoming "A" and "B" lines, and also to pins 4 & 5 on the RJ-45 (other pins appear not to be connected).

Meanwhile, the contacts on the BT631A (for the phone) bleep out directly to Fred's contact pins to the "2 3 5" IDC (corresponding pin numbers, remaining pins unpopulated or not connected).

So, I conclude that the 3-way cam-lock on the front of the rear assembly is a filtered circuit for connecting permanent-wired house voice circuit extensions, and the 2-way cam-lock on the rear of the filter assembly is for hard-wiring an extension cable to a remote modem. Removing the face plate (filter assembly) disconnects everything from the incoming line.

The filter circuit certainly has a lot more components in it, I wonder whether they'll do any good...
 
Last edited:
I couldn’t see from your straight on picture how the second and third parts connected so I went and fetched one to look at.

That’s a large set of spikes!

9cf845bb3935877c530131d5ed754348.jpg
 
Before (bog-standard BT master socket + plug-in microfilter splitter):

4128

After (OpenReach VDSL Mk4):

4129

SpeedSmart history:

4131

:frantic: !!!!!

Doubled my bandwidth for £13.77. Now perhaps I can think about moving it somewhere more convenient.
 
Last edited:
That's good news, I might have to try swapping in this mk4 filter for mine. Although I thought the filter was only relevant to the voice side, your results don't seem consistent with that!
 
Although I thought the filter was only relevant to the voice side, your results don't seem consistent with that!
Yes, it stops the broadband signal leaking down the voice circuit, but as I understand it the filter is also providing some specialised line termination impedance improved to support VDSL. So if yours is ADSL (pre-VDSL)... (the pictures look very similar though, it can only be a minor tweak).
 
Last edited:
The one I pictured earlier isn't mine, just one I borrowed from a shelf of parts..
 
Yes, it stops the broadband signal leaking down the voice circuit, but as I understand it the filter is also providing some specialised line termination impedance improved to support VDSL. So if yours is ADSL (pre-VDSL)... (the pictures look very similar though, it can only be a minor tweak).
You might get a further improvement by not connecting any internal wiring to pin 3, this (bell) wire is unlikely to be needed with most modern telephone equipment, if everthing in your house 'rings' without this wire you are much better off not connecting it, as it an aerial you don't want
 
Back
Top