I upgraded to BT Infinity some time ago. When the openreach engineer
turned up to do the necessary my house was a building site and I had my
computer installed temporarily in the kitchen where the master socket
is. The blurb had said that I would need a long connection cable from
the home hub to the computer if not installed close to the master socket
and that would be provided, albeit as a surface mounted connection.
However the engineer said that would not be necessary as he would
install a second master socket in the room I had designated as my office
replacing an extension socket originally installed by BT for Micronet
use back in the 1980s. (I gave up on Micronet when Offcom demanded that
BT charge extra for this service and did not rejoin the modern world
until I got a real internet connection in 1995).

I have at long last got round to trying out this second master socket
only to find that the home hub could not make the connection. So did the
engineer get it wrong and it is not possible to have two master sockets
on the same phone line or is it just that there may be something wrong
with the wiring which I might be able to put right? Since the new master
sockets were installed walls have been finish plastered and it will now
be difficult to hide any new cabling required. ;-(
--
Roger Chapman

"Roger Chapman" wrote in message ...

I upgraded to BT Infinity some time ago. When the openreach engineer turned
up to do the necessary my house was a building site and I had my computer
installed temporarily in the kitchen where the master socket is. The blurb
had said that I would need a long connection cable from the home hub to the
computer if not installed close to the master socket and that would be
provided, albeit as a surface mounted connection. However the engineer said
that would not be necessary as he would install a second master socket in
the room I had designated as my office replacing an extension socket
originally installed by BT for Micronet use back in the 1980s. (I gave up
on Micronet when Offcom demanded that BT charge extra for this service and
did not rejoin the modern world until I got a real internet connection in
1995).

I have at long last got round to trying out this second master socket only
to find that the home hub could not make the connection. So did the
engineer get it wrong and it is not possible to have two master sockets on
the same phone line or is it just that there may be something wrong with
the wiring which I might be able to put right? Since the new master sockets
were installed walls have been finish plastered and it will now be
difficult to hide any new cabling required. ;-(

Presumably the line from the first master socket to the second has gone
through the adsl filter in the first master socket, letting just voice
through

Andrew

On 01/12/2014 11:20, Andrew Mawson wrote:
"Roger Chapman" wrote in message ...

I upgraded to BT Infinity some time ago. When the openreach engineer
turned up to do the necessary my house was a building site and I had
my computer installed temporarily in the kitchen where the master
socket is. The blurb had said that I would need a long connection
cable from the home hub to the computer if not installed close to the
master socket and that would be provided, albeit as a surface mounted
connection. However the engineer said that would not be necessary as
he would install a second master socket in the room I had designated
as my office replacing an extension socket originally installed by BT
for Micronet use back in the 1980s. (I gave up on Micronet when Offcom
demanded that BT charge extra for this service and did not rejoin the
modern world until I got a real internet connection in 1995).

I have at long last got round to trying out this second master socket
only to find that the home hub could not make the connection. So did
the engineer get it wrong and it is not possible to have two master
sockets on the same phone line or is it just that there may be
something wrong with the wiring which I might be able to put right?
Since the new master sockets were installed walls have been finish
plastered and it will now be difficult to hide any new cabling
required. ;-(

Presumably the line from the first master socket to the second has gone
through the adsl filter in the first master socket, letting just voice
through

Andrew

I have just had a look inside the master socket and it looks that way.
The incoming blue pair terminate on the A & B connections on the middle
layer while the blue pair from the extension terminate at 2 and 5 on the
outer layer. I have not as yet had time to see precisely how the 2nd
master socket is wired.

So what would happen if I wired these two master sockets in parallel?

--
Roger Chapman

On 01/12/2014 12:43, Roger Chapman wrote:


I have just had a look inside the master socket and it looks that way.
The incoming blue pair terminate on the A & B connections on the middle
layer while the blue pair from the extension terminate at 2 and 5 on the
outer layer. I have not as yet had time to see precisely how the 2nd
master socket is wired.

So what would happen if I wired these two master sockets in parallel?


Internal phone wiring can, in some cases, impact significantly on ADSL
performance let alone vDSL so it's better to leave the master socket and
filter where it is, presuming this is terminated at the incoming BT pair.

If you really must change it, then you would need to swap the filter
over to the new "master socket" and wire the pairs back in the original
master socket.

I'd sooner leave the modem by the original master socket and run some
Cat5e

On 01/12/2014 12:55, Lee wrote:

If you really must change it, then you would need to swap the filter
over to the new "master socket" and wire the pairs back in the original
master socket.

Doh, no you don't or plugging any phone will cause problems. All the
phone extensions want to go through the filter.

In article ,
Roger Chapman wrote:
I have at long last got round to trying out this second master socket
only to find that the home hub could not make the connection. So did the
engineer get it wrong and it is not possible to have two master sockets
on the same phone line or is it just that there may be something wrong
with the wiring which I might be able to put right? Since the new master
sockets were installed walls have been finish plastered and it will now
be difficult to hide any new cabling required. ;-(

A master socket contains a capacitor and resistor in series across the
line. Adding a second one would double up on this and do gawd knows what
to the line. A standard secondary socket has the line simply in parallel
with the master.

The best way is to have the BT boxes as close as possible to where the
line comes into the house, and then cable from the router using CAT 5
cable - which is designed for fast data transfer, which house telephone
wiring is not. Or, of course, use the Wi-Fi side.

--
*Oh, what a tangled website we weave when first we practice *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Right try again
On the interstitial filter (at least on mine) there is a 2 pin IDC
which you can wire one pair of a CAT5 pair to, I would suggest running
that to the location you want the modem and terminating in a suitable
socket.

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:
In article , Roger Chapman
wrote:
I have at long last got round to trying out this second master socket
only to find that the home hub could not make the connection. So did
the engineer get it wrong and it is not possible to have two master
sockets on the same phone line or is it just that there may be
something wrong with the wiring which I might be able to put right?
Since the new master sockets were installed walls have been finish
plastered and it will now be difficult to hide any new cabling
required. ;-(

A master socket contains a capacitor and resistor in series across the
line. Adding a second one would double up on this and do gawd knows what
to the line. A standard secondary socket has the line simply in parallel
with the master.

The best way is to have the BT boxes as close as possible to where the
line comes into the house, and then cable from the router using CAT 5
cable - which is designed for fast data transfer, which house telephone
wiring is not. Or, of course, use the Wi-Fi side.

Or, you can do what I've done which is to have the splitter at the incoming
master socket and run a CAT5 cable from the data output of the splitter to
another room where the modem is located.

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

"charles" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:
In article , Roger Chapman
wrote:
I have at long last got round to trying out this second master socket
only to find that the home hub could not make the connection. So did
the engineer get it wrong and it is not possible to have two master
sockets on the same phone line or is it just that there may be
something wrong with the wiring which I might be able to put right?
Since the new master sockets were installed walls have been finish
plastered and it will now be difficult to hide any new cabling
required. ;-(

A master socket contains a capacitor and resistor in series across the
line. Adding a second one would double up on this and do gawd knows what
to the line. A standard secondary socket has the line simply in parallel
with the master.

The best way is to have the BT boxes as close as possible to where the
line comes into the house, and then cable from the router using CAT 5
cable - which is designed for fast data transfer, which house telephone
wiring is not. Or, of course, use the Wi-Fi side.

Or, you can do what I've done which is to have the splitter at the
incoming
master socket and run a CAT5 cable from the data output of the splitter to
another room where the modem is located.


I've done something similar with my Zen-fibre-to-the-cabinet setup, as I
didn't want either the BT adapter box or the modem/router near the incoming
master socket and filters. I spoke to the BT engineer who did the initial
installation, and he confirmed that this would be fine provided that the
wiring was done in cat 5e or cat 6 - and nothing else. To confirm that this
was OK I've measured the up and down speeds with the two boxes at the master
socket, and in their final remote location - no difference.

What I have now is a cat 5e feed from the master socket unfiltered output
to the input of the BT adapter box, and then directly on to the ASDL
modem/router. The cable length used is about 25 metres, and includes a cat
5e wall socket and a 5e patch panel.

Charles F


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com

On 01/12/2014 14:06, Charles F wrote:

"charles" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:
In article , Roger Chapman
wrote:
I have at long last got round to trying out this second master socket
only to find that the home hub could not make the connection. So did
the engineer get it wrong and it is not possible to have two master
sockets on the same phone line or is it just that there may be
something wrong with the wiring which I might be able to put right?
Since the new master sockets were installed walls have been finish
plastered and it will now be difficult to hide any new cabling
required. ;-(

A master socket contains a capacitor and resistor in series across the
line. Adding a second one would double up on this and do gawd knows what
to the line. A standard secondary socket has the line simply in parallel
with the master.

The best way is to have the BT boxes as close as possible to where the
line comes into the house, and then cable from the router using CAT 5
cable - which is designed for fast data transfer, which house telephone
wiring is not. Or, of course, use the Wi-Fi side.

Or, you can do what I've done which is to have the splitter at the
incoming
master socket and run a CAT5 cable from the data output of the
splitter to
another room where the modem is located.


I've done something similar with my Zen-fibre-to-the-cabinet setup, as I
didn't want either the BT adapter box or the modem/router near the
incoming master socket and filters. I spoke to the BT engineer who did
the initial installation, and he confirmed that this would be fine
provided that the wiring was done in cat 5e or cat 6 - and nothing
else. To confirm that this was OK I've measured the up and down speeds
with the two boxes at the master socket, and in their final remote
location - no difference.

What I have now is a cat 5e feed from the master socket unfiltered
output to the input of the BT adapter box, and then directly on to the
ASDL modem/router. The cable length used is about 25 metres, and
includes a cat 5e wall socket and a 5e patch panel.

Charles F

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com

BT Infinity is also only fibre to the roadside cabinet (in my case a
mere half mile away) despite the misleading adverts. :-(

I am afraid this and some of the other replies are over my head.

I have an extra long lead to connect the home hub to the computer which
I intend to use to export the signal to my office if I can manage to
hide the cable in the walls upstairs which still have not been plastered.

I will however have to move the real master socket. What do I have to do
to avoid upsetting the telephone exchange? Only 2 wires are connected at
the master socket but there is an old style junction box on the feed
that originally had 3 wires connected. (Now only orange and white). Is
there still the potential for a ringer voltage on one of the other wires?

--
Roger Chapman

On 01/12/2014 18:55, Roger Chapman wrote:
On 01/12/2014 14:06, Charles F wrote:

"charles" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:
In article , Roger Chapman
wrote:
I have at long last got round to trying out this second master socket
only to find that the home hub could not make the connection. So did
the engineer get it wrong and it is not possible to have two master
sockets on the same phone line or is it just that there may be
something wrong with the wiring which I might be able to put right?
Since the new master sockets were installed walls have been finish
plastered and it will now be difficult to hide any new cabling
required. ;-(

A master socket contains a capacitor and resistor in series across the
line. Adding a second one would double up on this and do gawd knows
what
to the line. A standard secondary socket has the line simply in
parallel
with the master.

The best way is to have the BT boxes as close as possible to where the
line comes into the house, and then cable from the router using CAT 5
cable - which is designed for fast data transfer, which house telephone
wiring is not. Or, of course, use the Wi-Fi side.

Or, you can do what I've done which is to have the splitter at the
incoming
master socket and run a CAT5 cable from the data output of the
splitter to
another room where the modem is located.


I've done something similar with my Zen-fibre-to-the-cabinet setup, as I
didn't want either the BT adapter box or the modem/router near the
incoming master socket and filters. I spoke to the BT engineer who did
the initial installation, and he confirmed that this would be fine
provided that the wiring was done in cat 5e or cat 6 - and nothing
else. To confirm that this was OK I've measured the up and down speeds
with the two boxes at the master socket, and in their final remote
location - no difference.

What I have now is a cat 5e feed from the master socket unfiltered
output to the input of the BT adapter box, and then directly on to the
ASDL modem/router. The cable length used is about 25 metres, and
includes a cat 5e wall socket and a 5e patch panel.

Charles F

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com

BT Infinity is also only fibre to the roadside cabinet (in my case a
mere half mile away) despite the misleading adverts. :-(

I am afraid this and some of the other replies are over my head.

I have an extra long lead to connect the home hub to the computer which
I intend to use to export the signal to my office if I can manage to
hide the cable in the walls upstairs which still have not been plastered.

I will however have to move the real master socket. What do I have to do
to avoid upsetting the telephone exchange? Only 2 wires are connected at
the master socket but there is an old style junction box on the feed
that originally had 3 wires connected. (Now only orange and white). Is
there still the potential for a ringer voltage on one of the other wires?

You may find one or more of these links helpful. I find the first adequate.

http://preview.tinyurl.com/4gu1

http://preview.tinyurl.com/5j82gb

http://preview.tinyurl.com/wb0y


--

Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field

What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]

On 01/12/2014 12:43, Roger Chapman wrote:
On 01/12/2014 11:20, Andrew Mawson wrote:
"Roger Chapman" wrote in message ...

I upgraded to BT Infinity some time ago. When the openreach engineer
turned up to do the necessary my house was a building site and I had
my computer installed temporarily in the kitchen where the master
socket is. The blurb had said that I would need a long connection
cable from the home hub to the computer if not installed close to the
master socket and that would be provided, albeit as a surface mounted
connection. However the engineer said that would not be necessary as
he would install a second master socket in the room I had designated
as my office replacing an extension socket originally installed by BT
for Micronet use back in the 1980s. (I gave up on Micronet when Offcom
demanded that BT charge extra for this service and did not rejoin the
modern world until I got a real internet connection in 1995).

I have at long last got round to trying out this second master socket
only to find that the home hub could not make the connection. So did
the engineer get it wrong and it is not possible to have two master
sockets on the same phone line or is it just that there may be
something wrong with the wiring which I might be able to put right?
Since the new master sockets were installed walls have been finish
plastered and it will now be difficult to hide any new cabling
required. ;-(

Presumably the line from the first master socket to the second has gone
through the adsl filter in the first master socket, letting just voice
through

Andrew

I have just had a look inside the master socket and it looks that way.
The incoming blue pair terminate on the A & B connections on the middle
layer while the blue pair from the extension terminate at 2 and 5 on the
outer layer. I have not as yet had time to see precisely how the 2nd
master socket is wired.

So what would happen if I wired these two master sockets in parallel?

The more recent VDSL filter plate has connections for unfiltered
phoneline extensions as well as providing connections for the filtered
phoneline.
Running a twisted pair cable from the master socket unfiltered
connections to another socket in the house and plugging your VDSL modem
in there will work and in practice you may see little difference in speed.
As has been posted elsewhere the "Master socket" is a red herring it
just means that there is surge protection built in and has nothing to do
with broadband.

"Roger Chapman" wrote in message
...
On 01/12/2014 14:06, Charles F wrote:

"charles" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:
In article , Roger Chapman
wrote:
I have at long last got round to trying out this second master socket
only to find that the home hub could not make the connection. So did
the engineer get it wrong and it is not possible to have two master
sockets on the same phone line or is it just that there may be
something wrong with the wiring which I might be able to put right?
Since the new master sockets were installed walls have been finish
plastered and it will now be difficult to hide any new cabling
required. ;-(

A master socket contains a capacitor and resistor in series across the
line. Adding a second one would double up on this and do gawd knows
what
to the line. A standard secondary socket has the line simply in
parallel
with the master.

The best way is to have the BT boxes as close as possible to where the
line comes into the house, and then cable from the router using CAT 5
cable - which is designed for fast data transfer, which house telephone
wiring is not. Or, of course, use the Wi-Fi side.

Or, you can do what I've done which is to have the splitter at the
incoming
master socket and run a CAT5 cable from the data output of the
splitter to
another room where the modem is located.


I've done something similar with my Zen-fibre-to-the-cabinet setup, as I
didn't want either the BT adapter box or the modem/router near the
incoming master socket and filters. I spoke to the BT engineer who did
the initial installation, and he confirmed that this would be fine
provided that the wiring was done in cat 5e or cat 6 - and nothing
else. To confirm that this was OK I've measured the up and down speeds
with the two boxes at the master socket, and in their final remote
location - no difference.

What I have now is a cat 5e feed from the master socket unfiltered
output to the input of the BT adapter box, and then directly on to the
ASDL modem/router. The cable length used is about 25 metres, and
includes a cat 5e wall socket and a 5e patch panel.

Charles F

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com

BT Infinity is also only fibre to the roadside cabinet (in my case a mere
half mile away) despite the misleading adverts. :-(

I am afraid this and some of the other replies are over my head.

I have an extra long lead to connect the home hub to the computer which I
intend to use to export the signal to my office if I can manage to hide
the cable in the walls upstairs which still have not been plastered.

I will however have to move the real master socket. What do I have to do
to avoid upsetting the telephone exchange? Only 2 wires are connected at
the master socket but there is an old style junction box on the feed that
originally had 3 wires connected. (Now only orange and white). Is there
still the potential for a ringer voltage on one of the other wires?

--
Roger Chapman

There were always just two wires on the incoming feed from the exchange, but
the UK historically used a three wire system in domestic premises once past
the master socket, with he ringing signal separated out onto a third wire.
However, modern phones do not need this third wire, so unless you have
period phones the third wire is unnecessary, and in fact is depreciated as
it tends to reduce the performance of ADSL by partly unbalancing the circuit
and making it more prone to interference.

Charles F


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com

Well, I was in at the end of Micronet, in case you are interested. it was
sold by Emap to BT, who could not make it pay, mainly because they are
useless!
They then closed it.
As for your query, it seems logical to me that if the one master works and
the other does not there has to be a wiring issue. After all, if it were a
loading issue both would not work, surely? Maybe the second master is not
supplied as a master, which might in effect make it act the way it does.
also of course things can go faulty.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Roger Chapman" wrote in message
...
I upgraded to BT Infinity some time ago. When the openreach engineer turned
up to do the necessary my house was a building site and I had my computer
installed temporarily in the kitchen where the master socket is. The blurb
had said that I would need a long connection cable from the home hub to the
computer if not installed close to the master socket and that would be
provided, albeit as a surface mounted connection. However the engineer said
that would not be necessary as he would install a second master socket in
the room I had designated as my office replacing an extension socket
originally installed by BT for Micronet use back in the 1980s. (I gave up
on Micronet when Offcom demanded that BT charge extra for this service and
did not rejoin the modern world until I got a real internet connection in
1995).

I have at long last got round to trying out this second master socket only
to find that the home hub could not make the connection. So did the
engineer get it wrong and it is not possible to have two master sockets on
the same phone line or is it just that there may be something wrong with
the wiring which I might be able to put right? Since the new master
sockets were installed walls have been finish plastered and it will now be
difficult to hide any new cabling required. ;-(
--
Roger Chapman

On 01/12/2014 22:12, Old Codger wrote:

You may find one or more of these links helpful. I find the first
adequate.

http://preview.tinyurl.com/4gu1

http://preview.tinyurl.com/5j82gb

http://preview.tinyurl.com/wb0y

Thanks. I have bookmarked for future reference since I am having trouble
taking in all the information on offer.

#2 goes on at some length about the illegality of interfering with BT's
wiring and the dire consequences that can flow from it. BT is no longer
a government owned monopoly with the power of life and death over the
only telephone system available so is it still a statutory offense to
interfere with their wiring and would they really want to lose a paying
customer when there is so much competition now?

--
Roger Chapman

On 01/12/2014 09:23, Roger Chapman wrote:
I upgraded to BT Infinity some time ago. When the openreach engineer
turned up to do the necessary my house was a building site and I had my
computer installed temporarily in the kitchen where the master socket
is. The blurb had said that I would need a long connection cable from
the home hub to the computer if not installed close to the master socket
and that would be provided, albeit as a surface mounted connection.
However the engineer said that would not be necessary as he would
install a second master socket in the room I had designated as my office
replacing an extension socket originally installed by BT for Micronet
use back in the 1980s. (I gave up on Micronet when Offcom demanded that
BT charge extra for this service and did not rejoin the modern world
until I got a real internet connection in 1995).

I have at long last got round to trying out this second master socket
only to find that the home hub could not make the connection. So did the
engineer get it wrong and it is not possible to have two master sockets
on the same phone line or is it just that there may be something wrong
with the wiring which I might be able to put right? Since the new master
sockets were installed walls have been finish plastered and it will now
be difficult to hide any new cabling required. ;-(

I would play hard-ball with BT/Openreach and ask them to fix it free of
charge.

--
Peter Crosland

Reply address is valid

On 02/12/2014 11:55, Peter Crosland wrote:
On 01/12/2014 09:23, Roger Chapman wrote:
I upgraded to BT Infinity some time ago. When the openreach engineer
turned up to do the necessary my house was a building site and I had my
computer installed temporarily in the kitchen where the master socket
is. The blurb had said that I would need a long connection cable from
the home hub to the computer if not installed close to the master socket
and that would be provided, albeit as a surface mounted connection.
However the engineer said that would not be necessary as he would
install a second master socket in the room I had designated as my office
replacing an extension socket originally installed by BT for Micronet
use back in the 1980s. (I gave up on Micronet when Offcom demanded that
BT charge extra for this service and did not rejoin the modern world
until I got a real internet connection in 1995).

I have at long last got round to trying out this second master socket
only to find that the home hub could not make the connection. So did the
engineer get it wrong and it is not possible to have two master sockets
on the same phone line or is it just that there may be something wrong
with the wiring which I might be able to put right? Since the new master
sockets were installed walls have been finish plastered and it will now
be difficult to hide any new cabling required. ;-(

I would play hard-ball with BT/Openreach and ask them to fix it free of
charge.

Now there is a thought. ;-)

Why should I mess around with things I don't really understand when it
was the Openreach engineer's attempt to be helpful(or perhaps just to
save himself time) that led to the present situation.

--
Roger Chapman

On 02/12/2014 15:50, Roger Chapman wrote:
On 02/12/2014 11:55, Peter Crosland wrote:
On 01/12/2014 09:23, Roger Chapman wrote:
I upgraded to BT Infinity some time ago. When the openreach engineer
turned up to do the necessary my house was a building site and I had my
computer installed temporarily in the kitchen where the master socket
is. The blurb had said that I would need a long connection cable from
the home hub to the computer if not installed close to the master socket
and that would be provided, albeit as a surface mounted connection.
However the engineer said that would not be necessary as he would
install a second master socket in the room I had designated as my office
replacing an extension socket originally installed by BT for Micronet
use back in the 1980s. (I gave up on Micronet when Offcom demanded that
BT charge extra for this service and did not rejoin the modern world
until I got a real internet connection in 1995).

I have at long last got round to trying out this second master socket
only to find that the home hub could not make the connection. So did the
engineer get it wrong and it is not possible to have two master sockets
on the same phone line or is it just that there may be something wrong
with the wiring which I might be able to put right? Since the new master
sockets were installed walls have been finish plastered and it will now
be difficult to hide any new cabling required. ;-(

I would play hard-ball with BT/Openreach and ask them to fix it free of
charge.

Now there is a thought. ;-)

Why should I mess around with things I don't really understand when it
was the Openreach engineer's attempt to be helpful(or perhaps just to
save himself time) that led to the present situation.

I think you will have a hard time getting Openreach to do anything.

Did the engineer install a new cable to your office or is it old BT/PO
wiring or something that you installed. As long as the wiring is
twisted pair to your office using 'proper' telephone cable, i.e. not B&Q
flat extension cable, it should not degrade your broadband signal, after
all it has come many yards over a twisted pair already and another 20
yards isn't going to make any difference.

Can you bypass the first socket by extending the external cable using
the internal cable to the master in your office? A choc bloc connector
would do while testing. If that works you could then use another pair
to bring the speech circuit back to the first socket.

Peter Parry has written some notes on socket wiring available at:
http://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Technica...e%20Wiring.htm

Peter

In article ,
Peter Andrews wrote:
Did the engineer install a new cable to your office or is it old BT/PO
wiring or something that you installed. As long as the wiring is
twisted pair to your office using 'proper' telephone cable, i.e. not B&Q
flat extension cable, it should not degrade your broadband signal, after
all it has come many yards over a twisted pair already and another 20
yards isn't going to make any difference.

Difference is it *may* pick up interference from things inside the house.

--
*All generalizations are false.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 02/12/2014 09:06, Roger Chapman wrote:
On 01/12/2014 22:12, Old Codger wrote:

You may find one or more of these links helpful. I find the first
adequate.

http://preview.tinyurl.com/4gu1

http://preview.tinyurl.com/5j82gb

http://preview.tinyurl.com/wb0y

Thanks. I have bookmarked for future reference since I am having trouble
taking in all the information on offer.

#2 goes on at some length about the illegality of interfering with BT's
wiring and the dire consequences that can flow from it. BT is no longer
a government owned monopoly with the power of life and death over the
only telephone system available so is it still a statutory offense to
interfere with their wiring and would they really want to lose a paying
customer when there is so much competition now?

Don't know about legality but I have always played with BT's wiring when
I wanted to do something and was capable of doing it correctly and
neatly. Even in the old days, prior to NTE5s, I would move the master
socket around and add extension sockets wired directly into the BT
wiring. More recently, after the introduction of the NTE5 but I still
had the old master, the computer was connected to one of a number of
extensions. I had a problem and the OpenReach man arrived to
investigate. Asked if he would like to see the actual wiring layout (I
live in a bungalow so this is easy to see in the loft) he said "Yes".
The fact that I was not connected to the master socket was then very
apparent. "You would do better to connect to the master" he said. "I
know" said I "but it makes negligible difference. I do intend moving
the master and have the wiring in ready, direct from your input". "This
one" he said. "Yes" said I "and the only reason I have not done it
already is that I don't yet have an NTE5 and am not sure if it will fit
plaster depth". "I have one in the van" he said, "we will have a look".
He gave me an OpenReach NTE5 and the, so called, accelerator plate so
I am now fully up to date and official. When FTTC became available
OpenReach fitted their modem without any query at all.

I suspect if all is correctly done there will be no problems.

If you have an NTE5 master then you are allowed to run extensions using
the connections on the removable front plate, it is only the incoming
lead to the "test" socket that is the preserve of BT/OpenReach


--

Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field

What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]

On 02/12/2014 16:50, Peter Andrews wrote:
On 02/12/2014 15:50, Roger Chapman wrote:
On 02/12/2014 11:55, Peter Crosland wrote:
On 01/12/2014 09:23, Roger Chapman wrote:
I upgraded to BT Infinity some time ago. When the openreach engineer
turned up to do the necessary my house was a building site and I had my
computer installed temporarily in the kitchen where the master socket
is. The blurb had said that I would need a long connection cable from
the home hub to the computer if not installed close to the master
socket
and that would be provided, albeit as a surface mounted connection.
However the engineer said that would not be necessary as he would
install a second master socket in the room I had designated as my
office
replacing an extension socket originally installed by BT for Micronet
use back in the 1980s. (I gave up on Micronet when Offcom demanded that
BT charge extra for this service and did not rejoin the modern world
until I got a real internet connection in 1995).

I have at long last got round to trying out this second master socket
only to find that the home hub could not make the connection. So did
the
engineer get it wrong and it is not possible to have two master sockets
on the same phone line or is it just that there may be something wrong
with the wiring which I might be able to put right? Since the new
master
sockets were installed walls have been finish plastered and it will now
be difficult to hide any new cabling required. ;-(

I would play hard-ball with BT/Openreach and ask them to fix it free of
charge.

Now there is a thought. ;-)

Why should I mess around with things I don't really understand when it
was the Openreach engineer's attempt to be helpful(or perhaps just to
save himself time) that led to the present situation.

I think you will have a hard time getting Openreach to do anything.

Did the engineer install a new cable to your office or is it old BT/PO
wiring or something that you installed. As long as the wiring is
twisted pair to your office using 'proper' telephone cable, i.e. not B&Q
flat extension cable, it should not degrade your broadband signal, after
all it has come many yards over a twisted pair already and another 20
yards isn't going to make any difference.

It was a BT installed extension from the days before DIY extensions were
allowed.

Can you bypass the first socket by extending the external cable using
the internal cable to the master in your office? A choc bloc connector
would do while testing. If that works you could then use another pair
to bring the speech circuit back to the first socket.

The wiring is there so I presume it is feasible. I have yet to see how
the 2nd master socket is wired and I have forgotten how the bedroom
extension is now wired into the second master socket. I wonder if I
replace the original master socket with an extension socket future
engineers might not even notice the modification.

Peter Parry has written some notes on socket wiring available at:
http://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Technica...e%20Wiring.htm

Another link to add to my increasing collection. :-)

--
Roger Chapman

On 01/12/2014 13:14, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In recent years I have become increasingly hard of thinking and more
than ever inclined to grasp the wrong end of the stick. I have returned
to this particular post because of what Dave says about master sockets
below.
In article ,
Roger Chapman wrote:
I have at long last got round to trying out this second master socket
only to find that the home hub could not make the connection. So did the
engineer get it wrong and it is not possible to have two master sockets
on the same phone line or is it just that there may be something wrong
with the wiring which I might be able to put right? Since the new master
sockets were installed walls have been finish plastered and it will now
be difficult to hide any new cabling required. ;-(

A master socket contains a capacitor and resistor in series across the
line. Adding a second one would double up on this and do gawd knows what
to the line. A standard secondary socket has the line simply in parallel
with the master.

I have been thinking a lot about this but try as I might I can't see how
wiring a second master socket up in parallel will have a materially
different outcome to wiring them up in series as at present.

The best way is to have the BT boxes as close as possible to where the
line comes into the house, and then cable from the router using CAT 5
cable - which is designed for fast data transfer, which house telephone
wiring is not. Or, of course, use the Wi-Fi side.

The current situation (the relevant part anyway) is that the original
master socket is in the kitchen with the incoming line connected to the
A & B terminals on the BT side of the face plate while the second master
socket is wired from the consumer side at the original MS to its own A &
B terminals with a secondary socket then wired from the other side on
that MS. Both the second MS and the SS function as ordinary phone
sockets. The broadband outlet doesn't work because presumably (as
suggested elsewhere in this thread) the broadband signal has already
been filtered out by the original MS.

I currently intend to suggest to BT that since this is a BT cock-up they
should fix it free of charge but will tell them that if they are happy
for me to switch the sockets from series to parallel if this will not
have a damaging effect I will make the change for them. What does the
panel think?

--
Roger Chapman

On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 12:04:33 +0000, Roger Chapman
wrote:
On 01/12/2014 13:14, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:


In recent years I have become increasingly hard of thinking and
more
than ever inclined to grasp the wrong end of the stick. I have
returned
to this particular post because of what Dave says about master
sockets
below.
In article ,
Roger Chapman wrote:
I have at long last got round to trying out this second master
socket
only to find that the home hub could not make the connection. So
did the
engineer get it wrong and it is not possible to have two master
sockets
on the same phone line or is it just that there may be something
wrong
with the wiring which I might be able to put right? Since the
new master
sockets were installed walls have been finish plastered and it
will now
be difficult to hide any new cabling required. ;-(

A master socket contains a capacitor and resistor in series
across the
line. Adding a second one would double up on this and do gawd
knows what
to the line. A standard secondary socket has the line simply in
parallel
with the master.


I have been thinking a lot about this but try as I might I can't
see how
wiring a second master socket up in parallel will have a materially
different outcome to wiring them up in series as at present.

The best way is to have the BT boxes as close as possible to
where the
line comes into the house, and then cable from the router using
CAT 5
cable - which is designed for fast data transfer, which house
telephone
wiring is not. Or, of course, use the Wi-Fi side.

The current situation (the relevant part anyway) is that the
original
master socket is in the kitchen with the incoming line connected to
the
A & B terminals on the BT side of the face plate while the second
master
socket is wired from the consumer side at the original MS to its
own A &
B terminals with a secondary socket then wired from the other side
on
that MS. Both the second MS and the SS function as ordinary phone
sockets. The broadband outlet doesn't work because presumably (as
suggested elsewhere in this thread) the broadband signal has
already
been filtered out by the original MS.


I currently intend to suggest to BT that since this is a BT cock-up
they
should fix it free of charge but will tell them that if they are
happy
for me to switch the sockets from series to parallel if this will
not
have a damaging effect I will make the change for them. What does
the
panel think?


--
Roger Chapman

What do you mean by "in series"? It is impossible to do. They have to
be in parallel and you really don't need the third wire.
I was under the impression that "normal" master sockets just produced
the third wire for old phones and did not filter the broadband
frequencies. Even with the BT I plate you still have to use an
external filter.

On 04/12/2014 19:29, Lawrence wrote:

What do you mean by "in series"? It is impossible to do. They have to be
in parallel and you really don't need the third wire. I was under the
impression that "normal" master sockets just produced the third wire for
old phones and did not filter the broadband frequencies. Even with the
BT I plate you still have to use an external filter.

With BT Infinity the only filter is in the master socket. In series is
probably a bit misleading but I did describe the actual layout which
should have made it clear what I really meant.

--
Roger Chapman

On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 22:13:48 +0000, Roger Chapman
wrote:

On 04/12/2014 19:29, Lawrence wrote:

What do you mean by "in series"? It is impossible to do. They have to be
in parallel and you really don't need the third wire. I was under the
impression that "normal" master sockets just produced the third wire for
old phones and did not filter the broadband frequencies. Even with the
BT I plate you still have to use an external filter.

With BT Infinity the only filter is in the master socket. In series is
probably a bit misleading but I did describe the actual layout which
should have made it clear what I really meant.

I will add my 2p worth here. Does your original master socket have one
socket that has to have external filters at every extension, or is it
like the one shown in CB's link (about how to set up BT Infinity),
with a socket for the phone and a socket for data?

If the latter, it would have an internal filter, so you'd have all
phones connected to the phone socket, and all computers connected to
the data socket. Maybe your second 'master' socket has been wired to
the phone side so all data has been filtered out.

You can have more than one master socket but they all have to be wired
in parallel before any filters.

You need to get your phone company to sort it out, as you'll be
breaking their rules if you try and correct it yourself.
--
Dave W

On 04/12/2014 22:13, Roger Chapman wrote:
On 04/12/2014 19:29, Lawrence wrote:

What do you mean by "in series"? It is impossible to do. They have to be
in parallel and you really don't need the third wire. I was under the
impression that "normal" master sockets just produced the third wire for
old phones and did not filter the broadband frequencies. Even with the
BT I plate you still have to use an external filter.

With BT Infinity the only filter is in the master socket. In series is
probably a bit misleading but I did describe the actual layout which
should have made it clear what I really meant.

I think that for modern installations we now may be back to external
filters - either that or the BT web site is really screwed up.

http://bt.custhelp.com/app/answers/d...a-health-check

this may be causing some confusion in this thread - certainly had me
puzzled for a while.

On 05/12/2014 11:10, CB wrote:
On 04/12/2014 22:13, Roger Chapman wrote:
On 04/12/2014 19:29, Lawrence wrote:

What do you mean by "in series"? It is impossible to do. They have to be
in parallel and you really don't need the third wire. I was under the
impression that "normal" master sockets just produced the third wire for
old phones and did not filter the broadband frequencies. Even with the
BT I plate you still have to use an external filter.

With BT Infinity the only filter is in the master socket. In series is
probably a bit misleading but I did describe the actual layout which
should have made it clear what I really meant.

I think that for modern installations we now may be back to external
filters - either that or the BT web site is really screwed up.

http://bt.custhelp.com/app/answers/d...a-health-check


this may be causing some confusion in this thread - certainly had me
puzzled for a while.

Perhaps they had so many complaints that they just had to change the
system. My sister cancelled Infinity when it became apparent that there
would have to be a highly visible cable draped through half the house to
connect the PC to the Hub. Given this change of picture I am certainly
going to have a word with BT both on my own account and on my sister's.

--
Roger Chapman

In article ,
Roger Chapman wrote:
Perhaps they had so many complaints that they just had to change the
system. My sister cancelled Infinity when it became apparent that there
would have to be a highly visible cable draped through half the house to
connect the PC to the Hub. Given this change of picture I am certainly
going to have a word with BT both on my own account and on my sister's.

Surely all Infinity systems include Wi-Fi? If your PC doesn't support this
you can buy an add on receiver for pennies. Not quite so fast as cable -
but unlikely to be any noticeable difference in practice.

--
*CAN VEGETARIANS EAT ANIMAL CRACKERS?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In message , CB writes
On 04/12/2014 22:13, Roger Chapman wrote:
On 04/12/2014 19:29, Lawrence wrote:

What do you mean by "in series"? It is impossible to do. They have to be
in parallel and you really don't need the third wire. I was under the
impression that "normal" master sockets just produced the third wire for
old phones and did not filter the broadband frequencies. Even with the
BT I plate you still have to use an external filter.

With BT Infinity the only filter is in the master socket. In series is
probably a bit misleading but I did describe the actual layout which
should have made it clear what I really meant.

I think that for modern installations we now may be back to external
filters - either that or the BT web site is really screwed up.

http://bt.custhelp.com/app/answers/d...talling-bt-inf
inity-yourself---a-health-check

this may be causing some confusion in this thread - certainly had me
puzzled for a while.

There is a move to offering self install FTTC (where a dangly filter
might be used), though as far as I am aware, only BT are offering it,
most ISP's still seem to using the engineer install. Where they will
install a faceplate filter.
--
Chris French

In message , Roger Chapman
writes
On 05/12/2014 11:10, CB wrote:
On 04/12/2014 22:13, Roger Chapman wrote:
On 04/12/2014 19:29, Lawrence wrote:

What do you mean by "in series"? It is impossible to do. They have to be
in parallel and you really don't need the third wire. I was under the
impression that "normal" master sockets just produced the third wire for
old phones and did not filter the broadband frequencies. Even with the
BT I plate you still have to use an external filter.

With BT Infinity the only filter is in the master socket. In series is
probably a bit misleading but I did describe the actual layout which
should have made it clear what I really meant.

I think that for modern installations we now may be back to external
filters - either that or the BT web site is really screwed up.


http://bt.custhelp.com/app/answers/d...stalling-bt-in
finity-yourself---a-health-check


this may be causing some confusion in this thread - certainly had me
puzzled for a while.

Perhaps they had so many complaints that they just had to change the
system.

Openreach started offering it as an option to ISP's earlier this year.
Until then it was engineer install only. So it is all quite new, most
ISP's still only offer engineer install.

Advantage is of course that it is potentially cheaper, no need for
appointments etc. disadvantage is more chance of a poorly performing
connection and complaining customers (AIUI VDSL is more prone to
suffering problems due to bad internal wiring, interference etc.)


--
Chris French

Chris French wrote:

Openreach started offering it as an option to ISP's earlier this year.
Until then it was engineer install only. So it is all quite new, most
ISP's still only offer engineer install.

Advantage is of course that it is potentially cheaper, no need for
appointments etc.

With ADSL the switch to wires-only meant the engineer could do all the
work from the exchange, instead of an exchange visit and home visit.

With VDSL wires-only, presumably the savings are less, as the engineer
has to visit the cabinet anyway, so is already quite close to your home?
Plus there's de-jumpering to be done at the exchange, though they might
save up several of those for a single visit?

On 05/12/2014 15:56, Andy Burns wrote:
Chris French wrote:

Openreach started offering it as an option to ISP's earlier this year.
Until then it was engineer install only. So it is all quite new, most
ISP's still only offer engineer install.

Advantage is of course that it is potentially cheaper, no need for
appointments etc.

With ADSL the switch to wires-only meant the engineer could do all the
work from the exchange, instead of an exchange visit and home visit.

With VDSL wires-only, presumably the savings are less, as the engineer
has to visit the cabinet anyway, so is already quite close to your home?
Plus there's de-jumpering to be done at the exchange, though they might
save up several of those for a single visit?

I am afraid you have lost me with the reference to VDSL. I thought BT
Infinity was ADSL regardless of whether you got a filter in the master
socket or the new scheme where they are back to individual filters.

--
Roger Chapman

Roger Chapman wrote:

I am afraid you have lost me with the reference to VDSL. I thought BT
Infinity was ADSL

No, the copper section of "Infinity" is VDSL2, which you could think of
as ADSL2 on steroids, but which only has benefits for short lengths of
copper (such as between the cabinet and you).

On 05/12/2014 09:06, Dave W wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 22:13:48 +0000, Roger Chapman
wrote:

On 04/12/2014 19:29, Lawrence wrote:

What do you mean by "in series"? It is impossible to do. They have to be
in parallel and you really don't need the third wire. I was under the
impression that "normal" master sockets just produced the third wire for
old phones and did not filter the broadband frequencies. Even with the
BT I plate you still have to use an external filter.

With BT Infinity the only filter is in the master socket. In series is
probably a bit misleading but I did describe the actual layout which
should have made it clear what I really meant.

I will add my 2p worth here. Does your original master socket have one
socket that has to have external filters at every extension, or is it
like the one shown in CB's link (about how to set up BT Infinity),
with a socket for the phone and a socket for data?

I have the two outlets on the master socket and the extra master socket
is indeed wired to the filtered output.

If the latter, it would have an internal filter, so you'd have all
phones connected to the phone socket, and all computers connected to
the data socket. Maybe your second 'master' socket has been wired to
the phone side so all data has been filtered out.

You can have more than one master socket but they all have to be wired
in parallel before any filters.

You need to get your phone company to sort it out, as you'll be
breaking their rules if you try and correct it yourself.

I am not adverse to breaking the odd minor rule but since the problem is
on of BT's making I will be trying to persuade them to fix it FOC.

--
Roger Chapman

On Fri, 05 Dec 2014 15:56:14 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:

With VDSL wires-only, presumably the savings are less, as the engineer
has to visit the cabinet anyway, so is already quite close to your home?
Plus there's de-jumpering to be done at the exchange, though they might
save up several of those for a single visit?

De-jumpering at the exchange? Not quite sure I follow that,
especially in relation to the wires-only. Is not wires-only just a
"marketing" phrase that means the customer has plug in any required
filters and kit? The line still carries POTS so has to go back to the
exchnage. What has to be de-jumpered? Are we assuming conversion from
ADSL to VDSL? Thus the connection to the DSLAM.

Presumably there is also some sort of filter in the cabinet to stop
the 4 km plus (or WHY) of line back to the exchange fupping up the
VDSL.

--
Cheers
Dave.

Dave Liquorice wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

With VDSL wires-only, presumably the savings are less, as the engineer
has to visit the cabinet anyway, so is already quite close to your home?
Plus there's de-jumpering to be done at the exchange, though they might
save up several of those for a single visit?

De-jumpering at the exchange? Not quite sure I follow that

Presumably most vDSL installs are upgrades from ADSL, so the copper pair
will be de-jumpered from the DSLAM in the exchange after it's jumpered
to the MSAN in the fibre cabainet.

especially in relation to the wires-only. Is not wires-only just a
"marketing" phrase that means the customer has plug in any required
filters and kit?

Slightly more than marketing, it means you provide your own router,
filter/faceplate, and you plug it in yourself ... remember when ADSL
installs required a BT engineer?

The line still carries POTS so has to go back to the
exchnage. What has to be de-jumpered? Are we assuming conversion from
ADSL to VDSL? Thus the connection to the DSLAM.

yes, sorry I should have read ahead before starting my reply.

Presumably there is also some sort of filter in the cabinet to stop
the 4 km plus (or WHY) of line back to the exchange fupping up the
VDSL.

I assume there's a 3kHz low pass filter as part of the line card of the
MSAN.

On 10/12/2014 00:34, Andy Burns wrote:
Dave Liquorice wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

With VDSL wires-only, presumably the savings are less, as the engineer
has to visit the cabinet anyway, so is already quite close to your home?
Plus there's de-jumpering to be done at the exchange, though they might
save up several of those for a single visit?

De-jumpering at the exchange? Not quite sure I follow that

Presumably most vDSL installs are upgrades from ADSL, so the copper pair
will be de-jumpered from the DSLAM in the exchange after it's jumpered
to the MSAN in the fibre cabainet.

especially in relation to the wires-only. Is not wires-only just a
"marketing" phrase that means the customer has plug in any required
filters and kit?

Slightly more than marketing, it means you provide your own router,
filter/faceplate, and you plug it in yourself ... remember when ADSL
installs required a BT engineer?

The line still carries POTS so has to go back to the
exchnage. What has to be de-jumpered? Are we assuming conversion from
ADSL to VDSL? Thus the connection to the DSLAM.

yes, sorry I should have read ahead before starting my reply.

Presumably there is also some sort of filter in the cabinet to stop
the 4 km plus (or WHY) of line back to the exchange fupping up the
VDSL.

Given that the card in the cabinet can support either adsl or vdsl I
expect they don't connect to a dslam in the exchange at all.

Depending on what they have put in the cabinet they may not go back to
the exchange at all as they have cards that support POTS that can go in
the cabinet.

I have better signal to noise figures on my adsl than I did have so I
expect my adsl is terminated in the cabinet now.

On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 10:37:50 +0000, Dennis@home wrote:

Given that the card in the cabinet can support either adsl or vdsl I
expect they don't connect to a dslam in the exchange at all.

Depending on what they have put in the cabinet they may not go back to
the exchange at all as they have cards that support POTS that can go in
the cabinet.

And how is that POTS connected into the PSTN? Does it require the
cabinet to have power? 'Cause that has some interesting implications
given that POTS should work under powerfail conditions for extended
periods of time.

I'd be most annoyed if the "POTS" went off before I'd had a chance to
ring the DNO to tell them about the power failure. I'd be even more
annoyed if I couldn't call for amabulance/police/fire be that 12
seconds after a power failure or 12 days.

I have better signal to noise figures on my adsl than I did have so I
expect my adsl is terminated in the cabinet now.

No change in speed or are you flat out on ADSL anyway? The fiddling
about with lines that happens with the arrival of FTTC (even if you
don't take the service) may mean that a slightly iffy joint, length
of cable or water from a jointing torpedo has been removed.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 10/12/2014 15:08, Dave Liquorice wrote:


No change in speed or are you flat out on ADSL anyway? The fiddling
about with lines that happens with the arrival of FTTC (even if you
don't take the service) may mean that a slightly iffy joint, length
of cable or water from a jointing torpedo has been removed.


The downstream went up a bit, from 16K to 17k.
The upstream went from 1k to 1k4.

Noise margins are 6db so it could go faster.

"Dave Liquorice" wrote in message
ll.co.uk...
On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 10:37:50 +0000, Dennis@home wrote:

Given that the card in the cabinet can support either adsl or vdsl I
expect they don't connect to a dslam in the exchange at all.

Depending on what they have put in the cabinet they may not go back to
the exchange at all as they have cards that support POTS that can go in
the cabinet.

And how is that POTS connected into the PSTN?

Using a fiber optic.

Does it require the cabinet to have power?

Of course.

'Cause that has some interesting implications given
that POTS should work under powerfail conditions
for extended periods of time.

Still perfectly possible.

I'd be most annoyed if the "POTS" went off before I'd had a
chance to ring the DNO to tell them about the power failure.

Trivially easy to allow that. And you can always use your mobile anyway.

I'd be even more annoyed if I couldn't call for amabulance/police/
fire be that 12 seconds after a power failure or 12 days.

Ditto with the mobile.

I have better signal to noise figures on my adsl than I did
have so I expect my adsl is terminated in the cabinet now.

No change in speed or are you flat out on ADSL anyway? The fiddling
about with lines that happens with the arrival of FTTC (even if you
don't take the service) may mean that a slightly iffy joint, length
of cable or water from a jointing torpedo has been removed.