tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post4282018243369243367..comments2024-03-28T09:19:27.451+00:00Comments on RevK<sup>®</sup>'s ramblings: VDSL SFP and FireBrickRevKhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12369263214193333422noreply@blogger.comBlogger36125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-57339393426736237152023-04-19T00:22:32.919+01:002023-04-19T00:22:32.919+01:00I got bored and figured out how to talk to the SFP...I got bored and figured out how to talk to the SFP so we all now have a Wireshark dissector and an SNMP subagent to play with:<br /><br />https://github.com/jimdigriz/mt5311<br /><br />ADSL2+ is possible, but the VCI/VPI mappings[1] do not match what we use here in the UK.<br /><br />From the work I have done it *looks* like you could amend the default configuration profiles, but I am not too keen to send random potentially bricking commands at an SFP I am actually using :)<br /><br />[1] use the VLAN for your setting in https://forum.netgate.com/assets/uploads/files/1627525984979-proscend-t-180-vlan-to-pvc.pngAlexander Clouterhttps://digriz.org.uk/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-43319930683754897092021-01-06T11:38:07.388+00:002021-01-06T11:38:07.388+00:00Hello Peter ... looks like you were trying to use ...Hello Peter ... looks like you were trying to use this SFP with ADSL2+. did you make any progress?SD64https://www.blogger.com/profile/10221294836701146727noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-47383963725170431122021-01-06T11:36:17.383+00:002021-01-06T11:36:17.383+00:00Hello
Interesting stuff here re VDSL SFP. do you ...Hello<br /><br />Interesting stuff here re VDSL SFP. do you know if anybody has solved the use of these SFP's with ADSL2+ in the UK?SD64https://www.blogger.com/profile/10221294836701146727noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-41244712426373516832019-10-23T00:01:53.932+01:002019-10-23T00:01:53.932+01:00I'm not sure this us true. The PPPoE may be po...I'm not sure this us true. The PPPoE may be possible on another device on the proper VLAN. As the poster indicated, NAT still needs to happen somewhere anyway.Fhaithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05218108774915376512noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-8881715697123518952019-10-07T20:04:47.556+01:002019-10-07T20:04:47.556+01:00We found something by goggling! But for VDSL they ...We found something by goggling! But for VDSL they "just worked" (needing the VLAN tag for the service as on the wire, typically 101).RevKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369263214193333422noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-10569664764583823882019-10-07T20:03:39.630+01:002019-10-07T20:03:39.630+01:00Hi RevK, I just bought one of these units, was won...Hi RevK, I just bought one of these units, was wondering if you had any notes on their function / mapping? They seem quite devoid of configuration. I currently don't have a VDSL line to test it on (until we move house), but do have a ZyXEL ADSL DSLAM I might play with.Peter Cliftonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12625182875153064666noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-13533078853306831152019-01-15T10:09:31.365+00:002019-01-15T10:09:31.365+00:00Sniggers...Sniggers...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-23175556080181232132018-05-25T21:50:09.694+01:002018-05-25T21:50:09.694+01:00Did you ever manage to get these working with UK A...Did you ever manage to get these working with UK ADSL?<br /><br />I looked at the ones supplied by Allnet (https://shop.allnet.de/detail/index/sArticle/282133) however at the time I was interested in buying, they were unobtanium.<br /><br />I did ask them various questions, and they claim it only supports VDSL. No doubt it is likely to be based on either the Proscend or the Mellanox reference design though - so I'd have imagined it "might" be possible.<br /><br />I'm given to understand that they use Annex B ADSL in Germany - not Annex M like we use.Peter Cliftonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12625182875153064666noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-53304073368584793992018-05-17T21:12:39.864+01:002018-05-17T21:12:39.864+01:00Have found these online, from what I can tell it s...Have found these online, from what I can tell it seems to be the Proscend T-180, but will report back once I've tested etc; https://www.mikrotik-shop.de/Interfaces/SFP/Kupfer/SFP-VDSL2-Modem-Telco::2192.html#horizontalTab1Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-74019203821227448112018-02-20T17:28:23.993+00:002018-02-20T17:28:23.993+00:00You may be missing my point slightly - I completel...You may be missing my point slightly - I completely agree, EU wide approval mechanism - that means any approved modem can *legally* be connected, but without net neutrality it would be possible for such connection to be a breach of *contract*. Net neutrality adds the extra step of not allowing an ISP to constrain the equipment (other than being CE marked / EU wide approved) in contract even. An important extra step. I am not sure EU approvals actually stop contracts restricting things, on their own.RevKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369263214193333422noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-36509295831122343322018-02-20T17:26:18.644+00:002018-02-20T17:26:18.644+00:00You are correct that BT cannot restrict terminal e...You are correct that BT cannot restrict terminal equipment to devices meeting SIN498, but the reason for this has nothing to do with net neutrality. Basically approval of telecommunications devices is done at an EU level these days. Not much of a single market if you have to get your VDSL2 device approved in all 28 countries. As a consequence the whole BT SIN498 thing as presented is flat out illegal, and really OFCOM should be taking BT to tasks over it.Jonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17705593479061175044noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-26136061270257586302018-02-20T17:23:19.098+00:002018-02-20T17:23:19.098+00:00Well yes, that is the approval system, and hence C...Well yes, that is the approval system, and hence CE mark. Net neutrality also applies. I.e. an ISP cannot say "you must use only our (approved) equipment on this service". Without that you could have approved equipment under a unified EU wide standard but a contract that says you cannot use it on a specific service. So I think net neutrality matters as part of this. Both parts matter.RevKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369263214193333422noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-8813424923141825802018-02-20T17:21:06.488+00:002018-02-20T17:21:06.488+00:00Er you are talking a bit of nonsense there. Net ne...Er you are talking a bit of nonsense there. Net neutrality has nothing to do with it at all. However you are right the MCT stuff is illegal because approval is done at an EU level not on a per country level. It's not much of a single market if a manufacturer of a VDSL2 device has to get it approved in every individual country. It's why you don't see those BABT approval stickers anymore. Frankly BT should be reported to OFCOM for breaking EU law with the whole SIN498 thing.Jonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17705593479061175044noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-33394031888645261542018-02-02T12:58:21.218+00:002018-02-02T12:58:21.218+00:00Very interesting, thank you for the insights!Very interesting, thank you for the insights!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-19287048924202942612018-02-02T10:39:47.258+00:002018-02-02T10:39:47.258+00:00Because net neutrality law does not allow BT to re...Because net neutrality law does not allow BT to restrict the terminal equipment to devices meeting SIN498, that is why!<br /><br />We cannot legally require customers to only use MCT. BT cannot require is to break the law by us making that requirement on customers.<br /><br />As for faults, the fault repair is on the service which has a clear demarkation point - the master socket - there is (as far as I know) no requirement for *ANY* equipment (MCT tested or not) to be attached to the line when the engineer arrives to fix the fault. If their service does not work to spec at the demarcation point they have to fix it, end of story.<br /><br />These specific devices may not be ideal, but BT trying to lock down what terminal equipment people use is not lawful, simple as that.RevKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369263214193333422noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-86704784214613950372018-02-02T10:33:59.792+00:002018-02-02T10:33:59.792+00:00Do you mind commenting on why OpenReach MCT wouldn...Do you mind commenting on why OpenReach MCT wouldn't be required? I thought all VDSL devices on their network had to be SIN 498, otherwise OR/BT won't assist when there's a line fault involving a non-compliant modem? (My understanding could be completely wrong!)<br /><br />Also, any way to get VDSL/ADSL statistics like SNR etc from these? I've read the Mikrotik forums about them, doesn't look like it's possible. Just wondered if you had seen something they hadn't.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-10251423497901567252018-02-02T04:34:07.855+00:002018-02-02T04:34:07.855+00:00I have one of these SFP's too...and while it s...I have one of these SFP's too...and while it seems to sync up on my DSL line I'm not seeing any traffic inbound on the SFP port regardless of what VLAN I'm looking at. The documentation for these is very limited to say the least. François Prowsehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04230846122714076770noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-64461489466971916642018-01-23T10:12:17.437+00:002018-01-23T10:12:17.437+00:00I found these: https://www.mikrotik-shop.de/Interf...I found these: https://www.mikrotik-shop.de/Interfaces/SFP/Kupfer/SFP-VDSL2-Modem-Telco::2192.html<br /><br />Appear to be the same thing. Not the cheapest!Davehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15963017871237474181noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-86749616009362621112018-01-22T20:31:47.000+00:002018-01-22T20:31:47.000+00:00They are the same modules according to the RouterO...They are the same modules according to the RouterOS thread. <br /><br />Apparently there is also a Windows tool which can change some config on these using Ethernet.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17775338892803078996noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-11359748953291492322018-01-22T16:11:51.614+00:002018-01-22T16:11:51.614+00:00It would nice if AA could resell these, as proscen...It would nice if AA could resell these, as proscend appears not to offer them to consumers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-68973486286500898692018-01-22T13:25:11.271+00:002018-01-22T13:25:11.271+00:00I would definitely be interested if anyone's f...I would definitely be interested if anyone's found a european supplier or if AAISP are going to resell them.roliverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09339177021117949205noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-32430774811760599752018-01-21T20:52:55.266+00:002018-01-21T20:52:55.266+00:00We purchased from the manufacturer last year. Not ...We purchased from the manufacturer last year. Not aware of a EU reseller at the moment though.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-20909611525683583992018-01-21T13:07:34.679+00:002018-01-21T13:07:34.679+00:00The device the SFP is plugged into still needs to ...The device the SFP is plugged into still needs to be able to manage the PPP session, so it won't be possible to convert a switch into a router.marroldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14587482147531978196noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-29676087336736729402018-01-21T11:55:34.908+00:002018-01-21T11:55:34.908+00:00The back end is serdes and if they want people to ...The back end is serdes and if they want people to plug in to switches, which is presumably why they chose that form factor, they would make it talk 1Gb Ethernet frames. The modem we are testing also does ADSL which is ATM but it does the LLC to bridge Ethernet frames. So I expect that they would find a way.RevKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369263214193333422noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3993498847203183398.post-75928038276087100162018-01-21T11:43:28.638+00:002018-01-21T11:43:28.638+00:00They are 2.48g tx and 1.25 Rx for running complex ...They are 2.48g tx and 1.25 Rx for running complex ATM/tdm protocols they absolutely would not work !!!! This absolute gibberish that any sfp works in a MSA 1GBe sfp port is shocking - sfp is a form factor! No standard to force it to support ethernet.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com