RB> I proved that it is the lines, back at
RB> the begining of the year when I was in FNQ.

DH> Since then, some careful politicking has turned up an admission from a
DH> senior Telstra manager that there _is_ dynamic line bandwidth sharing
DH> (read limiting) hardware now fitted on high traffic trunks and exchanges.

DH> FNQ is a low enough traffic area that the equipment hasn't been fitted..:-(

Cant be that, coz Dave Drummonds line is JUST as immaculate. One common
feature of BOTH that FNQ line and Daves is that they are both within
spitting distance of the exchange itself. Bet thats not a coincidence.

AND we have LOTS of duplicated session stats from people calling Pauls
system with a variety of modems at his end, with no evidence of ANY real
variability in the stats at all, which is a bit hard to reconcile with
the story about 'dynamic line bandwidth sharing', particularly as his
end in Sydney presumably qualifys as 'high traffic trunks and exchanges'

And a careful look at the Courier ATY11 line probe stats shows no
sign of that claimed bandwidth limitation at all. What you can see
with the worse lines like Bill Grimsleys home line and Poes is a
rather pronounced slope of the entire bit of the curve which is
horizontal with Daves, more loss at higher freqs, JUST what you would
expect to see due to the physical cable run between the exchange and
the modem itself when its rather long, rather elderly, and thinner wire.

You can however clearly see a completely different effect
on the calls to the US, which do appear to be more likely
to be due to that sort of thing on bandwidth.

DH> It has to do without the latest "benefits".

Welp, it sure aint visible on Dave Drummonds line.

RB> NOTHING CHANGED AGAIN. Except maybe Telstra
RB> are fiddling with lines somewhere.

DH> No maybe.  Cat's out of the bag irrevocably.

We'll see, with a Courier being able to MEASURE the
bandwidth, its now possible actually MEASURE the lines and
see if there is any evidence to support conspiracy theorys.
@EOT:

---