FTTC Not Available to users close to the exchange!!!!

Just wondering for users close to the exchange e.g. Less 1km. I can't understand why BT don't install some VDSL equipment inside the exchange and connect end users that are close to the exchange with VDSL modems thus relieving the need to Dig and Install a local cabinet.

Because the rules (called the ANFP - Access Network Frequency Plan) do not allow anyone to install VDSL in the exchange

To expand on Gadget's correct answer, the ANFP forbids installing VDSL equipment at the exchange to prevent crosstalk with ADSL from interfering with the service of those remaining on ADSL.

And the answer from BT is to build a new PCP and FTTC cabinet just outside the exchange. If the EO area is large enough it may be done commercially (fairly rare), if a BDUK project and money available they may do something.

A lot depends on how the council/BT in the area are handling the project, there are wide variations across the counties

They can installed VDSL Cabinet outside the exchange, they can do that without the need ANFP inside the exchange. Maybe BT will do it in the future but not at the moment.

Edited by adslmax (Fri 22-Nov-13 09:34:09)

They have already done some that way.

In reply to a post by David_W:

To expand on Gadget's correct answer, the ANFP forbids installing VDSL equipment at the exchange to prevent crosstalk with ADSL from interfering with the service of those remaining on ADSL.

seems bizzare?

Doesnt matter where the dslam is crosstalk with adsl will happen and thats why BT are applying power cutback on the adsl tones. Of course the affect is less against adsl lines with low attenuation so the issue is worse for those far from the exchange than close to it. Am I missing something?

Is there any actual reason for this past a loophole of the rules? IE: Would it make much difference if a MSAN/DSLAM was installed in the exchange that served both ADSL2+ and VDSL2?

I can't understand how 10-30m of distance would change any of the crosstalk effects with any real measure.

I do wish there was more pressure put on this. It's annoying that happily-subsidised rural areas are often going to have much better broadband access (and less contended 3G/4G) than city centre locations. VM often doesn't serve these areas too as it is so expensive/difficult to dig up the roads and upgrade/install cable.

Seems to me like yet again OFCOM can't get it's [censored] together quickly enough. This issue was raised on these very forums nearly 4 years ago. http://forums.thinkbroadband.com/regulation/f/381351...

Thanks for all the reply's it just seemed a better idea more cost effective to have close users vdsl connected right into the exchange. However red tape gets in the way as usual,
My business is 150 yards from the exchange which I am directly connected to. Currently on BT adsl 20meg and I get full speed no problems, the exchange is just been infinity enabled recently and no availability on infinity just yet on my line and would there be a decision to install FTTP instead.

Grangemouth exchange

Any Ideas out there?

Edited by deleted (Wed 27-Nov-13 21:36:40)

Anyone know what would happen for FTTPoD?

Would the exchange be considered a NGA aggregation node?

No.

They appear to be very strict about FTTPoD only being available where FTTC is.

All depends on how many properties, and if the comments online from people are to be believed, people who have good speeds from ADSL2+ aren't upgrading to FTTC anyway, so less incentive to do anything for you.

Fibre on Demand might be an option but with the slow nature of openreach likely to be a couple of years away if you don't already have a FTTC cab.

Generally the focus is on the easy wins with EO only being looked at a lot further down the line.

One immediate option is bonding
http://www.fluidata.co.uk/connectivity/purefluid/
or if upload is the bottleneck switch to an Annex M which should give you 2 to 2.5 Mbps for the upload.

Andrew thanks for you reply, download is ok but could do with a upload boost so will contact bt ask them about annex m option.

Regards
George