BDUK cross county liaison

My line is served from an exchange in another county via a cabinet also in that other county. Originally the other county's BDUK scheme planned to fibre enable the exchange and provide FTTC with a RFS date of June 2014. This would have enabled me to benefit albeit at a reduced speed due to distance from the cabinet. However this target date was not met and I am now informed by the BDUK responsible for the other county that it is no longer planned to fibre enable my cabinet but instead to provide FTTP in lieu for those properties currently served by it AND only within that county.

My own county's BDUK scheme currently continues to assume that the other county's original scheme will benefit me, not having yet caught up with recent events. I am currently trying to acquaint them with this current situation and ascertain what if anything they might do to help.

To assist me In this endeavour my question on this forum is whether or not it is even legally possible for my own county's BDUK scheme to subsidise the other county's BDUK scheme so as to cover the costs of their going back to the original FTTC proposal.

Since cabinets do cross county boundaries then expectation for some cross over was always there

Without knowing the counties and exchange cabinet all we can say is see other areas doing cabinets that are physically in another county but mainly benefit those in a paying county. Fttp might be more sensible if the people were likely to be on long lines

Wherever the postcodes served by the cabinet are is the relevant local authority - this situation arose in West Yorkshire also.

Some comment on a similar topic here..

News Item

If there is an FTTP node being installed, then why can you not connect to that? With FTTC roll outs BDUK part fund the installation of the cabinet and infrastructure to it, end users then arrange for their own upgrade. I would assume that with FTTP they are providing funding to get the backhaul fibre out to the area of the cabinet and an aggregation node; users then arrange for their own connection to that node.


Or am I missing soemthing?

native FTTP builds include not just the aggregation node but also splitter and manifolds, so if someone misses out by dint of a county boundary then FoD would be the only way, but ordering FoD when close to an existing FTTP area is something not supported as yet I believe.

No technical reason why not. FoD is already available to FTTC customers routing it back to a suitable node, probably the one that supplies the cabinet.

In this case, it could be a long run to one of the splitters is possible.

Edited by MHC (Wed 09-Jul-14 08:51:38)