Can't get connected from PCP to DSLAM 'All lin One' Cabinet

Hi, Over a month ago Openreach stated that our new FTCC "All in One" cabinet was "Accepting Orders"

I immediately contacted my ISP PlusNet (who have been brilliant) to get connected but has so far got nowhere.

However BT Availability Checker says my number is served by this new cabinet but that no fibre sevice is listed.

I just need 2 short wires fitted from PCP to DSLAM.

1st engineer confirmed my line was connected to the PCP E & D side but not to DSLAM.

Last engineer went away having done nothing because his information said I was on a different Cabinet even though BT Availability Checker says I'm on the new one.

Has anyone got a solution - short of giving me a key so I can fit the wires myself!!!!?

How far are you from the new AIO cabinet? It is possible that you are too far away to get a good FTTC connection which is why FTTC not listed as being available for your number on the BT Availability Checker. Alternatively there could be an error in the BT database and your record has not been updated correctly in which case MrSaffron (Andrew Ferguson) may be able to help if you PM him with your address and phone number.

In reply to a post by MCM:

How far are you from the new AIO cabinet? It is possible that you are too far away to get a good FTTC connection which is why FTTC not listed as being available for your number on the BT Availability Checker. Alternatively there could be an error in the BT database and your record has not been updated correctly in which case MrSaffron (Andrew Ferguson) may be able to help if you PM him with your address and phone number.

Hi MCM, I'm 50m from the AiO Cab and was told to expect 80mbps. I'm sure it is a case that the records are wrong because no-one in the village - all of who's lines are served by this new Cab - has Fibre availability - I ran 100 numbers through the 'Checker'.
I will PM Mr Saffron as you suggest. Many thanks.

Hi MCM

Engineer today could not jump PCP to DSLAM - just DSLAM node allocation holding things up - apparently.

(Edit - Is the BT Wholesale checker showing FTTC as available to you yet? Please can you copy and paste what it says for your number, including the line above the table but removing your number.)

Something has gone wrong with the order. The jumpering is done inside the PCP, and all the cabling and connections between the two cabinets installed before the FTTC cabinet goes live. (Subject of course to not all being used and more needing adding. Which can mean adding line cards to the FTTC cabinet and any resultant work).

At the time the ISP's order for FTTC for you is placed, a port in the FTTC cabinet should be allocated and recorded on the order. The connectors in the PCP for that port are labelled.

As you say no port has been allocated, you just waiting at this stage doesn't seem to be an option. Plusnet need to know and to find out why.

Edited by RobertoS (Wed 18-May-16 13:42:19)

Note this is an AIO cab so just the one cab, no external cables linking PCP and FTTC cabs, with all connections internal to the AIO cab. This make the explanation of the problem more difficult to understand. Perhaps there is a problem with the AIO cabinet.

Or there is no problem with the cabinet at all, and its just a database issue, since seeing checkers giving different cabinet numbers and wrong estimates too.

A request for check/fix has gone in from me.

Or there is no problem with the cabinet at all, and its just a database issue,

As was suggested by myself in my first reply to the OP where I also suggested he PM you so that you could check this for him.

There are a number of circulars I've been cc'd in now about the issue, it is possible some of avenues may have made it more official and thus rather than just a fix involving those who do it, it may be more complex in terms of how it has to be handled.

All I can say Andrew is the best of luck in resolving these problems, you have and are providing a great service to those using these forums having personally helped us in SW9 to get started on our community funded upgrade some years ago. Completion is tantalisingly near were it not for a Lambeth section 58 notice which is surprising given the state of the local roads.

Hi MCM and Mr Saffron, Another 10 days have gone by. An engineering fault was supposed to be fixed yesterday and I was meant to be connected but according to my ISP it was not fixed.
Any idea whats going on please?

By the way the BT Availability Checker now says VDSL 80/20 available (for the first time) but without jumpers I'm not getting it.

Edited by deleted (Thu 26-May-16 17:12:28)

No

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

Hi MCM and Mr Saffron, Another 10 days have gone by. An engineering fault was supposed to be fixed yesterday and I was meant to be connected but according to my ISP it was not fixed.
Any idea whats going on please?

By the way the BT Availability Checker now says VDSL 80/20 available (for the first time) but without jumpers I'm not getting it.

Get Plusnet to try and place the order again. The availability checker result would suggest the routing correction has now gone through and your number is now listed as being connected to the correct cabinet.

Thanks all, According to BT Checker my number HAS been served by this new cabinet for well over a month but with no VDSL availability. So the routing seemed correct.
O/R's Availability checker has said 'orders being accepted' for this number and Cab for 7 weeks.
Today my number does have VDSL availability - for the 1st time - but apparently due to a fault the PCP has not been connected to the DSLAM in the AIO.
An O/R engineer that came out about 7 weeks ago said there was a "fibre fault" but I assumed this had been fixed - maybe not???

I think the jumpers are fitted the first time FTTC is requested on a particular D-side line - your physical (as opposed to phone number) line to the cabinet.

With the normal separate cabinets, prior to FTTC on the line there are no jumpers. If the FTTC is ceased by you for any reason, they are often left in place in case the next occupant of your premises request FTTC. If the cabinet starts to get full I believe the left in place jumpers are usually removed to free up the FTTC port. This minimises the need for cabinet visits by the engineers.

If the next occupant, or you, decides to take ADSLx, the jumpers have to be removed, as being routed through the FTTC line card filters out ADSLx frequencies.

It seems likely to me the same system applies on the integrated cabinets. In which case your line showing no jumpers is normal, until FTTC is installed for you.

Yes, that's all correct.

My line (and all the others) has been connected to the new PCP for nearly 2 months - Nodes 361 E&D.

My ISP requested Fibre jumpers to DSLAM in this cab about 7 weeks ago.

My understanding is that jumpers are left in because VDSL to ADSL can be made in software.

There are about 150 lines going to this cab which is capable of double that with existing biscuits and more biscuits can be added to AIOs. Therefore IMHO jumpers can be left in place for the forseable future and could in theory have been installed for all lines when the PCP was wired up by the Network Subbies.

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

My ISP requested Fibre jumpers to DSLAM in this cab about 7 weeks ago.

I believe whoever at Plusnet told you that is talking rot.

My understanding is that jumpers are left in because VDSL to ADSL can be made in software.

I don't think that is correct either but there are posters around who will know for sure.

There are about 150 lines going to this cab which is capable of double that with existing biscuits and more biscuits can be added to AIOs. Therefore IMHO jumpers can be left in place for the forseable future and could in theory have been installed for all lines when the PCP was wired up by the Network Subbies.

Highly unlikely they jumper any lines to the FTTC side of the cabinet until FTTC is ordered. It would be a complete waste of engineer time and money, as it would logically have to be every line fed by the cabinet, including those with no Openreach based broadband, just a WLR3 line.

Also if I'm right about the filtering not being adjustable by software the jumpers would need removing for anyone wanting ADSLx.

"Biscuits"? Jargon for line cards?

Roberto said "Highly unlikely they jumper any lines to the FTTC side of the cabinet until FTTC is ordered. It would be a complete waste of engineer time and money, as it would logically have to be every line fed by the cabinet"

If I'm correct about software switching, then maybe if you add up all the individual engineer visits to connect just one subscriber - including admin and drive time etc - then it could make sense for the Network Guys to put all the jumpers in when they wire E&D side = 1/2 days work?

To be brutally frank about this, if you are making educated guesses at things, then this might not actually be helping the situation i.e. by the time the complicated version you give has made its way down the chain it is probably very different.

Much easier to state the simpler version that people will understand and are able to relay on. My recall of your scenario is that an all-in-one cabinet has gone live but the checkers have not fully aligned to allow an order to proceed.

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

There are about 150 lines going to this cab which is capable of double that with existing biscuits and more biscuits can be added to AIOs. Therefore IMHO jumpers can be left in place for the forseable future and could in theory have been installed for all lines when the PCP was wired up by the Network Subbies.

The Kitz page on FTTC cabinets reckons that an AIO has a DSLAM for 128 lines, while the space for copper has room for "500 E&D sides" (unclear whether that means 250 E-sides plus 250 D-sides, or 500 lines each with an E-side and a D-side).

When we look at some pictures of an open AIO, we can see a few things.

This one in Nottinghamshire has a DSLAM that looks very much like a Huawei MA5616. There are 4 linecards - and with only one connector on each linecard, we can tell it supports 128 lines (32 ports per line card).

The wiring in the centre has room for 160 connections to the DSLAM. IIRC, the krone strips are normally 10 pairs, and the excess is likely to be caused by the way the 32-port connector cables can be wired easily.

The wiring on the right has room for 380 E-side and 380 D-side pairs. It isn't obvious why the lowest blocks don't use the final 20 pairs.

This picture shows an AIO with a similar DSLAM, and similar centre wiring. The main PCP section on the right is set up for considerably fewer pairs.

The layout of the krone strips in both cabinets is consistent with standard PCP wiring, though mirrored. A new VDSL2 order would need manual links between the right (PCP) and centre (DSLAM) strips just as in any standard PCP. There doesn't appear to be any way for this to be done "under software", and the dimensioning suggests that the DSLAM can't support enough lines for a 1:1 permanent connection to be allowed.

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

then maybe if you add up all the individual engineer visits to connect just one subscriber - including admin and drive time etc - then it could make sense for the Network Guys to put all the jumpers in when they wire E&D side = 1/2 days work?

What's missing is the technical understanding of what you are suggesting.

Every line that gets physically connected into the DSLAM also gets physically connected into a filter that prevents DSL signals passing over the E-side. Every single live ADSL connection would be lost.

Then comes the regulation impact too. You've just wiped out any possibility of LLU operation on this cabinet - so Sky and TalkTalk would likely complain to Ofcom that BT are acting as monopolist again - even if they don't supply that exchange yet.

Troublegum wrote this last year "Instead of having to send an engineer to the cabinet to physically remove the jumpers when someone cancels FTTC or moves house, Openreach are now disabling the FTTC port remotely. This means that if the user ever wants to take a new FTTC service in the future or someone else takes over the line, then the service can be reactivated without an engineer visit."

So with jumpers in place, can FTTC port be disabled and re-enabled remotely or not?

In the case where someone had FTTC live on a line yes what you posted does happens.

If the new person in a home orders ADSL2+ then a visit has to happen to allow ADSL2+ to work. If as Openreach hope the person orders FTTC then its a remote switch on.

Jumpers are not put into place on a speculative nature, since doing so would cut off peoples ADSL2+ services.

That quote is correct, but relates to the FTTC supply. In the (perhaps unlikely these days) event someone else takes over the line and wants ADSLx the jumpers then need removing.

Disabling the port is not the same thing as disabling the ADSL filter on the specific line. With the jumpers in place so the ADSL filter in the circuit an ADSLx signal cannot get through to the D-side.

I don't see any physical filters on the Quante strips like you would on a standard dslam. So it is possible that they can be remotely switched on an All In One.

Edited by deleted (Fri 27-May-16 17:56:03)

So to save multiple engineer visits and costs, a remote way to disable and enable the filter would be required if all jumpers were to be fitted when a new cab is installed?

I have heard these AIO cabs described as 'Mini Exchanges' and in this case the fibre routing goes nowhere near the old echange but direct to the nearest Super Exchange. Is this correct?

Is there any way another company other than O/R can serve customers from these AIOs?

FTTC cabinets frequently go nowhere near the telephone line exchange, so I expect it could be to either a remote "fibre headend exchange", or to the e-side exchange which would in a way then become a headend exchange.

You never explained "biscuit". Now you have "Super Exchange" that I don't think is an official designation. I've seen mini exchanges mentioned in this context but have my doubts about that being official, and even more doubts about them having exchange facilities.

Currently, no. The cabinets are OR with no facilities for other companies to locate kit in them or cable to them.

I have heard these AIO cabs described as 'Mini Exchanges' and in this case the fibre routing goes nowhere near the old echange but direct to the nearest Super Exchange. Is this correct?

Incorrect. The copper E side goes to the existing exchange. As for the fibre link this goes to the headend exchange which may or may not be the same exchange as the one to which the copper is linked.

WWWombat said "Then comes the regulation impact too. You've just wiped out any possibility of LLU operation on this cabinet - so Sky and TalkTalk would likely complain to Ofcom that BT are acting as monopolist again - even if they don't supply that exchange yet"

You say there is no possibility for this - correct?

LLU is ADSL2+. As your idea of permanently fitting the jumpers prevents ADSLx, then LLU can't run through the cabinet. (Nor can BT Wholesale ADSLx of course).

FTTC is Openreach GEA, handed over to BTW/Sky/TT/Voda at the fibre headend. Ofcom define VULA and GEA is Openreach's shot at complying with that definition.

Partial said "I don't see any physical filters on the Quante strips like you would on a standard dslam. So it is possible that they can be remotely switched on an All In One"

If he is correct then this changes things doesn't it?

BTW My landline phone stopped ringing this afternoon.

Rang from a mobile � the mobile was ringing but not the landline.

Plugged an old style phone in the master with the DEC phones disconnected but got a tone like the old fashioned �engaged tone� beep, beep, beep beep. Rang it from a mobile but it did not ring.

Outgoing calls OK.

Any ideas?

He is correct in saying "it is possible they can be remotely switched". Therefore it is also possible they cannot. It changes nothing.

It is also irrelevant. Jumpers will not be added in the first place until there is an install. How many more times? The Plusnet person told you rubbish.

Has your broadband speed dropped dramatically? If so one wire of your pair is disconnected and you need to put in a line fault call to your line rental company, with no mention of broadband.

When you ring a number and that number doesn't ring but you hear it on the phone you are calling from, that is because the ringing tone is sent to you by your service at the same time as it forwards the call to the destination service. It isn't a response from the target number. It is just saying "OK, we are calling the number".

OK so we need a definitive answer on remote DSLAM port switching and on whether the latest AIOs don't have the filters that might prevent ADSL2+.

If the answer is yes to both, then could the PCP E to D side Jumpers & DSLAM jumpers theoretically be installed in the Huawei factory in China - although of course there would need to be enough biscuits installed to match.

The most elegant solution for most subscribers would be to do away with troublesome 'copper' (and aluminium) entirely and go to Fibre Telephony - preferably FTTP. Have O/R done this in Cornwall?

I understand that the first BT Infinity Service had Telephony over Fibre capability (BT Hub 2 b) but don't know the details. see BT_Home_Hub_2_0_Infinity_UG_troubleshooting.pdf

No my BB speed has not changed with this 'No ringer' issue.

Edited by deleted (Sat 28-May-16 08:06:02)

What you need to do is actually stop trying to dissect the equipment and report faults in simple terms. My feeling is that you have actually confused a provider and thus fault reports are gaga.

Home Hub have never had telephony over fibre capability, some have supported a well recognised process called Voice over IP (VoIP) but it still needed a copper telephone line to carry the broadband single to the Home Hub,

I thought we had moved on from the problems with my fibre order (now put down to system rather than engineering issues - whatever that means) to a more general discussion about the capabilities of the new AIOs and where efficiencies might be made in future that might impact favourably on line rental and connection charges.

Please explain how you think I might have confused my provider?

Could my 'no ringer' problem be down to a 'concentrator fault'?

It was not clear when you are discussing your situation or an ongoing fault or failure of an order placed with a provider to be fulfilled correctly or just wanting to talk about the technology in a general sense.

I've asked you a question about your phone not ringing and given you a possible cause, but don't see a reply from you about that.

You may have moved on from your FTTC supply, the rest of us are trying to clarify to you that you are into completely irrelevant and pointless theories about building and maintaining broadband networks.

Apart from the problem of your phone, I'm out if this thread. Life's too short to waste time thinking about your fantasies. Contact Openreach or BT Group CEOs if you think you have any useful suggestions. Have you any telecommunications background at this level?

Edited by RobertoS (Sat 28-May-16 10:41:42)

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

.

My understanding is that jumpers are left in because VDSL to ADSL can be made in software.

There are about 150 lines going to this cab which is capable of double that with existing biscuits and more biscuits can be added to AIOs. Therefore IMHO jumpers can be left in place for the forseable future and could in theory have been installed for all lines when the PCP was wired up by the Network Subbies.

No, Roberto's post above mine summed things up pretty well. You can't make a change from VDSL to ADSL in software, not the way it's been done in the Openreach network.

Everything Roberto and WWWombat have told you is correct, and I work on the network. Jumpers are left in if a physical line (D-side, ignore the phone number) has had FTTC that's been cancelled. The assumption is that the next person will more than likely order an FTTC service also which can be remotely turned on. However, if the next person orders an ADSL based service an engineer has to go to the cabinet and remove the jumpers to the DSLAM on a "FTTC Ceased-Recover Cabinet Jumpers" job.

Just for added clarification, every single Openreach FTTC DSLAM cabinet has filters in it that will stop ADSL based services from working. I've worded that very carefully so you don't have to ask a follow up (hopefully)

Edited by deleted (Sat 28-May-16 10:58:14)

In reply to a post by partial:

I don't see any physical filters on the Quante strips like you would on a standard dslam.

I noticed that too, but I'm unable to say whether a working AIO has no physical filters put into place. Just that the ones used for PR don't have them.

The AIO layout is missing one set of strips compared to the combination of the PCP and standalone FTTC cabinets - which might mean there is no place to put these physical filters.

However, Huawei sell linecard variants that include filters, as well as variants that do not. It is possible that the filter has been built into the DSLAM in an AIO; I know of no details to say one way or the other.

In reply to a post by partial:

So it is possible that they can be remotely switched on an All In One.

It is certainly possible that they can be placed in the DSLAM hardware; whether that makes them configurable under software control, to turn the filter on/off, is another matter. What it probably (almost certainly) would not do is make them switchable, in the sense of altering the port allocation.

If a port failed, and a new one needed to be allocated, then a hard-wired scheme would make this impossible.

If the filters could be turned on/off under software, would that cause issues if the DSLAM power were lost? Would it cause issues to an ADSL service? Would it affect voice access in an emergency?

However, the biggest issue of all is this: once you wire every line in the AIO into the DSLAM, you require the DSLAM to be fully populated with linecards - a port for every line. You will need that port for lines that are still on ADSL, lines that are on LLU, and lines that don't even want broadband.

Right now, with takeup around 20%, DSLAMs only need 1-2 cards to service demand. They don't need to be full.

The DSLAM would then start to cost 2x - 3x as much from day 1 ... which probably ruins the business case for building the cabinet.

From our point of view we treat the AIO cabinets exactly the same as the normal DSLAMs. They are always looking for ways to save time and money so I assume the filters are present in the AIO cabinets, I've not been told otherwise. But I haven't ever seen inside the DSLAM side of an AIO

In reply to a post by Icaras:

But I haven't ever seen inside the DSLAM side of an AIO

They are something of an enigma

They are indeed. But I don't have the key anyway!

Nice to see some INTELLIGENT dialogue - since Roberto bowed out - regarding ways to save money vis a vis fully wiring cabinets and switching filters etc.

IMHO the cost of extra line cards or biscuits could easily be outweighed by multiple engineer visits on a consumer by consumer basis - if the filter issue can be overcome.

As UHTV (and SUHD) streaming etc becomes more popular, Fibre uptake will likely snowball.

Question: If a DSLAM port can be enabled or disabled remotely and the filter is connected to that port - would that filter be enabled or disabled at the same time??

However I thought I ought to update you on the 'no ringer' line fault, which has meant no incoming calls for almost a week. O/R have finally decided it is an exchange fault which had a deadline for repair of 5pm today. Surprise, Surprise - deadline missed !

Discuss

[chuckle]

The filter is passive so cannot be switched on or off, the filter is always active in the fttc cabinet connection when a line is connected through it.

Edited by deleted (Wed 01-Jun-16 20:10:34)

The filters are behind the green cover , top left in the copper compartment, above the Fibre splice box

Edited by deleted (Wed 01-Jun-16 21:43:13)

I don't know why you are obsessing about filters. As Ribble says they are always there, that's just how it is. The current way of doing things works just fine. You're trying to solve a problem that isn't there. I'm generally happy to answer any questions, but honestly I don't see the point to your questions.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

[chuckle]

Edited by deleted (Wed 01-Jun-16 22:06:09)

Icarus - the point is COST & EFFICIENCY. If the filter issue can be overcome - not difficult I imagine in the 21st century - then cabinets could be fully wired in the factory saving many thousands of pounds in individual engineer visits to cabinets over the next 10 years.

Maybe the fault fixing timeframe could be reduced to 'same day' if engineers were utilised more efficiently.

We recently had 2 engineers at the same time on Cab 6 fixing 2 different faults - this should not happen with systems and tracking - should it?

They told me its absurd the way they are utilised - often driving up to 50 miles to fix a fault! How much does that cost?

The mantra "we have always done it this way" must surely be obsolete. You wouldn't have AIOs if this was the case or indeed Fibre or any of the advances of the last 200 years.

Cost savings could either be used to increase engineers wages or increase BT profits or reduce subscriber's line rental which has almost doubled in recent years!

BTW - After 2 months I'm still not connected to the DSLAM and my phone's still not working. Chuckle about that!

then cabinets could be fully wired in the factory saving many thousands of pounds in individual engineer visits to cabinets over the next 10 years.

So what happens when an E or D need to be changed, or the DSLAM port becomes faulty ? What of the myriad lines in a PCP that don't require FTTC service, that would be money wasted, and no company, despite their 'green efficiency mumblings' ever wants to waste money.

Though your intentions are good, getting on your high horse about a subject you apparently know little about is pointless.

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

BTW - After 2 months I'm still not connected to the DSLAM and my phone's still not working. Chuckle about that!

Maybe if you focussed your energy on getting your problems sorted, rather than banging on about irrelevancies, you might be able to get service.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

BTW - After 2 months I'm still not connected to the DSLAM and my phone's still not working. Chuckle about that!

Maybe if you focussed your energy on getting your problems sorted, rather than banging on about irrelevancies, you might be able to get service.

Both issues are firmly in the hands of Openreach and entirely out of my control - how could I do more than I already have - pray?

"irrelevancies" I read today that the rollout of "mini-masts" is taking place. The competion is hotting up. As mobile services become better more people will ditch landlines. This is why BT has bought back into Mobile - they can smell the coffee. Can you?

I bet you inside guys could each suggest several improvements which might make BT/OR more efficient and better able to compete in the near future and in so doing, help protect your jobs

How about a suggestion box? And I don't mean "suggest I shut up".

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

Both issues are firmly in the hands of Openreach and entirely out of my control - how could I do more than I already have - pray?

You can't contact Openreach, so you thinking the problem is Openreach means it's a dead end.

Your problem is actually with your ISP and they can deal with Openreach, so complain to your ISP. And keep on complaining until it's fixed - the squeaky wheel gets the grease.

You're just wasting everyone's time here.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

Both issues are firmly in the hands of Openreach and entirely out of my control - how could I do more than I already have - pray?

You can't contact Openreach, so you thinking the problem is Openreach means it's a dead end.

Your problem is actually with your ISP and they can deal with Openreach, so complain to your ISP. And keep on complaining until it's fixed - the squeaky wheel gets the grease.

You're just wasting everyone's time here.

Please read my posts before you espouse. My ISP executive office have been banging their heads agaist the wall for months - escalation upon escalation. Its Openreach at fault here - big-time.

Mr Saffron says I have complained too much and BatBoy sys not enough - give me strength!

Edited by deleted (Thu 02-Jun-16 09:31:52)

Yeah I know they will blame someone else, they always do if they can, but the problem really is theirs to solve. Only the ISP can contact Openreach so your only option is to motivate your ISP.

Don't worry, I've read your posts

MrSaffron didn't say you've complained too much, he said this:

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

To be brutally frank about this, if you are making educated guesses at things, then this might not actually be helping the situation

Edited by deleted (Thu 02-Jun-16 09:39:09)

For your information BatBoy - I have contacted Openreach CEO directly and BT's Mr Patterson.

Given your ISP is Plusnet, you've contacted people who don't work for Plusnet and that will help how?

If they are not getting any traction from the bottom up, trying from the top down may get the issue to the right people. He's only following advice given by Robertos
Personally I think you are being unduly hard on him. .

Fair enough

Plusnet & Openreach are both owned by BT - Mr Patterson is CEO of BT so ultimately responsible - clear enough?

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

Cost savings could either be used to increase engineers wages or increase BT profits or reduce subscriber's line rental which has almost doubled in recent years!

Whereby you demonstrate your total ignorance of the subject. The price Openreach charge ISPs for the line rental has fallen steadily nearly every year from £100.68 per year in 2006 to the current £86.72. A price drop of 13.87%.

To compare that to retail prices, adding Vat gives ~£104.06 which is ~£8.67 per month. That means many retailers are adding over 100% margin on line rental. You can't blame Openreach for that.

I have grave doubts that he has communicated with Plusnet in any manner that is likely to get his non-working phone fixed. My advice re the OR and Group CEOs was nothing to do with that. It was a suggestion to take his complete FTTC technical redesign ideas to them as he is so convinced they have it wrong at the moment.

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

Plusnet & Openreach are both owned by BT - Mr Patterson is CEO of BT so ultimately responsible - clear enough?

I know how it works and I've resolved similar problems by contacting the ISP rather than the various C-suite execs. Just giving you the benefit of my experience

This is where we are ATM - email from Plusnet Exec Office:
__________________________________________________________________

This is the update I just received �INFO OR9623 - We will miss the Estimated Response Time for fixing this fault. However the fault will now be dealt with at a higher priority so there is no need to call us�

If I don�t hear anything by 5:30pm I will check tomorrow morning first thing.

Kind regards,

Plusnet
___________________________________________________________________

As I said this is all about Openreach.

I would check before 5.30, say 3.30 or it's another day gone. Then it's Friday so the weekend looms and before you know it, it's Monday again.

No need to call indeed.

Quite so.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Or there is no problem with the cabinet at all, and its just a database issue, since seeing checkers giving different cabinet numbers and wrong estimates too.

A request for check/fix has gone in from me.

Hi Andrew, what happened with the check/fix you put in weeks ago?

All checkers have been in alignment for some time - even BT sales has been saying I can buy Infinity 1 & 2 for a while- so whats the hold up now please?

Once again, Plusnet are able to get BT Wholesale to check/fix the dslchecker as they are part of the same group.

In reply to a post by Ribble:

The filters are behind the green cover , top left in the copper compartment, above the Fibre splice box

Aha ... that would indeed explain an area in the cabinet that otherwise looked like "just" empty space.

No idea, if all the checkers are saying yes to phone number and also address then should be no reason an order cannot go through. When my enquiry was sent the checkers were not lined up, so that part of the puzzle appears fixed based on what you have said.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

No idea, if all the checkers are saying yes to phone number and also address then should be no reason an order cannot go through. When my enquiry was sent the checkers were not lined up, so that part of the puzzle appears fixed based on what you have said.

No idea & can find out?

As I said previously - OR now say it is a 'system issue' rather than engineering. Do I detect a problem with the very latest AIOs? I say this because another AIO wired up at the same time as ours Wootton Bassett 21 is also moribund? Are there many more like this or even all of them?

Edited by deleted (Thu 02-Jun-16 12:55:43)

You're obsessing way too much about AIO cabinets. They aren't treated any differently to the other FTTC cabinets!

Sounds like your dialtone isn't working due to an E-side fault or a fault in the exchange.

Why the delay then?

You should report the phone fault to whoever you pay your line rental to and they should tell you when it will be fixed.

How should we know? Ask Plusnet

Am I right in seeming to remember that when there is a fault report active on a line orders cannot be processed by Openreach?

Edited by RobertoS (Thu 02-Jun-16 13:41:14)

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

Am I right in seeming to remember that when there is a fault report active on a line orders cannot be processed by Openreach?

That would account for the last week but not the last 2 months!!!

The order was "processed months ago" just not completed.

I was told that for a new AIO cab it takes up to 2 weeks (after PCP wiring) for subscribers to be connected to the fibre. In this case, this has mushroomed to 2 months and counting. Was this information incorrect? What is the normal time for connection to fibre in new cabs?

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

I was told that for a new AIO cab it takes up to 2 weeks (after PCP wiring) for subscribers to be connected to the fibre. In this case, this has mushroomed to 2 months and counting. Was this information incorrect?

Who told you that?

I'd be looking at cancelling the order and going with a different ISP

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

Am I right in seeming to remember that when there is a fault report active on a line orders cannot be processed by Openreach?

That would account for the last week but not the last 2 months!!!

The order was "processed months ago" just not completed.

AIUI your original order wasn't successful, so was rejected, due to a number/address mismatch or similar. Which MrSaffron got sorted out for you.

In the meantime your line fault has developed. If my recollection quoted above is correct, (I expect several of the posters in the thread will know whether I'm right or wrong), then Plusnet would need to submit a new order. That may mean you have to re-order, or may not. Dialogue with Plusnet seems your best course, but keep it simple. With no mention of jumpers or biscuits, whatever you are meaning by biscuits which aren't in the UK broadband lexicon so far as I know.

Get the line fixed. Then see about the order.

The only time I have heard biscuits mentioned within the broadband arena is usually as a sweetener for the engineer when he/she comes to fix a problem - usually accompanied by tea or coffee.

Ringer now fixed.

It was - as I supected - the concentrator at the exchange which needed replacing.

Pity it took a week for OR to diagnose and fix it.

Maybe I can get my fibre connected to Cab 6 now - is that a flying pig I see?

You might find it takes until tomorrow for the fix to circulate through the various databases. There are a lot of only loosely integrated ones.

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

In reply to a post by Ribble:

The filters are behind the green cover , top left in the copper compartment, above the Fibre splice box

Aha ... that would indeed explain an area in the cabinet that otherwise looked like "just" empty space.

And here, finally, is a picture of an all-in-one with the filters visible...
https://twitter.com/SFNYorkshire/status/717719171665...
or
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CfXZyBLW4AIKi2B.jpg:large

That looks like it supports 50 lines.

After 9 weeks I finally got connected to DSLAM nodes on Wednesday at noon - along with 24 other subscribers.

OR engineer (one of 6 vans present ) changed my profile on his laptop to 40/10

Initial problems with the line profile meant I didn't see any speed increase.

Replaced my Hub 5B with one the engineer had, but saw no increase.

Changed back to mine and that did the trick - it went up to 40/10.

DLM that evening changed it back to 20/10.

Major issues that night downolading a 2 gig HD program - should have taken just a few minutes but took hours. Gave up trying to watch it that night. IMHO this means speed bombed.

Plusnet changed it back to 40/10 yesterday and its seems relatively stable with only 2 connection fails on Thursday.

Currently 37/8.8

A few questions guys:

1. Is there a monitoring programme like RouterStatsHub for the Hub5B or any other program that measures Router Throughput in real time?

2. Do these new AIOs support G.INP and Vectoring

3. If so are they turned on automatically.

4. I understand lack of SNMP is a problem with HH5Bs in terms of monitoring software?

Thanks again for all your help.

You suffered from the profile problem that regularly hits Plusnet upgrades. However, 40/10 is a strange speed for Plusnet these days - they sell 40/2 or 80/20 options, don't they?

2. G.INP should be supported, vectoring less likely though it is possible.

3. G.INP likely to be turned on in the DSLAM, but DLM will need to choose to activate it on a per-line basis. Some forms of DLM resets put FEC+interleaving on initially, which often gets swapped to G.INP retransmission after 48 hours.

4. Problem? Only if you expect consumer hardware to support enterprise features. Most VDSL2 modems and modem/router monitoring seems to be done using dedicated enthusiast-written apps, not SNMP. An awful lots makes use of one of the packages here:
http://forum.kitz.co.uk/index.php/board,46.0.html

Thanks for responding Wombat - much appreciated.

1. Its the 40 part of the 40/10 that is causing issues.

PlusNet say there is no profile on the upload speed which is why it went up and stayed up since DSLAM connection on Wednesday.
So you might be right that I'm on a 40/2 service which is 40/10 in practice.

2. I read that the 2016 AIOs are shipped as 'vectoring ready' can you confirm this please?

3. Do I need to ask PN to "activate g.inp? They don't seem to know what it is .

4. There appears to be a program/app for the HH5A but not the 5B - unless you guys know better of course?

So which product did you order, Plusnet sell just two

80/20
and
40/2

Providers cannot activate G.INP this is down to whether the automated DLM system decides the line needs it.

Thanks for respondng Mr Saffron.

Plusnet do not appear to advertise their upload speed (I couldn't find it) and in any case - as I said before - they say there is no profile applied to 'upload' - which is why I have 38/9mbps.
I must admit that I would expect to see nearer 20mbps upload if this was the case?

1. Could my poor speeds at peak times (8-9 pm) be mainly down to the 100m of Old Aluminium Wire - which is very thin, easily damaged and known to degrade � between the cabinet and my house - causing excessive crosstalk?

2. How much increase in 'crosstalk' can be attributed to the loosely twisted "twisted pairs" to be found in recent cables and the fact that engineers routinely "untwist" 400mm if this type either side of every joint as opposed to 200mm of the previous more twisted cable?

3. How do BT/OR measure and monitor crosstalk on a given line?

4. As crosstalk becomes a critical issue as speeds increase, are there any plans to use screened wires for the D side?

5. Are there any plans to use 'fibre only' for the D side - with telephony over fibre?

6. Would this requie extra plant in the FTCC cabinets?

There is no Profile in terms of IP Profile, but the amount the ISP pays for your service varies according to which wholesale product they order.

Aluminium does not change its electric characteristics for a period of time, so Al will not be the peak time issue.

How cross talk, if you want to pay an expert to attend with a lot of processing hardware who has permission to play with the Openreach network then you might find the answer. Untwisting 40cm of wiring sounds very unusual, the 1 to 2 cm (20mm) within the back of a master socket is of no concern.

They don't monitor it per-se, the technical solution is to deploy vectoring, but that is not a perfect process hence not available everywhere yet.

No plans for screened wires.

Telephony over fibre, yes already exists called Fibre Voice Access and available in WBC-FTTP areas.

FTTP means you can bulldoze cabinets, but means connecting fibre directly to all the premises that want it, hence large labour costs and longer to roll-out.

1. Could my poor speeds at peak times (8-9 pm) be mainly down to the 100m of Old Aluminium Wire - which is very thin, easily damaged and known to degrade � between the cabinet and my house - causing excessive crosstalk?

No. Crosstalk affects sync rate and has nothing to do with congestion.

How much increase in 'crosstalk' can be attributed to the loosely twisted "twisted pairs" to be found in recent cables and the fact that engineers routinely "untwist" 400mm if this type either side of every joint as opposed to 200mm of the previous more twisted cable?

Utter unadulterated cobblers. Why on earth would an engineers sit and untwist 400mm of every pair in every joint they work in ????? Ignoring the fact that it wouldn't be good practice, why make extra unnecessary work for yourself ????????????????????????????????? Most joints don't have an 800mm jointing gap any way. ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????

As crosstalk becomes a critical issue as speeds increase, are there any plans to use screened wires for the D side?

No.

Are there any plans to use 'fibre only' for the D side - with telephony over fibre?

Err ... not heard of FTTP then ? Though of what use 'fibre D sides' on their own would be ????

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

2. How much increase in 'crosstalk' can be attributed to the loosely twisted "twisted pairs" to be found in recent cables and the fact that engineers routinely "untwist" 400mm if this type either side of every joint as opposed to 200mm of the previous more twisted cable?

To add to Zarjaz's comments.

The twist rate on cables is well defined and BT will only be buying cable that meets the spec. BT also happens to won one of the UKs larger cable manufacturers.

Take a 1M length of Cat5e and strip off the outer insulation to reveal the four twisted pairs. Count the twists on each pair - they vary significantly.

As for untwisting 400mm - I would be very surprised if they even untwist 40mm. The BT techs will be trained correctly to keep it to a minimum for two reasons - firstly to retain the integrity of the twisting and secondly it make for a much neater job.

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

PlusNet say there is no profile on the upload speed which is why it went up and stayed up since DSLAM connection on Wednesday.
So you might be right that I'm on a 40/2 service which is 40/10 in practice.

You are making this awfully hard.

There is an upstream profile at BT, but it is used in a different way. Instead of being set in a way that depends on the actual sync speed (so as to regulate actual throughput), it is set to reflect the wholesale package speed (2, 10, or 20) bought by the ISP on your behalf.

When the modem syncs, it too will only sync at a maximum of the package speed (2, 10, or 20), but will sync at less with longer distances.

Plusnet offers two packages for fibre. If you bought the expensive "extra" package, then Plusnet buys the 80/20 wholesale package, your upstream profile at BT will be 20 Mbps, and your maximum upstream sync speed will be 20Mbps. If you bought the cheaper package, Plusnet buys the 40/2 wholesale package, your upstream profile will be 2, and your maximum upstream speed with be 2Mbps.

All of that is outside Plusnet's control, beyond the choice of what to buy. When they say there is no upstream profile, they really mean that they make no attempt to limit upstream speeds other than through the choice of wholesale package.

If you are getting a 40/10 package (which is a valid wholesale package, but Plusnet don't sell it), it could be because, as in the OP, the engineer changed you to that package. It shouldn't be with in his remit to do that.

You could solve all this aggro if you just told people what package you bought!

If you ordered 80/20, and are getting sync speeds of 38/9, then the reduction is likely to be down to the length of line. Upstream speed drops off with distance as much (if not more) than downstream.

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

2. I read that the 2016 AIOs are shipped as 'vectoring ready' can you confirm this please?

No, I can't. Where did you read that?

3. Do I need to ask PN to "activate g.inp? They don't seem to know what it is .

That doesn't surprise me - it isn't a thing that is under plusnet's control. DLM just decides whether your line is suitable.

Do Plusnet offer FVA on FTTP?

"Why on earth would an engineers sit and untwist 400mm of every pair in every joint they work in". You'd have to ask the engineers who do it. There were 6 present when I was told this!!!

Doesn't crosstalk increase significantly when neighbouring wires are carrying a great deal of traffic?

Is it likely to be congestion/contention at 8-9pm on Plusnet?

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

Plusnet do not appear to advertise their upload speed (I couldn't find it)

it's on several pages but well hidden. I'll give just one.

Scroll down to "Here's the legal bit" in the main body, but not as far as "Legal" in the footer. Open that Legal bit and scroll down within that to "Fibre Broadband", lower down than "Broadband and Fibre Broadband".

In reply to a post by MHC:

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

2. How much increase in 'crosstalk' can be attributed to the loosely twisted "twisted pairs" to be found in recent cables and the fact that engineers routinely "untwist" 400mm if this type either side of every joint as opposed to 200mm of the previous more twisted cable?

To add to Zarjaz's comments.

The twist rate on cables is well defined and BT will only be buying cable that meets the spec. BT also happens to won one of the UKs larger cable manufacturers.

Take a 1M length of Cat5e and strip off the outer insulation to reveal the four twisted pairs. Count the twists on each pair - they vary significantly.

As for untwisting 400mm - I would be very surprised if they even untwist 40mm. The BT techs will be trained correctly to keep it to a minimum for two reasons - firstly to retain the integrity of the twisting and secondly it make for a much neater job.

So - do you disagree that the cable now used has a reduced twist rate?

When was this spec introduced? I was told it was to reduce cost.

When the twist rate was set by BT did they envisage such traffic and freqencies.

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

Doesn't crosstalk increase significantly when neighbouring wires are carrying a great deal of traffic?

There are packets being transmitted at line speed at all times when in sync. They just have no data. Think posting empty envelopes.

60Mbps actual connection speed means 60 million bits are transmitted every second. It's just the recognisable patterns signifying the start and end of a packet that create packets, and it's just bits if present between the start and end patterns that the modern treats as data.

Cross-talk is about the 60 million bits and similar on a nearby line or several lines, not what the bits signify to a modem.

Are you sure you were talking to Openreach engineers, not contractors or even Virgin Media? The tale and questions about it get more and more removed from reality.

Is there any chance they weren't just having a laugh, to get rid of you?

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

Are you sure you were talking to Openreach engineers, not contractors or even Virgin Media? The tale and questions about it get more and more removed from reality.

Is there any chance they weren't just having a laugh, to get rid of you?

Yes

&

No!

Edited by deleted (Mon 13-Jun-16 15:43:46)

Possibly a misunderstanding?
It's usual to remove c. 400mm of the outer sheath from the end of a cable to expose the wires to be jointed, but they definately don't don't untwist the pairs more than the couple of cm needed to make the joint.

Do Plusnet offer FVA on FTTP?

No they don't, Plusnet's choice.

The pizza joint round the corner doesn't offer chips, I can get them elsewhere if I wish.

Earlier you asked;

Are there any plans to use 'fibre only' for the D side - with telephony over fibre?

And then a little later appear to be answering your own question. I suspect you are just out to wind the forum up.



Oh, and just before I go and stop reading your posts......

Why on earth would an engineers sit and untwist 400mm of every pair in every joint they work in". You'd have to ask the engineers who do it. There were 6 present when I was told this!!!

I don't have to ask, I am one, you clearly didn't listen , or didn't understand.

I just checked - and FTTP is not available in this area. It seems it has to be continuous fibre to the premises from the Super Exchange (in this case) without any cabinet - which I believe is what Mr Saffron was refering to when he said "bulldoze the cabinets".

Is there any way extra fibre can be connected to the fibre in cabinets (pos in the future) for the last metres to the premises, to make FTTP possible for those currently excluded - have experiments been done with this? I guess I'm saying - can you join optic fibres and might this be feasable.

No

No

But what does happen if some premises e.g. those too far from a cabinet to get superfast but someone is willing to spend money to push the fibre further is that at the aggregation node some of the existing fibres already installed ready for future expansion are then run via other splitters/manifolds etc to the premises.

You can join fibre optic cables three ways, a mechanical splice, a connector or a fusion splice. In the main backhaul segment usually fusion splicing as this produces the least lose of optical light.

I suggest going off to read about the architecture of GPON FTTH which is what Openreach deploy, our blog.thinkbroadband.com has various articles on the kit they use too.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

No

But what does happen if some premises e.g. those too far from a cabinet to get superfast but someone is willing to spend money to push the fibre further is that at the aggregation node some of the existing fibres already installed ready for future expansion are then run via other splitters/manifolds etc to the premises.

You can join fibre optic cables three ways, a mechanical splice, a connector or a fusion splice. In the main backhaul segment usually fusion splicing as this produces the least lose of optical light.

I suggest going off to read about the architecture of GPON FTTH which is what Openreach deploy, our blog.thinkbroadband.com has various articles on the kit they use too.

Thanks for the education

So any particular technical reason why an extra fibre cannot be joined within the FTCC cabinet on a line by line basis - apart from possibly space/access to a particular subscriber's fibre?

Are there unused fibres in AIOs that could be picked up.

I was hoping these cabs were future proofed for upgrading to FTTP in a few years.

Do you know how far away my agregation node is Andrew?

And what the likely cost might be?

I presume cost is not likely come down over time - more likely up?

Cheers

Edited by deleted (Tue 14-Jun-16 12:11:38)

Yes, because only 4 fibres go to the FTTC cabinet. The architecture was set-up so that in GPON areas no powered cabinet was needed and the aggregation node has many more spare fibres.

No idea where your aggregation node is, you can sometimes guess, but unless you want to pay me the 45p per mile to visit and time to walk the area will not be able to make a guess.

On cost, depends on what you are talking about, as you have VDSL2 already, then it would be the fibre on demand product which costs several thousand to install.

You really should start to read blog.thinkbroadband.com which has answers to many of your questions.

Thanks Andrew

Thats exactly what I wanted to know

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

So any particular technical reason why an extra fibre cannot be joined within the FTCC cabinet on a line by line basis - apart from possibly space/access to a particular subscriber's fibre?

Are there unused fibres in AIOs that could be picked up.

Simply that the network isn't designed to grow that way.

The FTTC network has an architecture where perhaps 4 fibres are fed from an aggregation node into an FTTC cabinet, within one blown-fibre tube; the "optics" hardware runs a 1Gbps ethernet point-to-point connection on one of these, with the others available as spare capacity or spares for breakage in the future.

That's 4 fibres for a 288-port cabinet, with a PCP serving 300-600 premises.

The FTTP network has an architecture where 4 fibres (plus spares for breakages) can be fed into a splitter node, which can ultimately serve 128 premises. This is a GPON network, where the P is for Passive. No electronics in the access network, and no need for cabinets.

The original intention was most certainly that the future layout for FTTP would not run via an FTTC cabinet. Once everyone is on a passive FTTP service, there is no need for powered cabinets, and you'd want to remove them.

The common ground that underpins both architectures is the "fibre spine": The fibre running out of the exchanges, and the tree/branch network of aggregation nodes.

So, it isn't a case of the AIO having spare fibre for future use by FTTP. The spare fibre would be in the aggregation node.

However...

All those architectural plans were laid before G.Fast came along. There's a very strong likelihood that this will have pushed back an FTTP deployment by another decade, so there are likely to be architectural consequences, and considerations of (for example) how to supply G.Fast backhaul.

You can get a feel for the progression of architectural development:
FTTC architecture (on page 14)
Old FTTP architecture
Newer FTTP architecture, with FOD2 connectorisation
Newer FTTP architecture, with overhead distribution
Newer FTTP architecture for underground new-build

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

I was hoping these cabs were future proofed for upgrading to FTTP in a few years.

And the technical progress in G.Fast pretty much shows why you shouldn't bother building in too much "future-proofing" ... as the future might not go in the direction you currently expect.

Good points, well made Wombat.

Just strikes me that the cost of a few extra fibres to evey cab cannot be much and might have allowed FTTP on the cheap.

Edited by deleted (Tue 14-Jun-16 19:59:46)

Can you please explain how the "fibre" is connected from FTTC Cab to G.Fast pod as per this article:

"the G.fast extension (pod) is actually attached to the side of a normal green PCP cabinet, while the power and fibre optic cable are run in from the usually nearby FTTC / VDSL2 cabinet" http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2016/06/bt-open...

Is it fused, connected or WHY?

Does it "take over" one or more of the 4 fibres?

On the face of it - it would seem Cab fibre can be "joined to" or "added to" offering the future proofing I alluded to"???

Shame there are not more than 4 fibres to each Cab - IMHO. I can't believe there would be any cost implication at all.

If they wanted 1 fibre could carry Terrabits of data, 4 just provides for backup and using simpler optics.

Not having seen in a g.fast pod yet, difficult to say with absolute certainty, time with the CEO was limited in a room of a dozen who all wanted to ask questions. It could be either a dedicated fibre from the aggregation node or one from the VDSL2 cabinet. You don't fuse a fibre into a line card it will have a connector on it, so whether a blown fibre or connectorised fibre link is not known - the later is more likely to make life simpler.

There will be ducting available to do any of the options you raise.

There is more information in the thinkbroadband article published three hours before your source. In fact your source apart from the history seems to take most of its G.Fast news from the tbb article.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

There is more information in the thinkbroadband article published three hours before your source. In fact your source apart from the history seems to take most of its G.Fast news from the tbb article.

I read that as well - didn't answer any of my questions.

Both appear to state that the G.fast pod fibre comes from FTTC cab - not agregation node.

If correct then appart from possible FTTP via FTCC Cab, this raises another inexpensive possibility - FTTdp via the FTCC cab

If the audience at the meeting had been just me then yes would have pressed for those answers but was a roundtable so not allowed to monopolise.

e.g. the question of whether the fibre splices onto existing fibre or connects into a port of the MUX/DSLAM is one to get an answer on eventually.

Am sure once chipsets are firmed up and suppliers are happy for boxes to be opened for random photography that will be invited along to see and the pictures can often carry many more answers to questions you don't think to ask at the time. e.g. managed to get up close with an all-in-one but not found a suitable article to add the pictures.

NOTE. FTTP via FTTC is NOT going to happen, that will come via the aggregation node.
FTTPdp will also come via the aggregation node.

Some research into point to point fibre and PON might help you understand some of the decision making going on.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

FTTP via FTTC is NOT going to happen, that will come via the aggregation node.
FTTPdp will also come via the aggregation node.
/quote]

Thanks Andrew, I'm sure you'll get some answers.

Many things are "NOT going to happen" until in fact they do! Like migration from one FTTC Cab to another for instance.

FTTP via FTTC would be much more affordable than via an AN would it not?

If so take up would be much higher???

Edited by deleted (Wed 15-Jun-16 11:48:34)

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

Many things are "NOT going to happen" until in fact they do! Like migration from one FTTC Cab to another for instance.

Do you have any examples?

FTTP via FTTC would be much more affordable than via an AN would it not?

No. If it would have been, that's the way it would have been done.

Quite apart from the fact the aggregation node might be outside the premises, with the FTTC and PCP cabinets quite a way away.

Why don't you do what Andrew and others have suggested and go and do some basic research into the loads of published documents and posts that google would bring up?

Edited by RobertoS (Wed 15-Jun-16 12:09:09)

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

Quite apart from the fact the aggregation node might be outside the premises, with the FTTC and PCP cabinets quite a way away.

Obviously OR would use the AN for FTTP if it was closer or cheaper.

My theory is that with the right forthought a fibre tree could have been designed with the FTTC cabs as the final twigs that bear the leaves i.e. FTTP connections could have been 'designed in'.

This might still be possible with combined G.Fast and FTTP connections within a so called G.fast pod?

FTTC cabs have a life span of 10 to 15 years, expect aggregation nodes to exist for a few decades.

No reason for a passive infrastructure to have to go via a cabinet that has mains in it and was designed for an active chassis.

The majority of cabinets have the aggregation node very close to them, old style ones need a three panel chamber, newer ones can fit into two panel chambers.

You have some interesting ideas, but of no point since the core network to support GPON at over 70,000 locations is already built.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

No reason for a passive infrastructure to have to go via a cabinet that has mains in it and was designed for an active chassis.

Except that (close proximity of ANs to premises withstanding - which I've already addressed) the FTTC cabs have fibre already in them which can be connected to, potentially offering much cheaper FTTP - esp by overhead fibre on existing poles.

I notice you have not addressed the posibility of a combined G.Fast/FTTP pod.

Until we know the average distance of ANs from centres of communities its difficult to estimate savings for those premises that are not close to ANs.

Is there an AN map you or I have access to?

If ANs are 'close' - how come (as you said Andrew) it still costs £1000s to buy FTTP??

FTTP for nearly every premises and getting rid of pesky metal wires must be the ultimate goal for you and your customers - surely?

But to acheive this the price per customer has to be a fraction of that current.

How do you intend to achieve this price point Andrew?

AN's are close to cabinets usually. And the 4 fibres are just 4 from the 50-144 or maybe more available at the aggregation node.

FTTP on Demand costs £1000's because the fibre is run the 250m to 1000m or more JUST for you.

On FTTP/G.fast again why bother going the pod that has powered kit it in, when long term you know the pods will be leaving. Also the pods are in the wrong place to house the GPON splits.

FTTP for all is an end goal, but Openreach is going there via various steps that have a life span of 10 to 15 years, because they believe they can be delivered faster and as FTTP evolves some prices fall helping to offset the changes. Plus no way would Ofcom allow a ripping out of the copper network en-masse at this time.

How do you intend to achieve this price point Andrew?
I don't since I don't work for BT am just trying to educate people with the information that is in the public domain, or has been acquired by questions when visiting sites.

Do you have a map which shows location of ANs?

If not how might I recognise/find it.

If this is what I'm looking for then I dont think there is one anywhere near:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/gazzyk1ns/ftt.

Edited by deleted (Wed 15-Jun-16 15:44:40)

I don't and not aware of one.

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/gazzyk1ns/ftt.

Sorry, the requested page does not exist.

Please check the URL for correct spelling and capitalization.

Never put a full stop at the end of a link, because that turls it into an invalid URL.

But yours doesn't work even without the full stop. Nor with a C, N or P replacing it.

AG Node usually hidden under three paving slabs, but may be just two in some cases. No identifying labels or anything.

Some pictures of AG node at http://blog.thinkbroadband.com/2016/06/a-peek-at-the... at end of the article, that is 2 slab chamber

Essential viewing at
http://www.coolwebhome.co.uk/fibre-milton-keynes/wgc...
With lots more pictures from a day in Milton Keynes at http://www.coolwebhome.co.uk/fibre-milton-keynes/def...

They would not use an existing chamber then?

If so - as the AIO was installed in March, I'm looking for a new chamber with 2 or 3 new slabs?

But where???

As I said before, I was told the fibre does does not go back to the Old Bromham Exchange but to the Devizes Super Exchange and then Swindon.

If so Devizes is 4 miles across fields from Heddington - the AN could be just about anywhere - presumably?

Anyone know where?

Edited by deleted (Wed 15-Jun-16 17:28:15)

If possible existing chambers are re-used, and I don't think I've seen a real one that does not have some existing copper lines going through it.

Sometimes a new chamber has to be built to get the space needed.

As for where its down to you to find it for curiosity value only, since it makes no difference to you unless you are going to order the Fibre on Demand service and then still no need to know as the quote for install fee will know where it is.

Generally within a short distance of less then a few hundred metres from a cabinet.

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

My theory is that with the right forthought a fibre tree could have been designed with the FTTC cabs as the final twigs that bear the leaves i.e. FTTP connections could have been 'designed in'.

I could have sworn that you read my last post. Even commented about the good points.

When FTTP is the only thing left in the ground, there is no need for an FTTC cabinet to exist. There is no need for the power that goes into it. There is no need for the copper that goes into it. There is no need for the cabinet. It can be removed.

What you are asking to do, purely for the sake of "future proofing" is to run an extra 20-40 fibres into the FTTC cabinet (You need that many to feed all the splitters, plus have spares for breakage). And then do nothing with them.

Once those 20-40 fibres have been run into the cabinet, what do you do with them in this future-proofed future?

Two answers ... You either
a) Run 20-40 fibres straight out again ... to feed into the splitter nodes that will be distributed in the coverage area of the cabinet, or
b) Put the splitter nodes in the FTTC cabinet and run 500-1000 fibres out to the DP's.

(b) is a pretty inefficient answer; there's no need for that many fibres in the one location. Splitter nodes should be distributed.

So future-proofing means ... putting 20-40 extra fibres into the cabinet ... in order to eventually run them straight back out again. They will make no use of anything inside the FTTC cabinet.

Is that smart? Not even close, right?

The "fibre spines" being created in the NGA rollout are creating this "fibre tree" with many branches to create a network of Aggregation Nodes. They are the part that is 'designed in'.

Go back and look at the architecture pictures. I know it looks like there is one aggregation node per exchange in those pictures, but that is not the case.

How many ANs? Consider some dimensioning data...
- A fibre DP likely serves 20 homes. There is likely to be one of these for perhaps 2 or 3 poles.
- A splitter node enclosure can hold 4 splitters (so takes 4 fibres in), and serves up to 128 homes (so sends 128 fibres out). One of these nodes to serve one or two streets, perhaps?
- An aggregation node can serve 12 splitter nodes (= 48 splitter devices), so a maximum of approximately 1500 premises. One every 20 streets?

Today, most urban/suburban PCPs serve 300-500 premises. That means there would be one aggregation node needed to cover the premises currently handled by 3-5 PCP's. My exchange would likely have 20-30 aggregation nodes.

The NGA rollout has put 75,000 FTTC cabinets out there, on 75,000 PCPs. If they've been building the fibre spine to that dimensioning data, then there would be around 15,000 aggregation nodes out there.

Now, we don't really know that BT has actually created this many aggregation nodes in their rollout. Once they saw a future for G.Fast, they could have chosen to cut back.

But ... this fibre spine is the first step (of many) in replacing all the copper in the ground, and putting a fibre replacement in place. Lessons from the last 100 years will tell BT that putting the right number of aggregation nodes in place, in the right place, is the correct move; a bit like putting the first PCPs in place over 50 years ago.

They will be mostly empty right now, of course. But as more fibres get used, more splices made, then these things become locked into place forever more.

Do you see why we keep pointing you at the AN as the source for the spare fibres for the future? And why we keep telling you the FTTC cabinet is not appropriate?

But let ask a more fundamental question. Don't you believe that BT employs engineering staff to make all of these design decisions? That what we get to see, as joe public, is the outcome of a myriad of technical and financial decisions? Some decisions that are easy for us to understand, but some that are harder?

There is a set of papers presented by BT research staff to IWCS (links no longer available), progressing over a 5 year period, detailing the decision steps they were making for what the UK access network infrastructure would look like ... ending up with the pictures I linked earlier. Do you think that just possibly they might have thought about the questions you are asking right now? That they might have done a little bit of that "forethought"?

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

FTTP for nearly every premises and getting rid of pesky metal wires must be the ultimate goal for you and your customers - surely?

I think you misunderstand who @MrSaffron works for. It certainly isn't BT!

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

If ANs are 'close' - how come (as you said Andrew) it still costs £1000s to buy FTTP??

It costs thousands because it costs thousands.

The Analysis Mason study in 2008 reckoned on FTTP costing approx £2,000 per connected property (with 30% connection rate) in denser urban areas, and £4k-5k in the less dense places, up to £10k in worst cases.

The majority of the time and effort comes when you need to get the fibre to the leaves of the tree - the final 50-100m to each individual property. When you are nearer the trunk of the tree, you get a massive boost from sharing - when the cost of putting one cable underground can be shared amongst thousands of properties at a time.

To deploy FTTP on demand, you are asking BT to work exclusively one one property. Some of the cabling and nodes can be shared in the future (so you don't get charged all of the cost), but some of it it exclusive, all the way into the home.

For the average UK property, building the spines and ANs has brought fibre 3km closer to the home, though the cost of each could probably be shared amongst a few thousand properties. For the average UK property again, the remaining distance is 350m ... but it won't (yet) be shared. Only one tenth of the distance, but a thousand times fewer sharers, makes it expensive.

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

When FTTP is the only thing left in the ground, there is no need for an FTTC cabinet to exist. There is no need for the power that goes into it. There is no need for the copper that goes into it. There is no need for the cabinet. It can be removed.

Except if the cab has been utilised as an AN - because the nearest other AN is an uneconomic distance away!


So future-proofing means ... putting 20-40 extra fibres into the cabinet ... in order to eventually run them straight back out again.


YES - The cabinet becomes THE NEAREST and MOST ECONOMICAL A/N!

I dont think it would need 40 fibres though!

Edited by deleted (Wed 15-Jun-16 19:23:12)

Just look at the pictures, where do you fit an aggregation node into a VDSL2 cabinet of its current size? And suddenly you commit to having to keep the cab standing for many decades as it houses the AG node.

Remember you need to get to both sides of the AG node too.

Having the AG node serve several cabinets inside a reasonable radius is perfectly logical, and for cabinets miles from any other cabinet then its own smaller (less trays) AG node in a pavement chamber is perfectly fine too.

Why the obsession with sticking fibre in the cabinet? Other than filling an already full box with extra kit and complexity what are you gaining? Fibre to the cabinet still would be coming through various pavement chambers, so not saving any fibre blowing/jointing/sub ducting.

On top of what Andrew just said, existing cabinets can and do get damaged and put out of service for a while.

That's bad enough for the few hundred connected. Put an aggregation node in it for FTTP and a whole area goes off-line, including their phone service.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Just look at the pictures, where do you fit an aggregation node into a VDSL2 cabinet of its current size?

A pod on the DSLAM side would do it - or as I said before, combine AN and G.fast in one pod.

Unless you are suggesting that an extra AN would be provided closeby - if a current one is a long way away - in order to keep FTTP costs down?

However I admit there would be chamber costs to balance against pod costs.

I've no idea how much a new chamber costs - including running fibre from existing AN - do you?

Can probably find a chamber dig cost, but don't see the idea of the ag node on the side of the cabinet working that well, plus would mean for areas with just FTTP you end up with a different layout.

By linking fttp more closely with VDSL2 it is sending a message saying not interested in FTTP and anyway its almost totally academic since over 70,000 VDSL2 cabinets are live and with AG nodes nearby.

Of course no reason why others deploying GPON or P2P fibre won't adopt your ideas depending on they are in the roll-out.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

By linking fttp more closely with VDSL2 it is sending a message saying not interested in FTTP


and anyway its almost totally academic since over 70,000 VDSL2 cabinets are live and with AG nodes nearby.

Thanks Andrew

Rather - I think it would be saying "Not interested in FTTP at an install cost of £2 - £5,000"

Didn't I read that average distance from an AN was 500m. This means there are many who are a kilometer or more away but may have an FTTC cab nearby?

This isn't a general solution but one specific to far away ANs.

This truly would be academic if BT/OR intend to instal new ANs or similar, closer to the FTTC cabs - when the existing AN is far off. But again I stress this would likely be much more expensive than pods.

Am out of here as you are going in circles

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

Except if the cab has been utilised as an AN - because the nearest other AN is an uneconomic distance away!

Doh! You do like fighting a lost cause, don't you?

I'll repeat: But let me ask a more fundamental question. Don't you believe that BT employs engineering staff to make all of these design decisions? That what we get to see, as joe public, is the outcome of a myriad of technical and financial decisions? Some decisions that are easy for us to understand, but some that are harder?


You plainly aren't an experienced network design engineer. Why do you think you can pretend to be one?

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

YES - The cabinet becomes THE NEAREST and MOST ECONOMICAL A/N!

So now you know what is nearest? And most economical? Over the full life of the asset? Where the AN and fibre might have a lifespan of 50-100 years, while the FTTC cabinet might only be 10-20 years? And if fibre becomes fully deployed, the PCP might disappear in 20-30 years too.

Are you sure your options are MOST ECONOMICAL?

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

I dont think it would need 40 fibres though!

A large PCP with 1000 subscribers, with 10% of them businesses.
Lets put the households on a 1:32 split - that's 28 fibres.
Lets put the businesses on a 1:16 split - that's 6 fibres.
Lets add 10% for spares for growth - that's 4 fibres
Lets add 10% for spares for breakages - that's 4 fibres.
Lets add 10% for spares for non-NGA purposes (future leased lines, etc) - that's 4 fibres.
Oh. Don't forget the 4 fibres for the FTTC cab itself.

Did we reach 40 yet? And that, I reckon, is being pretty conservative.

I think someone one here has related the fibre feed into their village, which IIRC consists of a couple of smaller PCPs. The cable run into the village, again IIRC, was 48 fibres.

To repeat again: There is a set of papers presented by BT research staff to IWCS (links no longer available), progressing over a 5 year period, detailing the decision steps they were making for what the UK access network infrastructure would look like ... ending up with the pictures I linked earlier. Do you think that just possibly they might have thought about the questions you are asking right now? That they might have done a little bit of that "forethought"?

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

Didn't I read that average distance from an AN was 500m. This means there are many who are a kilometer or more away but may have an FTTC cab nearby?

Remember the ducting.

You aren't likely to find anyone who is a km from their own cab, but is close to an FTTC cab, *and* has ducting leading to that nearer cab (or its AN). You aren't going to make things MORE ECONOMICAL if you need to dig in lots more ducting, or raise more poles.

When FTTPoD was first touted, BT estimated the average installation cost would be £1,500 - which suggests the average line fell into the distance (from aggregation node) category of 400-600m.

When various diagrams are shown with an overview of the UK access network, there is often some text indicating that the typical line has a D-side length (from PCP) of 350m.

That suggests that the AN's are, on average, perhaps 100-150m from the PCP - which perhaps means that an AN serving 3 PCP's is next to one, 100m from the second and 200m from the third.

Analysis of the PCP's in my part of town shows some distinct routes that the fibre spine is likely to take out from the exchange. And, you know what? The PCP's tend to be spread 100-200m apart along that route. The coverage for each PCP spreads sideways into the residential streets more, but the PCP's themselves are quite close, and quite regular.

I said this POD concept is a POSSIBLE cheaper FTTP option WHEN the AN is FAR AWAY therefore expensive to connect FTTP to. STICK TO THE SCENARIO.

This tends to happen in more rural areas - like mine - where we had no PCP at all and the telephone line went in the order of 3 to 5 miles back to the rural non LLU exchange. I think they are called Exchange Only Lines - but don't jump down my throat if I've got it slightly wrong - something you lot delight in doing!

That's why we've now got an ALL in One Cabinet!

Now I am the first to admit that I don't know where the AN is - and as none of you have answered this, I presume you don't either. However I know the area very well but have not seen or heard of it being constructed or any evidence of 'New Slabs'.

I did not see an AN in the chambers adjacent to our AIO.

My guess is, it is at least 1km away. If correct, then my concept might have some legs in economic terms IN THIS SCENARIO.

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

My guess is, it is at least 1km away.

Away from what?

In the case where the aggregation node is far away, then a fibre splitter will be installed as a child from the distant AG node, i.e. the classic GPON scenario for when GPON is rolled out to the area or someone orders it on demand.

Thanks Andrew

What would this cost?

It would require a fibre cable to be installed - presumably to the centre of population of the community - which is roughly where the AIO cab is.

Does a splitter still require a pit?

How many premises would it serve?

I understand FTTP orders are priced on the distance to an AN not the distance to a Splitter - if so it will still be very expensive - prohibitive for most.

Any idea why FTTP is coming up as "not available" for this village if its as straightforward as you suggest?

Edited by deleted (Thu 16-Jun-16 12:03:49)

FTTP is only available in a very small percentage of areas. FTTP on demand which is where people can "upgrade" their FTTC connection was only trialled in some areas and is not generally available.

I have just read this:

"the VDSL2 cabinets already are fed by fibre nodes and these nodes have been installed with the expansion for G.fast and FTTP in mind"

http://blog.thinkbroadband.com/2016/06/a-peek-at-the...

I take it that this article from June 9th LAST WEEK is wrong then "fibre nodes for FTTP are in Cabs" ???

If not - then I have been correct all along and the nay-sayers up the creek!

If it is, then I was not the only one to think it's plausible!

I should highlight for other readers where you quoted "fibre nodes for FTTP are in Cabs" when I wrote the blog item I did not intend or SAY that the nodes were located inside the cabinets.

What exactly is wrong about the article I wrote?
"One parting thought, the VDSL2 cabinets already are fed by fibre nodes and these nodes have been installed with the expansion for G.fast and FTTP in mind"

I do not say the fibre node is located inside the cabinet, that appears to be an assumption you have made. The words 'fed by' could be its 1 metre away in a footway box or 100m away or for want of argument 10km away. For avoidance of doubt there is some fibre management within a VDSL2 cabinet, but this is just for the VDSL2 Mux.

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

If so Devizes is 4 miles across fields from Heddington - the AN could be just about anywhere - presumably?

Anyone know where?

Which cabinet are you connected to in Heddington?

Presume the new cabinet 6 that serves Heddington with the most likely location for the aggregation node being near cabinet 2 or on the road between the Heddington Wick and Heddington

I thought the live date for cab 6 is June 21st.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

Which cabinet are you connected to in Heddington?

Cab 6

Live date for mass migration from Cab 2 was 8th June.

Edited by deleted (Thu 16-Jun-16 14:08:25)

Andrew
Is it not the nodes inside the cabinet which feed the DSLAM?

And which will be used to connect to the G.fast pods?

Where are these "installed nodes with expansion for g.fast?" your refer to please?

The nodes are what has been discussed many times in this thread - they are the Aggregation nodes that are generally in pavement chambers that have the bundles of fibres, some of which feed the cabinet. The nodes are not in the cabinet.

If you read MrS's sentence you quote carefully it is clear that the additional capacity for g.fast and FTTP are in the aggregation node and not in the cabinet.

"One parting thought, the VDSL2 cabinets already are fed by fibre nodes and these nodes have been installed with the expansion for G.fast and FTTP in mind"

Perhaps you would read it better if it said:

"One parting thought, the VDSL2 cabinets already are fed by fibre nodes. Fibre nodes have been installed with the expansion for G.fast and FTTP in mind"

Yes a fibre goes into the VDSL2 cabinet to feed the DSLAM and there will be a bit of fibre kit, but scaled in a way and squeezed in to only cope with the VDSL2 DSLAM.

Openreach are currently a little vague, but their wording suggests one of the spare fibres in the VDSL2 cabinet will be spliced and fed to the pod.

"installed nodes with expansion for g.fast" - this is referring less to the pod architecture (which was not known about when writing that blog entry) but the more traditional way that FTTdp is deployed, i.e. fibre ran deeper into the network with a small active G.fast DSLAM located on a pole or in the ground, i.e. a cabinet area might see a number of these smaller DSLAM installed to ensure blanket coverage at close to Gigabit type speeds.

Depends on who you believe and generally a user posting about being connected and doing a speed test suggests that at least some are live.

My feeling was that the original fault where we started was in part due to ordering so early in the life of the cabinet, and that causing confusion in PlusNet possibly further confused by some of what we have been told too.

Read the begining of my post - the new AIO cabinet pcp was fully wired and the cab powered up at begining of April - a full 3 months ago!!!

I understood from the contractors that their deadline from OR for completion was the end of March.

It was this connection to two cabs at the same time which caused the degradation in my service.

A senior manager from OR Roll Out and a guy from Carillion came to see me because of this issue.

Within a couple of weeks OR emailed me to say the cab was accepting VDSL Orders.

Shortly after this (days) the OR checker said the same.

The BT checker took many weeks to come into line.

Then there was the fault on my telephony.

Then the mass migration of Fibre 25 subscribers from Cab 2 to Cab 6 took place on June 8th after being postponed a week earlier due to systems issues.

On the 8th I was told that this was the first Mass Migration from one FTCC cab to another ever undertaken by OR - I'm just sayin!

At no time have I confused PlusNet Complaints, who fully understood the issues all the way along - and who incidently have been brilliant in the face of continual obfuscation by BT/OR even paying for a new line with fibre order to be installed in the hope of catalysing some action - it did not work.

Apart from a few recalcitrant ones - the last of which I believe has today been fixed - all lines were migrated on the 8th.

Edited by deleted (Thu 16-Jun-16 14:48:57)

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

On the 8th I was told that this was the first Mass Migration from one FTCC cab to another ever undertaken by OR - I'm just sayin!

At no time have I confused PlusNet Complaints, who fully understood the issues all the way along - and who incidently have been brilliant in the face of continual obfuscation by BT/OR even paying for a new line with fibre order to be installed in the hope of catalysing some action - it did not work.

Apart from a few recalcitrant ones - the last of which I believe has today been fixed - all lines were migrated on the 8th.

Why didn't you mention this before?

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

Why didn't you mention this before?

I did in passing - but no one on here believed such migrations were even possible!

Indeed the conversation had developed into one about FTTP via FTTC.

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

I did in passing - but no one on here believed such migrations were even possible!

Indeed the conversation had developed into one about FTTP via FTTC.

You never said you were migrated from cab 2 to cab 6 in the first mass migration that Openreach has ever done. As far as I was aware you were on a EO line.

What's a biscuit?

1. I knew nothing of the "mass migration" until the 8th.

2. All I knew was I was finally going to be joined up to Cab 6 DSLAM - which you knew all about.

3.The mass migration was not completed until today.

4. There are still issues on my and my neighbours' fibre which I did not want to compromise by telling you lot and stiring up a hornets nest.

5. You all know everything anyway - so obviously you must have known about this.

Edited by deleted (Thu 16-Jun-16 15:49:21)

You did not mention the exchange or cabinet number until today, so no-one could have pieced together the puzzle.

My feeling all along was that this was something of the classic early life issues that you get even when standard cabinets go live. For infill like this then there are often more issues that take longer to resolve.

As for moving people over and this being the first one in the UK, I'd hold fire on that, it may be for the teams working in that area, but have seen numerous areas with infill cabinets going live.

We don't know everything, but the collective can generally figure out most things, or we know the people to ask. 16 years of dealing with BT and ten years with Openreach means you get to know things.

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

1. I knew nothing of the "mass migration" until the 8th.

And then said nothing

2. All I knew was I was finally going to be joined up to Cab 6 DSLAM - which you knew all about.

Who knew you were on cab 6? Who knew you were on cab 2?

3.The mass migration was not completed until today.

4. There are still issues on my and my neighbours' fibre which I did not want to compromise by telling you lot and stiring up a hornets nest.

Instead you were going on about irrelevances which were just distractions

5. You all know everything anyway - so obviously you must have known about this.

What's a biscuit?

It's likely that I may experience this at some point in the not to distant future.
Developer has provided Gap funding and plans are in place to do something, although not sure what. I was guessing it will be an AIO cab. We are currently off PCP 7 in Kempston and have FTTC but speeds are not fab (not terrible) but they are going to improve them somehow.

I was hoping they would go the whole hog and go FTTP, but my guess is an AIO. Although G.Fast would be good also.
If You or Mr Ribble or anyone else knows whats planned then I'll also share my experience as things progress.

Hard to say on that one without a postcode.

There is a cabinet 33 where some postcodes already have FTTP e.g. around Oliver Close. Otherwise cabinet 7 already looks all superfast for me.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

You did not mention the exchange or cabinet number until today, so no-one could have pieced together the puzzle.

I think you'l find I did!

I pm'd you "My number is 01380 850XXXX which is served by a new AiO Cab PCP6.

I emailed you "The copper wires go to Bromham Exchange (Wilts)"

I'm pretty sure the Exchange and Cab are also refered to in my posts.

Edited by deleted (Thu 16-Jun-16 16:30:14)

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

You did not mention the exchange or cabinet number until today, so no-one could have pieced together the puzzle.

I think you'l find I did!

Which post?

You may have PM'd them to MrS but the first post to mention the cab on this thread was 2pm today. MrS may well have missed it in his PMs as I suspect he has a lot and many other things to deal with and no-one else in this thread will have known.

Yes you did PM those details on the 17/5 and actioned that passing on the info, but given the previous circular email you had cc'd me and various others in BT/Ofcom on then hard to know who fixed what or who picked up fixing anything.

The reality that this was a live swap for users already receiving VDSL2 from was not highlighted and there was hints and I may have said as much that part of the issue was the way PlusNet were handling things.

The complexity and circles you've introduced have led to confusion and wasted time on getting an original is the checker right or wrong issue figured out.

Edited by MrSaffron (Thu 16-Jun-16 16:42:03)

In reply to a post by ian72:

You may have PM'd them to MrS but the first post to mention the cab on this thread was 2pm today. MrS may well have missed it in his PMs as I suspect he has a lot and many other things to deal with and no-one else in this thread will have known.

I said "We recently had 2 engineers at the same time on Cab 6 fixing 2 different faults" early in this discussion.

Then on 15/6/16 I said "As I said before, I was told the fibre does does not go back to the Old Bromham Exchange but to the Devizes Super Exchange and then Swindon"

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

I said "We recently had 2 engineers at the same time on Cab 6 fixing 2 different faults" early in this discussion.

You never said you were on cab 6. Remember almost all exchanges have a cab 6

Woodlands ?

Am out of here as you are going in circles

YAAAAY ...... not just me then.

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

Why didn't you mention this before?

I did in passing - but no one on here believed such migrations were even possible!

It isn't a network migration. A migration is what we do when we move between CPs.

It was a network re-arrangement, carried out by Openreach for technical and operational reasons.

There are many cases on these forums of people on an FTTC cabinet further away from them than another FTTC cabinet. There is certainly one case where a person is connected to the same telephone pole as a neighbour, but to a different (nearer) FTTC cabinet. Openreach will not move him to that other FTTC cabinet.

Why? Because to do that they would have to move him to a different PCP. That would be a network rearrangement. They charge an awful lot for those even if it is technically possible. It involves far more than shifting a few wires at the exchange. For starters, as I said earlier there are a lot of loosely connected databases, and they would all need updating manually for that single line.

If one gets missed, or a mistake is made, in the future some poor soul somewhere is going to have huge problems worse than you started this thread with.

But you both came back ....

/me runs

Yep.. H15 Woodlands.
If you have any more info, I'd appreciate it.
I'd buy you a beer if you came and installed it tomorrow too

In reply to a post by andyfenx:

I said this POD concept is a POSSIBLE cheaper FTTP option WHEN the AN is FAR AWAY therefore expensive to connect FTTP to. STICK TO THE SCENARIO.

Funny. I'm pretty sure your mention of a Pod scenario is quite new. I can't really be bothered to re-read the entire thread, but I recall that your attitude was something akin to "Hey, see these Pod things? Maybe I was right after all! Surely I must be right now!".

Sorry, but no, you're not. The pod won't change a thing about the primacy of the aggregation node. In the lexicon of BT, that is the new " flexibility point" in the fibre world.

Even sticking to the scenario. Homogeneity is valuable to BT and the next 3 or 4 generations of engineer who get to maintain the network.

In your scenario of a small, rural, cluster of properties, then, as a budding network engineer, you should have been able to figure answers out from the previous dimensioning tips.

If there are less than 100 premises, then you likely only need a splitter node in your vicinity, and that (plus the AIO) need to be fed by fewer than a dozen fibres. Less than, say, 400 premises, and you need a chain of 3,4,5 splitter nodes. At 1,000 premises, you'd probably merit your own AN.

IIRC, you are of the order of a couple of hundred properties. The newest architectures would likely have fed your village/cluster with empty, 7-tube BFT, then blown a 4-fibre unit down 1 tube from the AN to the AIO. When FTTP is eventually needed, one of the other empty tubes can be unsealed, and an 8-fibre unit blown to a splitter located nearby. Repeated for a second splitter for the second hundred properties.

If G.Fast got deployed, as a pod or standalone, I imagine it would be fed by a separate 4-fibre unit down a separate tube.

All that is necessary to future-proof your location is a couple of empty BFT tubes deployed early on. That wasn't hard, now, was it?

Perhaps the distance beats Openreach's maximum BFT blowing rule. No fear ... all BT need to do is put down empty subducting for full 48- or 96-fbre cable to be blown down.

All you need to do is look at BT's architectures and dimensioning, and figure out what applies. It's a more measured approach than believing you are something special, demand a unique approach after a millisecond of thought, start shouting to gain approval. And attempt to reignite the fights whenever something new occurs to you.

Hi Pgre, your interest in rural FTTP means you may possibly be interested in the following:

I understand - and no one here has contradicted me - that FTTP is priced on distance from the Aggregation Node (AN).

If we assume that BT/OR use existing ducting for fibre deployment, then the AN is likely to be near the centre of the exchange area - probably near the old copper exchange.

From here the ducting/fibre will wiggle about, mainly following the council road and lane verges to avoid the necessity of too many wayleaves. By the time the fibre reaches a fibre cabinet it might have travelled several kilometers from the AN.

In our case the fibre 'apparently' first goes to Cab 2, where we can probably assume there is a Primary Splitter (it may be a Secondary Splitter by then) where the feed for our new AIO - a further kilometer away - comes from.

If I am correct - and I'm sure the geeezers on here will put me right if I'm not - our new AIO is likely to be 3 - 4Ks (as the duct runs) from the AN.

I think this might be the scenario your community is facing?

I think Andrew indicated that the cost for FTTP at this sort of distance from an AN is likely to be in the order of £5000. This is far out of reach of most customers, so uptake will be low to non-existant. This could be a policy to dissuade take up of FTTP in rural areas.

A far more affordable FTTP alternative for consumers would have been for BT/OR to install another splitter (if possible) in the chamber by our new AIO Cab 6, when they were installing the Cab, and for BT/OR to price FTTP 'from the nearest splitter' (or DP) - a matter of meters rather than kilometers from village premises.

Dependant on size, it might be possible to fit such a splitter in a G.fast pod but the end result would be the same either way.

It is not clear from the architecture diagrams how many splitters etc can be utilised in a string, but there is bound to be signal (optic) degradation at each joint which might impact maximum speeds.

Hope this helps