FTTP on the way?

We've had Openreach at the bottom of our road a few weeks ago, digging and laying pipes

Neighbour asked what they were doing and they said it was for fibre to enable the F.O lines to be pulled through our road (and another adjoining) up to the cabinet

So I'm assuming from this we can expect FTTP, but has anyone got any idea how long it takes to go from them doing the pipework to actually setting up the F.O lines?


(I'm guessing the answer may be 'how long's a piece of string?)

Cheers all

Somewhere along the way there could be a "word of mouth" misunderstanding.

For FTTC the fibre goes either to a new cabinet near to the existing phone one, with the two cabinets then getting a copper link to merge phone and VDSL2, or it goes to an All-In-One that replaces the existing cabinet if there is one. The latter happening when the phone lines are fed directly from the exchange with no phone cabinet. (EO lines). The final stretch to the home is still copper in both cases.

For FTTP cabinets are not involved. Only underground aggregation points. (Glorified fibre junction boxes). Then the fibre to the premises may go completely underground or partly underground and partly via ordinary telegraph poles. However, the FTTC cabinets are also fed from aggregation points, and any particular aggregation point can feed both FTTC cabinets and FTTP.

Thanks RobertoS

Glad to see you still here handing out decent info after sooooo many years - its quite a while since I've been on here and you were here then, and the previous times, many years ago

(Thanks in the same vain to Mr Saffron!)

I hope for you the misunderstanding was the use of the word "cabinet". Perhaps a loose usage by the Openreach people as they wouldn't be wanting to go into lengthy explanations . FTTP is done by cabinet area so ....

Good luck. Let us know what transpires.

Edited by RobertoS (Thu 20-Apr-17 10:48:16)

Could be a copper rearrangement, putting the EO lines into an existing PCP that is already fibre enabled for FTTC.

Could be, but that would be a big misunderstanding by someone in the chain, as the OP says it was reported as being to pull fibre.

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

Could be a copper rearrangement, putting the EO lines into an existing PCP that is already fibre enabled for FTTC.

Sorry,

What's PCP?

It could be read that way, but the words aren't really clear about what is being pulled: to enable our FO lines to be pulled through to the cabinet.

Could be pulling copper, to enable fibre connectivity.

PCP is the phone cabinet. Primary/Principal Connection Point, I forget which.

Primary Connection Point.

The existing green cabinets that BT engineers use to make connection back to the exchange and, nowadays, connect into the colocated FTTC cabinet.

What's an F.O line?

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

Primary Connection Point.

The existing green cabinets that BT engineers use to make connection back to the exchange and, nowadays, connect into the colocated FTTC cabinet.

What's an F.O line?

Just my [censored] shorthand - Fibre Optic

(ahem) Primary Cross connection Point .

In reply to a post by ncf355:

Just my [censored] shorthand - Fibre Optic

Right. I'm so used to the word "fibre" alone that adding "optic" feels alien, and the shorthand didn't make sense to me.

So EO lines are nothing to do with it, not a copper rearrangement. Back to RobertoS' answer...

In reply to a post by Zarjaz:

(ahem)

Doh! Now I'm cross

I'm still unable to see want was wrong with what you said. What am I missing?

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

In reply to a post by Zarjaz:

(ahem)

Doh! Now I'm cross

Cross, but connected with the answer.

The cross-connect bit.

Ah!

But that would make it PCCP .

So I did a little google and discovered Openreach have a glossary. That gives Primary Cross-connection Point, solving the double-C problem.

The GEA entry is less impressive. Correct but could leave a lot of people needing to google some of its content. Anybody not needing to google the content wold not need to be looking it up in the first place .

I wonder though ... I'm sure Zarjaz will know. Might it have been the simple "Primary Connection Point" in times of yore, because surely its only cross-connection function is with these new-fangled FTTC cabinets?

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

I wonder though ... I'm sure Zarjaz will know. Might it have been the simple "Primary Connection Point" in times of yore, because surely its only cross-connection function is with these new-fangled FTTC cabinets?

It's always been a cross-connection point, as it cross connects the E & D side pairs.

That makes sense .

In reply to a post by panda:

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

I wonder though ... I'm sure Zarjaz will know. Might it have been the simple "Primary Connection Point" in times of yore, because surely its only cross-connection function is with these new-fangled FTTC cabinets?

It's always been a cross-connection point, as it cross connects the E & D side pairs.

+ 1 for Panda's reply.

In reply to a post by panda:

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

I wonder though ... I'm sure Zarjaz will know. Might it have been the simple "Primary Connection Point" in times of yore, because surely its only cross-connection function is with these new-fangled FTTC cabinets?

It's always been a cross-connection point, as it cross connects the E & D side pairs.

I guess the important point is back when the GPO introduced PCPs in the first place, and what improvement they were seeking.

Was it the ability to change the cross-connection in the event of faults?

I've also heard the term flexibility point.

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

Was it the ability to change the cross-connection in the event of faults?

I've also heard the term flexibility point.

Flexibility point is a valid generic description, but whilst all PCPs (and SCPs) can be 'flexibility points', not all flexibility point are (P|S)CPs.

The original intent was to allow an access point where line routing can be easily manipulated - either for provision or repair - without the need for specialist skills or equipment. Remember that the majority of cabinets were installed at the time of hot (lead)/cold/resin joints which are a PITA and time consuming to open and close.

From a routing perspective, it allows some latitude when you have a choice of several E-side cables than can be connected to multiple DPs - particularly if the preferred route has issues, as an alternative may be available to provide service sooner than pulling in new cables with the inevitable hassle and delays.

Yep, I recall being told on my very first day that flexibility was what the network provided.

I have seen the "flexibility point" used in some theoretical paper on fibre too. That made it look like the aggregation node was fibre's equivalent flexibility point.

It is seems that the experience of running an access network for the odd decade or three has rubbed off.