Now we have VM, do we go to the back of the FTTP queue?

Virgin Media have recently dug up all the pavements in north-west Bath and installed something - presumably fibre, although it seems limited to 350Mbps max. (I'm not sure what speeds are available with OpenReach FTTP).
I would really welcome a faster connection but I'm not interested in VM because:
- don't want to be tied to VM as ISP (prefer Zen)
- don't want to be forced to buy TV packages
- very expensive to get max speed due to the bundling

Does the fact that my house could now be served by VM (which I guess counts as Ultrafast) mean that OpenReach will put us at the back of the queue for "proper" FTTP? If so, I'm quite angry I wasn't given the chance to object.

Does anyone know what criteria OpenReach use to decide the order of FTTP installation nationally? (or even G.fast)?

You weren�t giving the chance to object ??

Can you imagine how long such roll outs might take if these private companies had to await full concensus from every home owner, landlord and business ? Sheesh.

Having Virgin there would prevent you getting any state funded (BDUK) FTTP work.
Half decent FTTC does the same though.

OpenReach can and do deliberately target Virgin areas as they are a competitor after all.
So it doesn't "put you to the back of the queue" as such.
It may make your area less financially appealing as the take up rates are likely to be lower in areas already covered by Virgin.

Has your area had Virgin for years and it's being expanded or is it a whole new build area?
New builds are usually FTTP but expansions in existing coax/HFC areas will still be coax.

The first thing you need to do is get over yourself lol

2nd: you don't need to have tv if you don't want it.i don't
3rd: you don't need to have a bundle either if you don't want it.i don't
4th: you can have broadband only as i have,Compared to others i think it's too cheap,i'd be happy to pay more.That's a different subject though lol
5th: you are being too emotional regarding an isp.You have fast broadband on the doorstep.If you need/want fast broadband then use the tools you have that are available to you.If you don't like it or it does not perform as expected you can leave within 30 days anyway..
6th: You don't even need to have a landline either with VM:i don't


Have a great night

In reply to a post by Zarjaz:

You weren�t giving the chance to object ??

Can you imagine how long such roll outs might take if these private companies had to await full concensus from every home owner, landlord and business ? Sheesh.

I rather think the OP was thinking along the lines of being able to object to a planning application. Even the likes of Virgin still have to lodge a planning application in able to destroy perfectly good roads and paths. VDSL and FTTP deployment is subject to planning applications as well, that's one reason it can take ages for planning approval for a VDSL cab.

In reply to a post by kitfit1:

In reply to a post by Zarjaz:

You weren�t giving the chance to object ??

Can you imagine how long such roll outs might take if these private companies had to await full concensus from every home owner, landlord and business ? Sheesh.

I rather think the OP was thinking along the lines of being able to object to a planning application. Even the likes of Virgin still have to lodge a planning application in able to destroy perfectly good roads and paths. VDSL and FTTP deployment is subject to planning applications as well, that's one reason it can take ages for planning approval for a VDSL cab.

So you would rather they never bothered and just left everyone on ADSL and left the roads and pavements untouched ?

Suppose they could always use sky hooks and suspend the fibre from that

Why would they need planning permission when they have code powers to dig up public roads and footpaths?

In reply to a post by kitfit1:

I rather think the OP was thinking along the lines of being able to object to a planning application. Even the likes of Virgin still have to lodge a planning application in able to destroy perfectly good roads and paths. VDSL and FTTP deployment is subject to planning applications as well, that's one reason it can take ages for planning approval for a VDSL cab.

News to me.

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/phones-telecoms-and-interne...

Code powers allow an operator to have access to the public highway to perform certain street works necessary for the construction, inspection, maintenance, adjustment, repair and/or alteration of associated network apparatus, without the need for a specific street works licence.

Code powers also enable an operator to benefit from certain immunities from the Town and Country Planning legislation

The Code confers �code rights� on a person with Code powers. A �code right is a right �

to install electronic communications apparatus on, under or over the land;
to keep installed apparatus which is on, under or over land;
to inspect, maintain, and operate apparatus;
to carry out any works on the land to enable apparatus to be installed and maintained;
to gain access to land to maintain or operate apparatus;
to connect to a power supply;
to interfere with or obstruct a means of access to or from the land (whether or not any electronic communications apparatus is on, under or over the land), or
to lop or cut back any tree or other vegetation that could interfere with apparatus.

I rather think the OP was thinking along the lines of being able to object to a planning application. Even the likes of Virgin still have to lodge a planning application in able to destroy perfectly good roads and paths. VDSL and FTTP deployment is subject to planning applications as well, that's one reason it can take ages for planning approval for a VDSL cab.

VM contractors have been working on my road over the last week, putting up cabinets and digging up pavements and verges (I suppose to lay cables). All I received was a leaflet through the letterbox saying they will be doing all this work, there has certainly been nothing from the council regarding planning permission. Even roadworks.org is not showing any works taking place, although there definitely is work going on.

I have decent FTTC but was hoping OR FTTP would be installed rather than VM because, like the OP, I prefer my current ISP (especially static IP and, to a lesser extent, IPv6 support). VM being available at least increases choice and I hope OR FTTP comes along soon.

In reply to a post by teshy:

I have decent FTTC but was hoping OR FTTP would be installed rather than VM because, like the OP, I prefer my current ISP (especially static IP and, to a lesser extent, IPv6 support).

Note that AAISP allow you to access them through an L2TP tunnel, for £10/month. This gives you an AAISP static IPv4 and IPv6 address, and you can bring up the link on any provider.

Unfortunately it's capped at 100Mbps (dropping to 3Mbps if you exceed 1TB/month). But for example you could use tunnelled traffic for your work or server network, and native VM for household Internet.

Note that AAISP allow you to access them through an L2TP tunnel, for £10/month. This gives you an AAISP static IPv4 and IPv6 address, and you can bring up the link on any provider.

Thanks for the info, useful to know for when my current contract comes to an end.

I totally agree except on the part about paying more!

I have Vivid 350 broadband only, no TV, no phone. My only gripe is the poor upload speed in comparison to download, only went with 350 as I want a decent upload.

I've not had a change of IP address since I joined last April, so that's as good as static, currently not fussed about IPv6.

To be fair given their performance last year, the reputation they have for latency, upload speeds and the lack of static IP on residential packages I think there are a few good reasons why someone would prefer A N Other ISP.

I was indeed very apprehensive given their history, but so far the experience has been a good one.

In reply to a post by tinklerj:

Virgin Media have recently dug up all the pavements in north-west Bath and installed something - presumably fibre, although it seems limited to 350Mbps max. (I'm not sure what speeds are available with OpenReach FTTP).
I would really welcome a faster connection but I'm not interested in VM because:
- don't want to be tied to VM as ISP (prefer Zen)
- don't want to be forced to buy TV packages
- very expensive to get max speed due to the bundling

Does the fact that my house could now be served by VM (which I guess counts as Ultrafast) mean that OpenReach will put us at the back of the queue for "proper" FTTP? If so, I'm quite angry I wasn't given the chance to object.

Does anyone know what criteria OpenReach use to decide the order of FTTP installation nationally? (or even G.fast)?

Openreach FTTP barely gives more choice of ISP, one of the main complaints about it is that other ISPs can't be arsed with it.

Nobody is forced to buy TV from VM. I have broadband only and I'm paying £40 a month for 350mbit (402mbit rate cap) and have no TV or Phone from VM. I use AAISP VoIP for my landline.

How much are you paying Zen for FTTC and phone line? Probably not far off what I'm paying!

Openreach don't seem to pay much attention to VM availability when rolling out anyway. Be prepared to pay more than VM for the max speed though. Also, for the most part, the max speed available on FTTP is 330 Mbit.

In reply to a post by nemeth782:

Openreach FTTP barely gives more choice of ISP, one of the main complaints about it is that other ISPs can't be arsed with it.

Sky is due to start selling FTTP and G.fast, at which point it will become a lot more mainstream.

In reply to a post by nemeth782:

Also, for the most part, the max speed available on FTTP is 330 Mbit.

Albeit with 50Mbps upload speed, which to some people is more important than the download speed.

In reply to a post by nemeth782:

Openreach FTTP barely gives more choice of ISP, one of the main complaints about it is that other ISPs can't be arsed with it.

BT, IDNet, Zen, Sky (soon), Cerebrus, Spectrum, AAISP, ICUK,

The cheap ISPs might not be reselling it but the good ISPs are. Oh and so is BT

Edited by Andrue (Fri 01-Feb-19 08:49:45)

Thanks for this and the other comments received, from which (and more research) I have learned a lot e.g.

1. I had thought that VM installed only coax copper (DOCSIS) rather than actual optical fibre, which would limit its potential in the future, and they misleadingly called it fibre. Apparently these days they are installing actual optical fibre although the final connection from the white Virgin street cabinets into the houses is still DOCSIS over coax I believe.

2. I got the idea that only specific bundles (Vivid) were available (and to get the highest speeds you had to buy premium TV bundles as well) from VM's own letter through the door after cable laying was finished. No hint that other contract types were available on the web site. This of course is a standard commercial tactic but it doesn't help me to trust them.

I find VM's web site extremely misleading in one area - I quote:
"Most other major providers use a standard copper phone line to deliver broadband from their cabinet to your home...At Virgin Media we use DOCSIS® 3 technology and a unique thicker insulated cable that runs from the cabinet to your home and retains the speed regardless of the distance."

So in order to make their "fibre" offer (actually FTTN hybrid fibre/coax) look good they are comparing it with FTTC (which it really is in fact, but without the distance attenuation) but pretending it's FTTP. Although standard fully-optical fibre (to inside the house) may currently be limited to 300Mbps, that may not be the case in future - but with coax hybrid that is the absolute limit forever - am I correct?

They also did get my back up a bit, because we had no notification through the door, so we had no idea they were going to be digging up our street until a very shirty operative banged on our door demanding we move our car.

As an ISP, Virgin get only average reviews, so I would not want to be limited to them as my only way to get faster broadband. I am in the slowest 10% of FTTC right now with 24Mbps (I know 5% still can't get FTTC, or any broadband at all in some cases, and they have my sympathy, but it's still limiting in some ways and I was looking forward to upgrading to FTTP).

I don't understand why other ISPs than BT "can't be arsed" (#nemeth782) with Openreach FTTP. So what do they prefer, since Virgin's network is not available to them? The other fibre laying companies seem very small scale and I have little hope of them ever coming our way. With VM laid already (and maybe one day OR fibre), what incentive is there for any other fibre installer to lay fibre down every street? Bottom line is, I don't want anything to bar me forever from getting "full fibre" FTTP. G.fast is another complication (seems more like the Virgin approach), how are Openreach deciding when to put that in instead of FTTP?

Maybe it's off topic for this post, but it does seem to me a bit silly that in order to have decent competition between ISPs, there need to be multiple competing fibre installations, each time digging up the street at vast cost (if that's the way it's supposed to work - seems to me we either get that or a severely limited choice of ISPs). Mostly in the UK we use the model where there is one set of infrastructure, built and/or run by a well-regulated national (or regional or city-based) utility company, and individual national (or local) providers compete on a service basis to provide the services over that single infrastructure. This has been cost-effective for rail, phone, ADSL/FTTC broadband, water (sort of), gas, electricity - why has this model now been abandoned for FTTP? What model do other countries use for FTTP rollout? (Sensible countries I mean, I'm sure it's even more of a free-for-all in the USA for instance ).

The coax can do Gigabit today if they wanted, so not much of a limit for a good number of years. Countries like Germany is already selling 500 Mbps cable services.

A lot of the new roll-out in new areas is full fibre based, with just a few centimetres of coax involved, i.e. from the ONT to the Virgin settop boxes

To get the highest speed you can buy VIVID 350 with no TV and no phone, the Virgin site will of course steer you to the higher revenue generating bundles.

The Sky one is interesting, as the odd new build FTTP user is popping up, i.e. where FTTP is the Only choice

Performance over the tunnel can sometimes be better than the native connection

I don't understand why other ISPs than BT "can't be arsed" (#nemeth782) with Openreach FTTP.

It is because FTTP covers a small percentage of premises at this point and there is some work in sorting out processes, ordering systems and support that many of the ISPs have not yet put in place because of the small customer base. As the Openreach FTTP footprint increases more ISPs will do the work needed to start selling it as a service.

(Sensible countries I mean, I'm sure it's even more of a free-for-all in the USA for instance smile).

In the US there isn't a common model across the country. However, in a lot of the US there is only one cable layer - but there is also only one reseller (the company that installed the cable). If you don't like the company or the prices in the US then you generally have to move.

In reply to a post by ian72:

I don't understand why other ISPs than BT "can't be arsed" (#nemeth782) with Openreach FTTP.

It is because FTTP covers a small percentage of premises at this point and there is some work in sorting out processes, ordering systems and support that many of the ISPs have not yet put in place because of the small customer base. As the Openreach FTTP footprint increases more ISPs will do the work needed to start selling it as a service.

(Sensible countries I mean, I'm sure it's even more of a free-for-all in the USA for instance smile).

In the US there isn't a common model across the country. However, in a lot of the US there is only one cable layer - but there is also only one reseller (the company that installed the cable). If you don't like the company or the prices in the US then you generally have to move.

The US market is remarkable; for such a developed free market country to have such wide non competitive areas.

As candlerb says Sky is due to sell Fttp/Gfast that might well be a game changer for when significantly more competition comes into the existing market. The fact that many fttp deployments are ongoing and millions of new connections due in the next 2-5 years will also transform the market.

In reply to a post by Garlic:

As candlerb says Sky is due to sell Fttp/Gfast that might well be a game changer for when significantly more competition comes into the existing market. The fact that many fttp deployments are ongoing and millions of new connections due in the next 2-5 years will also transform the market.

So will 5G for millions of non-gamers. 4G is enough for me at the moment - FTTC ceased in December, landline ceased yesterday. Phone providing a wifi hotspot to laptops and iPad, and still fully functional itself. Unlike using mobile data through a router where you still need a separate phone contract.

In reply to a post by tinklerj:

1. I had thought that VM installed only coax copper (DOCSIS) rather than actual optical fibre, which would limit its potential in the future, and they misleadingly called it fibre. Apparently these days they are installing actual optical fibre although the final connection from the white Virgin street cabinets into the houses is still DOCSIS over coax I believe.

Not quite.

Old VM areas that are already coax remain so.
New installs are coax.

New Project Lightning areas are FTTP.
Fibre to the Property, which is then converted to coax at the property.

Just to add some clarity...

Some areas delivered under the Project Lighting are still coax based, because they are extensions of existing areas, e.g. neighbouring streets

The various new towns and suburbs project lighting is reaching though are FTTP, though confusingly all that the public will see is a bit of coax inside the home as the fibre ends on the outside wall of the property.

Services are not differentiated all all, so packages and pricing

In reply to a post by tinklerj:

Although standard fully-optical fibre (to inside the house) may currently be limited to 300Mbps, that may not be the case in future - but with coax hybrid that is the absolute limit forever - am I correct?

No. See: https://yousee.dk/bredbaand/overblik.aspx - 1G down, 100M up
https://tdc.dk/produkter/internet - 1G down, 500M up
https://telekomidag.se/com-hem-testar-bredband-pa-12... - 1.2G down, 100M up with symmetrical 1.2G in testing as examples.

The coax can comfortably handle 3 GHz or more of spectrum. VM could certainly get an aggregate of 30 Gb/s out of that with the right equipment - they are only using about 700 MHz at the moment for all broadband and TV.

If your in an area where they are installing fibre, then you will see them running in lots of little green tubes to the street cabinets.

You'll need to be logged into the Kitz forum to see the pictures.

https://forum.kitz.co.uk/index.php/topic,19668.msg35...

And here is some pictures of my install, the fibre is run right up to the house, and then converted to coax. I have seen one install where they ran the fibre into the house and had the converter inside.

https://forum.kitz.co.uk/index.php/topic,19668.msg37...