Like the other replies, I think your P10 is totally separate from the other two entries. Presumably, when you say that "the FTTC cabinet is actually there" you mean the one for PCP 10, as an already-existing PCP.

The other two look like they refer to a bundle of Exchange Only (EO) lines known as "Exchange 10". This won't yet have a PCP at all, so can't have a corresponding PCP.

Codelook uses data from BT, so can't just remove entries. However, where copper re-arrangement happens - where PCP are created for EO lines, or where EO lines are moved into existing PCP cabinets - codelook does eventually get updated. But things end up looking confusing for a while.

Remember, however, that the BT database behind this has to both represent the existing, live network - showing how homes are connected *now* - as well as showing plans for the future. I don't think we can expect anything other than confusion while this process is going on - and we should expect it to be a core activity for the next 2 years.

Right now, I think codelook has a better picture of plans for EO lines than it has had for a while. However, I have a sneaky suspicion that it is missing postcodes from its list of "all postcodes" for an exchange ... and those postcodes are the ones where planning confusion lies.

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

Like the other replies, I think your P10 is totally separate from the other two entries. Presumably, when you say that "the FTTC cabinet is actually there" you mean the one for PCP 10, as an already-existing PCP.

Yup.

The other two look like they refer to a bundle of Exchange Only (EO) lines known as "Exchange 10". This won't yet have a PCP at all, so can't have a corresponding PCP.

I suppose I never considered that it was a coincidence (that they have the number 10 in common) really, which sounds really stupid when put like that. But it was because the whole exchange picture for mine (EAHAS) has been very confusing for the last 6 months or more... and it's turned out that they almost certainly duplicated "Exchange 17" and "Exchange 16" as "Cabinet 17" and "Cabinet 16". If all three are simply coincidence, then I'd be surprised. But, with the new numbering scheme, of course I don't know. Cabinets 16 and 17 were new PCPs, with their FTTC twins installed at the same time, outside the exchange for EO lines (and confirmed by an engineer I spoke to). But codelook must have confused the postcodes up for (some?) of the lines they serve, because it would mean that the copper VDSL2 runs would be literally a couple of miles.

Anyway, none of this is vital to me, but as I think you'll appreciate it's always good to know these things. Just explaining my assumptions.

Edited by deleted (Thu 11-Feb-16 22:55:51)