So there will often be a �bundle� of fibres to the splitter. Dependant on what sort of physical splitter it is, the assembly can take 1, 2 or 4 splitters.

So say there�s a four splitter version, three are in use, to enable the fourth a single fibre would need to be spliced through the network to the agg node, then on to the head end in the exchange.

This is all ifs and buts for the OP though.

In reply to a post by Taras:

The Openreach version of FTTP uses G-pon, this is a passive fibre infrastructure. Basically up to 32 users share a total bandwidth of 2.5gbits down and 1.25gbits up. Thus it is a contended service, Gpon, also uses splitters and encryption to separate each user's data.

You can have more that 32 users sharing the bandwidth from a single fibre in GPON. The limit in the standard is 128 per fibre, though few providers would go for a spit ration that high, and line length impacts how many spits you can have. If it where me I would keep it at 9 or less spits so I can come back in the fullnes of time and change to CWDM-PON for up to 25Gbps symmetric on all connections.

Yes, but I was asking how many fibres are likely to be in the 'bundle' - if there was some sort of 'norm'? It would seem to be a huge waste of money to run a single fibre from the node along the poles so I would hope/assume there are more - but how many!

Still hoping someone can answer
"What is the mechanism involved in this run? Is it simply a case of extending the run along the road from the last pole or is there likely to be some limitation on the number of available fibres? ie IF there is at least one more unlit fibre can the run be extended?

AND
What is the policy on these County funded runs? Is there any requirement for the (publicly funded) run to be 'extendable'? "

Does anyone know what this 'fibre on poles' is all about? "

The last question is whether the pole dancing is the new way to 'do' Boris's promise - where poles exist, of course.- rather than by ducting.

In reply to a post by jabuzzard:

In reply to a post by Taras:

The Openreach version of FTTP uses G-pon, this is a passive fibre infrastructure. Basically up to 32 users share a total bandwidth of 2.5gbits down and 1.25gbits up. Thus it is a contended service, Gpon, also uses splitters and encryption to separate each user's data.

You can have more that 32 users sharing the bandwidth from a single fibre in GPON. The limit in the standard is 128 per fibre, though few providers would go for a spit ration that high, and line length impacts how many spits you can have. If it where me I would keep it at 9 or less spits so I can come back in the fullnes of time and change to CWDM-PON for up to 25Gbps symmetric on all connections.

Well OR is using 32 streams max and the next tier up is xg-pon. Just remember internet traffic, (well ip traffic) is bursty in nature. Even with a 80/20 line, you won't always be using 80/20 speeds.

In reply to a post by mikejp:

Yes, but I was asking how many fibres are likely to be in the 'bundle' - if there was some sort of 'norm'? It would seem to be a huge waste of money to run a single fibre from the node along the poles so I would hope/assume there are more - but how many!

Still hoping someone can answer
"What is the mechanism involved in this run? Is it simply a case of extending the run along the road from the last pole or is there likely to be some limitation on the number of available fibres? ie IF there is at least one more unlit fibre can the run be extended?

It will likely be a new deployment given that its around 18 houses, with a new fibre cable (with multiple strands) to a (new) primary splitter. Given that there's existing fibre, the lead time should in theory be shorter.

In reply to a post by mikejp:

AND
What is the policy on these County funded runs? Is there any requirement for the (publicly funded) run to be 'extendable'? "

Aka BDUK, many councils have gone to 3 or 4 phases due to clawback and extra money.

In reply to a post by mikejp:

Does anyone know what this 'fibre on poles' is all about? "

The current OR copper service is either delivered via underground ducts to the house, or a combination of underground ducts and the last few metres via overhead cables.

The new connectorised fttp installs use the same route as your existing copper route with the final cabling being a hybrid coper/fibre cable.

In reply to a post by mikejp:

The last question is whether the pole dancing is the new way to 'do' Boris's promise - where poles exist, of course.- rather than by ducting.

No.

On ending when others are further away - its a case of massively depends on the distances involved and contract aims

Doing 100% of one exchange will draw criticism from other exchange areas where no work has been done, so spreading what might be a contract of 3,000 premises across a county is not uncommon.

Most common reason is the value for money testing, and going that bit further down the road might mean the value for money criteria are breached, so roll-out stops at the point where they can deliver within bounds of contract.

Generally the FTTP planning does take into account that others would need to be reached, so capacity will exist, but no-one has paid for this spare capacity (well Openreach has but in accounting terms they will look to recover this eventually) so council in a later contract might extend further and even if just a short distance and is re-using some bits that are already installed there will be a share of that original build to pay.

Thanks Taras and Mr S. This 'value for money' is the crippler. A quick Google produces reams of documents none of which appear to tell me how this is judged! I would have thought that a longish road where no-one has more than 3mbps and not a cab in sight would qualify!

It would appear to me that FTTrN is the obvious way to go. Someone raised a 'concern' about 'power', but with the option of reverse powering or using the 48v on the line I cannot see the issue. This https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2014/09/diagra... gives an excellent SIMPLE coverage of the system.

In reply to a post by mikejp:

It would appear to me that FTTrN is the obvious way to go.

The only benefit of FTTrN is that you don't need to enter the house again to install the final fibre drop and ONT.

Apart from that, everything is a disadvantage compared to FTTP. With FTTrN you still need to bring the fibre to the place where a splitter or CBT would have been. You need to buy and power and service the electronics. You are dependent on the quality of the existing copper or aluminium drop cable. You are limited to G.fast-like speeds rather than gigabit speeds.

So it's more expensive to install and maintain than FTTP, whilst not giving the future-proofing benefits.

On value for money - simplest version if it needs more than £1,700 of gap funding (council/Gov money) under a BDUK contract it won't get done. This criteria exists to stop all the money being spent on a small number of hardest to reach areas.

Those who do miss out can look at things like Gigabit Voucher Scheme https://gigabitvoucher.culture.gov.uk as a way of part funding the roll-out of FTTP if they don't want to wait until 2025

G.fast can reach 500mbits plus. That said in some rural areas from house to dp can be up to 200m to 300m, which then makes g.fast pointless.