The majority of what you wrote is nonsense.

Hyperoptic have been deploying fibre instead of cat5e for a couple years at least.
Cat5e isn't stopping them selling higher than 1Gb/s either

There is nothing stopping Hyperoptic selling higher tiers to some of their customers, exactly as Community Fibre have been selling 1Gb/s to some buildings and 3Gb/s to others.
What makes you think that companies can't offer different tiers to different customers?

I don't think Openreach will be able to offer cheaper FTTP packages in future unless they upgrade to XGS-PON

What on Earth does XGS-PON have to do with OpenReach selling cheaper FTTP in the future.
That would increase costs, not lower them.

OpenReach FTTP isn't high in cost to deter high tiers to prevent contention.
You're just making rubbish up.

You compare OpenReach to Hypeeoptic and CF as if they are 1 and the same.
1 network isn't better/cheaper/dearer than the other because of X technology being deployed.

OpenReach are a highly regulated Wholesale network.
OpenReach need to apply to OFCOM to reduce the price of their wholesale offering, and the likes of Hyperoptic and Community Fibre object to them lowering those prices.
Read up on the recent Equinox FTTP deal OpenReach just reached.
Pretty much every single Alt-Net opposed OpenReach lowering their FTTP prices.

OpenReach also have considerable revenues they would like to protect in the dedicated circuit/leased line sector.
Such as the EAD links that Hyperoptic buy from OpenReach in order to sell fibre from a building.

It's got nothing to do with GPON or XGS-PON.
XGS-PON will allow faster (more expensive) or more symmetrical tiers (more expensive) from OpenReach, not cheaper deals.

That's what you told me before, John, I remember! But Cat5e limits speeds to up to 1Gbps only at around 100 meter line length.

You cannot deliver above 1Gbps with Cat5e cables being fed across the flats in a building even if the up-link to the basement supported 10Gbps. This is not nonsense, this is fact!

Plus, fair enough Hyperoptic may be deploying Fibre now for the last couple of years. But as I said the old buildings for a decade prior are still on the old Cat5e cables. They need to be replaced. Hyperoptic are being dishonest as they do not mention this on their website. No where do they inform that they install twisted pair of copper cables from the basement to each flats. I only found that information from people on these forums as well as on ISPreview.

XGS-PON reduces risk of contention for the same 1Gbps packages. That's the whole point why Openreach 1Gbps is not symmetrical. It can only deliver symmetrical to a few number of customers with GPON (2.5G/1.25G). But if more customers overload the network with 1Gbps package, symmetrical will no longer be possible, so therefore they limit the upload to 220Mbps and the prices are way higher than that of Community Fibre, G-Network, Hyperoptic, Gigaclear, B4RN, etc.

You are not getting value for money here, the customer in essence is being ripped-off.

You say XGS-PON would drive prices up. Actually it would mean more happier customers, as they won't be complaining why they aren't getting symmetrical gigabit speeds.

You just compare all the Gigabit packages supplied on the Openreach network they cost double or triple that of the Altnet while being asymmetrical!

I don't see how a customer who has both Openreach FTTP and another Altnet FTTP overbuild would want to join Openreach for a more expensive and non symmetrical service unless the monthly cost was cheaper!

In reply to a post by BLaZiNgSPEED:

Cat5e limits speeds to up to 1Gbps only at around 100 meter line length.

Nope: you can do 2.5Gbps ethernet over Cat5e, at 100 metres.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2.5GBASE-T_and_5GBASE-T

In reply to a post by BLaZiNgSPEED:

You cannot deliver above 1Gbps with Cat5e cables being fed across the flats in a building even if the up-link to the basement supported 10Gbps. This is not nonsense, this is fact!

It's not a fact. It's absolute nonsense you just made up.

XGS-PON reduces risk of contention for the same 1Gbps packages.

Why do you keep saying that?

What makes you think XGS-PON reduces the risk of contention compared to a Hyperoptic building with a 10Gb/s EAD link?

You write things as such a matter of fact when in reality you know very little about the market
Broadband networks are meant to be contended. They don't build them 1:1.

You can probably download 24/7 at the full 80/20 of your FTTC connection.
The link between your FTTC cabinet and its OLT is nowhere near enough to handle everyone utilising their connection fully at the same time. That's not how people use their broadband. It's used in short bursts mainly.

XGS-PON or not, Community Fibre won't have enough capacity for all their customers to saturate their connections all at the same time.
It isn't some wonder technology that stops all contention or congestion.
Deploying it won't lower prices. The hardware is considerably more expensive than GPON hardware although it is slowly coming down in price

That's the whole point why Openreach 1Gbps is not symmetrical. It can only deliver symmetrical to a few number of customers with GPON (2.5G/1.25G). But if more customers overload the network with 1Gbps package, symmetrical will no longer be possible, so therefore they limit the upload to 220Mbps and the prices are way higher than that of Community Fibre, G-Network, Hyperoptic, Gigaclear, B4RN, etc.

Utter nonsense again.

Broadband Networks are not built for 1:1. They do not build enough capacity to cover every single user using it all at the same time.

GPON isn't some ancient technology unable to support symmetrical packages. It absolutely can and does.
There are a number of GPON networks in the UK that sell symmetrical gigabit. CityFibre being the biggest.
The PON is just a tiny part of the network and is not the place where most contention exists. Far from it.

OpenReach don't limit the upload to 220Mb/s because of GPON either.
Unlike many of the other networks you mention, OpenReach have considerable leased line/dedicated circuit revenues that they would like to keep.
They aren't massively limited on how many 1Gb/s packages they can sell on a PON.
Them not selling symmetrical gigabit (or faster) for very low prices isn't just down to GPON but is down to deliberate market decisions and huge regulation.

John, but the question is why all the FTTP packages on the Openreach network show 220Mbps as the max upload speed on the 1Gbps package?

I watched some Youtubers and they mentioned the same thing, that they moved away to an altnet because they needed higher upload speed for their video productions and they mention also that they aren't getting higher than 220Mbps upload speed in speed tests using any Openreach FTTP ISP.

I haven't seen a Gigabit package yet, higher than 220Mbps average upload on the Openreach network. I have also not seen a single low package that's symmetrical either.

Ok, we can argue that GPON (2.5G/1.25G) can do 1Gbps symmetrical max. But what's the excuse for not having 80/80Mbps and have that set to 80/20Mbps? 80/20 may be an FTTC limitation, but it is not a limitation on FTTP.

If it is a deliberate marketing decision, from a customer point of view it doesn't seem like good marketing. The majority of the users such as myself who choose a new package are not obliged to know how the marketing or regulation works.

We want to choose what's best in ratio to the price that's on offer. Sure 3Gbps is currently a marketing ploy, I'm not going to choose that as I don't need it at this stage and certainly not for £89 a month.

But if I were to also have Openreach FTTP come to my property one day, give me a good persuasive reason why I should switch to Openreach 80/20 or 150/30 (£30-£35)? When the same 200/200Mbps costs £25 and 500/500Mbps is £35 on Community Fibre, Hyperoptic, etc.

Again, I'm the layman here, I don't know how the marketing works. But I am the customer and you need to try and convince me why it would be better to go for the more expensive asymmetrical Openreach packages and forget about my other altnet provider.

In reply to a post by BLaZiNgSPEED:

John, but the question is why all the FTTP packages on the Openreach network show 220Mbps as the max upload speed on the 1Gbps package?

That's the highest they have decided to offer. It's not a limitation of GPON.

In fact the 1000/220Mb package isn't even a residential offering.
It's a business tier, with very high monthly rental and a £500+vat install fee.

The highest OpenReach have decided to offer for residential is 1000/115.

If it is a deliberate marketing decision, from a customer point of view it doesn't seem like good marketing. The majority of the users such as myself who choose a new package are not obliged to know how the marketing or regulation works.

Most users don't know or care what technology delivers their broadband. Many already think they have "fibre" when they don't.
Most only look at the headline download rate and the price.

The likes of CityFibre do gigabit up and down on GPON, with the exact same split ratio as OpenReach. There's nothing within GPON that requires such low upstream rates.

The vast majority of home users don't need 115Mb/s upload, nevermind a gigabit.
The vast majority of the country only has access to Virgin or OpenReach. Virgins highest upload is 50Mb/s.
Both those companies appear to me to be healthy, successful businesses.

A small number of technically minded users or users who currently WFH will opt for an Alt-Net for the higher upload.
That doesn't mean it's a bag marketing decision by OpenReach to not offer higher upload speeds.

You as a customer are entitled to order whatever you want for whatever reason you want.

In reply to a post by candlerb:

In reply to a post by BLaZiNgSPEED:

Cat5e limits speeds to up to 1Gbps only at around 100 meter line length.

Nope: you can do 2.5Gbps ethernet over Cat5e, at 100 metres.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2.5GBASE-T_and_5GBASE-T

There's a heck of a lot of dodge or borderline dodge installed structured cabling out there.

I'm not even sure the contractors that installed any of the Cat5e structured cabling in these MDU would be using performance/cabling certification testers like Fluke DSX's to verify the cable meets all the (well established) performance criteria.

The issue at hand is that 2.5G Base_t runs a really high spectral bandwidth - practically the full 100 MHz spectral bandwidth for Cat5e (admittedly on a 100 m channel)...basically there is zero performance headroom in the cabling. Spelling potential trouble for [censored] cabling or installs..which otherwise happily pass 1GBase-T all day long.

https://www.cablinginstall.com/sponsored/berk-tek/ar...

I suppose in this particular respect, its all rather academic, as HyperO have moved on to pushing fibre to flats and the chances of them using copper to deliver >1 Gbps is slim to none.

I have community fibre 3gb service and it's fantastic.

However, there's a few things to consider. You'll usually only see the full speed from a wired connection when transferring several large files.

I would highly recommend it - assuming you have a usecase and understand the limitations.

https://www.speedtest.net/my-result/d/42ca9d1d-e746-...

Edited by jon999 (Thu 28-Oct-21 12:22:24)

Speedtest.net tests from your providers own server often don't leave their network.

What's the performance like to a speedtest.net server that isn't within Community Fibres own network?
What's the single thread performance like?

P.s I'm not jealous, honest.

In reply to a post by j0hn83:

Most only look at the headline download rate and the price.

…

The vast majority of home users don't need 115Mb/s upload, nevermind a gigabit.

Well said, personally I care more about latency than bandwidth. More bandwidth == better is something far too many people believe when the reality is that if your packets are crashing head-on into a router with a poor nutritional diet lacking in fibre and congested badly you're going to have a bad time no matter what. I do actually have a 10 gigabit LAN at home but not because I need that bandwidth but because it was a fun challenge to try to build-it and now I'm having fun trying to keep it working.