Thanks. It’s too laborious on a phone to scroll through all the address permutations!

Will be interested to hear what @witchunt says about the result.

How much production XGS-PON are you guys running now? Is it just within the Salisbury trial. Tell me to sod off if it’s secret squirrels. I’m just curious. 🤣

Did you ever get to the bottom of this one, or was it too shallow? [sorry couldn't help myself there]

Shallow build is used primarily in area’s where the majority of ‘dwellings’ are business addresses, typically an industrial estate or business park….in a residential setting OR build the network as close the the curtilage of the addresses to be served as possible , so the CBT is at the top of a pole , or jointbox in the footpath outside the addresses to be served, , and these addresses are are able to order FTTP , with shallow build the network is only built to be splitter node ( not the CBT ) , the splitter located somewhere centrally for the business addresses it’s intended to serve, possibly at the entrance to the estate or park , should a business order FTTP service , it’s like a two stage order on steroids, the ‘service delivery’ survey establishes what’s needed to provide the CBT and connectorised lead-in , to serve that individual address , using existing jointboxes, poles and possibly adding extra poles , jointboxes, duct etc….this is pretty much the same method as Ethernet leased lines , where the network is built from the nearest Ethernet node to the customer, but the CBT may well be useful for other neighbouring businesses ( depending on where it’s located )
This is a recent change from installing CBT’s outside business propertys and hoping orders follow, it is a more cost effective way of serving business addresses.
Not every shallow build is XGSPON , presumably the particular PON is part of a trial

Edited by Iniltous (Tue 22-Nov-22 19:49:19)

Many thanks for the explanation @Iniltous

Thank you for that valuable information. That really clears things up and will be a useful resource for folks that use the search feature on here going forward.

With the SNR on here being dubious sometimes quality knowledge is important to offset the speculation.

Again: thank you.

Very interesting and thanks for the explanation.

Presumably take-up is slower in commercial areas and the incremental cost of covering additional premises is higher, so the sums add up.

I was just reading this article over at ISPr

Interesting quote below, which accords somewhat with the theme of this thread:

“According to the FT (paywall), Openreach has now informed suppliers that it will instead build its full fibre network “narrower and deeper” and “tighten the timing of investment” to a just-in-time approach (i.e. not committing capital to projects further than 6 months out). The focus will thus switch to completing areas that are already partially finished.”

Probably better to clear an area in one go vs doing 20 at once and leaving gaps then coming back later to fill.

All is now revealed. Well kind of…

https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2023/01/openre...