FTTC question

Possibly a daft question this, but I've not stumbled across anything that hints at an answer. If, by some gigantic fluke, BT decided that the exchange to which I am connected was to be part of the proposed 1.5 billion FTTC roll-out would that mean every cabinet connected to that exchange would be upgraded? Or would they cherry-pick the cabinets in the most populated locations? Or is there some technical/commercial reason that would make having a mix of FTTC and non-FTTC in the same exchange impratical or nonsensical?

My local exchange serves just under 4000 residential properties spread out amongst a few semi-rural satellite villages/towns of varying size. So I'm wondering if the 3.5 km to the cabinet in my village would likely be seen as too much effort.

No one knows nor is likely to know for a long time yet. Doubt there will be any definate deployment proposals this year.

In reply to:

---

My local exchange serves just under 4000 residential properties spread out amongst a few semi-rural satellite villages/towns of varying size. So I'm wondering if the 3.5 km to the cabinet in my village would likely be seen as too much effort.

---

I would think a rural exchange which serves a number of villages, and only has a total of 4,000 residential lines, will be way down the list.
If the target is 40% of the population (a figure mentioned a while back), I can't see BT needing to go anywhere near towns (smaller than maybe 40,000 people) to hit the 40% figure (they could do most of that figure just by enabling London, Birmingham, Glasgow, Manchester, Liverpool, Newcastle, Leeds, Sheffield, Coventry, and the other towns with populations over 200,000).

Whilst the scrap value of copper is quite high (quite possibly higher than the new cost of fibre), and there's no doubt there's going to be a few million metres of the stuff could be reclaimed from just your area, I think the install costs will be far too high for BT to bother with those of us out in the sticks.
I don't even think our exchange (which serves around 22,000 lines) will be on the list.

The logical upgrade path for marketing purposes is to tackle those cabinets with larger numbers (not sure what number you'd need here) of customers AND 2-3km away from the exchange as that will provide the greatest impact. However the most likely path is to tackle those with existing fibre ducting that can be 'blow' easily.

sounds like my exchange then.

20k lines on it with average attenuation over 40db.

How you you know the average attenuation on your whole exchange?

Thanks all for the responses. Sounds like I'll be stuck on the wrong side of the divide. I'm clutching at the straw that because there's a school in the village it'll be deemed necessary to make FTTC available for that. The slimmest of hopes I know!

The school may already have or may get a fibre based leased line, but thats not dependent on FTTx.

apperently its stored in BTw database and isp's and engineers have access to it.

My exchange has commercial properties near it and the vast majority of residental properties hooked to it are on the other side of a canal.

Its not the exchange is the green cab density that's the important number as you are effectively moving the DSLAM from the exchange into the cabinet. If you have a small number of cabinets then I agree you'd be ideal unless the copper is all on the 'street' d-side rather than the 'exchange' e-side.

There already exists an Openreach product that an LLU provider could exploit - http://www.openreach.co.uk/orpg/products/llu/subloop/downloads/Sub%20Loop%20Unbundling%20Product%20Description%20Iss4%20_2_.pdf

Which exchange?

My exchange is EMETWLL (Etwall, Derbyshire).

Looking at the patterns of villages covered then I think you're likely to be an ideal for FTTC, even if its just 2 or 3 cabinets that get done (Hilton looks like a perfect candidate)

From your earlier post in the thread I thought exactly the same about Hilton. Unfortunately that's not where I am; I'm in Egginton which is nearer the exchange but less populous, though big enough to have a primary school of its own. Still, it's encouraging to hear that it need not be entirely outside the realms of possibility for FTTC to come our way. I'd happily pay for a better broadband connection if only there was an economic way for someone to sell it me!

Egginton would be fairly good as well, but the coverage map from Samknows wasn't clear as to whether its covered by that or another exchange

interesting, I will see if I can get that info, so low number of cabinets long distance from exchange with high user density is the best scenario.

yes, replacing large numbers of e-side copper connections is the goal, if they could sort out the software issues with the MSAN and do native VoIP on the hardware they would be even happier

But if lunarjetman puts his phone number into samknows shouldn't that accurately confirm his exchange?

Yes, if you look at http://www.samknows.com/broadband/mapping/mapping.php?ecode=EMETWLL then it appears that Egginton is possibly served by Etwell OR Repton using a telephone number is the only real way to know for sure

Sorry, I should have been clearer, I'm definitely on EMETWLL. Last time I checked on samknows it gave me a straight line distance of about 3.4km to the exchange, which if you look at the map is pretty much in reality as straight a line as you could hope to get following that road out of Egginton up to the centre of Etwall where the exchange is (which I've located out of curiosity before).

Edited by lunarjetman (Thu 08-Jan-09 14:10:41)

Sorry to intrude on this thread , I was wondering if a Exchange in which SKY have enabled LLU would tend to be a good candidate for FTTC? (I assume SKY cherry picked the most adsl populated exchanges)

My Exchange is the Port Talbot exchange SWPTB.

I live in a large villiage (with Primary School) around 3 KM from the exchange. Average attenation is 53db.

Any info would be appreciated

Hi Lunarjetman,

I'm in Hilton and have a straight line from SamKnows of 2.71KM. However given the roads round our villages I wouldn't be surprised if the cabling takes a circuitous route to Hilton. I'd be interested to know what speed you get on MAX (I'm currently running at 2meg, someone in the next road runs at 1.5).

Fingers crossed we get considered for FTTC but I wouldn't hold your breath.

Check out Heather Wheelers blog and also the minutes of various meetings for South Derbyshire District Council. They've been in discussion with BT about the poor speeds across the county - but unfortunately for some reason (perhaps saturation... or could it be that's where the council offices are?!) they've promoted Swadlincote as an exchange they'd like to see included in the improvements.

It's a shame as although there must be long lines in Swad, they've at least got the option of LLU; I know it may not bring faster speeds due to line/length and attenuation, but at least they have a wider choice of providers/pricing.

If you feel up to the challenge I'd suggest contacting Heather Wheeler (I had a go) and raising your concerns - it seems lobbying is the way forward if we'd like to see changes to our exchange - there isn't an obvious carrot for investment be it LLU or FTTC.

Hi Colin,

I used to get a speed of 3.5Mbps on an attenuation of 57db which I thought was pretty good. However, for the last year the line has been deteriorating and it will now only manage 2.5Mbps. I'm a whisker away from being able to raise a Fault Threshold Breach with BT; in fact I've already syncd below my fault rate, 3200Kbps, once but I figured that because my next sync just raised its head above that level I couldn't report it to plusnet.

It's this deterioration that prompted this thread really. I've done all I can feasibly do to improve my stats, and yet I'm left powerless with a line getting worse and no clear prospect of anyone finding a way to sell me higher speed broadband packages that I'd gladly buy if only they were available. To my untrained eye I would have thought that almost 4000 lines on the Etwall exchange would have offered a decent return either BT or for someone to unbundle. Just a couple of miles away from Etwall the Mickleover exchange has been unbundled so surely LLU operators backhaul must be easily reachable.

Thanks for the pointers to the blog and SDDC, I'll check them out.

I could probably get 2.5/3mb if I hadn't slipped back to a 9db SNR. Stuck on it now - it was rock solid for 30+ days then I resync'd as I was moving some wiring around - but sadly no move back to 6db.

I can't recall seeing this in the post - but you've checked the test socket, disconnected the ring-wire or fitted a filtered faceplate already? I made sure I filtered out my extension wiring before I came onto max (attenuation is reported around 57 by my 2wire business hub).

I didn't realise Mickleover had been unbundled - haven't checked the stat's but I expect they have more appeal to the other providers.

From reading another post by ADEBOV it seems that whilst ADSL2 won't hold much hope of a speed improvement due to distance, at the least it may provide some increase in download speeds due to the difference in the way LLU operators implement the system (no profiling). However they've got to provide the services to our exchange first.

I too would be tempted to pay more than I am now if I thought I might actually see some of the bandwidth. So at present I'm more interested in the price point. It'd be a nice decision to have to make - price vs speed!

Colin

In reply to a post by cjbell68:

I can't recall seeing this in the post - but you've checked the test socket, disconnected the ring-wire or fitted a filtered faceplate already?

Yep, got all that sort of stuff covered. Router is connect to a filtered faceplate by a .5 metre ADSLNation RJ11 shielded twisted-pair cable. Ring-wire is disconnected. Tried many routers with no appreciable difference between them.

The line used to sync as high as 4300Kbps so it's really frustrating watching it slip further and further backwards and not be able to do anything to arrest the decline. Throughout all this my target SNR has remained 6db, so I'm not looking at BT's DLM slowing my line down. I'm actually at the point now where DLM would be unable to raise my target margin above 6db as it would cause a Fault Threshold Breach in itself.

In this part of Egginton the line is fed from underground, so there aren't any drop cables running near trees or faulty street lights. My wife is fed-up of seeing me walking round the house with an AM radio tuned off-station!

I've tried it all to no avail; I'm left hoping that someone finds an economic way to sell me better speeds but it seems a slim hope.

Fingers crossed the time of year is having an impact on your speeds, I've read that they're supposed to pick up during summer months.

As for FTTC, I was hoping that something good might come of the Digital Britain report, but it doesn't look promising right now.

So fingers crossed somehow our exchange gets added to the list of FTTC candidates.

Good luck with sorting your line quality.

As more people in an area get DSL based broadband you can experience more cross talk, the end result is that speeds may slow down, generally only a little, but 200-300Kbps will be noticeable if you are looking for it.

200-300 Kbps will probably be very noticeable to most people on the exchange, apart from those who live in/near the centre of Etwall perhaps!

In reply to a post by cjbell68:

200-300 Kbps will probably be very noticeable to most people on the exchange, apart from those who live in/near the centre of Etwall perhaps!

You're getting Kilobits and KiloBytes confused?... *edit* notice the change in capitalisation - (b) = Bits and (B) = Bytes

200 Kilobits is only equal to around 25 KBytes/s (without overheads)

So it's not noticable at all in regards to throughput.

Edited by phantom66uk (Tue 10-Feb-09 16:33:06)

200-300 kilobits = 25-30KBps? Which I THINK is ~12% or so of my total downstream bandwidth with a 2mb profile?

Let me know if I've that wrong though, stranger things have happened
In anycase I'm inclined to say even if its kilobits every little helps! Albeit maybe not much to some.

Yes around 10% for a 2Mbps profile.
1 Byte is 8 bits.

The variation in speed due to congestion as the time of day varies is probably a lot more noticeable

In reply to a post by phantom66uk:

In reply to a post by cjbell68:

200-300 Kbps will probably be very noticeable to most people on the exchange, apart from those who live in/near the centre of Etwall perhaps!

You're getting Kilobits and KiloBytes confused?... *edit* notice the change in capitalisation - (b) = Bits and (B) = Bytes

200 Kilobits is only equal to around 25 KBytes/s (without overheads)

So it's not noticable at all in regards to throughput.

It's very noticeable when the 200-300Kbps gets shaved off your sync, resulting in a BRAS profile drop costing 50KB a second in throughput!

Ah the benfits of being with a supplier that uses no BRAS profiles!

Seriously, I do agree that it would be a pain if you only needed that 200 / 300 kilobits to jump up a profile step. This is why the profile system is so seriously flawed and why I ended up moving away to my current supplier.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

As more people in an area get DSL based broadband you can experience more cross talk, the end result is that speeds may slow down, generally only a little, but 200-300Kbps will be noticeable if you are looking for it.

Will this also be the case where more people migrate to ADSL2/ADSL2+ connections like for example with my exchange which has already been unbundled by a few LLU operators, some of which offer ADSL2/ADSL2+ services?

ASDL2+ uses the same frequencies then an extra 1.1Mhz so yes.

ADSL2+ does have extra power save modes that can be used to reduce power consumption and crosstalk on otherwise idle lines though, which is a possible benefit.

it will be interesting to see if the low power modes get utilised en masse. They can potentially wipe out the vast majority of crosstalk if adsl2 becomes the new default modulation and utilises the low power modes.

Unfortenatly isp's are looking at keeping adsl1 the default modulation or using adsl2+, adsl2+ is bad for long lines so they are likely to be pushed back onto adsl1 rather than using adsl2 which is the best out of the 3 for long lines.

Personally on my line crosstalk loses me over a meg synch, every year at christmas I can go from around a 6000kbit synch upto nearly 7.5mbit when all the offices turn off their adsl.

Edited by Chrysalis (Wed 11-Feb-09 08:37:39)

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

ADSL2+ does have extra power save modes that can be used to reduce power consumption and crosstalk on otherwise idle lines though, which is a possible benefit.

I assume that ADSL2 also has this power save mode to reduce crosstalk?

Some people with long lines (like myself) prefer ADSL2 as there is no benefit using ADSL2+ with attenuated lines that are over 50 dB.

Edited by deleted (Tue 10-Mar-09 08:52:00)

I believe so

ADSL2 added all the clever bits, and then ADSL2+ added the extra 1.1MHz

VDSL2 will see frequencies up to 30Mhz down the telephone line

VDSL2 will see frequencies up to 30Mhz down the telephone line

Andrew, a few posts recently you have mentioned VDSL2, but not long ago I think you were saying BT FTTC would be VDSL2+.

Have things changed, or are you just being lazy?