On 11/01/2024 10:56, Tweed wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 11/01/2024 07:50, Rupert Moss-Eccardt wrote:
>>> On 5 Jan 2024 16:22, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 05/01/2024 15:11, Tweed wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> What do you expect to happen in the cabinet? If it is a current FTTC
>>>>> cabinet it will stop working a few hours into a power cut, so you are no
>>>>> better off. Once FTTP comes along the cabinets will vanish as well.
>>>>>
>>>> That is an interesting question. Many people have said they will be used
>>>> as fibre splitting points instead
>>>
>>> "Many" people may have said that but they would be wrong.
>>>
>> I am not sure it is 100% wrong.
>>
>> There already is, in an FTTC cabinet, ducting and backhaul fibre.
>> There already is, in an FTTC cabinet, ducting to the consumer premises -
>> or near enough.
>>
>> Why would they *not* rip out the DSlams and out in fibre splicing trays?
>>
>>
>
> Timing issues? You’d upset your existing FTTC customers. You need to build
> and get working the FTTP network before you can migrate folk off FTTC.
> There will need to be a degree of parallel running.
>
Well as people transition, the space will become available - remove a
DSLAM, pop in a fibre tray.

Round here, there are new green boxes with just fibre, but that is
because there never was FTTC out here.

That's all down the hill in the village...

--
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and
wrong.

H.L.Mencken

The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 11/01/2024 10:56, Tweed wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 11/01/2024 07:50, Rupert Moss-Eccardt wrote:
>>>> On 5 Jan 2024 16:22, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>> On 05/01/2024 15:11, Tweed wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> What do you expect to happen in the cabinet? If it is a current FTTC
>>>>>> cabinet it will stop working a few hours into a power cut, so you are no
>>>>>> better off. Once FTTP comes along the cabinets will vanish as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>> That is an interesting question. Many people have said they will be used
>>>>> as fibre splitting points instead
>>>>
>>>> "Many" people may have said that but they would be wrong.
>>>>
>>> I am not sure it is 100% wrong.
>>>
>>> There already is, in an FTTC cabinet, ducting and backhaul fibre.
>>> There already is, in an FTTC cabinet, ducting to the consumer premises -
>>> or near enough.
>>>
>>> Why would they *not* rip out the DSlams and out in fibre splicing trays?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Timing issues? You’d upset your existing FTTC customers. You need to build
>> and get working the FTTP network before you can migrate folk off FTTC.
>> There will need to be a degree of parallel running.
>>
> Well as people transition, the space will become available - remove a
> DSLAM, pop in a fibre tray.
>
>
> Round here, there are new green boxes with just fibre, but that is
> because there never was FTTC out here.
>
> That's all down the hill in the village...
>
>

I’ve yet to personally see a location that currently has Open Reach FTTC
with an OR FTTP overbuild, so I don’t know how it’s done. Our FTTP has come
via City Fibre, so we have OR FTTC cabinets and unpowered smallish CF
cabinets, plus all of Virgin Media’s cabinets as well.

On 11/01/2024 11:11, Andy Burns wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> There already is, in an FTTC cabinet, ducting and backhaul fibre.
>> There already is, in an FTTC cabinet, ducting to the consumer premises
>> - or near enough.
>>
>> Why would they *not* rip out the DSlams and out in fibre splicing trays?
>
> All they need is a hole in the ground
>
> <https://www.thinkbroadband.com/assets/images/news-2019/fibre-splitter.jpg>
>
That may be all they *need* where space is limited, but round here there
are new green boxes with just fibre in them..

Frankly I think that cabinets are easier to work on.

> They could end the electricity supply to the cabinets as that would no
> longer be required, but do openreach have to pay "rent" for their
> cabinets in the street?

Dunno. They are trying to turn them into car chargers...

--
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and
wrong.

H.L.Mencken

On 11/01/2024 11:42, Tweed wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 11/01/2024 10:56, Tweed wrote:
>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 11/01/2024 07:50, Rupert Moss-Eccardt wrote:
>>>>> On 5 Jan 2024 16:22, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>> On 05/01/2024 15:11, Tweed wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What do you expect to happen in the cabinet? If it is a current FTTC
>>>>>>> cabinet it will stop working a few hours into a power cut, so you are no
>>>>>>> better off. Once FTTP comes along the cabinets will vanish as well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is an interesting question. Many people have said they will be used
>>>>>> as fibre splitting points instead
>>>>>
>>>>> "Many" people may have said that but they would be wrong.
>>>>>
>>>> I am not sure it is 100% wrong.
>>>>
>>>> There already is, in an FTTC cabinet, ducting and backhaul fibre.
>>>> There already is, in an FTTC cabinet, ducting to the consumer premises -
>>>> or near enough.
>>>>
>>>> Why would they *not* rip out the DSlams and out in fibre splicing trays?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Timing issues? You’d upset your existing FTTC customers. You need to build
>>> and get working the FTTP network before you can migrate folk off FTTC.
>>> There will need to be a degree of parallel running.
>>>
>> Well as people transition, the space will become available - remove a
>> DSLAM, pop in a fibre tray.
>>
>>
>> Round here, there are new green boxes with just fibre, but that is
>> because there never was FTTC out here.
>>
>> That's all down the hill in the village...
>>
>>
>
> I’ve yet to personally see a location that currently has Open Reach FTTC
> with an OR FTTP overbuild, so I don’t know how it’s done.

The reason for that is that FTTP is being driven by the sort of low
broadband speeds ADSL only delivers. And OFCOM.

Until all ADSL is gone, they wont start primping up the FTTC connections

--
“The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to
fill the world with fools.”

Herbert Spencer

Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
> > There already is, in an FTTC cabinet, ducting and backhaul fibre.
> > There already is, in an FTTC cabinet, ducting to the consumer premises -
> > or near enough.
> >
> > Why would they *not* rip out the DSlams and out in fibre splicing trays?
>
> All they need is a hole in the ground
>
> <https://www.thinkbroadband.com/assets/images/news-2019/fibre-splitter.jpg>

I'd assume the hole is preferable since there's much less chance of
vandalism, collisions, etc.

But if you aren't cabling back to the soon-to-be-nonexistent exchange, you
might not want to cable back to the cabinet locations either. I suppose
it'll depend on the map of ductwork in the local area as to whether there
are other more sensible fibre splice points.

For example, suppose a village is on a main road. It could make sense to
feed into a trunk that follows the road, rather than to a trunk that goes to
another village where the exchange used to be.

> They could end the electricity supply to the cabinets as that would no
> longer be required, but do openreach have to pay "rent" for their
> cabinets in the street?

Not sure. Who would they be paying it to? Does the highway authority of an
adopted road always own the land, or can there be leases and other things in
place?

Theo

The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 11/01/2024 11:42, Tweed wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 11/01/2024 10:56, Tweed wrote:
>>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On 11/01/2024 07:50, Rupert Moss-Eccardt wrote:
>>>>>> On 5 Jan 2024 16:22, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>> On 05/01/2024 15:11, Tweed wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What do you expect to happen in the cabinet? If it is a current FTTC
>>>>>>>> cabinet it will stop working a few hours into a power cut, so you are no
>>>>>>>> better off. Once FTTP comes along the cabinets will vanish as well.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is an interesting question. Many people have said they will be used
>>>>>>> as fibre splitting points instead
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Many" people may have said that but they would be wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I am not sure it is 100% wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>> There already is, in an FTTC cabinet, ducting and backhaul fibre.
>>>>> There already is, in an FTTC cabinet, ducting to the consumer premises -
>>>>> or near enough.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why would they *not* rip out the DSlams and out in fibre splicing trays?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Timing issues? You’d upset your existing FTTC customers. You need to build
>>>> and get working the FTTP network before you can migrate folk off FTTC.
>>>> There will need to be a degree of parallel running.
>>>>
>>> Well as people transition, the space will become available - remove a
>>> DSLAM, pop in a fibre tray.
>>>
>>>
>>> Round here, there are new green boxes with just fibre, but that is
>>> because there never was FTTC out here.
>>>
>>> That's all down the hill in the village...
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I’ve yet to personally see a location that currently has Open Reach FTTC
>> with an OR FTTP overbuild, so I don’t know how it’s done.
>
> The reason for that is that FTTP is being driven by the sort of low
> broadband speeds ADSL only delivers. And OFCOM.
>
> Until all ADSL is gone, they wont start primping up the FTTC connections
>
That’s not entirely correct. Berwick on Tweed town is being overbuilt with
FTTP at the moment and has FTTC. The work I’ve seen so far is all on
overhead supplied properties and the “cabinets” appear to be black pods
atop the poles. My suspicion is the main driving force in deployment is the
age of the equipment in the local exchange.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> Andy Burns wrote:
>
>> They could end the electricity supply to the cabinets as that would no
>> longer be required, but do openreach have to pay "rent" for their
>> cabinets in the street?
>
> Dunno. They are trying to turn them into car chargers...

Yes, that suggests to me they will become a cost without income to BT
once they're not needed for FTTC and they've had a suggestion scheme for
what to do with them in a few years time, and some employee who doesn't
realise how little current the cabinets are supplied with v.s. how much
you need to charge an EV has come up with that brainwave ...

Theo wrote:

> Andy Burns wrote:
>
>> do openreach have to pay "rent" for their cabinets in the street?
>
> Not sure. Who would they be paying it to? Does the highway authority of an
> adopted road always own the land, or can there be leases and other things in
> place?

I assumed, if anyone, it would be the local authority. I know they get
a UPRN, I did have a quick search and found something saying BT wanted
reciprocal access between providers to masts and cabinets, but nothing
about who pays.

On 11/01/2024 12:13, Theo wrote:
> Does the highway authority of an
> adopted road always own the land, or can there be leases and other things in
> place?

If it is adopted, they don't necessarily own the land, but they have
rights to the surface and down deep enough to cover the utilities.
Statutory undertakings, also have certain rights to use land without
getting formal permission, but I've never dug into the fine details.

Where I live, the freehold, for the flats includes an area which was
adopted after the development was complete. NTL didn't have to
negotiate with the freeholder when cable cabinets were installed.

On 11/01/2024 12:26, Tweed wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 11/01/2024 11:42, Tweed wrote:
>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 11/01/2024 10:56, Tweed wrote:
>>>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/01/2024 07:50, Rupert Moss-Eccardt wrote:
>>>>>>> On 5 Jan 2024 16:22, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 05/01/2024 15:11, Tweed wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What do you expect to happen in the cabinet? If it is a current FTTC
>>>>>>>>> cabinet it will stop working a few hours into a power cut, so you are no
>>>>>>>>> better off. Once FTTP comes along the cabinets will vanish as well.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That is an interesting question. Many people have said they will be used
>>>>>>>> as fibre splitting points instead
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Many" people may have said that but they would be wrong.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am not sure it is 100% wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There already is, in an FTTC cabinet, ducting and backhaul fibre.
>>>>>> There already is, in an FTTC cabinet, ducting to the consumer premises -
>>>>>> or near enough.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why would they *not* rip out the DSlams and out in fibre splicing trays?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Timing issues? You’d upset your existing FTTC customers. You need to build
>>>>> and get working the FTTP network before you can migrate folk off FTTC.
>>>>> There will need to be a degree of parallel running.
>>>>>
>>>> Well as people transition, the space will become available - remove a
>>>> DSLAM, pop in a fibre tray.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Round here, there are new green boxes with just fibre, but that is
>>>> because there never was FTTC out here.
>>>>
>>>> That's all down the hill in the village...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I’ve yet to personally see a location that currently has Open Reach FTTC
>>> with an OR FTTP overbuild, so I don’t know how it’s done.
>>
>> The reason for that is that FTTP is being driven by the sort of low
>> broadband speeds ADSL only delivers. And OFCOM.
>>
>> Until all ADSL is gone, they wont start primping up the FTTC connections
>>
> That’s not entirely correct. Berwick on Tweed town is being overbuilt with
> FTTP at the moment and has FTTC.

My village is being overbuilt with FTTP at the moment and has FTTC.
But the properties with FTTC are *not* being offered FTTP.

> The work I’ve seen so far is all on
> overhead supplied properties and the “cabinets” appear to be black pods
> atop the poles.

No. That is something rather different

http://vps.templar.co.uk/FTTP%20installation/2%20Pole%20termination.png

That is simply where a splice is made to trerminate the fibre at pole
top. Its usually a one to one splice - no politting involved

My suspicion is the main driving force in deployment is the
> age of the equipment in the local exchange.
>
That may be relevant, but at the moment there is no possibility to get
rid of copper to the exchange - VOIP rollout is a mess.

--
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have
guns, why should we let them have ideas?

Josef Stalin

On 11/01/2024 12:34, Andy Burns wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> Andy Burns wrote:
>>
>>> They could end the electricity supply to the cabinets as that would
>>> no longer be required, but do openreach have to pay "rent" for their
>>> cabinets in the street?
>>
>> Dunno. They are trying to turn them into car chargers...
>
> Yes, that suggests to me they will become a cost without income to BT
> once they're not needed for FTTC and they've had a suggestion scheme for
> what to do with them in a few years time, and some employee who doesn't
> realise how little current the cabinets are supplied with v.s. how much
> you need to charge an EV has come up with that brainwave ...
>
Well a standard 100A connection from the mains which is about as low as
it goes these days can still power 8 3KW chargers...

>

--
The biggest threat to humanity comes from socialism, which has utterly
diverted our attention away from what really matters to our existential
survival, to indulging in navel gazing and faux moral investigations
into what the world ought to be, whilst we fail utterly to deal with
what it actually is.

Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> Andy Burns wrote:
>>
>>> They could end the electricity supply to the cabinets as that would no
>>> longer be required, but do openreach have to pay "rent" for their
>>> cabinets in the street?
>>
>> Dunno. They are trying to turn them into car chargers...
>
> Yes, that suggests to me they will become a cost without income to BT
> once they're not needed for FTTC and they've had a suggestion scheme for
> what to do with them in a few years time, and some employee who doesn't
> realise how little current the cabinets are supplied with v.s. how much
> you need to charge an EV has come up with that brainwave ...
>

I don’t think it’s the cabinets that are the asset in this situation so
much as the cable ducts (which presumably have space to spare after putting
in fibre?) and will be used for kerbside charge points.

Certainly the cabinets themselves are rarely in a useful position to be
used as car chargers in my neighbourhood.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> > That’s not entirely correct. Berwick on Tweed town is being overbuilt with
> > FTTP at the moment and has FTTC.
>
> My village is being overbuilt with FTTP at the moment and has FTTC.
> But the properties with FTTC are *not* being offered FTTP.
>
That would appear to be the case for us too (rural Suffolk), we have
FTTC, poles carry FTTP further up the lane but we're not offered FTTP.

--
Chris Green
·

Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>> That’s not entirely correct. Berwick on Tweed town is being overbuilt with
>>> FTTP at the moment and has FTTC.
>>
>> My village is being overbuilt with FTTP at the moment and has FTTC.
>> But the properties with FTTC are *not* being offered FTTP.
>>
> That would appear to be the case for us too (rural Suffolk), we have
> FTTC, poles carry FTTP further up the lane but we're not offered FTTP.
>

Must be a regional thing (or some sort of installation cost issue). We’re
on FTTC (underground cable) and have been offered FTTP.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On 11/01/2024 16:22, Tim+ wrote:
> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> Andy Burns wrote:
>>>
>>>> They could end the electricity supply to the cabinets as that would no
>>>> longer be required, but do openreach have to pay "rent" for their
>>>> cabinets in the street?
>>>
>>> Dunno. They are trying to turn them into car chargers...
>>
>> Yes, that suggests to me they will become a cost without income to BT
>> once they're not needed for FTTC and they've had a suggestion scheme for
>> what to do with them in a few years time, and some employee who doesn't
>> realise how little current the cabinets are supplied with v.s. how much
>> you need to charge an EV has come up with that brainwave ...
>>
>
> I don’t think it’s the cabinets that are the asset in this situation so
> much as the cable ducts (which presumably have space to spare after putting
> in fibre?) and will be used for kerbside charge points.
>
> Certainly the cabinets themselves are rarely in a useful position to be
> used as car chargers in my neighbourhood.
>

I ended up wrecking a tyre against the kerb squeezing past the cars
parked near my local one.

To go with the other tyre I wrecked in a pothole in the local town

> Tim
>

--
"Strange as it seems, no amount of learning can cure stupidity, and
higher education positively fortifies it."

- Stephen Vizinczey

On 11/01/2024 17:49, Tim+ wrote:
> Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>> That’s not entirely correct. Berwick on Tweed town is being overbuilt with
>>>> FTTP at the moment and has FTTC.
>>>
>>> My village is being overbuilt with FTTP at the moment and has FTTC.
>>> But the properties with FTTC are *not* being offered FTTP.
>>>
>> That would appear to be the case for us too (rural Suffolk), we have
>> FTTC, poles carry FTTP further up the lane but we're not offered FTTP.
>>
>
> Must be a regional thing (or some sort of installation cost issue). We’re
> on FTTC (underground cable) and have been offered FTTP.
>

Its pure priority.

Openreach have a mandate to get 90% of the country on 100Mbps or better
by some date and another one to ensure everybody gets better than 10.
If you are already on 10+ via FTTC there is no great hurry to offer FTTP.

> Tim
>

--
"Strange as it seems, no amount of learning can cure stupidity, and
higher education positively fortifies it."

- Stephen Vizinczey

On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 15:31:26 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 11/01/2024 12:26, Tweed wrote:
>> The work I’ve seen so far is all on overhead supplied properties and
>> the “cabinets” appear to be black pods atop the poles.
>
> No. That is something rather different
>
> http://vps.templar.co.uk/FTTP%20installation/2%20Pole%20termination.png
>
> That is simply where a splice is made to trerminate the fibre at pole
> top. Its usually a one to one splice - no politting involved

The "splitters" are also black pods on top of poles - here's a random
photo:
https://www.increasebroadbandspeed.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/
cbt-2048x1355.jpg

Technically known as Connectorised Block Terminals.

Mike

On 11/01/2024 19:20, Mike Humphrey wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 15:31:26 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 11/01/2024 12:26, Tweed wrote:
>>> The work I’ve seen so far is all on overhead supplied properties and
>>> the “cabinets” appear to be black pods atop the poles.
>>
>> No. That is something rather different
>>
>> http://vps.templar.co.uk/FTTP%20installation/2%20Pole%20termination.png
>>
>> That is simply where a splice is made to trerminate the fibre at pole
>> top. Its usually a one to one splice - no politting involved
>
> The "splitters" are also black pods on top of poles - here's a random
> photo:
> https://www.increasebroadbandspeed.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/
> cbt-2048x1355.jpg
>
I am sure if that pole is feeding multiple properties they would split
at pole top for convenience .

But mostly they seem to want to split at (or below) ground level.

> Technically known as Connectorised Block Terminals.
>
> Mike

--
Karl Marx said religion is the opium of the people.
But Marxism is the crack cocaine.

On 11 Jan 2024 10:34, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 11/01/2024 07:50, Rupert Moss-Eccardt wrote:
>> On 5 Jan 2024 16:22, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 05/01/2024 15:11, Tweed wrote:
>>>
>>>> What do you expect to happen in the cabinet? If it is a current FTTC
>>>> cabinet it will stop working a few hours into a power cut, so you are no
>>>> better off. Once FTTP comes along the cabinets will vanish as well.
>>>>
>>> That is an interesting question. Many people have said they will be used
>>> as fibre splitting points instead
>>
>> "Many" people may have said that but they would be wrong.
>>
> I am not sure it is 100% wrong.
>
> There already is, in an FTTC cabinet, ducting and backhaul fibre.
> There already is, in an FTTC cabinet, ducting to the consumer premises -
> or near enough.
>
> Why would they *not* rip out the DSlams and out in fibre splicing trays?
>

Because that would be a whole new way of deploying and provisioning.

On 11 Jan 2024 12:13, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 11/01/2024 11:42, Tweed wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 11/01/2024 10:56, Tweed wrote:
>>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On 11/01/2024 07:50, Rupert Moss-Eccardt wrote:
>>>>>> On 5 Jan 2024 16:22, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>> On 05/01/2024 15:11, Tweed wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What do you expect to happen in the cabinet? If it is a current FTTC
>>>>>>>> cabinet it will stop working a few hours into a power cut, so you are no
>>>>>>>> better off. Once FTTP comes along the cabinets will vanish as well.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is an interesting question. Many people have said they will be used
>>>>>>> as fibre splitting points instead
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Many" people may have said that but they would be wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I am not sure it is 100% wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>> There already is, in an FTTC cabinet, ducting and backhaul fibre.
>>>>> There already is, in an FTTC cabinet, ducting to the consumer premises -
>>>>> or near enough.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why would they *not* rip out the DSlams and out in fibre splicing trays?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Timing issues? You'd upset your existing FTTC customers. You need to build
>>>> and get working the FTTP network before you can migrate folk off FTTC.
>>>> There will need to be a degree of parallel running.
>>>>
>>> Well as people transition, the space will become available - remove a
>>> DSLAM, pop in a fibre tray.
>>>
>>>
>>> Round here, there are new green boxes with just fibre, but that is
>>> because there never was FTTC out here.
>>>
>>> That's all down the hill in the village...
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I've yet to personally see a location that currently has Open Reach FTTC
>> with an OR FTTP overbuild, so I don't know how it's done.
>
> The reason for that is that FTTP is being driven by the sort of low
> broadband speeds ADSL only delivers. And OFCOM.
>
> Until all ADSL is gone, they wont start primping up the FTTC connections
>

Wrong! Here, for instance, we got FTTC and it was only about 18 months
later that FTTP started arriving. And now even those right next to the
cabinet can get FTTP.

On 11 Jan 2024 15:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 11/01/2024 12:26, Tweed wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 11/01/2024 11:42, Tweed wrote:
>>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On 11/01/2024 10:56, Tweed wrote:
>>>>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 11/01/2024 07:50, Rupert Moss-Eccardt wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 5 Jan 2024 16:22, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 05/01/2024 15:11, Tweed wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What do you expect to happen in the cabinet? If it is a current FTTC
>>>>>>>>>> cabinet it will stop working a few hours into a power cut, so you are no
>>>>>>>>>> better off. Once FTTP comes along the cabinets will vanish as well.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That is an interesting question. Many people have said they will be used
>>>>>>>>> as fibre splitting points instead
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Many" people may have said that but they would be wrong.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am not sure it is 100% wrong.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There already is, in an FTTC cabinet, ducting and backhaul fibre.
>>>>>>> There already is, in an FTTC cabinet, ducting to the consumer premises -
>>>>>>> or near enough.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why would they *not* rip out the DSlams and out in fibre splicing trays?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Timing issues? You'd upset your existing FTTC customers. You need to build
>>>>>> and get working the FTTP network before you can migrate folk off FTTC.
>>>>>> There will need to be a degree of parallel running.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Well as people transition, the space will become available - remove a
>>>>> DSLAM, pop in a fibre tray.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Round here, there are new green boxes with just fibre, but that is
>>>>> because there never was FTTC out here.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's all down the hill in the village...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I've yet to personally see a location that currently has Open Reach FTTC
>>>> with an OR FTTP overbuild, so I don't know how it's done.
>>>
>>> The reason for that is that FTTP is being driven by the sort of low
>>> broadband speeds ADSL only delivers. And OFCOM.
>>>
>>> Until all ADSL is gone, they wont start primping up the FTTC connections
>>>
>> That's not entirely correct. Berwick on Tweed town is being overbuilt with
>> FTTP at the moment and has FTTC.
>
> My village is being overbuilt with FTTP at the moment and has FTTC.
> But the properties with FTTC are *not* being offered FTTP.
>
>> The work I've seen so far is all on
>> overhead supplied properties and the "cabinets" appear to be black pods
>> atop the poles.
>
> No. That is something rather different
>
> http://vps.templar.co.uk/FTTP%20installation/2%20Pole%20termination.png
>
> That is simply where a splice is made to trerminate the fibre at pole
> top. Its usually a one to one splice - no politting involved

It isn't really a "splice" as the connection is zero tool.

On 11 Jan 2024 12:13:43 +0000 (GMT), Theo wrote:
> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
[snip]

>
> Not sure. Who would they be paying it to? Does the highway authority of an
> adopted road always own the land, or can there be leases and other things in
> place?

Well, actually, for most roads (old ones in particular, rather than
ones built on CPO land) the land is still owned by the frontager. It is
just that the highway is on top. If the highway is "stopped up", the
landowner gets to exercise their normal rights again which were
temporarily lost whilst the highway was there.

This is really helpful to highway authorities as they don't need to
maintain watercourses in many places, that falling to the riparian
owner.

As to being to put some "plant" on the highway, it has to be safe and
legal but there is limited scoped for the highways authority to stop an
undertaker

On 11 Jan 2024 10:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 11/01/2024 07:59, Rupert Moss-Eccardt wrote:
>> On 6 Jan 2024 15:44, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 06/01/2024 15:32, Theo wrote:
>>>> I've long tried to explain to people on Virgin Media that their line rental
>>>> is negatively priced. They complained that it is/was cheaper to take
>>>> broadband with phone compared with just broadband, but this is deliberate.
>>>> If you have a phone there's a chance you'll make revenue-earning calls for
>>>> VM - their call rates are so high (especially to mobiles and international)
>>>> they want to make sure you have a working phone line to increase the chances
>>>> of generating call revenue for them.
>>> Back in the day it was way cheaper to ask BT ro install an ISDN trunk
>>> - which included fibre, and then cancel it and buy a 2Mbps megastream
>>> over the fibre, than actually order the megastream and fibre...
>>>
>>
>> But then they started selling Megastream over copper so that no longer
>> worked. And, even before Megastream over copper they would often
>> offer ISDN30 over copper anyway. I've has DASS2 and DPNSS over copper.
>>
> So what?

You said "an ISDN trunk - which included fibre". I was pointing out
that was not universally true by any stretch.

On 12/01/2024 08:32, Rupert Moss-Eccardt wrote:
> On 11 Jan 2024 15:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 11/01/2024 12:26, Tweed wrote:
>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 11/01/2024 11:42, Tweed wrote:
>>>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/01/2024 10:56, Tweed wrote:
>>>>>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 11/01/2024 07:50, Rupert Moss-Eccardt wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 5 Jan 2024 16:22, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 05/01/2024 15:11, Tweed wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What do you expect to happen in the cabinet? If it is a current FTTC
>>>>>>>>>>> cabinet it will stop working a few hours into a power cut, so you are no
>>>>>>>>>>> better off. Once FTTP comes along the cabinets will vanish as well.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> That is an interesting question. Many people have said they will be used
>>>>>>>>>> as fibre splitting points instead
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Many" people may have said that but they would be wrong.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am not sure it is 100% wrong.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There already is, in an FTTC cabinet, ducting and backhaul fibre.
>>>>>>>> There already is, in an FTTC cabinet, ducting to the consumer premises -
>>>>>>>> or near enough.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why would they *not* rip out the DSlams and out in fibre splicing trays?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Timing issues? You'd upset your existing FTTC customers. You need to build
>>>>>>> and get working the FTTP network before you can migrate folk off FTTC.
>>>>>>> There will need to be a degree of parallel running.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well as people transition, the space will become available - remove a
>>>>>> DSLAM, pop in a fibre tray.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Round here, there are new green boxes with just fibre, but that is
>>>>>> because there never was FTTC out here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's all down the hill in the village...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I've yet to personally see a location that currently has Open Reach FTTC
>>>>> with an OR FTTP overbuild, so I don't know how it's done.
>>>>
>>>> The reason for that is that FTTP is being driven by the sort of low
>>>> broadband speeds ADSL only delivers. And OFCOM.
>>>>
>>>> Until all ADSL is gone, they wont start primping up the FTTC connections
>>>>
>>> That's not entirely correct. Berwick on Tweed town is being overbuilt with
>>> FTTP at the moment and has FTTC.
>>
>> My village is being overbuilt with FTTP at the moment and has FTTC.
>> But the properties with FTTC are *not* being offered FTTP.
>>
>>> The work I've seen so far is all on
>>> overhead supplied properties and the "cabinets" appear to be black pods
>>> atop the poles.
>>
>> No. That is something rather different
>>
>> http://vps.templar.co.uk/FTTP%20installation/2%20Pole%20termination.png
>>
>> That is simply where a splice is made to trerminate the fibre at pole
>> top. Its usually a one to one splice - no politting involved
>
> It isn't really a "splice" as the connection is zero tool.
>
>
That is what they seem to call it.

It is not zero tool though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xba2MThR9Ls

--
Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the
gospel of envy.

Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.

Winston Churchill

On 12/01/2024 08:39, Rupert Moss-Eccardt wrote:
> On 11 Jan 2024 10:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 11/01/2024 07:59, Rupert Moss-Eccardt wrote:
>>> On 6 Jan 2024 15:44, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 06/01/2024 15:32, Theo wrote:
>>>>> I've long tried to explain to people on Virgin Media that their line rental
>>>>> is negatively priced. They complained that it is/was cheaper to take
>>>>> broadband with phone compared with just broadband, but this is deliberate.
>>>>> If you have a phone there's a chance you'll make revenue-earning calls for
>>>>> VM - their call rates are so high (especially to mobiles and international)
>>>>> they want to make sure you have a working phone line to increase the chances
>>>>> of generating call revenue for them.
>>>> Back in the day it was way cheaper to ask BT ro install an ISDN trunk
>>>> - which included fibre, and then cancel it and buy a 2Mbps megastream
>>>> over the fibre, than actually order the megastream and fibre...
>>>>
>>>
>>> But then they started selling Megastream over copper so that no longer
>>> worked. And, even before Megastream over copper they would often
>>> offer ISDN30 over copper anyway. I've has DASS2 and DPNSS over copper.
>>>
>> So what?
>
> You said "an ISDN trunk - which included fibre". I was pointing out
> that was not universally true by any stretch.
>
It was *then*.

We are going back some though.

However that's not the point. I never claimed it was universally true,
only that *at that time* it was the cheapest way to get fibre installed.
Due to a marketing decision by BT.

--
"What do you think about Gay Marriage?"
"I don't."
"Don't what?"
"Think about Gay Marriage."