I've long held that Hell would freeze over before FTTP came to our
little bit of old Trafford. Today, a bit of paper pops through the
letterbox from Grain, telling us they are digging up the street to
provide fibre broadband service. Two hours later, the only way to leave
the house is out back...

Now, I'm with BT. Does this mean a full fibre upgrade (currency FTTC)
is on the cards, or are Grain a completely separate thing that does not
partner with BT/OpenReach in any way?

Jason H wrote:

> Now, I'm with BT.  Does this mean a full fibre upgrade (currency FTTC)
> is on the cards

unlikely

> or are Grain a completely separate thing that does not
> partner with BT/OpenReach in any way?

I should imagine they're an alt-net, with the standard business model
hoping to get bought by e.g VMO2 or CityFibre before anyone realises
they've dug lots of holes, run out of money and got very few customers ...

Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> Jason H wrote:
>
>> Now, I'm with BT.  Does this mean a full fibre upgrade (currency FTTC)
>> is on the cards
>
> unlikely
>
>> or are Grain a completely separate thing that does not
>> partner with BT/OpenReach in any way?
>
> I should imagine they're an alt-net, with the standard business model
> hoping to get bought by e.g VMO2 or CityFibre before anyone realises
> they've dug lots of holes, run out of money and got very few customers ...
>
>

There’s apparently 150 or so alt nets at the moment. The money is running
out as the cost of capital has gone up and the take up of their services is
lower than hoped. Many altnets are struggling/going to struggle to
refinance. It’s not at all obvious that the failing ones will get bought
out, especially if there is competition in some of their patch. It’s not a
repeat of the cable company consolidation as they were all regional
monopolies.

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
> There’s apparently 150 or so alt nets at the moment. The money is running
> out as the cost of capital has gone up and the take up of their services is
> lower than hoped. Many altnets are struggling/going to struggle to
> refinance. It’s not at all obvious that the failing ones will get bought
> out, especially if there is competition in some of their patch. It’s not a
> repeat of the cable company consolidation as they were all regional
> monopolies.

I'd expect that some may go bankrupt, but somebody may pick up the FTTP
assets in the fire sale. Many of them are installing in Openreach ducts, so
they don't have so much physical plant to maintain. I doubt OR will be
ripping out the fibre if they haven't paid the bill, and if OR were to
repossess the assets in lieu of rental fees, well they can add it to the OR
network[*].

So, once the physical fibre is in the ground, some financier may lose their
shirt but I think chances are good it'll stay working.

Theo

[*] some of them use dedicated fibres rather than OR's PON fibre-sharing,
but OR could work out how to integrate that

Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>> There’s apparently 150 or so alt nets at the moment. The money is running
>> out as the cost of capital has gone up and the take up of their services is
>> lower than hoped. Many altnets are struggling/going to struggle to
>> refinance. It’s not at all obvious that the failing ones will get bought
>> out, especially if there is competition in some of their patch. It’s not a
>> repeat of the cable company consolidation as they were all regional
>> monopolies.
>
> I'd expect that some may go bankrupt, but somebody may pick up the FTTP
> assets in the fire sale. Many of them are installing in Openreach ducts, so
> they don't have so much physical plant to maintain. I doubt OR will be
> ripping out the fibre if they haven't paid the bill, and if OR were to
> repossess the assets in lieu of rental fees, well they can add it to the OR
> network[*].
>
> So, once the physical fibre is in the ground, some financier may lose their
> shirt but I think chances are good it'll stay working.
>
> Theo
>
> [*] some of them use dedicated fibres rather than OR's PON fibre-sharing,
> but OR could work out how to integrate that
>

The duct issue is interesting. Cityfibre claim to be great users of PIA
(physical infrastructure access) but they still like digging. They are
installing on my late 1980s estate, which is entirely ducted. However CF
seem to be installing a lot of purple pipe and pavement cabinets. It seems
they only want to use the ducts for the final run into the houses. So I’m
guessing digging is cheaper than the PIA rental fees for much of the
install.

On Monday, 24 April 2023 at 19:04:25 UTC+1, Theo wrote:
> Tweed <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > There’s apparently 150 or so alt nets at the moment. The money is running
> > out as the cost of capital has gone up and the take up of their services is
> > lower than hoped. Many altnets are struggling/going to struggle to
> > refinance. It’s not at all obvious that the failing ones will get bought
> > out, especially if there is competition in some of their patch. It’s not a
> > repeat of the cable company consolidation as they were all regional
> > monopolies.
> I'd expect that some may go bankrupt, but somebody may pick up the FTTP
> assets in the fire sale. Many of them are installing in Openreach ducts, so
> they don't have so much physical plant to maintain. I doubt OR will be
> ripping out the fibre if they haven't paid the bill, and if OR were to
> repossess the assets in lieu of rental fees, well they can add it to the OR
> network[*].

The new fibre is in ~19mm sub ducts in BT's ducts or strung between poles.

The straight nits are easy, but the junctions at road junctions often require dig up. OTOH not as chaotic as the first generation back in the 90's (full dig up).

Depending on what BT's contract is like they may be able to repossess for non payment of rent or be the buyer in the fire sale by the insolvency practioners.

>
> So, once the physical fibre is in the ground, some financier may lose their
> shirt but I think chances are good it'll stay working.
>
> Theo
>
> [*] some of them use dedicated fibres rather than OR's PON fibre-sharing,
> but OR could work out how to integrate that

On Monday, 24 April 2023 at 19:24:46 UTC+1, Tweed wrote:
> Theo <theom...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> > Tweed <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> There’s apparently 150 or so alt nets at the moment. The money is running
> >> out as the cost of capital has gone up and the take up of their services is
> >> lower than hoped. Many altnets are struggling/going to struggle to
> >> refinance. It’s not at all obvious that the failing ones will get bought
> >> out, especially if there is competition in some of their patch. It’s not a
> >> repeat of the cable company consolidation as they were all regional
> >> monopolies.
> >
> > I'd expect that some may go bankrupt, but somebody may pick up the FTTP
> > assets in the fire sale. Many of them are installing in Openreach ducts, so
> > they don't have so much physical plant to maintain. I doubt OR will be
> > ripping out the fibre if they haven't paid the bill, and if OR were to
> > repossess the assets in lieu of rental fees, well they can add it to the OR
> > network[*].
> >
> > So, once the physical fibre is in the ground, some financier may lose their
> > shirt but I think chances are good it'll stay working.
> >
> > Theo
> >
> > [*] some of them use dedicated fibres rather than OR's PON fibre-sharing,
> > but OR could work out how to integrate that
> >
> The duct issue is interesting. Cityfibre claim to be great users of PIA
> (physical infrastructure access) but they still like digging. They are
> installing on my late 1980s estate, which is entirely ducted. However CF
> seem to be installing a lot of purple pipe and pavement cabinets. It seems
> they only want to use the ducts for the final run into the houses. So I’m
> guessing digging is cheaper than the PIA rental fees for much of the
> install.

They can amortise the dig up. Rented ducts depend on sales and the savvy know they don't need FTTP, or at least that they don't need to pay for it.

This may change when BT get around to slugging FTTC tp [ush customers onto more espensive fibre, BUT I measured >200Mbps on 5g recently when I noticed coverage had reached where i was,

notya...@gmail.com <notyalckram@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, 24 April 2023 at 19:24:46 UTC+1, Tweed wrote:
>> Theo <theom...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>>> Tweed <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> There’s apparently 150 or so alt nets at the moment. The money is running
>>>> out as the cost of capital has gone up and the take up of their services is
>>>> lower than hoped. Many altnets are struggling/going to struggle to
>>>> refinance. It’s not at all obvious that the failing ones will get bought
>>>> out, especially if there is competition in some of their patch. It’s not a
>>>> repeat of the cable company consolidation as they were all regional
>>>> monopolies.
>>>
>>> I'd expect that some may go bankrupt, but somebody may pick up the FTTP
>>> assets in the fire sale. Many of them are installing in Openreach ducts, so
>>> they don't have so much physical plant to maintain. I doubt OR will be
>>> ripping out the fibre if they haven't paid the bill, and if OR were to
>>> repossess the assets in lieu of rental fees, well they can add it to the OR
>>> network[*].
>>>
>>> So, once the physical fibre is in the ground, some financier may lose their
>>> shirt but I think chances are good it'll stay working.
>>>
>>> Theo
>>>
>>> [*] some of them use dedicated fibres rather than OR's PON fibre-sharing,
>>> but OR could work out how to integrate that
>>>
>> The duct issue is interesting. Cityfibre claim to be great users of PIA
>> (physical infrastructure access) but they still like digging. They are
>> installing on my late 1980s estate, which is entirely ducted. However CF
>> seem to be installing a lot of purple pipe and pavement cabinets. It seems
>> they only want to use the ducts for the final run into the houses. So I’m
>> guessing digging is cheaper than the PIA rental fees for much of the
>> install.
>
> They can amortise the dig up. Rented ducts depend on sales and the savvy
> know they don't need FTTP, or at least that they don't need to pay for it.
>
> This may change when BT get around to slugging FTTC tp [ush customers
> onto more espensive fibre, BUT I measured >200Mbps on 5g recently when I
> noticed coverage had reached where i was,
>

You won’t get those 5G speeds if others start to use it, this being a very
much contended system. Even Virgin Media with co-ax distribution struggled
with contention until they chopped their distribution into ever smaller
segments. Fibre, as implemented for domestic use, is also contended, but
the capacity to be shared is so very much higher in the first place. FTTC
will slowly fade as the maintenance costs become too great.

On Monday, 24 April 2023 at 19:56:18 UTC+1, Tweed wrote:
> notya...@gmail.com <notya...@gmail.com> wrote:
SNIP
> >
> > This may change when BT get around to slugging FTTC to push customers
> > onto more expensive fibre, BUT I measured >200Mbps on 5g recently when I
> > noticed coverage had reached where i was,
> >
> You won’t get those 5G speeds if others start to use it, this being a very
> much contended system.

5G is less contended than 4G, which in turn is less contended than 3G...
Indeed its main purpose is to provide more connections in busy locations - transport hubs, sports venues etc.

> Even Virgin Media with co-ax distribution struggled
> with contention until they chopped their distribution into ever smaller
> segments.

The uplink was the problem.

> Fibre, as implemented for domestic use, is also contended, but
> the capacity to be shared is so very much higher in the first place.

That is the nature of statistical multiplexing.

> FTTC will slowly fade as the maintenance costs become too great.

It will be gradually superseded. Faster once ISP's stop charging a premium for FTTP.

notya...@gmail.com <notyalckram@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, 24 April 2023 at 19:56:18 UTC+1, Tweed wrote:
>> notya...@gmail.com <notya...@gmail.com> wrote:
> SNIP
>>>
>>> This may change when BT get around to slugging FTTC to push customers
>>> onto more expensive fibre, BUT I measured >200Mbps on 5g recently when I
>>> noticed coverage had reached where i was,
>>>
>> You won’t get those 5G speeds if others start to use it, this being a very
>> much contended system.
>
> 5G is less contended than 4G, which in turn is less contended than 3G...
> Indeed its main purpose is to provide more connections in busy locations
> - transport hubs, sports venues etc.
>
>> Even Virgin Media with co-ax distribution struggled
>> with contention until they chopped their distribution into ever smaller
>> segments.
>
> The uplink was the problem.
>
>> Fibre, as implemented for domestic use, is also contended, but
>> the capacity to be shared is so very much higher in the first place.
>
> That is the nature of statistical multiplexing.
>
>> FTTC will slowly fade as the maintenance costs become too great.
>
> It will be gradually superseded. Faster once ISP's stop charging a premium for FTTP.
>

I think you’ll find FTTC will be charged at a premium once Open Reach want
rid of it. Anyway, do ISPs these days charge a premium for FTTP over FTTC
for a broadly similar speed offering? I’ve just checked Zen who want £34
for 80 Mbit/sec FTTC and £35 for 100 Mbit FTTP

On Tue, 25 Apr 2023 17:10:04 +0000, Tweed wrote:

> I think you’ll find FTTC will be charged at a premium once Open Reach
> want rid of it. Anyway, do ISPs these days charge a premium for FTTP
> over FTTC for a broadly similar speed offering? I’ve just checked Zen
> who want £34 for 80 Mbit/sec FTTC and £35 for 100 Mbit FTTP

I'm with AAISP. I changed from FTTC to FTTC, and chose the speed that had
exactly the same cost.

I went from 16/2.5 Mb/s to 300/50 Mb/s.

> I think you_ll find FTTC will be charged at a premium once Open
> Reach want rid of it.

Once exchanges reach PSTN end of life, for areas that have FTTP already they
cap the FTTC speed to 2Mb, then bar outgoing phone calls and finally cease
service six months later, assuming they've managed to upgrade everyone to FTTP
full fibre.

It started in Salisbury and Mildenhall this month, and in theory by December
2025 FTTC will be dead in areas that have full fibre.

But Openreach is only installing FTTP to about 300K homes each month, 10
million done, 15 million left, which I make until 2027. Unless they speed up or
buy and integrate all the full fibre competitors.

Angus

Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd wrote:
>> I think you_ll find FTTC will be charged at a premium once Open
>> Reach want rid of it.
>
> Once exchanges reach PSTN end of life, for areas that have FTTP already they
> cap the FTTC speed to 2Mb, then bar outgoing phone calls and finally cease
> service six months later, assuming they've managed to upgrade everyone to FTTP
> full fibre.
>
> It started in Salisbury and Mildenhall this month, and in theory by December
> 2025 FTTC will be dead in areas that have full fibre.
>
> But Openreach is only installing FTTP to about 300K homes each month, 10
> million done, 15 million left, which I make until 2027. Unless they speed up or
> buy and integrate all the full fibre competitors.

Openreach technicians that I talk to when I see them working locally
suggest 2035 for FTTP completely installed throughout the UK. That will
mean FTTC (with its associated unreliability) will be used to support
"Digital Voice" or whatever your phone company sells you for telephone
calls.

Some areas can't even get FTTC (either "lack of plant" or customer too
far from exchange) so one hopes that these people will get FTTP.

I'm in a rural Norfolk village that only got FTTC about 3 years ago, but
happily FTTP arrived 2 months ago. Only one connection drop (PPP
failure) in that time, whereas FTTC (1.1km to green cabinet) would drop
the connection and re-sync every few days.

--
Graham J

On Tue 25/04/2023 22:21, Graham J wrote:
> Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd wrote:
>>> I think you_ll find FTTC will be charged at a premium once Open
>>> Reach want rid of it.
>>
>> Once exchanges reach PSTN end of life, for areas that have FTTP
>> already they
>> cap the FTTC speed to 2Mb, then bar outgoing phone calls and finally
>> cease
>> service six months later, assuming they've managed to upgrade everyone
>> to FTTP
>> full fibre.
>>
>> It started in Salisbury and Mildenhall this month, and in theory by
>> December
>> 2025 FTTC will be dead in areas that have full fibre.
>>
>> But Openreach is only installing FTTP to about 300K homes each month, 10
>> million done, 15 million left, which I make until 2027. Unless they
>> speed up or
>> buy and integrate all the full fibre competitors.
>
> Openreach technicians that I talk to when I see them working locally
> suggest 2035 for FTTP completely installed throughout the UK.  That will
> mean FTTC (with its associated unreliability) will be used to support
> "Digital Voice" or whatever your phone company sells you for telephone
> calls.
>
> Some areas can't even get FTTC (either "lack of plant" or customer too
> far from exchange) so one hopes that these people will get FTTP.
>
> I'm in a rural Norfolk village that only got FTTC about 3 years ago, but
> happily FTTP arrived 2 months ago.  Only one connection drop (PPP
> failure) in that time, whereas FTTC (1.1km to green cabinet) would drop
> the connection and re-sync every few days.
>
>

This non-availability will end up nipping OR in the bum.

Take here - Harrogate - for instance. Harrogate and adjoining
Knaresborough have four exchanges between them. Two of those -
Knaresborough and Starbeck have no FTTP capability, but the other two
do. There are about four rural exchanges some distance out of Harrogate
two of which have some FTTP and the others nothing.
Accepted the rural exchanges will require serious civils to get fibre
there, but how they can seemingly not bother about two local exchanges
that represent maybe 30% or more of the urban area baffles me.
Could it be because we are a VM cabled area, and since the Pandemic
started CityFibre have piped most of the urban area as well?

> Accepted the rural exchanges will require serious civils to get
> fibre there, but how they can seemingly not bother about two
> local exchanges that represent maybe 30% or more of the urban
> area baffles me.
> Could it be because we are a VM cabled area, and since the
> Pandemic started CityFibre have piped most of the urban area as
> well?

Probably, I'm in Croydon which is VM cabled and has Community Fibre attempting
to install full fibre using Openreach ducts and poles, but Openreach has no
plans for full fibre here before 2025, nor in many other London areas. And
people close to the exchanges don't even have FTTC.

Unfortunately both VM and Community Fibre can be selective about who is offered
service, too much trouble and they don't bother. At least Openreach takes
service more seriously.

Community Fibre pulled fibre past my pole 9 months ago and offered service to
most in other streets, but the duct between the manhole and pole was blocked
with tarmac so mine got skipped. There have been several visits over 9 months
and a roll of fibre and GPON box is sitting at the bottom for several weeks,
but still no service.

Angus

Woody wrote:

[snip]

>>
>
> This non-availability will end up nipping OR in the bum.
>
> Take here - Harrogate - for instance. Harrogate and adjoining
> Knaresborough have four exchanges between them. Two of those -
> Knaresborough and Starbeck have no FTTP capability, but the other two
> do. There are about four rural exchanges some distance out of Harrogate
> two of which have some FTTP and the others nothing.
> Accepted the rural exchanges will require serious civils to get fibre
> there, but how they can seemingly not bother about two local exchanges
> that represent maybe 30% or more of the urban area baffles me.
> Could it be because we are a VM cabled area, and since the Pandemic
> started CityFibre have piped most of the urban area as well?

I don't think that the availability of fibre in the exchanges matters at
all. FTTP goes from the customer premises directly to a fibre centre -
possibly via optical concentrators (not sure it that's the correct word)
- and the fibres can go a significant distance - tens of km (unlike the
copper pairs for FTTC, ADSL, or even voice).

What OR will then be able to achieve is the complete removal of local
exchanges with all their difficult-to-maintain copper wiring and
switchgear. So several city-centre premises will be up for sale, making
them some money. To say nothing of ripping out the copper wires and
selling them for the scrap metal.

Any staff needed to service customer enquiries of any sort can work from
home - anwhere there is a reasonable internet connection. Since FTTP
can potentially offer 10GB symmetrical this could be virtually anywhere.

--
Graham J

On 25/04/2023 19:39, Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd wrote:
>
> It started in Salisbury and Mildenhall this month, and in theory by December
> 2025 FTTC will be dead in areas that have full fibre.
>
On a cabinet by cabinet level, that'll be no where I suspect. In other
words there won't be 100% FTTP conversion of every home fed by copper
from any of the given thousands of FTTC cabinets. FTTC as a product
ain't going anywhere for the rest of this decade.

On 26/04/2023 08:41, Graham J wrote:
> Woody wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>>>
>>
>  So several city-centre premises will be up for sale, making
> them some money.

Several city-centre premises may well be up for sale - but I dont think
OR will be selling them.

--
random signature text inserted here

> So several city-centre premises will be up for sale, making them
> some money.

Openreach plans to exit 4,500 exchange buildings by the early 2030s.

Just needs a few data centres.

Angus

Abandoned_Trolley wrote:

> Graham J wrote:
>
>> several city-centre premises will be up for sale, making them
>> some money.
>
> Several city-centre premises may well be up for sale - but I dont think
> OR will be selling them.

Telereal Trillium are the owners (for 20+ years) but BT/OR can get some
kickback as individual buildings are vacated, if change of use planning
permission increases the value ...

Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> Could it be because we are a VM cabled area, and since the Pandemic
> started CityFibre have piped most of the urban area as well?

Yes, the pot of subsidy money only covers properties that don't already have
'gigabit capable' (whatever that means) broadband. VM is 'capable', so
those streets get lower down the priority list - then it's just a question
of whether it's economic to do it without subsidy. Since the subsidies may
go away at some point, I suspect OR are trying to nail subsidised areas
first.

The same happened with the FTTC rollout. Where I used to live there was VM
so they didn't get subsidy to install FTTC. Even today your choices are VM
or 11Mbps ADSL. (It is now planned for Cityfibre)

Theo

On Wednesday, 26 April 2023 at 08:42:01 UTC+1, Graham J wrote:
> Woody wrote:
>
> [snip]
> >>
> >
> > This non-availability will end up nipping OR in the bum.
> >
> > Take here - Harrogate - for instance. Harrogate and adjoining
> > Knaresborough have four exchanges between them. Two of those -
> > Knaresborough and Starbeck have no FTTP capability, but the other two
> > do. There are about four rural exchanges some distance out of Harrogate
> > two of which have some FTTP and the others nothing.
> > Accepted the rural exchanges will require serious civils to get fibre
> > there, but how they can seemingly not bother about two local exchanges
> > that represent maybe 30% or more of the urban area baffles me.
> > Could it be because we are a VM cabled area, and since the Pandemic
> > started CityFibre have piped most of the urban area as well?
> I don't think that the availability of fibre in the exchanges matters at
> all. FTTP goes from the customer premises directly to a fibre centre -
> possibly via optical concentrators (not sure it that's the correct word)
> - and the fibres can go a significant distance - tens of km (unlike the
> copper pairs for FTTC, ADSL, or even voice).
>
> What OR will then be able to achieve is the complete removal of local
> exchanges with all their difficult-to-maintain copper wiring and
> switchgear. So several city-centre premises will be up for sale, making
> them some money. To say nothing of ripping out the copper wires and
> selling them for the scrap metal.
>
> Any staff needed to service customer enquiries of any sort can work from
> home - anwhere there is a reasonable internet connection. Since FTTP
> can potentially offer 10GB symmetrical this could be virtually anywhere.
>
> --
> Graham J

I live in Didsbury south Manchester. Our local exchange is around a mile away and by now BT alone probably serves over 50k connections from it: -
https://www.telecom-tariffs.co.uk/codelook.htm?xid=1796172&locality=11551

Now there are a lot of ducts under the area (a hangover from WWII), however even at one tiny fibre per connection, they would cram out the ducts and then some.

BT already has its concentration points at its cabinets, and in addition has been systematically migrating subscribers onto digital line recently whenever they make any change of service - I just ordered a Wi-Fi extender and I got a new Smart Hub 2 and digital line whether I liked it or not. Someone has run fibre down our [private] road, underground and on poles recently too.

Given the dire state of the 1970's aluminium POTS wiring we rely on now, I think we will be migrated to fibre fairly soon, just as a fibre modem and plug it into the WAN port on their hub.

notya...@gmail.com wrote:

> even at one tiny fibre per connection, they would cram out the ducts and then some.

But it's numerous connections per wavelength, per fibre ...

On Mon, 24 Apr 2023 18:24:43 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>The duct issue is interesting. Cityfibre claim to be great users of PIA
>(physical infrastructure access) but they still like digging. They are
>installing on my late 1980s estate, which is entirely ducted. However CF
>seem to be installing a lot of purple pipe and pavement cabinets. It seems
>they only want to use the ducts for the final run into the houses. So I’m
>guessing digging is cheaper than the PIA rental fees for much of the
>install.

Here, in Leicester, Zen used the BT ducts where there was capacity and
installed new ones where there wasn't, or to reach areas directly,
when BT went, literally, round the houses.
My Zen fibre connection makes use of a microduct installed in the BT
duct to the house but adjoining areas need connecting via a mini
chamber in the pavement.

On 26 Apr 2023 07:40, Woody wrote:
> On Tue 25/04/2023 22:21, Graham J wrote:
>> Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd wrote:
>>>> I think you_ll find FTTC will be charged at a premium once Open
>>>> Reach want rid of it.
>>>
>>> Once exchanges reach PSTN end of life, for areas that have FTTP
>>> already they
>>> cap the FTTC speed to 2Mb, then bar outgoing phone calls and finally
>>> cease
>>> service six months later, assuming they've managed to upgrade everyone
>>> to FTTP
>>> full fibre.
>>>
>>> It started in Salisbury and Mildenhall this month, and in theory by
>>> December
>>> 2025 FTTC will be dead in areas that have full fibre.
>>>
>>> But Openreach is only installing FTTP to about 300K homes each month, 10
>>> million done, 15 million left, which I make until 2027. Unless they
>>> speed up or
>>> buy and integrate all the full fibre competitors.
>>
>> Openreach technicians that I talk to when I see them working locally
>> suggest 2035 for FTTP completely installed throughout the UK.  That will
>> mean FTTC (with its associated unreliability) will be used to support
>> "Digital Voice" or whatever your phone company sells you for telephone
>> calls.
>>
>> Some areas can't even get FTTC (either "lack of plant" or customer too
>> far from exchange) so one hopes that these people will get FTTP.
>>
>> I'm in a rural Norfolk village that only got FTTC about 3 years ago, but
>> happily FTTP arrived 2 months ago.  Only one connection drop (PPP
>> failure) in that time, whereas FTTC (1.1km to green cabinet) would drop
>> the connection and re-sync every few days.
>>
>>
>
> This non-availability will end up nipping OR in the bum.
>
> Take here - Harrogate - for instance. Harrogate and adjoining
> Knaresborough have four exchanges between them. Two of those -
> Knaresborough and Starbeck have no FTTP capability, but the other two
> do. There are about four rural exchanges some distance out of Harrogate
> two of which have some FTTP and the others nothing.
> Accepted the rural exchanges will require serious civils to get fibre
> there, but how they can seemingly not bother about two local exchanges
> that represent maybe 30% or more of the urban area baffles me.
> Could it be because we are a VM cabled area, and since the Pandemic
> started CityFibre have piped most of the urban area as well?

FTTP is (sort of) independent of exchanges. Once we are "all IP" there
will be some Openreach Handover Points, where the access network
connects to the actual services but there will be many, many fewer of
those than exchanges.
https://d2reref.openreach.co.uk/cpportal/products/the-all-ip-programme/exchange-exit-programme