Kitz Forum
Broadband Related => Broadband Technology => Topic started by: aesmith on January 08, 2020, 03:16:34 PM
-
Hi,
I wonder if anyone knows the following. (1) What is the maximum distance from the passive splitter to an individual subscriber? (2) do any current FTTP ISPs provide analogue phone service over the FTTP architecture. Information on this second point seems to be contradictory, with references to "the way FTTP used to be installed", and some references to overhead fibre cable including a copper pair as well. The only straight answer that I got was from Zen who say the only way they do telephony is with a separate conventional copper phone line, either newly installed or by taking over an existing line.
The context here is that I'm looking into Community Fibre schemes, and people will want to know what happens to their phone lines - do they still have that line rental cost if they want to keep a conventional phone, or what.
Thanks, Tony S
-
Hi
If there is already a telephone line present, which sounds like there will be, then you have three choices for telephony if going for FTTP for broadband once it is installed. With overhead telephone cable they will replace that with a combined telephone and fibre cable so that the existing telephone line remains. If underground, they usually have room to just pull through a fibre only cable only running alongside the existing old copper wire.
1) Keep the existing copper phone line rental going. Telephone continues over copper, data goes over fibre. Might be more expensive as you are paying two bills, one for data and one for the copper phone line.
2) The way it will be in the future anyway, you ditch the phone line and just have FTTP then add a VoIP solution. This needs either an adaptor or new telephones that will plug into a router. The existing number can be transferred across to the VoIP supplier in most cases. You can opt for someone like SipGate that is free, you only pay for out going calls, but can receive free incoming calls for to the transferred landline number, or go with someone that charges a monthly charge for a package of calls.
3) Ditch a landline altogether and just use a mobile. This is something a lot of people will be doing more and more, certainly the younger generation will not be worried about landlines and many people already only have a landline because you get it automatically for broadband.
Obviously for most people 1 is the simplest most transparent solution as that is what they will already have and the data just moves to FTTP, but may cost more overall and in the next few years they will have to move to option 2 anyway.
As far as I know the telephone port on the FTTP modem is not in use and no products are sold to enable it, probably because Openreach want to stop being involved in providing telephony in the future, they just want to provide data.
Regards
Phil
-
As far as I know the telephone port on the FTTP modem is not in use and no products are sold to enable it, probably because Openreach want to stop being involved in providing telephony in the future, they just want to provide data.
Regards
Phil
Openreach previously supplied FVA to the telephone port on the ONT, but this is no longer supplied. https://www.openreach.co.uk/orpg/home/products/super-fastfibreaccess/fibrevoiceaccess/fibrevoiceaccess.do
-
Thanks for the comments. Regarding SIPgate, which is what I use at home, when I made that change it wasn't possible to port a number into their free service, which meant we had to get a new number. Do you know if that's still the case?
Another point, looking at BT retail's pricing their FTTP product is advertised as "including line rental", and there are options to include calling packages so it certainly looks like it's a voice service. So will that be on copper, or do they do something in their supplied Home Hub to provide voice over IP?
-
Hi
Sipgate do allow a number to be ported in if your current provider also supports it, it is a one of charge of £30 I think, and you end up with two numbers on the same account then, the transferred number and the one they give you by default when you sign up. https://basichelp.sipgate.co.uk/hc/en-gb/articles/204155912-Porting-my-existing-telephone-number-to-sipgate-basic
I don't know how reliable the above process is .
I'm not sure what BT Retail do regarding call packages on FTTP and how they are provided. Maybe someone else can help with that.
Regards
Phil
-
Hi,
I wonder if anyone knows the following. (1) What is the maximum distance from the passive splitter to an individual subscriber? (2)
FTTP planning aims to get the max distance from splitter to CBT at 350mtrs. Then there is a max of 150mtrs from CBT to premises.
Ergo, 500mts in total. :)
-
On their FTTP packages, BT Business now force you to take out their voice service over VOIP, called Digital Voice - even if you have a copper line.
BT Residential are still selling voice over copper to properties where theres a dual copper & fibre feed, however they will follow BT Business and force all FTTP punters onto their Digital Voice service very soon.
Everything else such as calling packages, voice mail etc remains the same on BT.
-
FTTP planning aims to get the max distance from splitter to CBT at 350mtrs. Then there is a max of 150mtrs from CBT to premises.
Ergo, 500mts in total. :)
This is actually really not an issue. Whether the CBT is 500 metres or 5000 metres away it's the optical budget that's the issue, so the sum of however many splits in the fibre and distance from the OLT to the customers.
-
Thanks. I must say the situation with voice on FTTP seems very unclear. I suppose the question I was anticipating was "do I need to pay for my phone line in addition to the FTTP?", and it seems that the answer will have to be "Yes, unless you're technical enough to find and sign up for a SIP service, port your number, source SIP telephony equipment and configure it to suit".
Black Sheep, thanks for the comments. Do O/R have any architectures suitable for rural deployment, where you could easily have properties on the end of 1000m or longer cable runs?
-
Thanks. I must say the situation with voice on FTTP seems very unclear. I suppose the question I was anticipating was "do I need to pay for my phone line in addition to the FTTP?", and it seems that the answer will have to be "Yes, unless you're technical enough to find and sign up for a SIP service, port your number, source SIP telephony equipment and configure it to suit".
Black Sheep, thanks for the comments. Do O/R have any architectures suitable for rural deployment, where you could easily have properties on the end of 1000m or longer cable runs?
Yes that is about the situation of it at the moment. However Openreach are withdrawing all their voice services by 2025, so it is something we will all have to do anyway at some point if we want to keep something we can call a "landline". I expect as we approach 2025 then it will be easier to switch to a VoIP provider as it will just a be much more 'plug and call', i.e. we order the service and a small box arrives ready to plug in and settings are already made.
As for distance, there is no distance barrier as such with FTTP and 1000 metres is no problem, just the associated costs of going further to more distant properties.
Regards
Phil
-
This is actually really not an issue. Whether the CBT is 500 metres or 5000 metres away it's the optical budget that's the issue, so the sum of however many splits in the fibre and distance from the OLT to the customers.
It is an issue as far as the build of the circuit goes.
We have moved into a connectorised age, whereby the CBT's are pre-spliced and only require a physical splice at the SN/IJ.
The CBT's come in various lengths with 350mtrs being the maximum.
Not sure what you mean by 'optical budget', Carl ?? The main issue in rural FTTP is spine capacity, but there are alternatives to pulling in a new spine such as subtended head-ends, cutting the costs drastically.
-
Black Sheep, thanks for the comments. Do O/R have any architectures suitable for rural deployment, where you could easily have properties on the end of 1000m or longer cable runs?
Not having been involved in rural builds as yet (will be from April on wards though), I have no examples to hand ... but IMHO, it won't be the distance per-se that's the issue, but the potential ROI.
I don't think a 1km circuit would be entertained if there is just 1/2 premises at the end of it. There would likely be an IJ located at the entrance to the lane leading to the premises, for future use though ??
Each rural PON build is highly likely to be bespoke, and it will be up to the clerk-of-works/surveyors to come up with the best solution all round.
-
Thanks again. As I mentioned I'm looking at a potential Community Fibre scheme, I'm having some difficulty hooking up with the right people at Openreach, but meantime was trying to get an idea about how realistic it might be. Unfortunately that 1000m with only a couple of houses on it is pretty typical, and furthermore those two or three properties may well be 500m apart. That's just looking at the existing copper routing.
-
Not sure what you mean by 'optical budget', Carl ?? The main issue in rural FTTP is spine capacity, but there are alternatives to pulling in a new spine such as subtended head-ends, cutting the costs drastically.
Sorry my man. Optical budget = acceptable attenuation / loss of light between OLT and ONT. The more you split the light via prisms and the more splices and connectors there are in the cable run causing loss the shorter the total fibre run can be.
Forgot you are constrained by connectorised fibre lengths now!
-
Thanks again. As I mentioned I'm looking at a potential Community Fibre scheme, I'm having some difficulty hooking up with the right people at Openreach, but meantime was trying to get an idea about how realistic it might be. Unfortunately that 1000m with only a couple of houses on it is pretty typical, and furthermore those two or three properties may well be 500m apart. That's just looking at the existing copper routing.
Doable, certainly, but really, really, really expensive. :'(
-
Sorry my man. Optical budget = acceptable attenuation / loss of light between OLT and ONT. The more you split the light via prisms and the more splices and connectors there are in the cable run causing loss the shorter the total fibre run can be.
Forgot you are constrained by connectorised fibre lengths now!
Cheers for the explanation. :)
-
Thanks in turn for all of your explanations. Sharing the knowledge is what places like this are for.
-
:drink:
-
FTTP planning aims to get the max distance from splitter to CBT at 350mtrs. Then there is a max of 150mtrs from CBT to premises.
Ergo, 500mts in total. :)
A couple more questions if people can bear it ..
(1) Black Sheep, just so I'm clear on terminology am I correct in thinking that the CBT runs multiple fibre back to a splitter? And there can be more than one CBT off a single splitter?
I'm visualising the architecture as single fibre from exchange or wherever it's source, going to a single splitter, which in turn may go to several CBTs which in turn each may feed multiple properties. Does that sound about right?
Part of the reason for asking is that we're looking at a Community Fibre contract and there are some exceptions for excess construction charges even after the initial price is paid upfront. Implying that individual householders who've shared the upfront cost might suddenly find their own connection is priced out of reach. Some clarification is being sought but knowing the terminology will help.
(2) Second question. I notice that BT gives guaranteed minimum speeds for their FTTP products. How does that work, surely on fibre the speed should be known, or is this purely allowance for contention. It's significant because if the speed was actually only 10 meg or even 25 meg then the end user would find themselves ineligible for the voucher scheme, as that requires a 30 meg speed.
-
A couple more questions if people can bear it ..
(1) Black Sheep, just so I'm clear on terminology am I correct in thinking that the CBT runs multiple fibre back to a splitter? And there can be more than one CBT off a single splitter?
I'm visualising the architecture as single fibre from exchange or wherever it's source, going to a single splitter, which in turn may go to several CBTs which in turn each may feed multiple properties. Does that sound about right?
Part of the reason for asking is that we're looking at a Community Fibre contract and there are some exceptions for excess construction charges even after the initial price is paid upfront. Implying that individual householders who've shared the upfront cost might suddenly find their own connection is priced out of reach. Some clarification is being sought but knowing the terminology will help.
Absolutely right, pal .... the current build method is to utilise ULW36 (Ultra-lightweight, carrying 36 fibres,
The architecture could work two ways, from the splitter (This splits the light into 32 beams, from a single fibre fed which is from the head-end in the Exchange), the ULW could then feed directly to a CBT, or it could go through IJ's (Intermittent joints) before it reaches the CBT ... it's all dependant on distances when in the planning/surveying stages.
With 'Fibre cities' we work to a PON having a maximum of 120THP (Total Homes Passed) made up of four splitters - ergo - 30 premises per splitter. *There are exceptions to the 30THP per splitter, but it's as rare as hen's teeth.
Alas, 'Community Partnerships' and joint funding etc etc, is not my forte by any stretch of the imagination, I have no idea how that side of it works ?? Sorry.
-
(2) Second question. I notice that BT gives guaranteed minimum speeds for their FTTP products. How does that work, surely on fibre the speed should be known, or is this purely allowance for contention. It's significant because if the speed was actually only 10 meg or even 25 meg then the end user would find themselves ineligible for the voucher scheme, as that requires a 30 meg speed.
Committed information rates on the Openreach FTTP products. Worst case performance under contention on the Openreach section of the network.
https://www.btplc.com/SINet/SINs/pdf/506v1p6.pdf
-
Thanks for the SIN.