Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Bowdon]

I would have thought in the long run keeping the port on the ONT would have been good leverage for OR. The more they remove the less they will be involved.

I also thought these ISP's were all about streamlining kit. If we're all using different UPS units in different formations its adding to an otherwise slick diagnosis problem solving path.

[Reformed]

I would have thought in the long run keeping the port on the ONT would have been good leverage for OR. The more they remove the less they will be involved.

Not really. How do you propose they switch the PSTN off while still running a voice service? They'd have to build an entirely new voice platform akin to the original plans for 21CN.

Its kinda weird they were gung-ho on going ahead when any idiot could see the issues of vulnerable users being left in the dark.  Seemed a huge oversight the instant they decided not to carry voice from the ONT and ditch the battery.

Have to draw the line at some point. This is a failure of the service providers selling phone services with no regard for resilience, not Openreach. Plenty of notice was given of changes to voice provision.

[Alex Atkin UK]

Have to draw the line at some point. This is a failure of the service providers selling phone services with no regard for resilience, not Openreach. Plenty of notice was given of changes to voice provision.

You might argue that yes the ISP should perhaps offer a UPS solution for their router, but that still leaves the ONT as a problem.  The average end user it would probably never occur to them of the need for a UPS as they never have needed one before.  They also don't tend to come in kid-friendly or elderly friendly form factors.  The original BBU covered those things perfectly and also had very easy/cheap to replace (and dispose of the old ones) batteries.

I'd certainly argue that it being the ISPs responsibility to keep the ONT powered is not true, the ONT is OR domain and they should be the ones providing something.

I totally get the flexibility of having VoIP over the Internet so you can connect from anywhere, but on the other hand VoIP from the ONT over its own VLAN with a higher priority for its traffic makes a lot of sense for a home phone line.  Should contention ever happen on the PON, VoIP should get priority and if its done independently of the Internet connection it also doesn't fall foul of net neutrality.

[tonygibbs16]

You might argue that yes the ISP should perhaps offer a UPS solution for their router, but that still leaves the ONT as a problem.  The average end user it would probably never occur to them of the need for a UPS as they never have needed one before.  They also don't tend to come in kid-friendly or elderly friendly form factors.  The original BBU covered those things perfectly and also had very easy/cheap to replace (and dispose of the old ones) batteries.

I'd certainly argue that it being the ISPs responsibility to keep the ONT powered is not true, the ONT is OR domain and they should be the ones providing something.

I totally get the flexibility of having VoIP over the Internet so you can connect from anywhere, but on the other hand VoIP from the ONT over its own VLAN with a higher priority for its traffic makes a lot of sense for a home phone line.  Should contention ever happen on the PON, VoIP should get priority and if its done independently of the Internet connection it also doesn't fall foul of net neutrality.

I think that there are couple of things in here:

• ONT needs to be powered up for FTTP to work, so I think that OR have a responsibility to provide a battery backup for ONT especially for vulnerable customers or those in mobile not spots. But no ONT for FTTC.
           - Openreach have been saying that they don't know who vulnerable customers are. see this webinar by the London Office of Technology and Innovation on Analogue to Digital Switchover.
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AXbl2DhQww
• ISPs and VoIP providers need to let customers know that VoIP will go down if the router and phone are not powered. OFCOM has been saying that Communication Service Providers have to make it possible to make 999/112 emergency calls when there is a power cut. BT was saying use your mobile, but now they are not.

It is a complicated situation, because power from the exchange for telephony has been there for circa 100 years, and so POTS has been the last service working in most houses when everything else is down.

I think that events like Storm Arwen are showing that it is a bigger issue & change than companies like BT realised.

Cheers,
     Tony

[Reformed]

I totally get the flexibility of having VoIP over the Internet so you can connect from anywhere, but on the other hand VoIP from the ONT over its own VLAN with a higher priority for its traffic makes a lot of sense for a home phone line.  Should contention ever happen on the PON, VoIP should get priority and if its done independently of the Internet connection it also doesn't fall foul of net neutrality.

This can be done without plugging a handset into the ONT. CP orders 2 x CVLANs from Openreach and has one of them set at higher priority on Openreach's systems and have their CPE shape.

See https://www.openreach.co.uk/cpportal/content/dam/cpportal/public/images-and-documents/home/help-and-support/sins/documents/SIN_506.pdf sections 2.1.5-2.1.7 and  2.3.9-2.3.10.

[Alex Atkin UK]

I think that events like Storm Arwen are showing that it is a bigger issue & change than companies like BT realised.

That's what bothers me, I could see this issue a mile away, I find it odd it took an actual event for them to see it.

[j0hn]

What do they do when the next storm takes down their phone line instead of knocking out the power?

[licquorice]

They will insist that all infrastructure is underground to prevent storm damage.

[Black Sheep]

........ and then the floods came ...... 

[licquorice]

 

[Alex Atkin UK]

What do they do when the next storm takes down their phone line instead of knocking out the power?

But now you're getting into whataboutisms.  This isn't about covering every eventuality, its about trying to make it as reliable as POTS was.

........ and then the floods came ...... 

That's why I live on a hill, though of course that means the electricity comes via lower areas but we do seem to get less power cuts than the rest of the city.

[Reformed]

Getting it as reliable as POTS is certainly doable. Anyone want to volunteer to pay for it?

[Alex Atkin UK]

Getting it as reliable as POTS is certainly doable. Anyone want to volunteer to pay for it?

You're forgetting that there were certain things they HAD to cover the cost of as part of the privatisation in the first place.  My grandparents already paid for the original infrastructure that they bought for a steal and as getting rid of it means they are no longer holding up their end of the bargain (they already got rid of most pay phones) then surely they should at least make it as reliable?

[Reformed]

What they had to cover is irrelevant. BT was privatised a long time ago and the infrastructure purchased at the market rate.

Perhaps part of the reason for the lower acquisition price was the enormous pension liabilities?

Either way they're a privately owned, publicly owned business with the obligations the regulator and competition place on them. These are a balancing act.

No reason at all why almost everyone can't be covered via wireless infrastructure. If battery backup on the land line + bigger battery backup wireless isn't enough we're in trouble.

At the extremes satellite could be engaged, too. However unless you're planning on providing generators to everyone in the group, fueling and maintaining them free of charge there's always going to be the constraint of power supply to the home.

There may well end up being a last resort service for vulnerable people and it'll be BT. None of the altnets will be interested.

[HPsauce]

Not sure if the left and right hands inside BT are communicating, I got this the other day:

We’re moving to Digital Voice Services and because of this a landline Calling Feature you’re subscribed to called ‘Call Sign’ will be removed on 30 September 2022.  Your Calling Features package will be updated accordingly and you won’t be billed for it after this date.