PSTN and ISDN switch-off

[Graham J]

I've read this:

<https://btbusiness.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/55133/~/the-pstn-and-isdn-switch-off%3A-what-it-means-for-you>

I understand how VoIP works, and that implementing it over FTTP will be
easy, and should be very reliable.

I have seen VoIP implemented over FTTC, and where the copper pair to the
green cabinet is not very long it will probably be sufficiently
reliable. Will Openreach actually leave FTTC in place to carry VoIP?
Indefinitely?

In some areas FTTC is not available and never will be. Some of these
areas can get ADSL, usually at speeds of 1 Mbits/sec or less; with
associated horrendous reliability issues. So it's not sensible to carry
VoIP over such poor internet connections. Does anybody know whether all
these usually very rural locations will be upgraded directly to FTTP?

If the only available internet connection is ADSL, will Openreach
actually discontinue PSTN to these users?

--
Graham J

[Martin Brown]

On 06/12/2021 12:29, Graham J wrote:
> I've read this:
>
> <https://btbusiness.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/55133/~/the-pstn-and-isdn-switch-off%3A-what-it-means-for-you>
>
>
> I understand how VoIP works, and that implementing it over FTTP will be
> easy, and should be very reliable.

Very reliable right up to the moment all mains power fails!

> I have seen VoIP implemented over FTTC, and where the copper pair to the
> green cabinet is not very long it will probably be sufficiently
> reliable.  Will Openreach actually leave FTTC in place to carry VoIP?
> Indefinitely?
>
> In some areas FTTC is not available and never will be.  Some of these
> areas can get ADSL, usually at speeds of 1 Mbits/sec or less; with
> associated horrendous reliability issues.  So it's not sensible to carry
> VoIP over such poor internet connections.  Does anybody know whether all
> these usually very rural locations will be upgraded directly to FTTP?

Looks like they will be upgraded to FTTP directly - I am one of the
first in North Yorkshire to take advantage of it. I had to switch from
EE to BT to retain my copper POTS geographic phone line. I correctly as
it turns out don't trust fibre to work without electricity.

I hadn't expected to find this out only a fortnight after upgrading.

I understand from the engineers that rats have already damaged some of
the new underground fibre runs and they are inside pipes with a hefty
insulation and kevlar protection for the fibres inside.

> If the only available internet connection is ADSL, will Openreach
> actually discontinue PSTN to these users?

Probably by forced upgrade at some stage.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[grinch]

On 06/12/2021 14:15, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 06/12/2021 12:29, Graham J wrote:
>> I've read this:
>>
>> <https://btbusiness.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/55133/~/the-pstn-and-isdn-switch-off%3A-what-it-means-for-you>
>>
>>
>> I understand how VoIP works, and that implementing it over FTTP will
>> be easy, and should be very reliable.
>
>

For a single phone circuit you need at most 64k ,that would work over
wet string ,sorry should not be so rude about openreach's network

> I understand from the engineers that rats have already damaged some of
> the new underground fibre runs and they are inside pipes with a hefty
> insulation and kevlar protection for the fibres inside.

The love new copper cables as well its the PVC they like I am told.

>
>> If the only available internet connection is ADSL, will Openreach
>> actually discontinue PSTN to these users?
>
> Probably by forced upgrade at some stage.
>

As the equipment will be switched off and physically disconnected and
scrapped ,it will be then up to the end user if the want to have a land
line or not.

I don't know how they have got away with not having to provide a 999
service as they always had to in the past I don't know.

Once the power goes of in your house you have no land line no matter how
its delivered copper or fibre.

Even if you have battery/generator backup does the next link in the chain?

[Jeff Gaines]

On 06/12/2021 in message <sol98h$i3l$1...@gioia.aioe.org> grinch wrote:

>I don't know how they have got away with not having to provide a 999
>service as they always had to in the past I don't know.
>
>Once the power goes of in your house you have no land line no matter how
>its delivered copper or fibre.

Power was provided to the POTS by the provider though, not your house
supply.

--
Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK
I can please only one person per day. Today is not your day.
Tomorrow, isn't looking good either.

[Martin Brown]

On 06/12/2021 15:12, grinch wrote:
> On 06/12/2021 14:15, Martin Brown wrote:
>> On 06/12/2021 12:29, Graham J wrote:
>>> I've read this:
>>>
>>> <https://btbusiness.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/55133/~/the-pstn-and-isdn-switch-off%3A-what-it-means-for-you>
>>>
>>>
>>> I understand how VoIP works, and that implementing it over FTTP will
>>> be easy, and should be very reliable.
>
> For a single phone circuit you need at most 64k ,that would work over
> wet string ,sorry should not be so rude about openreach's network

Wet string describes it very accurately round here. The water table is
such that many joints are under water this time of year. Joints
sometimes have enough water in that the engineer can shake it and hear
it rattling around like marraccas!

>> I understand from the engineers that rats have already damaged some of
>> the new underground fibre runs and they are inside pipes with a hefty
>> insulation and kevlar protection for the fibres inside.
>
> The love new copper cables as well its the PVC they like I am told.

These are the new fibre ducts with fibre in. The outer PVC coat looks
very similar. The new drop lines are a curious figure of 8 shaped combo
of copper and single fibre in a kevlar fibre jacket. The engineer hated
the stuff because it tears chunks out of flesh and fingernails.

>>> If the only available internet connection is ADSL, will Openreach
>>> actually discontinue PSTN to these users?
>>
>> Probably by forced upgrade at some stage.
>
> As the equipment will be switched off and physically disconnected and
> scrapped ,it will be then up to the end user if the want to have a land
> line or not.
>
> I don't know how they have got away with not having to provide a 999
> service as they always had to in the past I don't know.
>
> Once the power goes of in your house you have no land line no matter how
> its delivered copper or fibre.

POTS stays working though which is why I wanted to keep it.

> Even if you have battery/generator backup does the next link in the chain?

Actually the fibre to premises thing the nodes are sufficiently remote
that they quite probably are outside the powercut zone. Mine is about 12
miles away (much further than the nearest exchange).

In warmer weather I might experiment to see if it does still work during
a scheduled power cut but keeping warm was by far the highest priority
last weekend. Some people are still not yet back on power.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[notya...@gmail.com]

On Monday, 6 December 2021 at 12:29:21 UTC, Graham J wrote:
> I've read this:
>
> <https://btbusiness.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/55133/~/the-pstn-and-isdn-switch-off%3A-what-it-means-for-you>
>
> I understand how VoIP works, and that implementing it over FTTP will be
> easy, and should be very reliable.
>
> I have seen VoIP implemented over FTTC, and where the copper pair to the
> green cabinet is not very long it will probably be sufficiently
> reliable.

Been using it for fifteen years, initially without FTTC.

> Will Openreach actually leave FTTC in place to carry VoIP? Indefinitely?

Dunno. The will be a point where they may decide to replace all residual POTS lines with fibre to simplify mainenance.

>
> In some areas FTTC is not available and never will be. Some of these
> areas can get ADSL, usually at speeds of 1 Mbits/sec or less; with
> associated horrendous reliability issues. So it's not sensible to carry
> VoIP over such poor internet connections.

1Mbps ample to carry quite a few VOIP calls. Voip also runs over 3G, 4G and I presume 5G. I first used Voip over 3G accidentally in 2009.

> Does anybody know whether all
> these usually very rural locations will be upgraded directly to FTTP?
>
> If the only available internet connection is ADSL, will Openreach
> actually discontinue PSTN to these users?

See above.

>
> --
> Graham J

[Graham J]

notya...@gmail.com wrote:

[snip]

>
> 1Mbps ample to carry quite a few VOIP calls. Voip also runs over 3G, 4G and I presume 5G. I first used Voip over 3G accidentally in 2009.

Which begs the question of why the mobile phone system was never carried
over IP in the first place!

--
Graham J

[Graham J]

Martin Brown wrote:

[snip]

> Looks like they will be upgraded to FTTP directly - I am one of the
> first in North Yorkshire to take advantage of it.

Are you very remote? I have a farm customer near Holbeach who has ADSL
at about 1 Mbits/sec, so his copper pair is about 5km long, and very
unreliable to boot. There are only a dozen or so other properties
within about a 5km radius circle, so I can't see Openreach running fibre
to any of these.

> I had to switch from
> EE to BT to retain my copper POTS geographic phone line. I correctly as
> it turns out don't trust fibre to work without electricity.
>
> I hadn't expected to find this out only a fortnight after upgrading.

Did you try connecting a UPS to your fibre modem, to establish whether
the remote fibre node was in fact still active despite the well known
and widespread power failure?


--
Graham J

[Martin Brown]

In the early days of mobile phones digital data rates were slow *and*
expensive.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Graham J]

The first UK mobile phone service (in about 1985) was indeed all analog.

When the first digital mobile service was introduced there was no
user-level access to the digital layer. User level digital traffic was
modulated onto a carrier (in the same way as a dial-up modem on a copper
pair) which was then itself digitised before being carried over the
underlying digital channel, hence the expense and slow speed.

My point was that we could have bypassed these multiple conversions by
implementing the underlying digital layer as IP (ideally IPv6) at the
outset. Does anybody know why this was not done?


--
Graham J

[Graham J]

Graham J wrote:

[snip]

>
> If the only available internet connection is ADSL, will Openreach
> actually discontinue PSTN to these users?

Adding to this: I have a friend who lives in very rural Lincolnshire, on
the end of a 12km copper pair. So he has no wired internet service
whatever. How will Openreach provide him with a voice service when PSTN
is discontinued?


--
Graham J

[Martin Brown]

On 06/12/2021 15:58, Graham J wrote:
> Martin Brown wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> Looks like they will be upgraded to FTTP directly - I am one of the
>> first in North Yorkshire to take advantage of it.
>
> Are you very remote?  I have a farm customer near Holbeach who has ADSL
> at about 1 Mbits/sec, so his copper pair is about 5km long, and very
> unreliable to boot.  There are only a dozen or so other properties
> within about a 5km radius circle, so I can't see Openreach running fibre
> to any of these.

Not all that remote really but I never expected them to run full fibre
to a hamlet with a dozen houses - or even more crazy to the end of a
public road which serves one farm (but with a 1/2 mile private drive).

I think the big gotcha for farms is that you have to pay for the long
cable run on your own land. One has been quoted £3k (so they told me).

It is worth considering EE 4GEE (or whatever they call it now) or the
corresponding Three offering using a MiFi with external antenna
capability and a couple (I found one adequate in practice) of yagi
antennae bought via eBay from China (make sure you choose the right band
for the locality). I found with those I could work mobile phone masts
right up to the time gating limit of 35km distant if there was line of
sight. Directional antennas are tetchy but once set up reliable.

Round here there is a rival microwave network run by these guys too:

https://www.quickline.co.uk/home-connect-internet-only/

(name keeps changing) it gives 10M base, 30M or 300M (expensive) and
most of the farms are on it now. Initial install is ~£250 for the dish
and installation to a high location but monthly cost is not unlike ADSL.

I used to get 5Mpbs on my ADSL2+ line but the average in the village was
2M and anyone further down the lane than me is lucky to get 1M.
Reliability was so bad that farmers filling in forms went crazy!

>
>> I had to switch from EE to BT to retain my copper POTS geographic
>> phone line. I correctly as it turns out don't trust fibre to work
>> without electricity.
>>
>> I hadn't expected to find this out only a fortnight after upgrading.
>
> Did you try connecting a UPS to your fibre modem, to establish whether
> the remote fibre node was in fact still active despite the well known
> and widespread power failure?

No. I was quite literally too busy on the Saturday running an Xmas Fair
in the Village Hall without any electricity and on the Sunday stacking
the logs that had just arrived. The rest of the time was spent just
trying to keep warm in the living room next to the wood burning stove.

The rest of the house got down to danger of frost damage temperatures so
I wasn't keen to do anything outside of the living room at all. Trips
out in the car to get a newspaper, more batteries and meths was about it.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Graham J]

Martin Brown wrote:

[snip]

>
> I think the big gotcha for farms is that you have to pay for the long
> cable run on your own land. One has been quoted £3k (so they told me).

Most farmers I know would drag a moling tool behind a tractor to put in
the Openreach duct for them ...

> It is worth considering EE 4GEE (or whatever they call it now) or the
> corresponding Three offering using a MiFi with external antenna
> capability and a couple (I found one adequate in practice) of yagi
> antennae bought via eBay from China (make sure you choose the right band
> for the locality). I found with those I could work mobile phone masts
> right up to the time gating limit of 35km distant if there was line of
> sight. Directional antennas are tetchy but once set up reliable.

We have done just that at this farm site. It was only possible because
there was already a suitable mast on the roof of a barn where a 10 metre
teleporter could give access to the mast to fit the transceiver/router
box. And this is in flat Lincolnshire! But the line of sight to the
only visible phone mast is through a clump of trees!

The remaining problem is that the 4G service (from EE) has a dynamic IP,
which changes fairly frequently. When that IP is in a blacklist, email
traffic for the user's mail server is blocked. I've talked to several
reputable mail hosting services and they all block traffic from
blacklisted IPs. I'm aware that Gmail does not apply such blacklisting,
but I'm sure it will only be a matter of time before it is forced on them.


--
Graham J

[Richmond]

This is odd. They ask a question and then fail to answer it.

"When will my area be full fibre-enabled?

You can find out if your address has been full fibre-enabled by clicking
on the Check availability button at What’s available to me now?"

I think they are saying it will be enabled when it has been enabled.

[Tweed]

They will have to put in a fibre. It would ultimately cost them more to
keep the legacy kit in the exchange (that’s probably going to be sold off)
working, plus they will ultimately not have any lines persons trained to
work on copper. Or they might provide a wireless solution if that’s viable
at the time.

[Martin Brown]

On 06/12/2021 16:38, Graham J wrote:
> Martin Brown wrote:
>
> [snip]
>>
>> I think the big gotcha for farms is that you have to pay for the long
>> cable run on your own land. One has been quoted £3k (so they told me).
>
> Most farmers I know would drag a moling tool behind a tractor to put in
> the Openreach duct for them ...

I'll have more on that story eventually, for now they have decided to
leave it until after Xmas since disrupted phone service right now would
knacker their Farm Shop. We had that problem a few years back when
frayed BT cable bridged my circuit and theirs so it was like a party
line. Neither ADSL link could function and phones rang in both
locations. I agreed with them to never answer and if it turned out to be
a call for me they would ring my mobile and say "pick up your phone".

Fault persisted for a week on and off. Their ADSL was never any good
after that so they went with Quickline for the shop and holiday lets. I
definitely got the better copper pair (I recommend tea and biscuits for
keeping cold wet engineers spirits up and getting the best line).

>
>> It is worth considering EE 4GEE (or whatever they call it now) or the
>> corresponding Three offering using a MiFi with external antenna
>> capability and a couple (I found one adequate in practice) of yagi
>> antennae bought via eBay from China (make sure you choose the right
>> band for the locality). I found with those I could work mobile phone
>> masts right up to the time gating limit of 35km distant if there was
>> line of sight. Directional antennas are tetchy but once set up reliable.
>
> We have done just that at this farm site.  It was only possible because
> there was already a suitable mast on the roof of a barn where a 10 metre
> teleporter could give access to the mast to fit the transceiver/router
> box.  And this is in flat Lincolnshire!  But the line of sight to the
> only visible phone mast is through a clump of trees!

Trees can be bad news in the summer when it rains.

>
> The remaining problem is that the 4G service (from EE) has a dynamic IP,
> which changes fairly frequently.  When that IP is in a blacklist, email
> traffic for the user's mail server is blocked.  I've talked to several
> reputable mail hosting services and they all block traffic from
> blacklisted IPs.  I'm aware that Gmail does not apply such blacklisting,
> but I'm sure it will only be a matter of time before it is forced on them.

Ouch. I never encountered that problem but then I only ever used the
mobile data high speed link intermittently for things where the fixed
line 5Mbps just would not do (mostly teleconferencing).

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[grinch]

They wont bother if they don't absolutely have to .If he wants to pay
for a fibre install himself that's different. I the past you might have
been able to get a grant from EU funds but that of course it now not
possible.

We do need to get over the belief that we are entitled to a service,that
is not the case it has to be profitable for the service provider.

18 years of working for various ISP's has taught me that.

[Graham J]

What about the USO (Universal Service Obligation) to supply a voice
connection? Will this be discontinued? Or will it be extended to
provision of a broadband service capable of supporting VoIP?

In my friend's location there is no 3G or 4G signal inside his property,
so a mobile phone would not be a solution.

--
Graham J

[Graham J]

Graham J wrote:

[snip]

To repeat my earlier question:

> Will Openreach actually leave FTTC in place to carry VoIP?
> Indefinitely?

Does anybody know?

--
Graham J

[notya...@gmail.com]

On landlines, mainly because telephone exchanges were circuit switched and lines were real. When I was a kid there were dozens of lines strung between telegraph poles alongside main railway lines. By the late 1970's the telco's had moved up to time division multiplexing adopting CCITT [now ITU] protocol No. 7 for international links and the GPO [later BT] based their System X telephone exchanges on this, although the core of their exchanges was still a time - space - time switch.

On mobiles AFAIK the backhaul was always IP or something very similar, although in remoter areas BT Cellnet may just have passed calls onto their PSTN network from 1985 to the advent of 2.5G.

[notya...@gmail.com]

On Monday, 6 December 2021 at 16:11:47 UTC, Graham J wrote:
> Martin Brown wrote:

SNIP

> >
> The first UK mobile phone service (in about 1985) was indeed all analog.
>
> When the first digital mobile service was introduced there was no
> user-level access to the digital layer. User level digital traffic was
> modulated onto a carrier (in the same way as a dial-up modem on a copper
> pair) which was then itself digitised before being carried over the
> underlying digital channel, hence the expense and slow speed.
>
> My point was that we could have bypassed these multiple conversions by
> implementing the underlying digital layer as IP (ideally IPv6) at the
> outset. Does anybody know why this was not done?
>

IPv6 not specified until 1995 and not even a draft standard until 1998.

They would have needed a Tardis.

>
> --
> Graham J

[Andy Burns]

Graham J wrote:

> To repeat my earlier question:
>
>> Will Openreach actually leave FTTC in place to carry VoIP? Indefinitely?
>
> Does anybody know?

Well, they'll have to for *many* years after POTS is dead, FTTC will remain the
default for most people after that, whether many will bother with VoIP remains
to be seen ...

[Graham J]

Surely the justification for Openreach to discontinue the PSTN is that
maintenance of the copper lines and phone circuit switching will be
unaffordable.

But this is inconsistent with leaving copper pairs running from the
green cabinet to each nearby household - Openreach will still have to
train and employ staff to maintain these lines. Given that the the
copper pair is the least reliable part of the broadband service, why
would they do this?

--
Graham J

[Martin Brown]

Judging from my conversations with my previous ISP and also with BT the
explanation is that "no-one wants a landline any more" so the use of the
fixed line phones will eventually cease as our generation expires.

They could be right. A fair number of people round here have abandoned
their BT landline as too slow for internet and just too unreliable.

All full fibre FTTP apart from with BT are now strictly internet only
with VOIP as an optional extra you can buy from a third party but you
will lose your existing geographic phone number by taking it up.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Andy Burns]

Graham J wrote:
> Surely the justification for Openreach to discontinue the PSTN is that
> maintenance of the copper lines and phone circuit switching will be unaffordable.

There won't be any circuit switching and the copper will only be local(ish)
between cabinet and house just for VDSL.

[Roderick Stewart]

On Tue, 7 Dec 2021 11:51:08 +0000, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:

>> Surely the justification for Openreach to discontinue the PSTN is that
>> maintenance of the copper lines and phone circuit switching will be
>> unaffordable.
>>
>> But this is inconsistent with leaving copper pairs running from the
>> green cabinet to each nearby household - Openreach will still have to
>> train and employ staff to maintain these lines.  Given that the the
>> copper pair is the least reliable part of the broadband service, why
>> would they do this?
>
>Judging from my conversations with my previous ISP and also with BT the
>explanation is that "no-one wants a landline any more" so the use of the
>fixed line phones will eventually cease as our generation expires.
>
>They could be right. A fair number of people round here have abandoned
>their BT landline as too slow for internet and just too unreliable.

There are probably also a fair number of places like mine, where the
existing copper from the cabinet is more than adequate for my needs. I
can browse the internet and watch HDTV without glitches of buffering
so I have no nothing to gain by changing anything, especially if it
costs more.

There's a series of TV adverts trying to sell fibre internet on the
grounds that speeds are in the hundreds of Mb/s, which seems to me a
bit lke trying to sell people racing cars to drive to the shops or
fetch the kids from school. This could only work on people who can be
brainwashed to think that "bigger is always better" and have no idea
what the numbers actually mean.

Rod.

[Theo]

grinch <gri...@somewhere.com> wrote:
> They wont bother if they don't absolutely have to .If he wants to pay
> for a fibre install himself that's different. I the past you might have
> been able to get a grant from EU funds but that of course it now not
> possible.
>
> We do need to get over the belief that we are entitled to a service,that
> is not the case it has to be profitable for the service provider.
>
> 18 years of working for various ISP's has taught me that.

I think market conditions are about right for things to move in this
area. Two reasons:

One is that old copper lines are increasingly unreliable, especially ones up
poles that flap in the wind, and ones down holes that get wet. If the
customer is on km of copper line I would expect the maintenance costs are
non zero.

The other is that BT and others get a 130% tax deduction for what they spend
on FTTP infrastructure. In other words they get 1.3x what they spend on
infrastructure off their tax bill. The more they spend, the less taxes they
pay.

That makes it highly attractive to spend big and fast - it is then just a
case of priorities and logistics (ie where to begin and getting enough
workforce to do it). It may be that rural Lincolnshire is not top of the
list, but on the other hand saving the maintenance of that long copper line
starts to make it more attractive than some other, more complicated,
scenarios (eg urban areas where there's lots of work involved in diverting
traffic etc etc).

It may be a poled line, though long, through flat country is actually
relatively cheap to upgrade. And of course they have targets to get
everyone off slow ADSL too.

Theo

[Theo]

Graham J <nob...@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
> Surely the justification for Openreach to discontinue the PSTN is that
> maintenance of the copper lines and phone circuit switching will be
> unaffordable.
>
> But this is inconsistent with leaving copper pairs running from the
> green cabinet to each nearby household - Openreach will still have to
> train and employ staff to maintain these lines. Given that the the
> copper pair is the least reliable part of the broadband service, why
> would they do this?

No, the PSTN switch off is about the *exchange* end of the connection.

You still have copper between the cabinet and you, but without the PSTN
there's no copper from the cabinet to the exchange. There's also no phone
equipment in the exchange, and so now you don't need an exchange.

Backhaul the connection from the cabinet via fibre to a remote datacentre
maybe 30 miles away, that means you can close the exchange (no more leasing
fees - BT don't own them any more), recover the old copper wiring and sell
it for scrap.

BT make cash from selling things off, and save cash by having to maintain
the copper that was only used for voice.

For anyone who wants to buy/lease an old exchange, here's your chance:
https://www.telerealtrillium.com/business-areas/our-properties?page=1&view=all

Theo

[Andy Burns]

Theo wrote:

> One is that old copper lines are increasingly unreliable, especially ones up
> poles that flap in the wind, and ones down holes that get wet.

Though the stories (from Martin Brown?) about rodents damaging fibre aren't
encouraging, whether they're using cheaper types of fibre for "home" use I don't
know, but in 20 years of dealing with openreach and virginmedia fibres to
business premises, I don't recall any rodent incidents ...

[Andy Burns]

Roderick Stewart wrote:

> Martin Brown wrote:
>
>> Judging from my conversations with my previous ISP and also with BT the
>> explanation is that "no-one wants a landline any more" so the use of the
>> fixed line phones will eventually cease as our generation expires.

I would still happily use landlines for reliability/quality, though VoIP ought
to be able to improve on POTS quality, but I think that's probably what will
happen, my parents were the main callers to my home phone, and they're both
sadly dead, my neighbour still calls, but hardly anybody else nowadays.

>> They could be right. A fair number of people round here have abandoned
>> their BT landline as too slow for internet and just too unreliable.
>
> There are probably also a fair number of places like mine, where the
> existing copper from the cabinet is more than adequate for my needs. I
> can browse the internet and watch HDTV without glitches of buffering
> so I have no nothing to gain by changing anything, especially if it
> costs more.

Yes 79.99/19.99 Mbps VDSL is fine for all my needs,
and reliability compared to ADSL is off the scale.

> There's a series of TV adverts trying to sell fibre internet on the
> grounds that speeds are in the hundreds of Mb/s, which seems to me a
> bit lke trying to sell people racing cars to drive to the shops or
> fetch the kids from school. This could only work on people who can be
> brainwashed to think that "bigger is always better" and have no idea
> what the numbers actually mean.

There is a virgin FTTP "toby" at my boundary, but I have no need.

[Java Jive]

On 07/12/2021 09:27, grinch wrote:
>
> We do need to get over the belief that we are entitled to a service,that
> is not the case it has to be profitable for the service provider.
>
> 18 years of working for various ISP's has taught me that.

ISPs in general don't own the infrastructure that their business is
based upon, BT do, and they are under various public service obligations.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

[MB]

On 07/12/2021 13:39, Andy Burns wrote:
> I would still happily use landlines for reliability/quality, though VoIP ought
> to be able to improve on POTS quality, but I think that's probably what will
> happen, my parents were the main callers to my home phone, and they're both
> sadly dead, my neighbour still calls, but hardly anybody else nowadays.

Just listen to any radio news programme and you will see how it has
"improved" quality. Also all those junk callers are using VOIP and it
is often not the just accent that makes it difficult to understand them.

[MB]

On 07/12/2021 12:14, Andy Burns wrote:
> There won't be any circuit switching and the copper will only be local(ish)
> between cabinet and house just for VDSL.

My "fibre" broadband drops our far more often than my PSTN connection,
often several times a week.

Can't remember the last time the PSTN failed.

[Andy Burns]

MB wrote:

> Just listen to any radio news programme and you will see how it has "improved"
> quality.

I don't know how many remote contributors use mobile, VoIP, skype etc, but you
would expect someone would notice the frequent requirement to "call you back on
a better line" and ask for that as the default type of line they use.

[Graham J]

It's because the news programs call people on their mobiles that the
quality is so bad. VoIP beats both mobiles and landlines hands down.

--
Graham J

[Graham J]

Exactly so. The last time my landline failed was in 1987 when I had
ISDN in the form of BT Home Highway, and the drainage ditch digging
contractor cut through the wires in several places.


--
Graham J

[Graham J]

Martin Brown wrote:

[snip]

>
> Judging from my conversations with my previous ISP and also with BT the
> explanation is that "no-one wants a landline any more" so the use of the
> fixed line phones will eventually cease as our generation expires.
>
> They could be right. A fair number of people round here have abandoned
> their BT landline as too slow for internet and just too unreliable.

Mobiles are OK in the outdoors round here, but inside the house they get
no signal. So most people need the landline-based internet connection
to allow WiFi calling.


--
Graham J

[Andy Burns]

Graham J wrote:

> The last time my landline failed was in 1987

Was off for two separate weeks when the pikies stole 1/4 mile of cable, then
stole the replacement shortly afterwards, other than that sometimes it' a bit
crackly, but if it was off right now I wouldn't know ...

[Tweed]

Your needs don’t count for much. Eventually the copper local loop will be
replaced by fibre. FTTC is an intermediate technology. Ultimately full
fibre is cheaper to maintain. The speed of replacement will depend on
capital investment plans and what competition Open Reach faces in a
particular area.

[Tweed]

Thing is it’s not fibre broadband. FTTC is NOT fibre broadband. The
marketing people might like to pretend it is, but that’s a different
matter.

[Theo]

Tweed <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thing is it’s not fibre broadband. FTTC is NOT fibre broadband. The
> marketing people might like to pretend it is, but that’s a different
> matter.

It's 'part fibre' broadband. Perhaps we should call it 'fib broadband'?

Theo

[Roderick Stewart]

As long as "cheaper to maintain" means "cheaper for me", I have no
problem with it, and if it's forced upon me I'll be happy to accept
it, even though hundreds of megabits per second is gross overkill for
what almost any domestic user could ever conceivably need.

Rod.

[Mark Carver]

ADSL could also be called fibre broadband, because that's what the
back-haul to the exchange uses !