Vodafone blocked from reselling OpenReach FTTP?

[www.GymRats.uk]

Openreach finally got fibre to my business property and I've been
waiting for some "good deals" to pop up, and 2 weeks ago a Vodafone
flyer come through the door. Checked out their offerings and they were
exceedingly economical even for their business packages with a static
I.P. address. Postcode checker for the property confirmed all was good
to go but I'd known that for a few months as B.T. and Zen were already
reporting "Ultra fast" was now available.

So I went to finalise the deal yesterday but when I checked again got
the message "you can not have fibre at this time". Re-checked Zen and
BT both said it was good to go.

Checked with Vodafone operative via chat and no, sorry Sir your address
can't have fibre. I tried to explain that a few days ago they said it
could and other suppliers are still saying it can but if "Computer says
no" that's it.

From what I can tell Vodafone were offering FTTP at pretty much
openreach wholesale prices so I'm thinking Openreach have pulled the
plug on Vodafone placing new orders, for the moment at least.

Anyone else able to confirm with an address known to be served by FTTP ?

Cheers - Pete

[Andy Burns]

www.GymRats.uk wrote:


> From what I can tell Vodafone were offering FTTP at pretty much
> openreach wholesale prices so I'm thinking Openreach have pulled the
> plug on Vodafone placing new orders

More likely that vodafone's systems don't have proper data, I'd say ... do
vodafone resell openreach's fibre, or just cityfibre?

[www.GymRats.uk]

Both depending on what's in the area.

Openreach finally completed the area in December although already served
by FTTC except our properties were Exchange Line so no FTTC.

[www.GymRats.uk]

On 02/03/2022 20:21, www.GymRats.uk wrote:

> So I went to finalise the deal yesterday but when I checked again got
> the message "you can not have fibre at this time". Re-checked Zen and
> BT both said it was good to go.
>
> Checked with Vodafone operative via chat and no, sorry Sir your address
> can't have fibre. I tried to explain that a few days ago they said it
> could and other suppliers are still saying it can but if "Computer says
> no" that's it.

OK so on checking again now it appears their business packages have been
removed but domestic packages are still avaialable.
Bit of a shame as no static IP address for domestic.
Perhaps that's an openreach thing.

[BrightsideS9]

On Wed, 2 Mar 2022 20:21:14 +0000, "www.GymRats.uk" <nor...@here.con>
wrote:

>Anyone else able to confirm with an address known to be served by FTTP.

How strange. 18 months ago my son moved into a new (to him) property
out in the countryside. BT said only ADSL available at 1 meg.
Vodafone said no problem with FTTC. So he signed up with Vodafone. Bt
man came to install (well make an old burgar alram line usable as an
FTTC line).

BT man pointed out that on the telegraph pole, some 20 yards away,
there was some 'stuff' and said you could have FTTP if he wanted.

He opted for Vodafone FTTC, and gets 72Meg. Works great then and now.

I often think BT doesn't know what it has available to its own
marketeeers and third party resellers.

--
brightside S9

[Roderick Stewart]

On Wed, 2 Mar 2022 20:21:14 +0000, "www.GymRats.uk" <nor...@here.con>
wrote:

I wouldn't worry about it. If Zen says yes, just go with Zen.

Maybe Vodafone was advertising a lower price, but what's the use of a
lower price for something you can't have? Do you really want to deal
with a company that doesn't keep its promises?

Rod.

[Tim+]

Roderick Stewart <rj...@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Mar 2022 20:21:14 +0000, "www.GymRats.uk" <nor...@here.con>
> wrote:
>
>> Openreach finally got fibre to my business property and I've been
>> waiting for some "good deals" to pop up, and 2 weeks ago a Vodafone
>> flyer come through the door. Checked out their offerings and they were
>> exceedingly economical even for their business packages with a static
>> I.P. address. Postcode checker for the property confirmed all was good
>> to go but I'd known that for a few months as B.T. and Zen were already
>> reporting "Ultra fast" was now available.
>>
>> So I went to finalise the deal yesterday but when I checked again got
>> the message "you can not have fibre at this time". Re-checked Zen and
>> BT both said it was good to go.
>>
>> Checked with Vodafone operative via chat and no, sorry Sir your address
>> can't have fibre. I tried to explain that a few days ago they said it
>> could and other suppliers are still saying it can but if "Computer says
>> no" that's it.
>>
>> From what I can tell Vodafone were offering FTTP at pretty much
>> openreach wholesale prices so I'm thinking Openreach have pulled the
>> plug on Vodafone placing new orders, for the moment at least.
>>
>> Anyone else able to confirm with an address known to be served by FTTP ?
>>
>> Cheers - Pete
>
> I wouldn't worry about it. If Zen says yes, just go with Zen.

A word of warning. Sadly Zen are a bit careless with their language.
According to them I’m on fibre, but they actually mean FTTC. Perfectly
adequate for me but it’s not FTTP.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

[Jeff Gaines]

On 03/03/2022 in message
<98346837.668001618.4282...@news.individual.net> Tim+
wrote:

You are on fibre, FTTC is fibre (to the cabinet).

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
Greater love hath no man than this, that he lay down his friends for his
life.
(Jeremy Thorpe, 1962)

[Andy Burns]

Jeff Gaines wrote:

> Tim+ wrote:
>
>> A word of warning. Sadly Zen are a bit careless with their language.
>> According to them I’m on fibre, but they actually mean FTTC.  Perfectly
>> adequate for me but it’s not FTTP.
>

> You are on fibre, FTTC is fibre (to the cabinet).

By that logic ADSL is also fibre, FTTE (to the exchange)

[Tim+]

Does this mean that as long as the internet passes along any piece of fibre
upstream of my house I’m on “fibre”?

Seems a sloppy and misleading definition. FTTC /= to FTTP.

[Bob Eager]

On Thu, 03 Mar 2022 13:34:48 +0000, Tim+ wrote:

>> You are on fibre, FTTC is fibre (to the cabinet).
>>
>>
> Does this mean that as long as the internet passes along any piece of
> fibre upstream of my house I’m on “fibre”?
>
> Seems a sloppy and misleading definition. FTTC /= to FTTP.

That's marketing for you.

[Tim+]

I know. I would have expected better from Zen though.

[Jeff Gaines]

On 03/03/2022 in message
<1500364916.668007114.260...@news.individual.net>

Tim+ wrote:

>>You are on fibre, FTTC is fibre (to the cabinet).
>>
>
>Does this mean that as long as the internet passes along any piece of fibre
>upstream of my house I’m on “fibre”?
>
>Seems a sloppy and misleading definition. FTTC /= to FTTP.

I think Andy & Tim+ you are being more than somewhat pedantic. FTTC is
known generally & widely as "fibre".

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK

Have you ever noticed that all the instruments searching for intelligent
life are pointing away from Earth?

[Tim+]

Jeff Gaines <jgaines...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 03/03/2022 in message
> <1500364916.668007114.260...@news.individual.net>
> Tim+ wrote:
>
>>> You are on fibre, FTTC is fibre (to the cabinet).
>>>
>>
>> Does this mean that as long as the internet passes along any piece of fibre
>> upstream of my house I’m on “fibre”?
>>
>> Seems a sloppy and misleading definition. FTTC /= to FTTP.
>
> I think Andy & Tim+ you are being more than somewhat pedantic. FTTC is
> known generally & widely as "fibre".
>

By marketeers only. I don’t think it’s pedantry at all, it’s about being
truthful and accurate. Why would anyone defend misinformation?

Given that real FTTP has been available in some areas to folk for some time
calling FTTC fibre is just misleading.

What are all these companies pedalling FTTC as “fibre” gonna call FTTP?
“Real fibre”? “New improved fibre”? “I’m sorry we lied to you before but
here is *real* fibre”?

[Jeff Gaines]

On 03/03/2022 in message
<984078830.668008298.395...@news.individual.net> Tim+
wrote:

>here is real fibre”?
>
>Tim

One is FTTC the other FTTP, what is difficult to understand about that?

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK

I've been through the desert on a horse with no name.
It was a right bugger to get him back when he ran off.

[Peter Johnson]

On 3 Mar 2022 13:56:50 GMT, Tim+ <tim.d...@gmail.com> wrote:


>
>By marketeers only. I don’t think it’s pedantry at all, it’s about being
>truthful and accurate. Why would anyone defend misinformation?
>
>Given that real FTTP has been available in some areas to folk for some time
>calling FTTC fibre is just misleading.
>
>What are all these companies pedalling FTTC as “fibre” gonna call FTTP?
>“Real fibre”? “New improved fibre”? “I’m sorry we lied to you before but
>here is *real* fibre”?
>

So what whould they call FTTC then?

(As someone who expectes to be a Zen FTTP connected customer sometime
this afternoon I have just discovered that when they say the
appointment is 1300-1800 they mean sometime between those times, not
sometime around 1300. I was obviously spoiled when I had a similar
appoinment for the installation of FTTC a few years ago, and the BTO
engineer turned up just after 1300.)

[Andy Burns]

Jeff Gaines wrote:

> One is FTTC the other FTTP, what is difficult to understand about that?

What is misleading is ISPs who sell FTTC as "super fibre broadband", what are
plusnet going to call FTTP whenever they do sell it, maybe take a hint from
BigClive and call it "super mega fibre"?

[Graham J]

.

Given that the cable or fibre infrastructure is owned and maintained by
Openreach (except in Hull), it always has been the case that Openreach
technicians are booked by the half-day (i.e. 08:00 to 13:00 and 13:00 to
18:00). If your technician turned up just after 13:00 then that is just
good luck. Even the technicians themselves don't know when they are
going to be given your job; they complete the current job and log off,
then are issued the next - which might be at the other end of the
county. There does not appear to be any job management that allocates
work to the nearest (or even the most relevantly skilled) technician.

Zen have no power to insist that Openreach's technician turns up at a
specific time. I think this is also true of all other ISPs that use the
Openreach infrastructure. Some (e.g. Talktalk) have their own
technicians - and they are tasked with fixing faults in the customer's
wiring, which effectively means that they are confirming that the fault
is with Openreach, so the fault is then passed on.

I think this is very short-sighted. Openreach could easly have a
premium booking option which for a fee would guarantee a technician
would attend at a specified time.

When I ran a computer support business I would offer to attend the
customer's premises and wait for the engineer. I explained that I would
bring a book or some paperwork and would charge half rates - so £20 per
hour. Given that the usual reason for attending was a failure of their
internet connection I could not generally bring any useful work.



--
Graham J

[Jeff Gaines]

On 03/03/2022 in message <j8c5lq...@mid.individual.net> Andy Burns
wrote:

I can understand that entirely. I would have thought most people in here
would be able to avoid that trap.

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK

640k ought to be enough for anyone.
(Bill Gates, 1981)

[Andy Burns]

Jeff Gaines wrote:

> I would have thought most people in here would be able to avoid that trap.

I think you're right, but what about "normal" people?

[Chris Green]

Graham J <nob...@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Given that the cable or fibre infrastructure is owned and maintained by
> Openreach (except in Hull), it always has been the case that Openreach
> technicians are booked by the half-day (i.e. 08:00 to 13:00 and 13:00 to
> 18:00). If your technician turned up just after 13:00 then that is just
> good luck. Even the technicians themselves don't know when they are
> going to be given your job; they complete the current job and log off,
> then are issued the next - which might be at the other end of the
> county. There does not appear to be any job management that allocates
> work to the nearest (or even the most relevantly skilled) technician.
>

Hey, yes there is! "... job management that allocates work to the

nearest (or even the most relevantly skilled) technician."

Computer software and systems to do exactly that were developed in the
1980s and 1990s at BT's Martlesham laboratories (now Adastral Park).
I worked on that "Work Management" software for many years, from
around 1989 through to my retirement in the early naughties.

The software had several patents related to it and was good enough
that its further development was separated from BT in a new
independent company so that it could be sold to other businesses with
similar problems.

I'm not sure what the situation is now of course as I have been out of
touch for several years.

Of course it is a very intractable problem, the "Travelling Salesman"
problem, but worse. It can be shown that it's impossible to solve
completely with finite processing power, all one can do is slowly
approximate to better solutions.

--
Chris Green
·

[Graham J]

You may have written the software, but my experience as an Openreach
customer suggests that nobody uses it!

(I knew a Chris Stephens who worked at Martlesham and may have retired
about the same time as you. He played water polo, which is how I came
to know him.)


--
Graham J

[Java Jive]

On 03/03/2022 16:13, Chris Green wrote:
>
> Of course it is a very intractable problem, the "Travelling Salesman"
> problem, but worse. It can be shown that it's impossible to solve
> completely with finite processing power, all one can do is slowly
> approximate to better solutions.

Yes, as you and I have discussed before in another place, but for the
benefit of those here who did not see that previous discussion, 'The
Travelling Salesman' problem was for quite a while a well known unsolved
problem in computing circles. ISTR encountering an iterative style of
solution to it when studying for my Maths & Computing degree, but can't
remember much about it now, and no longer have the course material to
refresh my memory !-(

There's some general info here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travelling_salesman_problem

--

Fake news kills!

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

[Chris Green]

Yes, I realise that is perfectly possible! :-)

In fact, IMHO, after we were split off as an independent company it
did feel as if things were less focused on the specific BT
application.

> (I knew a Chris Stephens who worked at Martlesham and may have retired
> about the same time as you. He played water polo, which is how I came
> to know him.)
>

Not someone I know/remember.

--
Chris Green
·

[Jeff Gaines]

On 03/03/2022 in message <j8c7kq...@mid.individual.net> Andy Burns
wrote:

>Jeff Gaines wrote:
>
>>I would have thought most people in here would be able to avoid that trap.
>
>I think you're right, but what about "normal" people?

Hopefully they will turn to us for advice :-)

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK

Though no-one can go back and make a new start, everyone can start from
now and make a new ending.

[www.GymRats.uk]

On 03/03/2022 13:56, Tim+ wrote:

> What are all these companies pedalling FTTC as “fibre” gonna call FTTP?
> “Real fibre”? “New improved fibre”? “I’m sorry we lied to you before but
> here is *real* fibre”?

Some call it "Full Fibre" rather than the undisclosed "Partial Fibre" of
FTTC which seems to be causing a bit of a disturbance on this thread.

[Tim+]

Peter Johnson <pe...@parksidewood.nospam> wrote:
> On 3 Mar 2022 13:56:50 GMT, Tim+ <tim.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> By marketeers only. I don’t think it’s pedantry at all, it’s about being
>> truthful and accurate. Why would anyone defend misinformation?
>>
>> Given that real FTTP has been available in some areas to folk for some time
>> calling FTTC fibre is just misleading.
>>
>> What are all these companies pedalling FTTC as “fibre” gonna call FTTP?
>> “Real fibre”? “New improved fibre”? “I’m sorry we lied to you before but
>> here is *real* fibre”?
>>
> So what whould they call FTTC then?

*sigh*. How about “FTTC”? Calling it just plain “Fibre” is misleading.

[Tim+]

Nothing if those are the terms used by folk selling the services. The
trouble is, they call them both “fibre”.

Forgive me if I’m wrong but I would expect different performance from these
two products.

[Brian Gregory]

Why would anyone care what it's called?
You look at the figures and see what speeds you're going to get.

--
Brian Gregory (in England).

[Tim+]

Brian Gregory <void-invalid...@email.invalid> wrote:
> On 03/03/2022 17:23, Tim+ wrote:
>> Peter Johnson <pe...@parksidewood.nospam> wrote:
>>> On 3 Mar 2022 13:56:50 GMT, Tim+ <tim.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> By marketeers only. I don’t think it’s pedantry at all, it’s about being
>>>> truthful and accurate. Why would anyone defend misinformation?
>>>>
>>>> Given that real FTTP has been available in some areas to folk for some time
>>>> calling FTTC fibre is just misleading.
>>>>
>>>> What are all these companies pedalling FTTC as “fibre” gonna call FTTP?
>>>> “Real fibre”? “New improved fibre”? “I’m sorry we lied to you before but
>>>> here is *real* fibre”?
>>>>
>>> So what whould they call FTTC then?
>>
>> *sigh*. How about “FTTC”? Calling it just plain “Fibre” is misleading.
>>
>> Tim
>>
>
> Why would anyone care what it's called?

Because accuracy costs nothing. Calling a service “fibre” without
explaining that it may never achieve full fibre speeds because it’s just
FTTC is misleading.

> You look at the figures and see what speeds you're going to get.

How about we all stop colluding with the lying ways of ISPs?

[Tweed]

It’s not just about speed. Reliability is another important factor. FTTC is
at the mercy of your local copper loop. FTTP is much more binary, either it
works to spec or you get nothing. FTTC is a bodge and should never be
described as fibre.

[Martin Brown]

It is very sloppy but blame BT marketeers for that. They sold FTTC as
fibre and then had to think of another name for the real FTTP service.
It is deliberately opaque to anyone but the cognescenti.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Martin Brown]

On 03/03/2022 16:06, Jeff Gaines wrote:
> On 03/03/2022 in message <j8c5lq...@mid.individual.net> Andy Burns
> wrote:
>
>> Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>
>>> One is FTTC the other FTTP, what is difficult to understand about that?

Most ISPs for consumer grade connections deliberately blur the two.

>> What is misleading is ISPs who sell FTTC as "super fibre broadband",
>> what are plusnet going to call FTTP whenever they do sell it, maybe
>> take a hint from BigClive and call it "super mega fibre"?
>
> I can understand that entirely. I would have thought most people in here
> would be able to avoid that trap.

But the general public cannot. It is marketeering plain and simple.

I was in the curious position of a choice of EO ADSL2+ copper or FTTP.
There was *NO* and therefore no possibility of FTTC.

This made the overselling "fibre" scammers much easier to detect!

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Martin Brown]

It depends. Unless you want to go beyond 70Mbps you might not notice any
difference at all if you are reasonably close to a cabinet.

The degraded speeds of FTTC are offered on FTTP but they will try pretty
hard to up sell you to a higher tier (worth exploiting by asking for the
36M service at first and reluctantly upgrading to a discounted faster
connection). Why pay the sucker's list price when you don't have to?


--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Brian Gregory]

On 03/03/2022 20:30, Martin Brown wrote:
> The degraded speeds of FTTC are offered on FTTP but they will try pretty
> hard to up sell you to a higher tier (worth exploiting by asking for the
> 36M service at first and reluctantly upgrading to a discounted faster
> connection). Why pay the sucker's list price when you don't have to?

What upload speed do you get with 36Mb download?

[Roderick Stewart]

On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 23:20:59 +0000, Brian Gregory
<void-invalid...@email.invalid> wrote:

>What upload speed do you get with 36Mb download?

About five.

Rod.

[Andy Burns]

Brian Gregory wrote:

> Martin Brown wrote:
>
>> The degraded speeds of FTTC are offered on FTTP but they will try pretty hard
>> to up sell you to a higher tier (worth exploiting by asking for the 36M
>> service at first and reluctantly upgrading to a discounted faster connection).
>> Why pay the sucker's list price when you don't have to?
>
> What upload speed do you get with 36Mb download?

Could be 40/10Mbps or 40/2Mbps
but the latter is no longer sold for FTTP as of 30/06/2021

[Martin Brown]

Answer is it depends. One fibre service round here, Zoom, is symmetric
but AFAIK they don't offer anything as slow as 36M.

BT's full fat fibre hobbled to 36M is 8-9M upload speed which is almost
an order of magnitude faster than the 1Mbps I had on ADSL2+. Doubles if
you have the 72M service.

https://www.bt.com/products/broadband/deals

NB these so called "deals" are still sucker prices.

Upload stayfast guarantee is only 10Mbps (surprisingly low) for all!

https://www.bt.com/help/broadband/full-fibre/what-is-bt-s-stay-fast-guarantee-for-full-fibre

They go to great lengths to hide and obfuscate price and performance.

I am on 150Mbps and get speedtest of 149M down and 31M up.

I had a trial of 500Mbps where I got 300 down and ~50M up.

It didn't seem worth the premium price.



--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Martin Brown]

That is easier said than done.

The BT marketeers go to great lengths to obfuscate exactly what speeds
eg. the misleading Fibre 1 and Fibre 2 products provide.

The problem arose because they hyped up FTTC as "Fibre" by quietly
ignoring the last kilometre of VDSL over copper wire.

That doesn't leave space for true Fibre to premises which is FTTP. It is
sometimes called "Full Fibre" in the less misleading marketing material.

Incidentally the overhead fibre is remarkably strong with its on pole
strain relievers. I saw one holding up a fallen tree 8" trunk earlier in
the week. It was sagging badly but it had not actually broken. I guess
this is from the internal strength of the kevlar weave armour.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Martin Brown]

On 03/03/2022 18:57, Tim+ wrote:
> Brian Gregory <void-invalid...@email.invalid> wrote:
>> On 03/03/2022 17:23, Tim+ wrote:
>>> Peter Johnson <pe...@parksidewood.nospam> wrote:
>>>> On 3 Mar 2022 13:56:50 GMT, Tim+ <tim.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> By marketeers only. I don’t think it’s pedantry at all, it’s about being
>>>>> truthful and accurate. Why would anyone defend misinformation?
>>>>>
>>>>> Given that real FTTP has been available in some areas to folk for some time
>>>>> calling FTTC fibre is just misleading.
>>>>>
>>>>> What are all these companies pedalling FTTC as “fibre” gonna call FTTP?
>>>>> “Real fibre”? “New improved fibre”? “I’m sorry we lied to you before but
>>>>> here is *real* fibre”?
>>>>>
>>>> So what whould they call FTTC then?
>>>
>>> *sigh*. How about “FTTC”? Calling it just plain “Fibre” is misleading.
>>>
>>> Tim
>>>
>>
>> Why would anyone care what it's called?
>
> Because accuracy costs nothing. Calling a service “fibre” without
> explaining that it may never achieve full fibre speeds because it’s just
> FTTC is misleading.

It is intended to be misleading so as to sell more of the product that
they were trying to promote at the time namely FTTC with VDSL delivery
over copper. It was a big improvement over previous ADSL (which in turn
was a huge improvement over V90 of 56kFlex).

>
>> You look at the figures and see what speeds you're going to get.
>
> How about we all stop colluding with the lying ways of ISPs?

You can't do much about it. They will say whatever they think will sell
the most product for the highest price that they can get for it. Hence
you have to ring them up and haggle rather than just do it online.


--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Martin Brown]

On 03/03/2022 19:15, Tweed wrote:
> Tim+ <tim.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Brian Gregory <void-invalid...@email.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> You look at the figures and see what speeds you're going to get.
>>
>> How about we all stop colluding with the lying ways of ISPs?

> FTTC is a bodge and should never be described as fibre.

That ship sailed a long time ago. It is called Fibre by all ISPs.

Full Fibre is the real deal for FTTP.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Tweed]

Not quite. Andrews and Arnold use all the correct terminology.

Home::1 is our domestic broadband package. It includes a real fixed legacy
IPv4 address and a block of routed IPv6 addresses. (An additional block of
four or eight IPv4 address is available upon request at no extra cost,
contact our sales team.) We offer both the slower ADSL services and the
faster VDSL (fibre to the cabinet) services, FTTP and G.FAST services where
available. The package is available with a copper pair or you can use with
a phone line you buy from another Openreach-based provider such as BT.

But otherwise, yes you are right, “full fibre” seems to be the marketing
term for FTTP. Perhaps All Bran broadband?

[Peter Johnson]

On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 15:50:14 +0000, Graham J <nob...@nowhere.co.uk>
wrote:

>>
>> (As someone who expectes to be a Zen FTTP connected customer sometime
>> this afternoon I have just discovered that when they say the
>> appointment is 1300-1800 they mean sometime between those times, not
>> sometime around 1300. I was obviously spoiled when I had a similar
>> appoinment for the installation of FTTC a few years ago, and the BTO
>> engineer turned up just after 1300.)
>
>Given that the cable or fibre infrastructure is owned and maintained by
>Openreach (except in Hull), it always has been the case that Openreach
>technicians are booked by the half-day (i.e. 08:00 to 13:00 and 13:00 to
>18:00). If your technician turned up just after 13:00 then that is just
>good luck. Even the technicians themselves don't know when they are
>going to be given your job; they complete the current job and log off,
>then are issued the next - which might be at the other end of the
>county. There does not appear to be any job management that allocates
>work to the nearest (or even the most relevantly skilled) technician.
>
>Zen have no power to insist that Openreach's technician turns up at a
>specific time. I think this is also true of all other ISPs that use the
>Openreach infrastructure. Some (e.g. Talktalk) have their own
>technicians - and they are tasked with fixing faults in the customer's
>wiring, which effectively means that they are confirming that the fault
>is with Openreach, so the fault is then passed on.
>

Nothing to do with Openreach. The installation was carried out by two
men (with two vans) from Kelly Communications on behalf of CityFibre.
Mine was the 8th FTTP installation they had done yesterday.
And the underlying infrastructure is owned by BT and maintained by (BT
subsidiary) Openreach.

[Graham J]

Peter Johnson wrote:

[snip]

>>
>> Zen have no power to insist that Openreach's technician turns up at a
>> specific time. I think this is also true of all other ISPs that use the
>> Openreach infrastructure. Some (e.g. Talktalk) have their own
>> technicians - and they are tasked with fixing faults in the customer's
>> wiring, which effectively means that they are confirming that the fault
>> is with Openreach, so the fault is then passed on.
>>
>
> Nothing to do with Openreach. The installation was carried out by two
> men (with two vans) from Kelly Communications on behalf of CityFibre.
> Mine was the 8th FTTP installation they had done yesterday.
> And the underlying infrastructure is owned by BT and maintained by (BT
> subsidiary) Openreach.

So did Kelly give you an exact appointment time and stick to it?

I've seen Kelly and MJ Quinn vans where the paintwork says either Kelly
or Quinn together with something like "working on behalf of Openreach".

If in your area the infrastructure is owned by BT and maintained by
Openreach, then CityFibre and Kelly are really just subcontractors
working for BT. If your contract was with CityFibre then you may well
get a better class of service in terms of better appointment times.

I think in some areas (cities, obviously) CityFibre have their own
infrastructure, and there will be a connection somewhere to the rest of
the internet.



--
Graham J

[Andy Burns]

Peter Johnson wrote:

> The installation was carried out by two men (with two vans) from Kelly
> Communications on behalf of CityFibre. Mine was the 8th FTTP installation
> they had done yesterday. And the underlying infrastructure is owned by BT and
> maintained by (BT subsidiary) Openreach.

Surprised that both CityFibre and Openreach are involved, sure it's not just a
multitude of "working with whoever" stickers on the Kelly vans?

[Tweed]

I thought CityFibre owned their own infrastructure, and were competitors to
Open Reach.

[Andy Burns]

Tweed wrote:

> Andy Burns wrote:
>
>> Surprised that both CityFibre and Openreach are involved
>

> I thought CityFibre owned their own infrastructure, and were competitors to
> Open Reach.

Me too, but see Peter's other photos, looks like duct sharing after all ...