Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Is it the end of the line for landline phones?
110 views
Skip to first unread message
Java Jive
Apr 22, 2021, 8:21:28 AM4/22/21
to
Is it the end of the line for landline phones?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56831212
"When did your home landline last ring?
On the rare occasion it does, we all know the chances are it's going to
be a scam caller, especially since in the last year our elderly parents
have all mastered Whatsapp and Zoom.
Plus mobile calls have come down in price over the last decade.
As a result, 40% of us have stopped using a landline phone altogether,
according to new survey from price comparison site Uswitch.
And while 95% of over-65-year-olds still have a traditional phone,
nearly half of under-25s don't even have a landline installed.
[...]
"We've been locked inside for a year, but landline use has actually
fallen," points out Uswitch's Nick Baker.
[...]
In 2000 95% of homes had landlines, now that's fallen to around 80% of
homes. But even in homes that have fixed line, many just have it because
it comes as part of a package supplying broadband. A quarter of them
don't have a handset attached."
Smallish survey though ...
--
Fake news kills!
I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56831212
"When did your home landline last ring?
On the rare occasion it does, we all know the chances are it's going to
be a scam caller, especially since in the last year our elderly parents
have all mastered Whatsapp and Zoom.
Plus mobile calls have come down in price over the last decade.
As a result, 40% of us have stopped using a landline phone altogether,
according to new survey from price comparison site Uswitch.
And while 95% of over-65-year-olds still have a traditional phone,
nearly half of under-25s don't even have a landline installed.
[...]
"We've been locked inside for a year, but landline use has actually
fallen," points out Uswitch's Nick Baker.
[...]
In 2000 95% of homes had landlines, now that's fallen to around 80% of
homes. But even in homes that have fixed line, many just have it because
it comes as part of a package supplying broadband. A quarter of them
don't have a handset attached."
Smallish survey though ...
--
Fake news kills!
I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk
Tweed
Apr 22, 2021, 8:35:55 AM4/22/21
to
it for outbound calls. If I want someone to reach me I give them my mobile
number, as I’m likely to have it with me. The landline phones sit gathering
dust. Even the costs don’t justify its existence. I have a very cheap
landline rental deal with Zen. £12.30 per month rental, calls billed as
used. My mobile is £14 per month, unlimited call and 10Gb data per month.
Virgin cable carries my broadband (no phone or TV). The landline may have
to go.....
Mark Carver
Apr 22, 2021, 9:46:23 AM4/22/21
to
On 22/04/2021 13:21, Java Jive wrote:
> Is it the end of the line for landline phones?
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56831212
>
I'm planning to let my landline number die when BT finally decommission
> Is it the end of the line for landline phones?
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56831212
>
my PSTN circuit.
An interesting question, given that the ISPs (that offer SOGEA etc
services) use (proprietary ?) and differing methods of providing the
voice circuit, (which involve a telephone socket on their supplied
routers) is how would you achieve the telephone service using your own
router ?
Tweed
Apr 22, 2021, 10:10:46 AM4/22/21
to
porting it to sipgate, just to mop up the odd important call. You don’t
need to devote any equipment to it, as sipgate will email you a recording
of any messages left by a caller. (An incoming call goes to answerphone if
no sip phone active) Apart from the £30 porting fee there are no ongoing
charges. I’ve recently done this with the number of my recently deceased
mother.
Chris Green
Apr 22, 2021, 10:18:03 AM4/22/21
to
Java Jive <ja...@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
> Is it the end of the line for landline phones?
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56831212
>
> "When did your home landline last ring?
>
Well ours rings several times a day at least. E.g. three times this
> Is it the end of the line for landline phones?
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56831212
>
> "When did your home landline last ring?
>
morning and I don't suppose that's all for today. ... *and* they were
all wanted calls.
--
Chris Green
·
Mark Carver
Apr 22, 2021, 10:18:50 AM4/22/21
to
On 22/04/2021 15:10, Tweed wrote:
>
> Just before you euthanise your landline number, give some thought to
> porting it to sipgate, just to mop up the odd important call. You don’t
> need to devote any equipment to it, as sipgate will email you a recording
> of any messages left by a caller. (An incoming call goes to answerphone if
> no sip phone active) Apart from the £30 porting fee there are no ongoing
> charges. I’ve recently done this with the number of my recently deceased
> mother.
>
Oh, I like the idea of that. If it's just a 30 quid one off charge, then
>
> Just before you euthanise your landline number, give some thought to
> porting it to sipgate, just to mop up the odd important call. You don’t
> need to devote any equipment to it, as sipgate will email you a recording
> of any messages left by a caller. (An incoming call goes to answerphone if
> no sip phone active) Apart from the £30 porting fee there are no ongoing
> charges. I’ve recently done this with the number of my recently deceased
> mother.
>
fine.
I've had a quick look on Sipgate's website, but couldn't work out which
product (or mix of products) it is ?
Woody
Apr 22, 2021, 10:33:52 AM4/22/21
to
Tweed
Apr 22, 2021, 10:36:31 AM4/22/21
to
You set it up first and they allocate a random number within the area code
you select. Being German they are very thorough and snail mail you a
verification code to check that the address you give is genuine. Once
you’ve done that you can go through the porting process. They have help
pages on that. You can email them now to double check that your number is
able to be ported. If it is a standard domestic line there should be no
issues.
Woody
Apr 22, 2021, 10:48:24 AM4/22/21
to
Firstly as a mobile does not give indication of the callers location, if
the number is unknown to the (landline user) recipient they likely will
not answer it.
Secondly many people - especially older people - if they are not on a
landline package (such as BT now offer) that includes calls to mobiles
they may not call back for fear of call costs.
Thirdly those same people may not call back even if they are on a
package that includes mobile calls as they fear not being able to hear
and/or use the voicemail in many cases due to the OGM being low level.
One major issue is that mobile users seem to expect the audio quality to
be perfect and do not realise that the person they are calling may have
difficulty hearing what they are saying, again especially if elderly
and/or have a hearing deficiency. Our daughter (on VF) enjoys a
reasonably good mobile signal on her iPhone at home, but if she calls my
wife who has a hearing problem (she has a type of frequency selective
deafness due to a medical condition) and the incoming speech is 'burbly'
she cannot understand what is being said. For that matter I have normal
hearing (save perhaps some HF loss due to age) and I even have
difficulty hearing what daughter is saying sometimes.
Theo
Apr 22, 2021, 11:09:55 AM4/22/21
to
Mark Carver <mark....@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> An interesting question, given that the ISPs (that offer SOGEA etc
> services) use (proprietary ?) and differing methods of providing the
> voice circuit, (which involve a telephone socket on their supplied
> routers) is how would you achieve the telephone service using your own
> router ?
They're likely to be SIP, so in theory you can configure your SIP ATA, SIP
> An interesting question, given that the ISPs (that offer SOGEA etc
> services) use (proprietary ?) and differing methods of providing the
> voice circuit, (which involve a telephone socket on their supplied
> routers) is how would you achieve the telephone service using your own
> router ?
phone, Asterisk box, whatever, with their SIP credentials.
However it is very possible they won't tell you the credentials, which is
the problem.
In the case of Sky, I believe they're picked up via TR104 which is part of
TR069. That's a TCP connection from your IP with a password baked into your
router, so in theory you can find out the password and a TR069 client can
then ask for the SIP credentials. When I last tried I couldn't make it work
- must try again some time.
Theo
Tweed
Apr 22, 2021, 11:15:26 AM4/22/21
to
Those that know us will know our number. Clearly, if you have a known older
person that has hearing problems, or is too tight to call a mobile number,
or you do have a genuine need to ring random older people, then you have to
make your own decisions on retaining a landline. But I’d contend that is a
small subset of current users.
Peter Johnson
Apr 22, 2021, 11:33:50 AM4/22/21
to
On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:46:21 +0100, Mark Carver
<mark....@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>An interesting question, given that the ISPs (that offer SOGEA etc
>services) use (proprietary ?) and differing methods of providing the
>voice circuit, (which involve a telephone socket on their supplied
>routers) is how would you achieve the telephone service using your own
>router ?
I guess the router manufacturers will inytoduce devices to cater for
<mark....@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>An interesting question, given that the ISPs (that offer SOGEA etc
>services) use (proprietary ?) and differing methods of providing the
>voice circuit, (which involve a telephone socket on their supplied
>routers) is how would you achieve the telephone service using your own
>router ?
this eventuality, probably with all the configurations in the
firmware, in the same way they do it for the DSL settings.
Chris
Apr 22, 2021, 12:03:30 PM4/22/21
to
On 22/04/2021 13:21, Java Jive wrote:
Tweed
Apr 22, 2021, 12:50:47 PM4/22/21
to
Mark Carver
Apr 22, 2021, 3:01:44 PM4/22/21
to
without ceasing my broadband connection too (PlusNet ) ?
Chris
Apr 22, 2021, 3:02:46 PM4/22/21
to
completely.
bert
Apr 22, 2021, 3:16:45 PM4/22/21
to
In article <tbc8lh-o...@esprimo.zbmc.eu>, Chris Green <c...@isbd.net>
writes
Our is used quite heavily. Wife also uses it for texts.
Who wants to carry a mobile around with them all day in the house. We
have 1 handset downstairs and 1 upstairs.
We have different ring tones for different callers. My wife is not too
mobile so if the phone rings I can usually nip and pick it up even
though we know it's for her.
One question~ will decreasing no of land lines result in an increase in
broadband prices as cross subsidies are no longer possible?
--
bert
writes
Who wants to carry a mobile around with them all day in the house. We
have 1 handset downstairs and 1 upstairs.
We have different ring tones for different callers. My wife is not too
mobile so if the phone rings I can usually nip and pick it up even
though we know it's for her.
One question~ will decreasing no of land lines result in an increase in
broadband prices as cross subsidies are no longer possible?
--
bert
Graham J
Apr 22, 2021, 3:21:48 PM4/22/21
to
Woody wrote:
[snip]
>
> Thirdly those same people may not call back even if they are on a
> package that includes mobile calls as they fear not being able to hear
> and/or use the voicemail in many cases due to the OGM being low level.
>
> One major issue is that mobile users seem to expect the audio quality to
> be perfect and do not realise that the person they are calling may have
> difficulty hearing what they are saying, again especially if elderly
> and/or have a hearing deficiency. Our daughter (on VF) enjoys a
> reasonably good mobile signal on her iPhone at home, but if she calls my
> wife who has a hearing problem (she has a type of frequency selective
> deafness due to a medical condition) and the incoming speech is 'burbly'
> she cannot understand what is being said. For that matter I have normal
> hearing (save perhaps some HF loss due to age) and I even have
> difficulty hearing what daughter is saying sometimes.
The difference in quality between a conventonal landline and many mobile
services is really significant. As an example, listen to any radio or
TV news programme where somebody is interviewed over a mobile phone.
Very often the interviewee is completely unintelligible.
I understand that a live report from a remote location may have to use a
mobile, but often the interviewee is in his/her office and a landline is
available. I think broadcasters should have a convention of re-voicing
(or subtitling) all calls from mobiles.
When you consider that a landline phone has a bandwith of just 300Hz to
about 3.4 kHz it is remarkable that its intelligibility is so good. I'm
surprised that the mobile phone designers did not set out to at least
equal this performance.
--
Graham J
[snip]
>
> Thirdly those same people may not call back even if they are on a
> package that includes mobile calls as they fear not being able to hear
> and/or use the voicemail in many cases due to the OGM being low level.
>
> One major issue is that mobile users seem to expect the audio quality to
> be perfect and do not realise that the person they are calling may have
> difficulty hearing what they are saying, again especially if elderly
> and/or have a hearing deficiency. Our daughter (on VF) enjoys a
> reasonably good mobile signal on her iPhone at home, but if she calls my
> wife who has a hearing problem (she has a type of frequency selective
> deafness due to a medical condition) and the incoming speech is 'burbly'
> she cannot understand what is being said. For that matter I have normal
> hearing (save perhaps some HF loss due to age) and I even have
> difficulty hearing what daughter is saying sometimes.
services is really significant. As an example, listen to any radio or
TV news programme where somebody is interviewed over a mobile phone.
Very often the interviewee is completely unintelligible.
I understand that a live report from a remote location may have to use a
mobile, but often the interviewee is in his/her office and a landline is
available. I think broadcasters should have a convention of re-voicing
(or subtitling) all calls from mobiles.
When you consider that a landline phone has a bandwith of just 300Hz to
about 3.4 kHz it is remarkable that its intelligibility is so good. I'm
surprised that the mobile phone designers did not set out to at least
equal this performance.
--
Graham J
Tweed
Apr 22, 2021, 3:35:32 PM4/22/21
to
and check your number can be ported.
Graham J
Apr 22, 2021, 3:43:11 PM4/22/21
to
bert wrote:
[snip]
>
> One question~ will decreasing no of land lines result in an increase in
> broadband prices as cross subsidies are no longer possible?
By 2025 Openreach say all voice calls will be implemented using VoIP.
So by 2075 (or possibly earlier) all those copper pairs will be replaced
by Fibre To The Premises, and once this is complete all voice calls
should be as reliable as they are now over copper; and potentially they
could be better quality than now.
The cost of a landline service is now all in the maintenance, so
replacing the copper with FTTP should reduce maintenance costs, and the
resale value of the copper will fund the work.
For greenfield sites, there is already the need for electricity, fresh
water, and sewerage connections, so there's no logical reason why any of
these suppliers should not be forced to include a duct for fibre when
installing their (usually underground) services. But joined-up thinking
like this does not seem to exist in such organisations.
--
Graham J
[snip]
>
> One question~ will decreasing no of land lines result in an increase in
> broadband prices as cross subsidies are no longer possible?
So by 2075 (or possibly earlier) all those copper pairs will be replaced
by Fibre To The Premises, and once this is complete all voice calls
should be as reliable as they are now over copper; and potentially they
could be better quality than now.
The cost of a landline service is now all in the maintenance, so
replacing the copper with FTTP should reduce maintenance costs, and the
resale value of the copper will fund the work.
For greenfield sites, there is already the need for electricity, fresh
water, and sewerage connections, so there's no logical reason why any of
these suppliers should not be forced to include a duct for fibre when
installing their (usually underground) services. But joined-up thinking
like this does not seem to exist in such organisations.
--
Graham J
MB
Apr 22, 2021, 4:03:18 PM4/22/21
to
On 22/04/2021 15:48, Woody wrote:
>
> Firstly as a mobile does not give indication of the callers location, if
> the number is unknown to the (landline user) recipient they likely will
> not answer it.
I treat all unknown callers the same whether landline or mobile.
>
> Firstly as a mobile does not give indication of the callers location, if
> the number is unknown to the (landline user) recipient they likely will
> not answer it.
I prefer people to call me from their proper landline phone so the call
does not drop out as we hear so frequently with callers to radio
programme. It is becoming quite common for them to try two or three
times to get a better connection then ask the caller to call them from a
landline.
MB
Apr 22, 2021, 4:05:06 PM4/22/21
to
On 22/04/2021 20:21, Graham J wrote:
> The difference in quality between a conventonal landline and many mobile
> services is really significant. As an example, listen to any radio or
> TV news programme where somebody is interviewed over a mobile phone.
> Very often the interviewee is completely unintelligible.
>
> I understand that a live report from a remote location may have to use a
> mobile, but often the interviewee is in his/her office and a landline is
> available. I think broadcasters should have a convention of re-voicing
> (or subtitling) all calls from mobiles.
>
> When you consider that a landline phone has a bandwith of just 300Hz to
> about 3.4 kHz it is remarkable that its intelligibility is so good. I'm
> surprised that the mobile phone designers did not set out to at least
> equal this performance.
I just commented on this.
> The difference in quality between a conventonal landline and many mobile
> services is really significant. As an example, listen to any radio or
> TV news programme where somebody is interviewed over a mobile phone.
> Very often the interviewee is completely unintelligible.
>
> I understand that a live report from a remote location may have to use a
> mobile, but often the interviewee is in his/her office and a landline is
> available. I think broadcasters should have a convention of re-voicing
> (or subtitling) all calls from mobiles.
>
> When you consider that a landline phone has a bandwith of just 300Hz to
> about 3.4 kHz it is remarkable that its intelligibility is so good. I'm
> surprised that the mobile phone designers did not set out to at least
> equal this performance.
I get the impression that broadcasters are getting a bit fed up with
poor mobile connections and are quicker to ask them call from a landline.
Tweed
Apr 22, 2021, 4:18:44 PM4/22/21
to
new housing estate near me has both Open Reach and Virgin Cable fibre
ducts. I’m very interested to see how Virgin will compete given their now
high pricing. I’m guessing they are running a loss leader on cable TV as
very few TV aerials and Sky dishes have appeared. You don’t get the normal
Virgin pricing pages if you enter the postcode of a new build, but rather
an invitation to contact them for a deal.
Chris Green
Apr 22, 2021, 5:33:04 PM4/22/21
to
Graham J <nob...@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
> bert wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> >
> > One question~ will decreasing no of land lines result in an increase in
> > broadband prices as cross subsidies are no longer possible?
>
> By 2025 Openreach say all voice calls will be implemented using VoIP.
> So by 2075 (or possibly earlier) all those copper pairs will be replaced
> by Fibre To The Premises, and once this is complete all voice calls
> should be as reliable as they are now over copper; and potentially they
> could be better quality than now.
>
'Potentially' mobile calls could/should be better than landline but
> bert wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> >
> > One question~ will decreasing no of land lines result in an increase in
> > broadband prices as cross subsidies are no longer possible?
>
> By 2025 Openreach say all voice calls will be implemented using VoIP.
> So by 2075 (or possibly earlier) all those copper pairs will be replaced
> by Fibre To The Premises, and once this is complete all voice calls
> should be as reliable as they are now over copper; and potentially they
> could be better quality than now.
>
they aren't!
... and are they really going to replace all the 'last mile' copper, I
doubt it very much. We may get mass FTTC but we're not going to get
mass FTTP.
> The cost of a landline service is now all in the maintenance, so
> replacing the copper with FTTP should reduce maintenance costs, and the
> resale value of the copper will fund the work.
>
full of water will be just as bad, if not worse, than a copper one
surely.
--
Chris Green
·
Bob Eager
Apr 22, 2021, 5:34:17 PM4/22/21
to
Our landline is DSL-only; no calls provided.
Bob Eager
Apr 22, 2021, 5:35:03 PM4/22/21
to
On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 17:03:29 +0100, Chris wrote:
> Don't you have to have a landline to get VDSL/FTTC?
Yes, but it doesn't have to have phone service on it.
> Don't you have to have a landline to get VDSL/FTTC?
Tweed
Apr 23, 2021, 1:57:12 AM4/23/21
to
question of how quickly. The passive optical network (PON) technology being
deployed is pretty water resistant/immune. It’s not going to be done
piecemeal, so when they decide to “do” an exchange they’ll be out replacing
everything it serves. Part of the issue is it’s not just the copper that
gets life expired, but all the back end electronics.
Roderick Stewart
Apr 23, 2021, 3:33:27 AM4/23/21
to
On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 20:02:45 +0100, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Don't you have to have a landline to get VDSL/FTTC?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> You do but you don’t need to use it for voice calls.
>
>True, but you still have to pay for it. I'd be happy to be shot of it
>completely.
If you get rid of your landline, then the only alternative is either
>>> Don't you have to have a landline to get VDSL/FTTC?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> You do but you don’t need to use it for voice calls.
>
>True, but you still have to pay for it. I'd be happy to be shot of it
>completely.
some sort of wireless system, or the UHF coaxial cable service
provided (in the UK) by a monopoly. Neither seems ideal to me.
Rod.
Graham J
Apr 23, 2021, 3:39:23 AM4/23/21
to
monopopy - Openreach (or Hull Telecom). At least Openreach very nearly
accepts a universal service obligation to provide a copper pair for
voice calls anywhere in the UK. Obviously there's no guarantee that the
copper will support an internet connection ...
--
Graham J
Mark Carver
Apr 23, 2021, 3:40:25 AM4/23/21
to
(additional) supplier to deal with.
Mark Carver
Apr 23, 2021, 3:41:45 AM4/23/21
to
Mark Carver
Apr 23, 2021, 3:54:39 AM4/23/21
to
On 22/04/2021 20:21, Graham J wrote:
>
>
>
>
> When you consider that a landline phone has a bandwith of just 300Hz
> to about 3.4 kHz it is remarkable that its intelligibility is so
> good. I'm surprised that the mobile phone designers did not set out
> to at least equal this performance.
>
>
There are many factors that affect the audio bandwidth and quality of
> to about 3.4 kHz it is remarkable that its intelligibility is so
> good. I'm surprised that the mobile phone designers did not set out
> to at least equal this performance.
>
>
mobile phone calls, but as I've experienced excellent quality calls
mobile to mobile, the problem doesn't exist in the phones themselves,
but rather the choice of codec etc adopted by the mobile phone networks.
Last time I was a Vodafone subscriber (2013) call quality was generally
lousy to/from landlines. I ported to EE, and instantly the call quality
improved.
Recliner
Apr 23, 2021, 4:17:38 AM4/23/21
to
Graham J
Apr 23, 2021, 4:26:04 AM4/23/21
to
--
Graham J
Mark Carver
Apr 23, 2021, 4:46:44 AM4/23/21
to
circuits, into the least amount of bandwidth. c.f. Freeview, DAB, etc etc
The design per se (end to end) allows for excellent quality.
Tweed
Apr 23, 2021, 4:46:44 AM4/23/21
to
These days things are much better. My Vodafone calls with my iPhone to
other mobiles or landlines are crystal clear. (Unless the other end is
using some rubbish overly compressed link to an overseas call centre....)
Chris Green
Apr 23, 2021, 5:03:02 AM4/23/21
to
Tweed <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
> We will get mass FTTP and last mile copper will be replaced. It’s just a
> question of how quickly. The passive optical network (PON) technology being
> deployed is pretty water resistant/immune.
Really? Better than copper in a box? I mean a phone line with copper
> We will get mass FTTP and last mile copper will be replaced. It’s just a
> question of how quickly. The passive optical network (PON) technology being
> deployed is pretty water resistant/immune.
wires will probably work OK[ish] if a lot of it is wet or even under
water if the connections have been well made. It's the connections
that matter and I'd have thought that the machanics of optical fibre
connections are just as vulnerable as those of copper wires.
I don't really know all that much about the nitty griity details of
optical fibre connections so they may well be more dirt/water/vibration
resistant. Will they really be so up tatty old telegraph poles though?
> It’s not going to be done
> piecemeal, so when they decide to “do” an exchange they’ll be out replacing
> everything it serves. Part of the issue is it’s not just the copper that
> gets life expired, but all the back end electronics.
>
the manpower available to replace all the wires up posts.
--
Chris Green
·
Mark Carver
Apr 23, 2021, 5:14:05 AM4/23/21
to
On 23/04/2021 09:48, Chris Green wrote:
> Tweed <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> We will get mass FTTP and last mile copper will be replaced. It’s just a
>> question of how quickly. The passive optical network (PON) technology being
>> deployed is pretty water resistant/immune.
> Really? Better than copper in a box? I mean a phone line with copper
> wires will probably work OK[ish] if a lot of it is wet or even under
> water if the connections have been well made. It's the connections
> that matter and I'd have thought that the machanics of optical fibre
> connections are just as vulnerable as those of copper wires.
The whole world (literally) is festooned with fibre, and has been for
> Tweed <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> We will get mass FTTP and last mile copper will be replaced. It’s just a
>> question of how quickly. The passive optical network (PON) technology being
>> deployed is pretty water resistant/immune.
> Really? Better than copper in a box? I mean a phone line with copper
> wires will probably work OK[ish] if a lot of it is wet or even under
> water if the connections have been well made. It's the connections
> that matter and I'd have thought that the machanics of optical fibre
> connections are just as vulnerable as those of copper wires.
quite some time.
I'm not aware of any unreliably issues related to it, that don't already
exist with copper (road diggers, and fishing vessels dredging up the cables)
All we're talking about here, is replacing the 'last mile' with the stuff ?
> I don't believe that's going to happen by 2025! There simply isn't
> the manpower available to replace all the wires up posts.
>
FTTC and therefore still using copper.
I gather the date for all copper to be replaced is 2030 (ish ?)
Tweed
Apr 23, 2021, 5:25:58 AM4/23/21
to
Chris Green <c...@isbd.net> wrote:
> Tweed <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> We will get mass FTTP and last mile copper will be replaced. It’s just a
>> question of how quickly. The passive optical network (PON) technology being
>> deployed is pretty water resistant/immune.
>
> Really? Better than copper in a box? I mean a phone line with copper
> wires will probably work OK[ish] if a lot of it is wet or even under
> water if the connections have been well made. It's the connections
> that matter and I'd have thought that the machanics of optical fibre
> connections are just as vulnerable as those of copper wires.
>
> I don't really know all that much about the nitty griity details of
> optical fibre connections so they may well be more dirt/water/vibration
> resistant. Will they really be so up tatty old telegraph poles though?
>
>
It’s the nitty gritty that you don’t want in an optical termination. The
> Tweed <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> We will get mass FTTP and last mile copper will be replaced. It’s just a
>> question of how quickly. The passive optical network (PON) technology being
>> deployed is pretty water resistant/immune.
>
> Really? Better than copper in a box? I mean a phone line with copper
> wires will probably work OK[ish] if a lot of it is wet or even under
> water if the connections have been well made. It's the connections
> that matter and I'd have thought that the machanics of optical fibre
> connections are just as vulnerable as those of copper wires.
>
> I don't really know all that much about the nitty griity details of
> optical fibre connections so they may well be more dirt/water/vibration
> resistant. Will they really be so up tatty old telegraph poles though?
>
>
slightest bit of dirt will ruin things, which is why the connectors are
designed to be properly sealed at the optical interface.
>> It’s not going to be done
>> piecemeal, so when they decide to “do” an exchange they’ll be out replacing
>> everything it serves. Part of the issue is it’s not just the copper that
>> gets life expired, but all the back end electronics.
>>
> I don't believe that's going to happen by 2025! There simply isn't
> the manpower available to replace all the wires up posts.
>
decade. From what I can find out 2026 is when the copper shutdown *starts*
on a major scale. There are a few pilot shutdowns happening shortly.
Graham J
Apr 23, 2021, 5:56:36 AM4/23/21
to
Mark Carver wrote:
[snip]
>
>> I don't believe that's going to happen by 2025! There simply isn't
>> the manpower available to replace all the wires up posts.
>>
> 2025 is when PSTN is to be retired, many will still be connected via
> FTTC and therefore still using copper.
>
> I gather the date for all copper to be replaced is 2030 (ish ?)
So from 2025 to 2030 at least there will be VoIP connections relying on
ADSL (because you can't get FTTC in many areas) and FTTC. Both ADSL and
FTTC connections are just about tolerable for web browsing (although
filling in forms often doesn't work over slow ADSL) but they won't be
good enough for VoIP because any noise spike will cause the router/DSLAM
to re-synchronise and this takes about a minute. So there's a minute
when your VoIP connection is broken. Once the DSL connection re-syncs
and re-authenticates, your VoIP device then has to re-register with its
provider - several more seconds. This just doesn't happen with Voice
over Copper - it either works (possibly with the odd click) or fails
totally until repaired.
So the impression amongst the general public will be that VoIP just does
not work. They are therefore likely to ditch the landline voice service
completely and go to mobile, where they can at least see the signal
strength and estimate whether it's worth making the call. There's very
little chance that mobile operators will improve service for rural
communities (even where I am, a few miles from Thetford in Norfolk the
mobile only works outdoors, irrespective of Vodafone, EE, O2, Three, or
whoever). So I could use WiFi calling, but that will fail when the DSL
service re-syncs just as will VoIP.
There will be no point in moving domestic users to VoIP until they are
all served by FTTP. At present, there's no reason to suppose that FTTP
will be affected by nearby lightning strikes or other noise events (e.g.
electric fences as used by farmers) and my understanting of the
technology is that it is inherently more immune to such problems. But
by the time the installers have done their worst I fully expect the
domestic level service to be riddled with reliability problems arising
from inappropriate cost-saving measures.
--
Graham J
[snip]
>
>> I don't believe that's going to happen by 2025! There simply isn't
>> the manpower available to replace all the wires up posts.
>>
> 2025 is when PSTN is to be retired, many will still be connected via
> FTTC and therefore still using copper.
>
> I gather the date for all copper to be replaced is 2030 (ish ?)
ADSL (because you can't get FTTC in many areas) and FTTC. Both ADSL and
FTTC connections are just about tolerable for web browsing (although
filling in forms often doesn't work over slow ADSL) but they won't be
good enough for VoIP because any noise spike will cause the router/DSLAM
to re-synchronise and this takes about a minute. So there's a minute
when your VoIP connection is broken. Once the DSL connection re-syncs
and re-authenticates, your VoIP device then has to re-register with its
provider - several more seconds. This just doesn't happen with Voice
over Copper - it either works (possibly with the odd click) or fails
totally until repaired.
So the impression amongst the general public will be that VoIP just does
not work. They are therefore likely to ditch the landline voice service
completely and go to mobile, where they can at least see the signal
strength and estimate whether it's worth making the call. There's very
little chance that mobile operators will improve service for rural
communities (even where I am, a few miles from Thetford in Norfolk the
mobile only works outdoors, irrespective of Vodafone, EE, O2, Three, or
whoever). So I could use WiFi calling, but that will fail when the DSL
service re-syncs just as will VoIP.
There will be no point in moving domestic users to VoIP until they are
all served by FTTP. At present, there's no reason to suppose that FTTP
will be affected by nearby lightning strikes or other noise events (e.g.
electric fences as used by farmers) and my understanting of the
technology is that it is inherently more immune to such problems. But
by the time the installers have done their worst I fully expect the
domestic level service to be riddled with reliability problems arising
from inappropriate cost-saving measures.
--
Graham J
tim...
Apr 23, 2021, 9:55:10 AM4/23/21
to
"Woody" <harro...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:s5s2bm$167$1...@dont-email.me...
> On Thu 22/04/2021 13:35, Tweed wrote:
>> Java Jive <ja...@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>> Is it the end of the line for landline phones?
>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56831212
>>>
>>> Is it the end of the line for landline phones?
>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56831212
>>>
>>> "When did your home landline last ring?
>>>
>>>
>>> On the rare occasion it does, we all know the chances are it's going to
>>> be a scam caller, especially since in the last year our elderly parents
>>> have all mastered Whatsapp and Zoom.
>>>
>>> Plus mobile calls have come down in price over the last decade.
>>>
>>> As a result, 40% of us have stopped using a landline phone altogether,
>>> according to new survey from price comparison site Uswitch.
>>>
>>> And while 95% of over-65-year-olds still have a traditional phone,
>>> nearly half of under-25s don't even have a landline installed.
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> "We've been locked inside for a year, but landline use has actually
>>> fallen," points out Uswitch's Nick Baker.
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> In 2000 95% of homes had landlines, now that's fallen to around 80% of
>>> homes. But even in homes that have fixed line, many just have it because
>>> it comes as part of a package supplying broadband. A quarter of them
>>> don't have a handset attached."
>>>
>>>
>>> Smallish survey though ...
>>>
>>
>> It fits with my use. My mobile phone comes with unlimited minutes. So I
>>> be a scam caller, especially since in the last year our elderly parents
>>> have all mastered Whatsapp and Zoom.
>>>
>>> Plus mobile calls have come down in price over the last decade.
>>>
>>> As a result, 40% of us have stopped using a landline phone altogether,
>>> according to new survey from price comparison site Uswitch.
>>>
>>> And while 95% of over-65-year-olds still have a traditional phone,
>>> nearly half of under-25s don't even have a landline installed.
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> "We've been locked inside for a year, but landline use has actually
>>> fallen," points out Uswitch's Nick Baker.
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> In 2000 95% of homes had landlines, now that's fallen to around 80% of
>>> homes. But even in homes that have fixed line, many just have it because
>>> it comes as part of a package supplying broadband. A quarter of them
>>> don't have a handset attached."
>>>
>>>
>>> Smallish survey though ...
>>>
>>
>> use
>> it for outbound calls. If I want someone to reach me I give them my
>> mobile
>> number, as I’m likely to have it with me. The landline phones sit
>> gathering
>> dust. Even the costs don’t justify its existence. I have a very cheap
>> landline rental deal with Zen. £12.30 per month rental, calls billed as
>> used. My mobile is £14 per month, unlimited call and 10Gb data per month.
>> Virgin cable carries my broadband (no phone or TV). The landline may have
>> to go.....
>>
>>
> There are some catches I fear.
>
> Firstly as a mobile does not give indication of the callers location, if
> the number is unknown to the (landline user) recipient they likely will
> not answer it.
>
> Secondly many people - especially older people - if they are not on a
> Firstly as a mobile does not give indication of the callers location, if
> the number is unknown to the (landline user) recipient they likely will
> not answer it.
>
> landline package (such as BT now offer) that includes calls to mobiles
> they may not call back for fear of call costs.
>
> Thirdly those same people may not call back even if they are on a package
> that includes mobile calls as they fear not being able to hear and/or use
> the voicemail in many cases due to the OGM being low level.
The biggest issue with calling back mobile numbers is the premium number
> Thirdly those same people may not call back even if they are on a package
> that includes mobile calls as they fear not being able to hear and/or use
> the voicemail in many cases due to the OGM being low level.
range that costs in excess of a pound per minute that's hidden inside the
mobile number range.
A novice user is easily fooled by this trick
tim...
Apr 23, 2021, 9:59:36 AM4/23/21
to
"Tweed" <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:s5tnjm$9co$1...@dont-email.me...
> Chris Green <c...@isbd.net> wrote:
>> Graham J <nob...@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
>>> bert wrote:
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>>
>>>> One question~ will decreasing no of land lines result in an increase in
>>>> broadband prices as cross subsidies are no longer possible?
>>>
>>> By 2025 Openreach say all voice calls will be implemented using VoIP.
>>> So by 2075 (or possibly earlier) all those copper pairs will be replaced
>>> by Fibre To The Premises, and once this is complete all voice calls
>>> should be as reliable as they are now over copper; and potentially they
>>> could be better quality than now.
>>>
>> 'Potentially' mobile calls could/should be better than landline but
>> they aren't!
>>
>> ... and are they really going to replace all the 'last mile' copper, I
>> doubt it very much. We may get mass FTTC but we're not going to get
>> mass FTTP.
>>
>>> The cost of a landline service is now all in the maintenance, so
>>> replacing the copper with FTTP should reduce maintenance costs, and the
>>> resale value of the copper will fund the work.
>>>
>> Why is fibre easier to maintain than copper? A fibre 'connection box'
>> full of water will be just as bad, if not worse, than a copper one
>> surely.
>>
>
> We will get mass FTTP and last mile copper will be replaced. It’s just a
> question of how quickly.
I've said it before, I'll say it again
>> Graham J <nob...@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
>>> bert wrote:
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>>
>>>> One question~ will decreasing no of land lines result in an increase in
>>>> broadband prices as cross subsidies are no longer possible?
>>>
>>> By 2025 Openreach say all voice calls will be implemented using VoIP.
>>> So by 2075 (or possibly earlier) all those copper pairs will be replaced
>>> by Fibre To The Premises, and once this is complete all voice calls
>>> should be as reliable as they are now over copper; and potentially they
>>> could be better quality than now.
>>>
>> 'Potentially' mobile calls could/should be better than landline but
>> they aren't!
>>
>> ... and are they really going to replace all the 'last mile' copper, I
>> doubt it very much. We may get mass FTTC but we're not going to get
>> mass FTTP.
>>
>>> The cost of a landline service is now all in the maintenance, so
>>> replacing the copper with FTTP should reduce maintenance costs, and the
>>> resale value of the copper will fund the work.
>>>
>> Why is fibre easier to maintain than copper? A fibre 'connection box'
>> full of water will be just as bad, if not worse, than a copper one
>> surely.
>>
>
> We will get mass FTTP and last mile copper will be replaced. It’s just a
> question of how quickly.
the one and a half million extant flat dwellers and the million plus in HMOs
in the country, will almost never get FTTP
Tweed
Apr 23, 2021, 10:10:48 AM4/23/21
to
cable there too. It’s never stopped Virgin getting cable into HMOs.
See also
https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2021/03/new-uk-law-passed-to-spread-gigabit-broadband-into-big-buildings.html
Vir Campestris
Apr 23, 2021, 4:56:51 PM4/23/21
to
On 22/04/2021 22:20, Chris Green wrote:
> Why is fibre easier to maintain than copper? A fibre 'connection box'
> full of water will be just as bad, if not worse, than a copper one
> surely.
Get a bit of copper wire and stick it in a jamjar of water. It will go
> Why is fibre easier to maintain than copper? A fibre 'connection box'
> full of water will be just as bad, if not worse, than a copper one
> surely.
green after a while. If the jar has gone green it's just something
growing on it; glass does not corrode the way copper does.
This is why we have perfectly good samples of Roman glassware, but the
coins are all corroded.
Andy
Theo
Apr 23, 2021, 5:03:25 PM4/23/21
to
Mark Carver <mark....@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Thank you. I don't think I can currently port my landline number out,
> without ceasing my broadband connection too (PlusNet ) ?
It's possible:
> Thank you. I don't think I can currently port my landline number out,
> without ceasing my broadband connection too (PlusNet ) ?
https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2016/05/aaisp-finds-solution-porting-bt-fixed-line-phone-numbers-voip.html
although it may not be something Sipgate offer.
(I can recommend AAISP - well worth the £1.20/month 'line rental')
Theo
Theo
Apr 23, 2021, 5:32:49 PM4/23/21
to
Java Jive <ja...@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
> Is it the end of the line for landline phones?
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56831212
>
> "When did your home landline last ring?
>
> On the rare occasion it does, we all know the chances are it's going to
> be a scam caller, especially since in the last year our elderly parents
> have all mastered Whatsapp and Zoom.
Define 'landline'. My landline is SOGEA, so there's no analogue voice. I
> Is it the end of the line for landline phones?
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56831212
>
> "When did your home landline last ring?
>
> On the rare occasion it does, we all know the chances are it's going to
> be a scam caller, especially since in the last year our elderly parents
> have all mastered Whatsapp and Zoom.
use VOIP, just not the VOIP from my broadband provider...
Theo
Mark Carver
Apr 24, 2021, 4:25:14 AM4/24/21
to
progressed at all on this.
Ofcom need to get off their arse (as ever) and make <renumber and
export> a mandatory feature that all ISPs must offer.
Roderick Stewart
Apr 24, 2021, 4:43:11 AM4/24/21
to
On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 10:14:03 +0100, Mark Carver
<mark....@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>2025 is when PSTN is to be retired, many will still be connected via
>FTTC and therefore still using copper.
>
>I gather the date for all copper to be replaced is 2030 (ish ?)
As predicted by engineers, or by government ministers?
<mark....@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>2025 is when PSTN is to be retired, many will still be connected via
>FTTC and therefore still using copper.
>
>I gather the date for all copper to be replaced is 2030 (ish ?)
Rod.
Roderick Stewart
Apr 24, 2021, 5:06:05 AM4/24/21
to
On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 14:10:47 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> the one and a half million extant flat dwellers and the million plus in HMOs
>> in the country, will almost never get FTTP
>
>Why ever not? If you can get a copper cable to them you can get a fibre
>cable there too. It’s never stopped Virgin getting cable into HMOs.
Wayleave agreements perhaps, or lack thereof. This is the reason, I
<usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> the one and a half million extant flat dwellers and the million plus in HMOs
>> in the country, will almost never get FTTP
>
>Why ever not? If you can get a copper cable to them you can get a fibre
>cable there too. It’s never stopped Virgin getting cable into HMOs.
was told, why VM have been unable (or unmotivated, depending on how
you look at it) to make their cable system available in our unadopted
road, despite providing it to every street around us. Fortunately FTTC
works pretty well here, but we don't have a choice. If anybody wants
FTTH, it could only be provided if it's possible for the fibres to
take the same routes - over and under the ground - as the existing
copper cables.
Can optical fibres slung across roads from telephone poles survive
being thrashed about by the wind for many decades like the copper
cables they would have to replace? Is it possible to use a fibre
splicer in a junction box at the top of one of these poles?
I don't see any technical reason why they couldn't run them via
whatever route works best, but as usual the admin would be a bigger
obstacle than the engineering.
Rod.
Tweed
Apr 24, 2021, 5:13:57 AM4/24/21
to
They’ve now got regulatory agreement on the return they can make on the
investment required. It’s not in their financial interest to keep the
copper network running for an extended period.
Up until now they’ve been sweating the existing assets. Things have now got
to the point where major renewal investment has to happen. It’s not just
the bits we see, eg the telephone poles and drop wires, but the umpteen
core distribution cables and all the equipment in the exchanges.
Tweed
Apr 24, 2021, 5:25:41 AM4/24/21
to
incorporated into the construction. There’s a run along a county lane near
me.
This
https://www.thinkbroadband.com/assets/images/news-2019/fibre-joint-creeper.jpg
is a picture of a pole joint.
This
https://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/8620-a-walk-in-a-fibre-wonderland-pictures-of-fttp-roll-out-in-lingfield
gives an overview of some of the deployment technology/equipment.
Roderick Stewart
Apr 24, 2021, 5:43:54 AM4/24/21
to
On Sat, 24 Apr 2021 09:25:40 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
Well, that all looks very encouraging. For the time being FTTC works
well enough for my needs so FTTH would be an extravagance, but it's
good to know I could probably have it if I wanted it.
Rod.
<usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Roderick Stewart <rj...@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 14:10:47 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
>> <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> the one and a half million extant flat dwellers and the million plus in HMOs
>>>> in the country, will almost never get FTTP
>>>
>>> Why ever not? If you can get a copper cable to them you can get a fibre
>>> cable there too. It?s never stopped Virgin getting cable into HMOs.
>Roderick Stewart <rj...@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 14:10:47 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
>> <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> the one and a half million extant flat dwellers and the million plus in HMOs
>>>> in the country, will almost never get FTTP
>>>
>>> Why ever not? If you can get a copper cable to them you can get a fibre
well enough for my needs so FTTH would be an extravagance, but it's
good to know I could probably have it if I wanted it.
Rod.
Theo
Apr 24, 2021, 1:10:08 PM4/24/21
to
Mark Carver <mark....@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> It's amazing (given that link is now 5 years old !) that we haven't
> progressed at all on this.
>
> Ofcom need to get off their arse (as ever) and make <renumber and
> export> a mandatory feature that all ISPs must offer.
Ofcom are working on it:
> It's amazing (given that link is now 5 years old !) that we haven't
> progressed at all on this.
>
> Ofcom need to get off their arse (as ever) and make <renumber and
> export> a mandatory feature that all ISPs must offer.
https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2021/04/ofcom-will-stop-requiring-uk-phone-providers-to-offer-local-dialling.html
https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2019/04/ofcom-consults-on-the-future-of-uk-phone-numbers-and-porting.html
https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2018/10/ofcom-seeks-to-fix-loss-of-uk-phone-number-during-isp-switches.html
I think the route they're taking is divorcing phone numbers from physical
lines, and then all the related issues with broadband stoppage go away.
With newer Openreach products like FTTP and SOGEA, your broadband is
provisioned to an address (UPRN) and there's no number attached to the line.
Meanwhile if you sign up for phone service the number is ported to your
provider's VOIP service.
That porting process is currently a mess, but a process in which you can
move your landline number to any service provider (similar to mobile
porting) is a better destination than the one of simply sticking-plaster the
issues with 2000s-era copper broadband. It's just taking longer to get
there.
Theo
Theo
Apr 24, 2021, 1:17:36 PM4/24/21
to
Roderick Stewart <rj...@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> Well, that all looks very encouraging. For the time being FTTC works
> well enough for my needs so FTTH would be an extravagance, but it's
> good to know I could probably have it if I wanted it.
For a long time VM didn't build out any infrastructure because their owners
> Well, that all looks very encouraging. For the time being FTTC works
> well enough for my needs so FTTH would be an extravagance, but it's
> good to know I could probably have it if I wanted it.
decided to milk the assets (and/or were paying back the enormous loans to
build them in the first place). Even wiring up new builds at the end of
cabled streets didn't happen.
Now they're building out again, this time with FTTP. So it's possible they
will get to you before Openreach does. Here's what they build:
https://www.virginmedia.com/content/dam/virginmedia/dotcom/images/shop/downloads/New-Build-Handbook-v1-63.pdf
Theo
MB
Apr 24, 2021, 6:52:20 PM4/24/21
to
On 24/04/2021 10:43, Roderick Stewart wrote:
> Well, that all looks very encouraging. For the time being FTTC works
> well enough for my needs so FTTH would be an extravagance, but it's
> good to know I could probably have it if I wanted it.
I am the same, I have no desire to have to find space and worse, a mains
> Well, that all looks very encouraging. For the time being FTTC works
> well enough for my needs so FTTH would be an extravagance, but it's
> good to know I could probably have it if I wanted it.
supply for a small increase in speed.
Roderick Stewart
Apr 25, 2021, 2:29:47 AM4/25/21
to
On 24 Apr 2021 18:17:33 +0100 (BST), Theo
They may get to our part of town, but they won't be able to install
anything in our unadopted road without one of the aforementioned
"wayleave" documents, which apparently they'd have to persuade
everyone in the road to sign. My enquiries would seem to indicate that
they're not very interested in going to the trouble for potentially a
maximum of 25 new customers, or in reality maybe about 4 or 5.
Rod.
anything in our unadopted road without one of the aforementioned
"wayleave" documents, which apparently they'd have to persuade
everyone in the road to sign. My enquiries would seem to indicate that
they're not very interested in going to the trouble for potentially a
maximum of 25 new customers, or in reality maybe about 4 or 5.
Rod.
Roderick Stewart
Apr 25, 2021, 2:41:11 AM4/25/21
to
that's important to you it might be worth considering, but I suspect
that in reality it usually wouldn't. In a domestic setup, sufficient
download speed for streaming HD television will usually be enough, so
as long as you have about 15-20Mb/s, it wouldn't be worth the expense
of increasing it because you wouldn't notice any difference.
Of course, that won't stop them trying to persuade everyone that they
need hundreds of megabytes per second, and in many cases they'll
succeed because hardly anyone understands the numbers or knows how
much bandwidth they're really using. But then, advertising is never
based on need.
Rod.
Tweed
Apr 25, 2021, 2:59:51 AM4/25/21
to
would need the reputation of FTTC to be trashed and I guess they are not
willing to do that just yet. Unless you live immediately next to cabinet
FTTP will give you a more reliable less glitchy service. So it’s not just
about speed. Anyway, I doubt many will be given the choice - they’ll be
along ripping out the copper based service area by area. It will be
interesting to see how this enforced conversion is going to be sold to the
end users.
Recliner
Apr 25, 2021, 3:44:50 AM4/25/21
to
My Hyperoptic connection needs no more space or power supply than my
previous Openreach FTTC setup. As for a 'small increase in speed',
downloads are 10 times faster, and uploads 50 times faster. The VoIP phone
quality is also hugely improved. It's also much more reliable, and costs me
less than I was paying BT.
Theo
Apr 25, 2021, 5:27:18 AM4/25/21
to
Recliner <recline...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Why the need for extra space or a mains supply?
>
> My Hyperoptic connection needs no more space or power supply than my
> previous Openreach FTTC setup. As for a 'small increase in speed',
> downloads are 10 times faster, and uploads 50 times faster. The VoIP phone
> quality is also hugely improved. It's also much more reliable, and costs me
> less than I was paying BT.
I think you said you're in a flat, so Hyperoptic have plant elsewhere in the
> Why the need for extra space or a mains supply?
>
> My Hyperoptic connection needs no more space or power supply than my
> previous Openreach FTTC setup. As for a 'small increase in speed',
> downloads are 10 times faster, and uploads 50 times faster. The VoIP phone
> quality is also hugely improved. It's also much more reliable, and costs me
> less than I was paying BT.
building and you're wired by copper ethernet, not optical fibre?
In FTTP there's an ONT that needs to be powered. I would hope Openreach
would be persuadable to put your fibre termination somewhere it makes sense
to have your router/etc, rather than the place it made sense to fit the
single hall telephone in 20th century.
However if it isn't then there should be ways to power the ONT via PoE, so
you just need to run a single ethernet cable from the ONT to the router, and
can inject power from the router end. I don't know if the current ONT boxes
support that natively, but if not PoE splitters to power via a 12V jack can
be bought for a few pounds. The gear does need some square inches of wall
space though.
Theo
Recliner
Apr 25, 2021, 5:47:52 AM4/25/21
to
Theo <theom...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> Recliner <recline...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Why the need for extra space or a mains supply?
>>
>> My Hyperoptic connection needs no more space or power supply than my
>> previous Openreach FTTC setup. As for a 'small increase in speed',
>> downloads are 10 times faster, and uploads 50 times faster. The VoIP phone
>> quality is also hugely improved. It's also much more reliable, and costs me
>> less than I was paying BT.
>
> I think you said you're in a flat, so Hyperoptic have plant elsewhere in the
> building and you're wired by copper ethernet, not optical fibre?
Yes, that's correct. I think it's a Category 5e cable, which is connected
> Recliner <recline...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Why the need for extra space or a mains supply?
>>
>> My Hyperoptic connection needs no more space or power supply than my
>> previous Openreach FTTC setup. As for a 'small increase in speed',
>> downloads are 10 times faster, and uploads 50 times faster. The VoIP phone
>> quality is also hugely improved. It's also much more reliable, and costs me
>> less than I was paying BT.
>
> I think you said you're in a flat, so Hyperoptic have plant elsewhere in the
> building and you're wired by copper ethernet, not optical fibre?
to the Hyperoptic cabinet. They wired it to a socket close to my old
relocated BT master socket, adjacent to my PC (I had the master socket
moved in 2000, when I first got ADSL) . Only the router needs power, and
uses the same socket my BT hub had used.
As an aside, that first ADSL, which cost £50 per month, was a thousand
times slower (0.5Mbps) than my much cheaper Hyperoptic 500 Mbps line.
>
> In FTTP there's an ONT that needs to be powered. I would hope Openreach
> would be persuadable to put your fibre termination somewhere it makes sense
> to have your router/etc, rather than the place it made sense to fit the
> single hall telephone in 20th century.
put in Cat 5e cabling to where I wanted my socket.
Mark Carver
Apr 25, 2021, 6:45:55 AM4/25/21
to
landline provision *not* bundled in with broadband anyway.
Certainly not that long ago. I was ADSL 2003 until 2010, with a verity
of ADSL ISPs, but the phone line remained with BT.
Then FTTC with IDNet for a year, followed by Merula for a year, then
from 2012 Plusnet. That must have been the point I moved the landline
to PN too.
Today it's difficult NOT to get the two bundled together. Anyway, still
four years left for things to change !
Java Jive
Apr 25, 2021, 9:55:56 AM4/25/21
to
On 25/04/2021 07:29, Roderick Stewart wrote:
>
> They may get to our part of town, but they won't be able to install
> anything in our unadopted road without one of the aforementioned
> "wayleave" documents, which apparently they'd have to persuade
> everyone in the road to sign. My enquiries would seem to indicate that
> they're not very interested in going to the trouble for potentially a
> maximum of 25 new customers, or in reality maybe about 4 or 5.
Maybe you could start a local organisation of the householders to handle
>
> They may get to our part of town, but they won't be able to install
> anything in our unadopted road without one of the aforementioned
> "wayleave" documents, which apparently they'd have to persuade
> everyone in the road to sign. My enquiries would seem to indicate that
> they're not very interested in going to the trouble for potentially a
> maximum of 25 new customers, or in reality maybe about 4 or 5.
this sort of thing?
--
Fake news kills!
I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk
bert
Apr 26, 2021, 6:41:05 AM4/26/21
to
In article <s63415$asg$1...@dont-email.me>, Tweed <usenet...@gmail.com>
writes
Probably with the same sort of bullshit as smart meters.
--
bert
writes
--
bert
MB
Apr 27, 2021, 4:38:01 AM4/27/21
to
On 25/04/2021 07:40, Roderick Stewart wrote:
> Potentially fibre could provide a colossal increase in speed. If
> that's important to you it might be worth considering, but I suspect
> that in reality it usually wouldn't. In a domestic setup, sufficient
> download speed for streaming HD television will usually be enough, so
> as long as you have about 15-20Mb/s, it wouldn't be worth the expense
> of increasing it because you wouldn't notice any difference.
Most of the time there is little advantage in a speed much faster than I
> Potentially fibre could provide a colossal increase in speed. If
> that's important to you it might be worth considering, but I suspect
> that in reality it usually wouldn't. In a domestic setup, sufficient
> download speed for streaming HD television will usually be enough, so
> as long as you have about 15-20Mb/s, it wouldn't be worth the expense
> of increasing it because you wouldn't notice any difference.
can read.
A friend in the US has access to something like Petabytes or Exabytes,
it was useful when he wanted to back up all his image files. It took a
couple of weeks on his original home connection but at work he was able
to copy them all almost in the blink of the proverbial eye. :-)
My thought was what a hacker could do if could they access your computer
at that sort of speed!
Vir Campestris
May 10, 2021, 4:22:16 PM5/10/21
to
On 24/04/2021 18:10, Theo wrote:
> With newer Openreach products like FTTP and SOGEA, your broadband is
> provisioned to an address (UPRN) and there's no number attached to the line.
> Meanwhile if you sign up for phone service the number is ported to your
> provider's VOIP service.
>
> That porting process is currently a mess, but a process in which you can
> move your landline number to any service provider (similar to mobile
> porting) is a better destination than the one of simply sticking-plaster the
> issues with 2000s-era copper broadband. It's just taking longer to get
> there.
Damn right it's a mess.
> provisioned to an address (UPRN) and there's no number attached to the line.
> Meanwhile if you sign up for phone service the number is ported to your
> provider's VOIP service.
>
> That porting process is currently a mess, but a process in which you can
> move your landline number to any service provider (similar to mobile
> porting) is a better destination than the one of simply sticking-plaster the
> issues with 2000s-era copper broadband. It's just taking longer to get
> there.
We've got FTTP. There's a port on the modem that will allow me to plug
in a POTS phone and make outgoing calls - but incoming ones are
restricted to the copper.
Andy
Theo
May 10, 2021, 6:48:50 PM5/10/21
to
Vir Campestris <vir.cam...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Damn right it's a mess.
>
> We've got FTTP. There's a port on the modem that will allow me to plug
> in a POTS phone and make outgoing calls - but incoming ones are
> restricted to the copper.
What CLID do you get on the outgoing calls? Same as your copper, or a
> Damn right it's a mess.
>
> We've got FTTP. There's a port on the modem that will allow me to plug
> in a POTS phone and make outgoing calls - but incoming ones are
> restricted to the copper.
different number?
(when I had FTTP I never tried the phone port on the ONT)
THeo
Vir Campestris
May 11, 2021, 4:21:22 PM5/11/21
to
On 10/05/2021 23:48, Theo wrote:
> What CLID do you get on the outgoing calls? Same as your copper, or a
> different number?
No idea. I might think to try one day...
> What CLID do you get on the outgoing calls? Same as your copper, or a
> different number?
Andy
Mark Carver
May 12, 2021, 3:19:20 AM5/12/21
to
On 10/05/2021 23:48, Theo wrote:
in his case, but for half a day he had incoming calls on the old BT ONT
port, and outgoing on the Sky Router telephone port. A bit like what
happens with mobile phone porting. Sounds like Vir's migration got stuck
halfway through ?
notya...@gmail.com
May 12, 2021, 6:52:53 AM5/12/21
to
BT has disabled outgoing on their line, but incoming still route there.
$ky have enabled the account and allow outgoing calls on their line, with CLI of the BT number.
This is routine on Voip, where one can have the CLI of the virtual number, a Voip geographic number, a geographic number ported in or any other number (land or mobile) for which you can produce a current bill.
I had fun with this when I took my N8 in for a warranty repair (~2012). The receptionist took its SIM out and I then rang her [using Voip over their Wi-Fi] from an old phone using the number from the SIM and then put the SIM in the [empty] old phone. This confused her somewhat...
So no porting did not get stuck, Sky enabled their line ahead of the actual port for the convenience of the customer so they could still make outgoing calls while BT got its act together.
You can also buy phones (e.g. Seimens Gigaset) which will plug into both POTS and IP and take and make calls on both. There is one by my desk.
Theo
May 12, 2021, 9:44:38 AM5/12/21
to
Mark Carver <mark....@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> My son recently migrated from BT FTTP, to Sky FTTP. No copper involved
> in his case, but for half a day he had incoming calls on the old BT ONT
> port, and outgoing on the Sky Router telephone port. A bit like what
> happens with mobile phone porting. Sounds like Vir's migration got stuck
> halfway through ?
That's different. There are actually three ports involved:
> My son recently migrated from BT FTTP, to Sky FTTP. No copper involved
> in his case, but for half a day he had incoming calls on the old BT ONT
> port, and outgoing on the Sky Router telephone port. A bit like what
> happens with mobile phone porting. Sounds like Vir's migration got stuck
> halfway through ?
Classic master socket connected to copper (analogue PSTN)
Phone port on Openreach ONT (digital 'PSTN'/VOIP)
Phone port on ISP's router (VOIP)
Sky do calls via VOIP to their router - this is entirely independent from
the Openreach network. Optionally they can port in an Openreach number,
but the VOIP can work before than happens.
On the Openreach network, some people have copper and some are FTTP only.
I don't know how they decide which to provision but it wouldn't surprise me
if both are operational in some way. I think the plan is for the copper to
be disabled as part of the national PSTN shutdown.
I'm not sure which ISPs use the Openreach ONT port, but presumably it
supports use cases like people who only have voice services on their FTTP.
Theo
notya...@gmail.com
May 12, 2021, 1:01:53 PM5/12/21
to
Tweed
May 12, 2021, 1:08:34 PM5/12/21
to
will go.
Martin Brown
May 12, 2021, 4:08:20 PM5/12/21
to
--
Regards,
Martin Brown
grinch
May 13, 2021, 6:08:18 AM5/13/21
to
r
>>>> FTTP.
>>>>
>>>> Theo
>>>
>>> I presume that BT will increase concentration in their cabinets, so that
>>> the remaining POTS customers (and those who won't pay the inevitable
>>> premium for FTTP) will gave their phone / internet interface there
>>> rather
>>> than the exchange, rendering the copper from cabinet to exchange
>>> redundant. Perhaps they will be able to reuse/ retain it paralleled up
>>> for 48V DC power and avoid having mains in their cabinets.
You can drive single mode fibre much further than -48v ,the standard
>>>> FTTP.
>>>>
>>>> Theo
>>>
>>> I presume that BT will increase concentration in their cabinets, so that
>>> the remaining POTS customers (and those who won't pay the inevitable
>>> premium for FTTP) will gave their phone / internet interface there
>>> rather
>>> than the exchange, rendering the copper from cabinet to exchange
>>> redundant. Perhaps they will be able to reuse/ retain it paralleled up
>>> for 48V DC power and avoid having mains in their cabinets.
cisco single mode fibre card will work at up to 40km according to cisco.
So less cabinets and telephone exchanges further apart.Cost saving by
selling land /buildings perhaps.
>>>
>>
>> You won’t ultimately have any choice but to have FTTP. Copper local loops
>> will go.
>
> Is that before or after Hell freezes over?
>
Given the cost savings in staff and maintenance ,its a matter of when. I
>>
>> You won’t ultimately have any choice but to have FTTP. Copper local loops
>> will go.
>
> Is that before or after Hell freezes over?
>
was told by our OR account manager where I used to work that that is
their ultimate aim,a large M.P.L.S network that provides all their
services and a fibre local loop.
If they bother out in the sticks will be driven by who is prepared to
pay for it, OR or government.
Martin Brown
May 13, 2021, 6:38:24 AM5/13/21
to
On 13/05/2021 11:08, grinch wrote:
> r
>>> You won’t ultimately have any choice but to have FTTP. Copper local
>>> loops
>>> will go.
>>
>> Is that before or after Hell freezes over?
>>
> Given the cost savings in staff and maintenance ,its a matter of when. I
> was told by our OR account manager where I used to work that that is
> their ultimate aim,a large M.P.L.S network that provides all their
> services and a fibre local loop.
>
> If they bother out in the sticks will be driven by who is prepared to
> pay for it, OR or government.
I don't doubt that it will happen in larger towns and cities - to some
extent it is already happening with various other players fibreing up
the suburbs of Manchester and Newcastle for example. Mildly annoying the
number of times they each take it in turn to dig up the pavements.
However, rural internet provision remains bronze age and and shows no
signs at all of ever getting upgraded unless someone greases OR's palms
with a hell of a lot of dosh. It makes no economic sense to run a high
bandwidth link ten miles for just half a dozen houses!
The half baked trial scheme of FTTRN was still born and sank without
trace. The PSU's cost the same irrespective of the number of houses.
https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2014/08/first-bt-fibre-remote-node-fttrn-broadband-trial-set-q4-2014.html
A good proxy for internet and mobile not spots is no mains gas.
--
Regards,
Martin Brown
> r
>>> You won’t ultimately have any choice but to have FTTP. Copper local
>>> loops
>>> will go.
>>
>> Is that before or after Hell freezes over?
>>
> Given the cost savings in staff and maintenance ,its a matter of when. I
> was told by our OR account manager where I used to work that that is
> their ultimate aim,a large M.P.L.S network that provides all their
> services and a fibre local loop.
>
> If they bother out in the sticks will be driven by who is prepared to
> pay for it, OR or government.
extent it is already happening with various other players fibreing up
the suburbs of Manchester and Newcastle for example. Mildly annoying the
number of times they each take it in turn to dig up the pavements.
However, rural internet provision remains bronze age and and shows no
signs at all of ever getting upgraded unless someone greases OR's palms
with a hell of a lot of dosh. It makes no economic sense to run a high
bandwidth link ten miles for just half a dozen houses!
The half baked trial scheme of FTTRN was still born and sank without
trace. The PSU's cost the same irrespective of the number of houses.
https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2014/08/first-bt-fibre-remote-node-fttrn-broadband-trial-set-q4-2014.html
A good proxy for internet and mobile not spots is no mains gas.
--
Regards,
Martin Brown
Graham J
May 13, 2021, 7:11:45 AM5/13/21
to
grinch wrote:
[snip]
>>> You won’t ultimately have any choice but to have FTTP. Copper local
>>> loops
>>> will go.
>>
>> Is that before or after Hell freezes over?
>>
> Given the cost savings in staff and maintenance ,its a matter of when. I
> was told by our OR account manager where I used to work that that is
> their ultimate aim,a large M.P.L.S network that provides all their
> services and a fibre local loop.
>
> If they bother out in the sticks will be driven by who is prepared to
> pay for it, OR or government.
I've heard that the secondhand value of the removed copper will pay for
the fibre installation.
Round here County Broadband are trying to sell their FTTP service, and
have installed some green tubes in the Openreach ducts. In principle it
sound good, but they've not responded to my request for detailed
technical information about their router, or the option to use a fibre
modem and one's one Ethernet router in order to implement a LAN-to-LAN
VPN or other services that need a specific router as the termination
point for a public IP address.
So it will be necessary to allow all ISPs to have access to all
installed fibre, in much the same way that currently all ISPs have
access to the Openreach copper infrastructure. This should mean that
permission for a fibre installation is only granted on this condition.
--
Graham J
[snip]
>>> You won’t ultimately have any choice but to have FTTP. Copper local
>>> loops
>>> will go.
>>
>> Is that before or after Hell freezes over?
>>
> Given the cost savings in staff and maintenance ,its a matter of when. I
> was told by our OR account manager where I used to work that that is
> their ultimate aim,a large M.P.L.S network that provides all their
> services and a fibre local loop.
>
> If they bother out in the sticks will be driven by who is prepared to
> pay for it, OR or government.
the fibre installation.
Round here County Broadband are trying to sell their FTTP service, and
have installed some green tubes in the Openreach ducts. In principle it
sound good, but they've not responded to my request for detailed
technical information about their router, or the option to use a fibre
modem and one's one Ethernet router in order to implement a LAN-to-LAN
VPN or other services that need a specific router as the termination
point for a public IP address.
So it will be necessary to allow all ISPs to have access to all
installed fibre, in much the same way that currently all ISPs have
access to the Openreach copper infrastructure. This should mean that
permission for a fibre installation is only granted on this condition.
--
Graham J
Theo
May 13, 2021, 9:17:42 AM5/13/21
to
notya...@gmail.com <notya...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, 12 May 2021 at 14:44:38 UTC+1, Theo wrote:
> > That's different. There are actually three ports involved:
> >
> > Classic master socket connected to copper (analogue PSTN)
> > Phone port on Openreach ONT (digital 'PSTN'/VOIP)
> > Phone port on ISP's router (VOIP)
>
> On Wednesday, 12 May 2021 at 14:44:38 UTC+1, Theo wrote:
> > That's different. There are actually three ports involved:
> >
> > Classic master socket connected to copper (analogue PSTN)
> > Phone port on Openreach ONT (digital 'PSTN'/VOIP)
> > Phone port on ISP's router (VOIP)
>
> I presume that BT will increase concentration in their cabinets, so that
> the remaining POTS customers (and those who won't pay the inevitable
> premium for FTTP) will gave their phone / internet interface there rather
> than the exchange, rendering the copper from cabinet to exchange
> redundant. Perhaps they will be able to reuse/ retain it paralleled up
> for 48V DC power and avoid having mains in their cabinets.
The SOGEA product heads in that direction. There is no analogue voice on
> the remaining POTS customers (and those who won't pay the inevitable
> premium for FTTP) will gave their phone / internet interface there rather
> than the exchange, rendering the copper from cabinet to exchange
> redundant. Perhaps they will be able to reuse/ retain it paralleled up
> for 48V DC power and avoid having mains in their cabinets.
the line, it's purely broadband. Voice is provided by #3 in my list, VOIP
from the ISP router. That means the copper to the exchange is redundant and
can be removed.
Unfortunately the transition to SOGEA is a bit bumpy if you have phone
extensions, otherwise I would expect conversion en masse to SOGEA for people
with FTTC. I think they should work out the kinks (also battery backup)
first.
Theo
bert
May 13, 2021, 9:57:40 AM5/13/21
to
In article <s7iviq$1cvl$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> writes
Low orbit satellites?
--
bert
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> writes
--
bert
Tweed
May 13, 2021, 11:13:59 AM5/13/21
to
Graham J
May 13, 2021, 11:30:10 AM5/13/21
to
Theo wrote:
[snip]
>
> Unfortunately the transition to SOGEA is a bit bumpy if you have phone
> extensions, otherwise I would expect conversion en masse to SOGEA for people
> with FTTC. I think they should work out the kinks (also battery backup)
> first.
A router could easily contain a battery (just as does a mobile phone)
and charging circuit. TR-069 management could even tell the ISP the
health of that battery so replacement can be scheduled.
--
Graham J
[snip]
>
> Unfortunately the transition to SOGEA is a bit bumpy if you have phone
> extensions, otherwise I would expect conversion en masse to SOGEA for people
> with FTTC. I think they should work out the kinks (also battery backup)
> first.
and charging circuit. TR-069 management could even tell the ISP the
health of that battery so replacement can be scheduled.
--
Graham J
Andy Burns
May 13, 2021, 12:41:49 PM5/13/21
to
Theo wrote:
> I think they should work out the kinks (also battery backup)
> first.
They disagree with you, they used to supply a battery backup, but no
> I think they should work out the kinks (also battery backup)
> first.
longer do.
Theo
May 13, 2021, 1:20:59 PM5/13/21
to
have another phone for use in emergencies. If they want to move to everyone
having FTTC/P with no copper to the exchange they will need to handle that
corner case.
I would be quite happy to buy a UPS that can run a router for a few days,
but there's nothing I've seen on the market.
(the 4 AA cells that was Openreach's idea of battery backup was hilariously
useless)
Theo
Abandoned_Trolley
May 13, 2021, 2:58:49 PM5/13/21
to
On 23/04/2021 22:32, Theo wrote:
> Java Jive <ja...@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>> Is it the end of the line for landline phones?
>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56831212
>>
>> "When did your home landline last ring?
>>
>> On the rare occasion it does, we all know the chances are it's going to
>> be a scam caller, especially since in the last year our elderly parents
>> have all mastered Whatsapp and Zoom.
>
> Define 'landline'. My landline is SOGEA, so there's no analogue voice. I
> use VOIP, just not the VOIP from my broadband provider...
>
> Theo
>
never mind about landlines - will this thread ever end ?
> Java Jive <ja...@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>> Is it the end of the line for landline phones?
>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56831212
>>
>> "When did your home landline last ring?
>>
>> On the rare occasion it does, we all know the chances are it's going to
>> be a scam caller, especially since in the last year our elderly parents
>> have all mastered Whatsapp and Zoom.
>
> Define 'landline'. My landline is SOGEA, so there's no analogue voice. I
> use VOIP, just not the VOIP from my broadband provider...
>
> Theo
>
never mind about landlines - will this thread ever end ?
Tweed
May 13, 2021, 3:38:04 PM5/13/21
to
whether it is copper fibre VoIP etc. As opposed to a mobile phone.
Or in terms of domestic use, a landline rings and it could be for anyone in
the household. A mobile rings and it is for you. (Scam calls aside).
Vir Campestris
May 20, 2021, 11:49:29 AM5/20/21
to
On 13/05/2021 12:11, Graham J wrote:
> I've heard that the secondhand value of the removed copper will pay for
> the fibre installation.
We've got ~100 houses in our village, and we're a couple of miles from
> I've heard that the secondhand value of the removed copper will pay for
> the fibre installation.
the exchange. When BT realised they were about to lose all the broadband
contracts they fixed it. We now have fibre to the village, and a mix of
FTTP in the more spread out areas and a couple of FTTC cabinets where
it's more dense.
A couple of miles of 100 pair copper has to be worth a bit... but it's
still running the POTs service. Even though there's an outgoing-only
POTS port on my fibre modem...
Andy
Graham J
May 20, 2021, 12:05:11 PM5/20/21
to
<https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2020/05/openreach-to-stop-selling-copper-phone-in-118-areas-go-fttp.html>
... But my guess is that they will only do so using their own routers
which will have POTS ports. In theory the Openreach VoIP ought to work
with any VoIP device but my suspicion is that it will be carefully
designed to be incompatible.
There are other VoIP providers. What to they say about working with the
POTS port on your fibre modem?
--
Graham J
Vir Campestris
May 20, 2021, 4:17:44 PM5/20/21
to
On 20/05/2021 17:04, Graham J wrote:
> By 2025 Openreach is supposed to replace POTS with VoIP. See:
>
> <https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2020/05/openreach-to-stop-selling-copper-phone-in-118-areas-go-fttp.html>
>
>
> ... But my guess is that they will only do so using their own routers
> which will have POTS ports. In theory the Openreach VoIP ought to work
> with any VoIP device but my suspicion is that it will be carefully
> designed to be incompatible.
>
> There are other VoIP providers. What to they say about working with the
> POTS port on your fibre modem?
I haven't asked.
> By 2025 Openreach is supposed to replace POTS with VoIP. See:
>
> <https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2020/05/openreach-to-stop-selling-copper-phone-in-118-areas-go-fttp.html>
>
>
> ... But my guess is that they will only do so using their own routers
> which will have POTS ports. In theory the Openreach VoIP ought to work
> with any VoIP device but my suspicion is that it will be carefully
> designed to be incompatible.
>
> There are other VoIP providers. What to they say about working with the
> POTS port on your fibre modem?
It's an Openreach modem. I got the port on that put in a more convenient
place than the old copper socket - but it's not so much more convenient
that I have worried about it.
Andy
MB
May 29, 2021, 7:59:17 AM5/29/21
to
On 20/05/2021 17:04, Graham J wrote:
> By 2025 Openreach is supposed to replace POTS with VoIP. See:
The scammers will just love that, something else to use to scam people.
notya...@gmail.com
May 29, 2021, 1:05:58 PM5/29/21
to
I get frequent attempted scams on my two POTS lines (both in the phone book), some on my old business number (Voip for over a decade) and a few on my mobile phone (in the original BTC number range 07860).
Interestingly I also get occasional silent calls on the 3 SIM in my tablet, although only a few neighbours and close friends have its number via WhatsApp...
Vir Campestris
May 30, 2021, 4:20:22 PM5/30/21
to
On 20/05/2021 17:04, Graham J wrote:
switching us over.
Andy
Optimist
May 31, 2021, 3:50:57 AM5/31/21
to
over the internet like Skype or Vonage. This is BT's explanation
https://www.bt.com/help/landline/what-is-digital-voice-and-how-can-i-get-it- - Virgin Media will be
doing something similar.
Another link here https://www.futureofvoice.co.uk/
notya...@gmail.com
May 31, 2021, 9:55:10 AM5/31/21
to
With BT Broadband Voice (business) and BT Broadband Talk (residential) - both free, you were stuck with using BT's soft phone or BT equipment, except that the link BT sent to configure one's soft phone contained the authentication name and password for the service. This could then be configured into other equipment, but even then the registration would only work whilst the soft phone remained online.
I never tried it from anywhere else before the service was pulled by BT and replaced by more expensive offerings or not at all.
BT also refused to migrate ISDN MSN's or business call sign numbers to [their] Voip or to port their Voip numbers to another provider.
The result of all this is that BT now only get the principle line and used for inclusive calls - a fraction of their former revenue.
Vir Campestris
May 31, 2021, 4:16:53 PM5/31/21
to
On 31/05/2021 08:50, Optimist wrote:
> The term VoIP is misleading, as the connection will still be with the telco's phone network, not
> over the internet like Skype or Vonage. This is BT's explanation
> https://www.bt.com/help/landline/what-is-digital-voice-and-how-can-i-get-it- - Virgin Media will be
> doing something similar.
>
> Another link herehttps://www.futureofvoice.co.uk/
That BT link was dead. Until I realised Thunderbird had guessed wrong
> The term VoIP is misleading, as the connection will still be with the telco's phone network, not
> over the internet like Skype or Vonage. This is BT's explanation
> https://www.bt.com/help/landline/what-is-digital-voice-and-how-can-i-get-it- - Virgin Media will be
> doing something similar.
>
> Another link herehttps://www.futureofvoice.co.uk/
and the link is
<https://www.bt.com/help/landline/what-is-digital-voice-and-how-can-i-get-it->
including the trailing hyphen.
It told me nothing.
The other one says "The telephone providers are upgrading the landline
network, also known as the PSTN (Public Switched Telephone Network) from
analogue to digital or IP (Internet Protocol)"
So it's voice calls, and it's using IP. How is it not VOIP?
AFAICT the only difference is that the analogue-IP conversion will take
place in BT's modem, not inside a dedicated IP phone.
Andy
Theo
May 31, 2021, 6:27:04 PM5/31/21
to
Vir Campestris <vir.cam...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> So it's voice calls, and it's using IP. How is it not VOIP?
>
> AFAICT the only difference is that the analogue-IP conversion will take
> place in BT's modem, not inside a dedicated IP phone.
It is indeed VOIP. The main difference from what people usually think of as
> So it's voice calls, and it's using IP. How is it not VOIP?
>
> AFAICT the only difference is that the analogue-IP conversion will take
> place in BT's modem, not inside a dedicated IP phone.
VOIP is that it's not over the public internet, it's over a private route
(VLAN?) to the ISP (or possibly to Openreach).
The main question is then where the ATA lives that terminates it - in the
Openreach ONT (for FTTP), in the ISP router, or in a customer SIP device.
The latter being something I've not seen officially supported, but might
work in some cases?
(it is almost certainly SIP - unlike other proprietary internet-based VOIP
protocols like Skype or Facetime or whatever)
Theo
Optimist
Jun 1, 2021, 1:19:13 AM6/1/21
to
centre, which routes the call in the usual way. Incoming calls will be routed by the telco in the
usual way, to the specific line for the phone number, but as a digital signal. Hence a dedicated
socket in the modem.
For a normal VOIP service, you'd connect your IP phone to your own network for it to communicate via
your router to your VOIP provider which would route the call, and incoming calls would be routed
according to the IP address of the device, regardless of the location suggested by the phone number.
The telcos are doing this so that in the long term they can replace the copper lines by fibre or
wireless.
An explanation from Virgin Media here, but it's scarcely better than the other two
https://community.virginmedia.com/t5/Virgin-Phone-Switchover/gh-p/Switchover
Trolleybus
Jun 1, 2021, 12:10:43 PM6/1/21
to
On Tue, 01 Jun 2021 06:19:11 +0100, Optimist <curmu...@mailinator.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 31 May 2021 21:16:51 +0100, Vir Campestris <vir.cam...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On 31/05/2021 08:50, Optimist wrote:
>>> The term VoIP is misleading, as the connection will still be with the telco's phone network, not
>>> over the internet like Skype or Vonage. This is BT's explanation
>>> https://www.bt.com/help/landline/what-is-digital-voice-and-how-can-i-get-it- - Virgin Media will be
>>> doing something similar.
>>>
>>> Another link herehttps://www.futureofvoice.co.uk/
>>
>>That BT link was dead. Until I realised Thunderbird had guessed wrong
>>and the link is
>><https://www.bt.com/help/landline/what-is-digital-voice-and-how-can-i-get-it->
>>including the trailing hyphen.
>>
>>It told me nothing.
>>
>>The other one says "The telephone providers are upgrading the landline
>>network, also known as the PSTN (Public Switched Telephone Network) from
>>analogue to digital or IP (Internet Protocol)"
>>
>>So it's voice calls, and it's using IP. How is it not VOIP?
>>
>>AFAICT the only difference is that the analogue-IP conversion will take
>>place in BT's modem, not inside a dedicated IP phone.
>
>AFAICS all they are doing is to digitise the signals between the customer and the telco's switching
>centre, which routes the call in the usual way. Incoming calls will be routed by the telco in the
>usual way, to the specific line for the phone number, but as a digital signal. Hence a dedicated
>socket in the modem.
>
Don't think so; or that certainly wasn't the plan when I was working with BT 15
>On Mon, 31 May 2021 21:16:51 +0100, Vir Campestris <vir.cam...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On 31/05/2021 08:50, Optimist wrote:
>>> The term VoIP is misleading, as the connection will still be with the telco's phone network, not
>>> over the internet like Skype or Vonage. This is BT's explanation
>>> https://www.bt.com/help/landline/what-is-digital-voice-and-how-can-i-get-it- - Virgin Media will be
>>> doing something similar.
>>>
>>> Another link herehttps://www.futureofvoice.co.uk/
>>
>>That BT link was dead. Until I realised Thunderbird had guessed wrong
>>and the link is
>><https://www.bt.com/help/landline/what-is-digital-voice-and-how-can-i-get-it->
>>including the trailing hyphen.
>>
>>It told me nothing.
>>
>>The other one says "The telephone providers are upgrading the landline
>>network, also known as the PSTN (Public Switched Telephone Network) from
>>analogue to digital or IP (Internet Protocol)"
>>
>>So it's voice calls, and it's using IP. How is it not VOIP?
>>
>>AFAICT the only difference is that the analogue-IP conversion will take
>>place in BT's modem, not inside a dedicated IP phone.
>
>AFAICS all they are doing is to digitise the signals between the customer and the telco's switching
>centre, which routes the call in the usual way. Incoming calls will be routed by the telco in the
>usual way, to the specific line for the phone number, but as a digital signal. Hence a dedicated
>socket in the modem.
>
years ago, so things may have changed since then. The plan was to replace SS#7
signaling with a pure IP-based network. Call management was to be done using
SIP, but hardly out-of-the-box RFC 3261 SIP. The telcos had already at that
stage submitted change requests numbering into the thousands.
I even went on a short course about the new telephone network architecture but
seem to have forgotten its name. IP Multimedia Subsystem may have been part of
it but there was an overall name which may well have never made it into
production.
They did have good gin and tonic at that hotel, though.
Graham J
Jun 1, 2021, 12:48:33 PM6/1/21
to
Trolleybus wrote:
[snip]
In essence your phone service will almost certainly be tied to your
broadband supplier and their router. Expect problems if you change
broadband supplier.
However, if you migrate your phone number now to an independent VoIP
provider then the ISP you choose and the router you use are irrelevant.
Of course this might be difficult with FTTP ...
If your broadband is delivered via ADSL or FTTC it will be much less
reliable than the traditional POTS service delivered on the supporting
copper pair. Any noise or wiring problem will cause your router to
re-sync; and this usually takes about a minute; not what you want on a
phone call! By contrast noise on a POTS line is heard on the phone as a
click or crackle - so it's usually tolerable.
So whatever VoIP service you use your calls will be interrupted by the
general unreliability of the broadband service. I am aware that some
people have 100% reliable broadband, but a good proportion of us suffer
interruptions at least once per week. This is generally not noticeable
for emails or web browsing so many people do not complain. But just
look at the up-time reported by your router - I bet it's never much more
than 100 hours.
Hopefully FTTP will be very much more reliable.
--
Graham J
[snip]
In essence your phone service will almost certainly be tied to your
broadband supplier and their router. Expect problems if you change
broadband supplier.
However, if you migrate your phone number now to an independent VoIP
provider then the ISP you choose and the router you use are irrelevant.
Of course this might be difficult with FTTP ...
If your broadband is delivered via ADSL or FTTC it will be much less
reliable than the traditional POTS service delivered on the supporting
copper pair. Any noise or wiring problem will cause your router to
re-sync; and this usually takes about a minute; not what you want on a
phone call! By contrast noise on a POTS line is heard on the phone as a
click or crackle - so it's usually tolerable.
So whatever VoIP service you use your calls will be interrupted by the
general unreliability of the broadband service. I am aware that some
people have 100% reliable broadband, but a good proportion of us suffer
interruptions at least once per week. This is generally not noticeable
for emails or web browsing so many people do not complain. But just
look at the up-time reported by your router - I bet it's never much more
than 100 hours.
Hopefully FTTP will be very much more reliable.
--
Graham J
notya...@gmail.com
Jun 1, 2021, 3:13:20 PM6/1/21
to
Even if my broadband fails, my mobile phone will register over 3/4G and calls will still come in or be made.
Vir Campestris
Jun 16, 2021, 4:51:25 PM6/16/21
to
On 31/05/2021 23:27, Theo wrote:
> The main question is then where the ATA lives that terminates it - in the
> Openreach ONT (for FTTP), in the ISP router, or in a customer SIP device.
> The latter being something I've not seen officially supported, but might
> work in some cases?
BT just enabled us for "Digital Voice".
> The main question is then where the ATA lives that terminates it - in the
> Openreach ONT (for FTTP), in the ISP router, or in a customer SIP device.
> The latter being something I've not seen officially supported, but might
> work in some cases?
Our POTS line stopped working (dial tone, but can't make calls). That's
no surprise.
What _is_ a surprise is that the new connection is on the router, not
the ONT.
What's annoying is that the cable the openreach guy installed for us
from the ONT to a socket in the room next door won't reach the router.
Andy
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages