<martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
> On 11/05/2022 12:41, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <t58krv$5jv$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:42:07 on Sun, 8 May 2022,
>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <3mff7hl713e52uahoanc5ie6hc9686lc6v@4ax.com>, at 14:00:55 on
>>>> Sun, 8 May 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> On Sun, 8 May 2022 13:19:58 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In message <t56fqb$ni3$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:03:39 on Sat, 7 May
>>>>>> 2022,
>>>>>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 7 May 2022 11:19:54 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>>>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 7 May 2022 10:03:05 +0100
>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <28ia7hltm2uf8ri8aakvg2qfr5uhm0gs4v@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>>>> 17:15:18 on
>>>>>>>>>>>>> fatter one along the street) are far more robust than
>>>>>>>>>>>>> telephone wires.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Why wouldn't it be?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Because in Muttley-world it wasn't.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Why not try and tear some standard copper phone cable apart with
>>>>>>>>>> your bare
>>>>>>>>>> hands then get back to me about how weak it is.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And then try and cut it with a pair of scissors, or walk over it
>>>>>>>>> a few
>>>>>>>>> times in heavy boots; then try the same with a typical power cable.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Its not going to be cut or walked over is it? Its in a conduit or
>>>>>>>> cabinet
>>>>>>>> safely tucked away. The only time it'll get broken is if someone
>>>>>>>> messes
>>>>>>>> about with it. The only exception would be overhead wires from
>>>>>>>> poles to
>>>>>>>> houses but I've never seen one break yet.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rewinding quite a bit on this thread, the reliability of the
>>>>>>> copper local
>>>>>>> loop has something but not too much with its impending replacement
>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>> fibre. If you are OpenReach with copper that can at best supply 80
>>>>>>> Mbit/sec
>>>>>>> down and 20 up, and your competitors come along with fibre that
>>>>>>> can manage
>>>>>>> an order of magnitude better at the same price, which one is the the
>>>>>>> average customer going to buy? OR have to move to fibre to survive
>>>>>>> in the
>>>>>>> market place.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's not true because if they try hard they can deliver 300Mbps
>>>>>> on the
>>>>>> copper (that's what I have at the moment), in the urban and semi-urban
>>>>>> areas that might be the ones someone else would offer cable.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is that FTTC or FTTP?
>>>>
>>>> It's FTTC, and the final throw of the dice for copper-to-the-premises.
>>>> Most resellers won't guarantee more than about 160Mbps, but I seem to be
>>>> lucky in having towards the upper end of the 330Mbps theoretical limit.
>>>>
>>>> Frankly, I'd have preferred FTTP, but Openreach haven't done that in my
>>>> street yet. And with the "end of copper" deadline heading for the long
>>>> grass, I decided I didn't want to wait.
>>>>
>>>>>> But who are Openreach's competitors most of the country? Virgin's
>>>>>> precursors gave up extending their network 20yrs ago.
>>>>>
>>>>> There are plenty of local FTTP competitors, but I'm not sure if there
>>>>> are any national ones.
>>>>
>>>> Are those FTTP competitors using their own networks, dug by them through
>>>> the streets; or are they Piggy-backing Openreach's FTTP? In a sense LLU,
>>>> but in this case the local [all the way back to wherever Openreach's
>>>> head end is] loop is fibre, not copper.
>>>>
>>>>>> There's no Virgin here, and actually only two LLU.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Read up on CityFibres plans and financing. They are digging round here
>>> and
>>> intend to (and nearby are) offer service in the same streets as Virgin
>>> Media and OpenReach. They aren’t the only ones going for the suburban
>>> market.
>>>
>>> https://cityfibre.com/about-us/our-network
>>
>> Interesting, if somewhat spotty, network map there. With some clusters.
>> They say they have their own exchanges, and there's obviously one
>> in/near Crawley. I wonder what's so special about North Walsham (near
>> Norwich)... other than maybe the Bacton Gas Terminal.
>>
>>> CF lay their own fibre, mainly in their own ducts (purple pipes) but
>>> sometime seem to use existing OR ducts into the house. They have their
>>> own
>>> head end “exchanges”. Unlike OR’s FTTP, CF offer symmetric up and down
>>> speeds up to 1 GBit/sec. It’s a wholesale network and you can choose
>>> from a
>>> number of retail provides. Vodafone and Zen seem to be the main
>>> players at
>>> the moment.
>>>
>>> Your high speed FTTC connection only works because you are very near to
>>> your cabinet, so you are lucky.
>>
>> I'm not *that* close for a built-up area.
>>
>>> It’s nothing to do with OR trying harder.
>>
>> It is, because they bothered to equip the cabinet with G-Fast.
>>
>> Ironically, people living further from the exchange here *can* get FTTP!
>> That's because ...
>>
>>> Most FTTC customers aren’t even close enough to get the basic 80 Mbit/sec
>>> speed.
>>
>> ...they weren't getting much joy from even the 12Mbps ADSL.
>>
>>> https://cloudandfibre.co.uk/what-is-gfast/
>>>
>>> “GFast works in a very similar way to FTTC but extra specialised
>>> equipment
>>> is fitted to the BT cabinet
>>
>> It's an Openreach cabinet. I'm not getting service from BT.
>>
>>> to alter the speed frequencies of the connection. This change within
>>> the frequencies increases the speed through the copper cable which
>>> results in a more reliable broadband with ultrafast speeds.
>>
>> As I usually put it, each advance in the speed of ADSL is basically by
>> SHOUTING LOUDER down the copper, and some better modem silicon, just
>> like we progressed from 2.4K to 14.4k (via 9.6K) dial-up over a
>> relatively short period.
>>
>>> GFast users are typically located no more than 500 metres from their
>>> local BT cabinet.”
>>
>> The product formerly known as 'Infinity' is usually reckoned to be
>> 60Mbps at 500m, and I know I was getting more than that. I have the ID
>> of the street cabinet I'm connected to, unfortunately not a map of which
>> street cabinet has which ID. The most likely one is at 120m (which is
>> nevertheless a whole block way). Plus of course up the pole, the
>> dropwire, and back down the side of the house, which must be about
>> another 50m. However, the FTTC curves are virtually flat as far as 200m.
>>
>>> Virgin Media have said they are going to replace their entire hybrid
>>> coax/fibre network with proper fibre (and eliminate the DOCSIS bodge)
>>> over
>>> the next 7 years - so they’ve noticed they have to invest to survive.
>>> If OR
>>> sticks with copper they’ll be left without a viable business in the long
>>> term, being left with only the expensive to service rural customers.
>>
>> They've already said they are turning off the copper by 2025.
> What they're not saying is how they will service properties with no
> mobile coverage. It's all very well say IP phones or whatever but what
> about during a power cut?
>

Batteries.