FTTP Install what to expect

[Martin Brown]

So far so good Openreach have been in touch and I now have a much better
idea of how the fibre to premises kit will look.

https://www.openreach.com/fibre-broadband/full-fibre-broadband-installation-checklist

The only surprise is that *both* the internal wall termination box and
the fibre modem will each require their own separate mains power so a
dedicated double socket is needed near the point of entry.

Power cable and modem interconnect lengths are not specified.

It is going to have to live on an extension lead for a while...

[Jeff Gaines]

Post by Martin Brown
So far so good Openreach have been in touch and I now have a much better
idea of how the fibre to premises kit will look.
https://www.openreach.com/fibre-broadband/full-fibre-broadband-installation-checklist
The only surprise is that both the internal wall termination box and the
fibre modem will each require their own separate mains power so a
dedicated double socket is needed near the point of entry.
Power cable and modem interconnect lengths are not specified.
It is going to have to live on an extension lead for a while...

That's a very detailed and clear explanation, would never have happened
before it became a private organisation. I see they've found a picture of
a middle aged white man, didn't think there were any left!

[Andy Burns]

So do we suppose that you can use a third-party router

Yes, but that might prevent using the ISP's own voice features, if that relies
on using a POTS socket on the router.

and that the connection between the router and fibre modem is Ethernet?

Yes gigabit, but I thought that was widely known by people here.

[Martin Brown]

Post by Andy Burns

So do we suppose that you can use a third-party router

Yes, but that might prevent using the ISP's own voice features, if that
relies on using a POTS socket on the router.

I see no reason why you can't daisy chain a second router onto their kit
provided that you disable it from using its own DHCP. I do that to
provide Wifi coverage through the rest of my house.

High speed stuff is best off going directly to their router though.

Post by Andy Burns

and that the connection between the router and fibre modem is Ethernet?

Yes gigabit, but I thought that was widely known by people here.

What is less clear is what form the fibre modem itself takes and the
nature of the interconnection between the wall box and their router.

Seems at least two sorts are in play one with a single gigabyte output
and a maybe a phone like socket and another with about 4 ethernet ports.
I was blissfully unaware of the powered wall box until this morning.

It could get interesting since the incoming existing POTS line enters
the property in the loft where the master socket is "conveniently"
located. I'm not kidding!

Initially I will be happy if it all works at 100M though I will want to
speed test it to its rated maximum during the 30 day 500M trial period.

[Andy Burns]

Post by Martin Brown
I see no reason why you can't daisy chain a second router onto their kit
provided that you disable it from using its own DHCP. I do that to provide Wifi
coverage through the rest of my house.

maybe, maybe not ... is there special sauce on the router's WAN port e.g. a
dedicated VLAN for VoIP traffic, so the ISP's router might need to be "first"
with your own plugged into the LAN side of that, personally I wouldn't want
cascaded routers.

Post by Martin Brown
What is less clear is what form the fibre modem itself takes and the nature of
the interconnection between the wall box and their router.

A short SC/APC fibre, e.g.

<https://www.servicepower.co.uk/shop/fibre-optic-patchcords/scapc-patchcords/scapc-scapc-singlemode-9125-simplex>

when Mr BT has gone, you can replace it with a nice long one to relocate the
modem and router somewhere else.

Post by Martin Brown
Seems at least two sorts are in play one with a single gigabyte output and a
maybe a phone like socket and another with about 4 ethernet ports.

openreach have chopped and changed the kit they use, in the early FTTP days,
they used to supply a UPS and a larger box that the modem + router + UPS all
lived in, and there was no external box.

[Richard Tobin]

So do we suppose that you can use a third-party router, and that the
connection between the router and fibre modem is Ethernet?

I use a Netgear pfSense router. The connection is PPPoE.

-- Richard

[Tweed]

Post by Martin Brown
The only surprise is that *both* the internal wall termination box and
the fibre modem will each require their own separate mains power so a
dedicated double socket is needed near the point of entry.

The website you mentioned,
https://www.openreach.com/fibre-broadband/full-fibre-broadband-installation-checklist
implies that the two sockets are for the fibre modem and your router.
The "box ... on the inside" *is* the modem. That's what I have.
We'll install two boxes, one inside your property and one outside.
What is the external box for? I don't have one. The wire from the
pole (which consists of both the fibre and a copper phone connection)
comes straight through the wall.
-- Richard

It’s to transition from outdoor grade fibre to indoor.

Have a look at this video

https://player.vimeo.com/video/525110308?dnt=1&app_id=122963

at around 30 minutes in.

It is a very interesting video for anyone interested in how FTTP is wired.

[Chris Green]

Post by Tweed
It is a very interesting video for anyone interested in how FTTP is wired.

I thought it wasn't! :-)

[Martin Brown]

Post by Martin Brown
The only surprise is that *both* the internal wall termination box and
the fibre modem will each require their own separate mains power so a
dedicated double socket is needed near the point of entry.

The website you mentioned,
https://www.openreach.com/fibre-broadband/full-fibre-broadband-installation-checklist
implies that the two sockets are for the fibre modem and your router.
The "box ... on the inside" *is* the modem. That's what I have.

OK. Thanks. What model and what and how many outputs does it have?
I'm getting different descriptions from my contacts.

I presume the other box is the router then. Is it also gigabyte class?

We'll install two boxes, one inside your property and one outside.
What is the external box for? I don't have one. The wire from the
pole (which consists of both the fibre and a copper phone connection)
comes straight through the wall.

I suspect they assume that everyone has underground physical cabling
these days and the outside box is to weather proof their cable run.

My POTS phone line comes from a pole directly into the loft where they
"conveniently" installed the master sockets (two lines). I split the
ADSL signal off there and run it to my office. Sounds like I will need
to run some 20m of Cat6 cabling instead.

We are quite primitive here with mains and phone lines arriving on
vulnerable overhead lines (all on the same poles). Milk tanker totals
them every now and then usually on a particularly frosty morning from
hitting black ice. Took out 10m of holly hedge too last time he did it.

[Richard Tobin]

Post by Martin Brown
OK. Thanks. What model and what and how many outputs does it have?

I can't see anything resembling a manufacturer or model number, but
it looks very similar to the one described here:

https://www.openreach.com/content/dam/openreach/openreach-dam-files/images/news-and-opinion/articles/2018/02/ONT%20Factsheet.pdf

There is an unused port labelled "TEL1".

It was installed about 3 years ago.

-- Richard

[Andy Burns]

Post by Richard Tobin
https://www.openreach.com/content/dam/openreach/openreach-dam-files/images/news-and-opinion/articles/2018/02/ONT%20Factsheet.pdf
There is an unused port labelled "TEL1".
It was installed about 3 years ago.

That's a bit old-hat, the new single port style is as on the right here.

<Loading Image...>

[Richard Tobin]

Post by Richard Tobin
https://www.openreach.com/content/dam/openreach/openreach-dam-files/images/news-and-opinion/articles/2018/02/ONT%20Factsheet.pdf

Post by Richard Tobin
There is an unused port labelled "TEL1".
It was installed about 3 years ago.

That's a bit old-hat, the new single port style is as on the right here.
<https://www.ispreview.co.uk/wp-content/gallery/bt-openreach-uk-illustrations/fttp_old_ont_vs_new_ont_2019.jpg>

The thing on the right is remarkably similar to what's inside the
thing on the left!

The only difference in the labelling is the absence of the port to
connect to the battery back-up.

-- Richard

[Andy Burns]

Post by Richard Tobin

Post by Andy Burns
That's a bit old-hat, the new single port style is as on the right here.
<https://www.ispreview.co.uk/wp-content/gallery/bt-openreach-uk-illustrations/fttp_old_ont_vs_new_ont_2019.jpg>

The thing on the right is remarkably similar to what's inside the
thing on the left!

Sorry, there's a smaller version

<Loading Image...>

[Andy Burns]

I suspect they assume that everyone has underground physical cabling these days
and the outside box is to weather proof their cable run.
My POTS phone line comes from a pole directly into the loft where they
"conveniently"  installed the master sockets (two lines).

In which case for FTTP, they're likely to want to string the new fibre up at
loft height, then drop down to "knee level" for the external demarc box, then go
back up to loft height, before going through the wall, if the loft is still
where you want the active kit to live?

This means lower likelihood of an engineer having to use ladders (nasty H&S
rules) in future for trouble shooting, he can plug his test kit in at "knee level".

[Mark Carver]

Post by Andy Burns

Post by Martin Brown
I suspect they assume that everyone has underground physical cabling
these days and the outside box is to weather proof their cable run.
My POTS phone line comes from a pole directly into the loft where
they "conveniently"  installed the master sockets (two lines).

In which case for FTTP, they're likely to want to string the new fibre
up at loft height, then drop down to "knee level" for the external
demarc box, then go back up to loft height, before going through the
wall, if the loft is still where you want the active kit to live?

I'm not sure, because of summertime temperatures a domestic loft is
really a good place for active hi tech electronics ?

[Graham J]

Mark Carver wrote:
[snip]

Post by Mark Carver
I'm not sure, because of summertime temperatures a domestic loft is
really a good place for active hi tech electronics ?

You could try water cooling - there's usually (in the UK) a cold water
storage tank.

[Mark Carver]

Post by Graham J
[snip]

Post by Mark Carver
I'm not sure, because of summertime temperatures a domestic loft is
really a good place for active hi tech electronics ?

You could try water cooling - there's usually (in the UK) a cold water
storage tank.

Not in my loft (in deepest Hampshire, UK) there isn't. Header tanks are
so last century

[Martin Brown]

Post by Andy Burns

Post by Martin Brown
I suspect they assume that everyone has underground physical cabling
these days and the outside box is to weather proof their cable run.
My POTS phone line comes from a pole directly into the loft where they
"conveniently"  installed the master sockets (two lines).

In which case for FTTP, they're likely to want to string the new fibre
up at loft height, then drop down to "knee level" for the external
demarc box, then go back up to loft height, before going through the
wall, if the loft is still where you want the active kit to live?

Having the master sockets in the loft wasn't my idea.
BT did that after a previous line hit by tree disaster!

Post by Andy Burns
This means lower likelihood of an engineer having to use ladders (nasty
H&S rules) in future for trouble shooting, he can plug his test kit in
at "knee level".

Hmm. Thanks for the advanced warning. Line comes in at the apex of the
gable end at present and immediately above a wide bay window.

If the cable comes down to ground level then I think I'd be inclined to
reverse everything and have the modem and router there and then have to
rewire my cat5 connection from my office down to the living room. That
existing wire is good for 100M but won't support 1G. Inertia may rule!

I can move something with a 1G ethernet port to do >100M speed tests.

[Andy Burns]

Post by Martin Brown
Having the master sockets in the loft wasn't my idea.
BT did that after a previous line hit by tree disaster!

ok, so they'll give you a choice where you want it this time.

Post by Martin Brown

Post by Andy Burns
This means lower likelihood of an engineer having to use ladders (nasty H&S
rules) in future for trouble shooting, he can plug his test kit in at "knee level".

Hmm. Thanks for the advanced warning. Line comes in at the apex of the gable end
at present and immediately above a wide bay window.
If the cable comes down to ground level then I think I'd be inclined to reverse
everything and have the modem and router there and then have to rewire my cat5
connection from my office down to the living room. That existing wire is good
for 100M but won't support 1G. Inertia may rule!

Some people will tell you you need cat5e, or cat6 cable, but actually 1000base-T
ethernet was specced to use existing cat5, so you should be fine, especially as
I assume it's much less than 100m from your office to your living room ...

[Chris Green]

Post by Martin Brown
If the cable comes down to ground level then I think I'd be inclined to
reverse everything and have the modem and router there and then have to
rewire my cat5 connection from my office down to the living room. That
existing wire is good for 100M but won't support 1G. Inertia may rule!

As long as it's fully wired I've found that even pretty old Cat5 will
support Gigabit, especially at the few tens of metres lengths one has
in a house.

[Martin Brown]

Post by Chris Green

Post by Martin Brown
If the cable comes down to ground level then I think I'd be inclined to
reverse everything and have the modem and router there and then have to
rewire my cat5 connection from my office down to the living room. That
existing wire is good for 100M but won't support 1G. Inertia may rule!

As long as it's fully wired I've found that even pretty old Cat5 will
support Gigabit, especially at the few tens of metres lengths one has
in a house.

Thanks - that is good to know. I was going to try it and see anyway.

[Vir Campestris]

Post by Martin Brown
So far so good Openreach have been in touch and I now have a much better
idea of how the fibre to premises kit will look.
https://www.openreach.com/fibre-broadband/full-fibre-broadband-installation-checklist
The only surprise is that *both* the internal wall termination box and
the fibre modem will each require their own separate mains power so a
dedicated double socket is needed near the point of entry.
Power cable and modem interconnect lengths are not specified.
It is going to have to live on an extension lead for a while...

I've read the thread.

I have three boxes:
- An external junction box. This is unpowered.
- An internal fibre modem. This is on a short length of fibre to the
external junction box. This does need power.
- A router. Again, this needs power.

The link between the modem and the router is plain old Ethernet.
(Twisted pair I mean, not 10base5...). I assume it's running gigabit -
certainly it's more than 100Mbit.

For me it was convenient to have the modem and router in the same place
(understairs cupboard) but I see no reason why they have to be.

There are POTS ports on the router, but they never worked.

Andy

[Andy Burns]

- An external junction box. This is  unpowered.
- An internal fibre modem. This is on a short length of fibre to the external
junction box. This does need power.
- A router. Again, this needs power.
The link between the modem and the router is plain old Ethernet. (Twisted pair I
mean, not 10base5...). I assume it's running gigabit - certainly it's more than
100Mbit.
For me it was convenient to have the modem and router in the same place
(understairs cupboard) but I see no reason why they have to be.
There are POTS ports on the router, but they never worked.

As far I I recall, you retained working POTS on original copper pair and master
socket for "a few months", then BT came back and made some changes to enable
them to cut the copper pair? I think you said that included providing you with
a wifi telephone? But does the POTS socket on the ONT also work?

[Vir Campestris]

Post by Andy Burns

- An external junction box. This is  unpowered.
- An internal fibre modem. This is on a short length of fibre to the
external junction box. This does need power.
- A router. Again, this needs power.
The link between the modem and the router is plain old Ethernet.
(Twisted pair I mean, not 10base5...). I assume it's running gigabit -
certainly it's more than 100Mbit.
For me it was convenient to have the modem and router in the same
place (understairs cupboard) but I see no reason why they have to be.
There are POTS ports on the router, but they never worked.

As far I I recall, you retained working POTS on original copper pair and
master socket for "a few months", then BT came back and made some
changes to enable them to cut the copper pair?  I think you said that
included providing you with a wifi telephone?  But does the POTS socket
on the ONT also work?

Sorry, been away.

You're completely correct, except the ONT POTS socket has never worked.

Andy

[Martin Brown]

Post by Vir Campestris

Post by Andy Burns

- An external junction box. This is  unpowered.
- An internal fibre modem. This is on a short length of fibre to the
external junction box. This does need power.
- A router. Again, this needs power.
The link between the modem and the router is plain old Ethernet.
(Twisted pair I mean, not 10base5...). I assume it's running gigabit
- certainly it's more than 100Mbit.
For me it was convenient to have the modem and router in the same
place (understairs cupboard) but I see no reason why they have to be.
There are POTS ports on the router, but they never worked.

Looking at it I think it is a filtered pass through for the ADSL input.
It is annotated "Phone" symbol of phone - outline lowercase b.
The ADSL input is labelled "ADSL" with a larger outline lowercase b.

Post by Vir Campestris

Post by Andy Burns
As far I I recall, you retained working POTS on original copper pair
and master socket for "a few months", then BT came back and made some
changes to enable them to cut the copper pair?  I think you said that
included providing you with a wifi telephone?  But does the POTS
socket on the ONT also work?

Sorry, been away.
You're completely correct, except the ONT POTS socket has never worked.

My installation is complete and is non-standard.

The original copper line was left in place and still works just as
before (but no longer has an ADSL signal on it). The new fibre drop line
was run from a different pole to a different gable end on the house,
drops to ground level and then goes around the house to a small grey
junction box with the fibre splice inside and then back up to my office.

What surprised me slightly is that the fibre drop line is a figure of 8
shape and includes a copper line pair as well as the fibre. I have no
wish to lose my POTS phone line - mains supply is too unreliable here.
And Northern Powergrid are very slow to fix faults.

The fibre modem is on the inside of the wall and has an optical input
with a small length of fibre and just one 1G ethernet output.

The router is BT's standard offering and has both a WAN input and an
ADSL input, USB and a phone sockets. Minor snag is that in this mode I
only have 3 superfast ethernet links in the office but it works OK.

I have yet to explore what things can be plugged into its USB socket and
be made available over the network.

[Graham J]

Java Jive wrote:

[snip]

The fact that management did not acknowlege the severity of
the damage is likely to be an ongoing problem; it is part of the
curent political and business mindset.

Yes, in some respects we seem to be slipping back into being a third
class nation.

We are already there! Just think sleaze, political incompetence,
insularity (i.e. Brexit), etc...

I think it will be important for small remote communities to take
control of this themselves, by having (or knowing where to borrow at
short notice) suitable generators; and encouraging informal social
support so that elderly or disadvantaged neighbours are helped,
possibly by taking them to a hotel unaffected by the power loss.

Who would pay the hotel fees?

A sensible question. Bad weather can affect anyone, anywhere, from time
to time. Either one pays the cost when affected, or one tries to
arrange insurance to cover such problems. In 2016 my garden and a
summerhouse were badly flooded in a thunderstorm, the like of which was
unheard of in living memory in the village. So I claimed for repair
work on my insurance. Of course, since then I have more than repaid the
insurance industry in increased premiums.

For the utilities such as the electricity supply business in Scotland
and the north of England, a sensible insurance provision would have been
to cut down the trees within falling distance of overhead supply cables,
and to have sufficient engineers and generators available on standby to
cope with storm damage. For them, it was a commercial decision not to
incur these costs. So they should now pay the hotel bills for old folk
who have to move to a hotel in order to survive.

There are less forseeable disasters (such as Covid-19), but the same
philosophy of preparedness would have helped. More research staff in
vaccine development, more PPE and distribution mechanisms for it, better
level of health in the population, better education of the population,
better level of technical understanding amongst those in government so
they understand the warnings from experts, etc.

All this costs more, so the more general answer is "all of us should pay
(the hotel fees), so the cost is borne by the population as a whole, in
the same way as we pay for our armed forces" .

[MB]

Post by Graham J
For the utilities such as the electricity supply business in Scotland
and the north of England, a sensible insurance provision would have been
to cut down the trees within falling distance of overhead supply cables,
and to have sufficient engineers and generators available on standby to
cope with storm damage.

I thought they did already?

You usually see a large number of generators in their yards and plenty
of firms hiring them out.

From some of the comments in the media, I think people think they
connect a generator to each user! You often see generators scattered
around the area feeding power lines when they are doing some major work.

And I think they do some cutting back of trees at the appropriate time
of the year, also they do aerial surveys of the power lines and that is
one of things probably being checked as well looking for faulty insulators.

[Andy Burns]

What surprised me slightly is that the fibre drop line is a figure of 8 shape
and includes a copper line pair as well as the fibre.

I wonder whether anybody can explain this?

Openreach bought umpty thousand kilometers of shotgun fibre+copper cable before
they decided whether or not they were ditching POTS?

I have yet to explore what things can be plugged into its USB socket and be
made available over the network.

memory stick or hard drive to share by SMB?

printer?

4G backup dongle? I wonder if BT offer their unbreakable/hybrid on FTTP, or
just on FTTC?

<https://www.bt.com/help/bt-halo/getting-set-up/setting-up-hybrid-connect>

[Andy Burns]

In what way do you say it's non-standard?

The copper pair on the fibre drop line is completely unused.

I don't have FTTP yet (and the exchanges of interest to me aren't even on a by
2026 list yet) so not speaking from experience, but from people here, and
installations shown on websites/youtube, that seems normal, the copper exists
but isn't used.

There are two phone
lines now to my property from *different* BT poles.

yes, that's unusual.

[Martin Brown]

Post by Andy Burns

In what way do you say it's non-standard?

The copper pair on the fibre drop line is completely unused.

I don't have FTTP yet (and the exchanges of interest to me aren't even
on a by 2026 list yet) so not speaking from experience, but from people
here, and installations shown on websites/youtube, that seems normal,
the copper exists but isn't used.

Don't assume that the exchange for FTTP will be the same as your present
POTS one. It isn't - my fibre line goes a heck of a long way back to my
county town. My tiny local exchange shows no FTTP offerings at all.

Something like 8 miles as the crow flies and nearer 12 as the roads or
cable runs are likely to go.

Post by Andy Burns

There are two phone lines now to my property from *different* BT poles.

yes, that's unusual.

The alternative would have been to move the copper line pair to be on
the same cable as the fibre. The cable itself was provisioned with that
possibility in mind. I was a bit surprised by this since I had expected
it to be a thinner lightweight fibre only cable.

[Andy Burns]

Don't assume that the exchange for FTTP will be the same as your present POTS
one. It isn't

I realise that, but they do tend to announce the FTTP areas by reference to the
current POTS/ADSL exchanges.

[Martin Brown]

Post by Andy Burns

Post by Martin Brown
Don't assume that the exchange for FTTP will be the same as your
present POTS one. It isn't

I realise that, but they do tend to announce the FTTP areas by reference
to the current POTS/ADSL exchanges.

They didn't with ours and still haven't.

The way I found out about it was by word of mouth - a neighbour had been
upgraded to it because BTOR could not get their copper line pair to work
at all and there were no spare copper pairs going back to the exchange.

I did eventually get an email from my ISP saying that full fat fibre was
here but it arrived after I had already committed to move to BT so that
I could retain my POTS landline. That option is only possible with BT.

Every other ISP's FTTP is a pure fibre internet only offering.

[Graham J]

Vir Campestris wrote:

[snip]

Post by Vir Campestris
There are POTS ports on the router, but they never worked.

What router do you have? The POTS ports on your router are there to
support VoIP where the router is configured to talk to a VoIP service
provider such as Voipfone or similar. So normally they only exist on a
router such as a Draytek that is intended to support VoIP.

Your internal fibre modem has a POTS port (according to the photo linked
to up-thread). This device can therefore provide the VoIP functionality
(so in effect it contains a router presenting an IP address to the VoIP
module), and it will be configured to communicate with the VoIP service
provided by your ISP. I doubt that you will be able to access the
configuration of this facility so you can't reconfigure it to work with
the VoIP service provider of your choice.

This modem is all that will be needed to allow "granny" to plug in her
telephone when her copper pair is removed and replaced with fibre. She
won't know that she actually has an internet connection.

Can anybody confirm how the customer's router connects to the Ethernet
port on the modem? Does it assume the modem provides an IP address? Or
does it only accept PPPoE traffic and require the router to log into the
ISP? This would have implications for the use of a router that
implements a VPN since the router itself must be the endpoint for the
public IP address.

[Roderick Stewart]

On Wed, 10 Nov 2021 21:33:03 +0000, Vir Campestris

Post by Vir Campestris
- An external junction box. This is unpowered.
- An internal fibre modem. This is on a short length of fibre to the
external junction box. This does need power.
- A router. Again, this needs power.

That's the way it looks as far as I can tell. Although it's all
probably fairly low powered, it means one more permanently powered
box, one more mains power supply, one more power cable, and another
cable between the boxes as well.

When VDSL was first installed, there was a small modem supplied by
Openreach and a separate wireless router supplied by my ISP. I managed
to persuade the installer not to screw the modem to the wall, as I
hoped to be able to replace both boxes with a single one on a high
corner shelf at some future time when I'd learned more about the
system, which I was eventually able to do. That's what I have now.

I wonder if I were to upgrade to FTTP, would it be the same story
again? I wonder if it would mean two boxes at first because the new
type of modem was too specialised and only available from Openreach,
but then single boxes becoming available later as the system became
more popular and more manufacturers started making them? Plugging a
fibre "cable" into a fibre port on a little box doesn't look like a
complicated task, so I see no reason why the modem, router and
wireless point couldn't all be incorporated in a single box as it
usually is for ADSL or VDSL now. I think I'l wait.

Rod.

[Mark Carver]

Post by Roderick Stewart
I wonder if I were to upgrade to FTTP, would it be the same story
again? I wonder if it would mean two boxes at first because the new
type of modem was too specialised and only available from Openreach,
but then single boxes becoming available later as the system became
more popular and more manufacturers started making them? Plugging a
fibre "cable" into a fibre port on a little box doesn't look like a
complicated task, so I see no reason why the modem, router and
wireless point couldn't all be incorporated in a single box as it
usually is for ADSL or VDSL now. I think I'l wait.

I can't see BT Openreach making the fibre connection the demarcation
point any time soon.

I don't think they've even managed to fully come to terms with the
copper master socket for POTs yet !

[Andy Burns]

There may come a time when they do what Virgin do, which is to merge the
modem/ONT and router into a single box, which they own. Being owned by
them you have to use their box, you can't replace it, but they will
periodically upgrade it as new standards come along.

There's talk of VMO2 splitting out their actual network from the Virgin Media
bits, that could shake things up a bit ...

[Mark Carver]

Post by Mark Carver
I can't see BT Openreach making the fibre connection the demarcation
point any time soon.
I don't think they've even managed to fully come to terms with the
copper master socket for POTs yet !

There may come a time when they do what Virgin do, which is to merge the
modem/ONT and router into a single box, which they own. Being owned by
them you have to use their box, you can't replace it, but they will
periodically upgrade it as new standards come along.
If you want to run your own router (for special firewall rules or whatever)
you can put their box in modem mode and put your own router behind it, but
most people stick with the Virgin modem/router and its wifi/etc.

Yes, although some of the positions of that install may not be in
terribly 'WiFi friendly' locations.

I'm just thinking of where I'll probably ask my ONT to be situated when
the time comes, and it'll be at the front of the house, under the study
desk.
Not a problem for me, I'll be sending the Ethernet output up a tie line
into the middle of the house and into my technology cupboard

[Andy Burns]

It benchmarked speedtest at 450Mbps after commissioning and may well go a little
faster after things have stabilised.

compared to xDSL, can't think of anything that needs to stabilise?
only two installs/day per engineer sounds bad for BT's profits ...

[Theo]

Post by Andy Burns

It benchmarked speedtest at 450Mbps after commissioning and may well go a little
faster after things have stabilised.

compared to xDSL, can't think of anything that needs to stabilise?
only two installs/day per engineer sounds bad for BT's profits ...

BT get to book 130% of the installation cost against tax. In other words,
every pound they spend on FTTP they get £1.30 off their tax bill. So the
more they spend the happier they get...

Theo

[Martin Brown]

Post by Andy Burns

It benchmarked speedtest at 450Mbps after commissioning and may well
go a little faster after things have stabilised.

compared to xDSL, can't think of anything that needs to stabilise?

Apparently the kit needs a few hours for AGC and the like to settle
down. There is an optimum power level for it to fine tune.

Post by Andy Burns
only two installs/day per engineer sounds bad for BT's profits ...

I did say it was an installation from hell. Though even if it had been a
normal one without needing the cherry picker I expect it would still
have taken him the full 4 hour slot to physically connect up a new cable
to an overhead pole by ladder and route it to my property. I'm not sure
how one guy on his own is supposed to do this safely across an active
road! (perhaps they always get help for this stage - I don't know)

Anyway guy with cherry picker when he arrived made short work of fixing
the missing infrastructure at the top of my nearest pole and stringing a
cable to me from across the main road. They used the cherry picker to
bridge the cable over the road high in the air. Very neatly done.

Easy enough as a two man job with the right kit.

Unclear how two blokes up ladders could ever do it safely without a
third man to stop the traffic on the road below whilst the cable is
still on the ground.

[Richard Tobin]

Post by Martin Brown
I did say it was an installation from hell. Though even if it had been a
normal one without needing the cherry picker I expect it would still
have taken him the full 4 hour slot to physically connect up a new cable
to an overhead pole by ladder and route it to my property. I'm not sure
how one guy on his own is supposed to do this safely across an active
road! (perhaps they always get help for this stage - I don't know)

Mine had to be threaded through the branches of a tree, and I wondered
how they would do that. The answer is to tie the end of the cable
to a hammer and throw it.

-- Richard

[Martin Brown]

Post by Richard Tobin

Post by Martin Brown
I did say it was an installation from hell. Though even if it had been a
normal one without needing the cherry picker I expect it would still
have taken him the full 4 hour slot to physically connect up a new cable
to an overhead pole by ladder and route it to my property. I'm not sure
how one guy on his own is supposed to do this safely across an active
road! (perhaps they always get help for this stage - I don't know)

Mine had to be threaded through the branches of a tree, and I wondered
how they would do that. The answer is to tie the end of the cable
to a hammer and throw it.

Not with a bow and arrow with a cotton thread then. How disappointing!

I expect they can install one much quicker in a city where the fibre
infrastructure is already in place at the pavement (and there *is* a
pavement). It is all very ad hoc out in the rural backwaters.

The other problem they are seeing is rats eating the cables (already).
It has literally only been installed for 3 months and live for 2 weeks.

[Martin Brown]

Post by Martin Brown

Post by Andy Burns
compared to xDSL, can't think of anything that needs to stabilise?

Apparently the kit needs a few hours for AGC and the like to settle
down. There is an optimum power level for it to fine tune.

potentially your router could adjust the laser brightness for the
upstream, but the laser on the downstream is passively split between you
and 30 odd other customers, does the headend really adjust the
brightness packet-by-packet?

I shouldn't think so, but I can believe that new electronics does have
an initial burn in time where they do not quite behave as they will in
the longer term. I expect it varies the gain on the receiver and the
output power on the uplink. The engineer did do an amplitude test with
some sort of mobile optical link tester before connecting it up.

From what he said having too much amplitude can be as bad as too little.
Anyway that was fine (unlike my poxy attenuation and noise on ADSL2+).

[Andy Burns]

Post by Martin Brown
From what he said having too much amplitude can be as bad as too little.
Anyway that was fine (unlike my poxy attenuation and noise on ADSL2+).

On site-to-site fibre connections, I've seen attenuators inserted.

[Martin Brown]

Post by Martin Brown
Unclear how two blokes up ladders could ever do it safely without a
third man to stop the traffic on the road below whilst the cable is
still on the ground.

Are they allowed to just have a third man to stop traffic, normally they
have to get a specialist company to do that nowadays.

I think it depends on the extent of the works. When they were digging
the trenches for burying the cable ducts they had all manner of traffic
light controlled obstructions on the road. Not always in the right place
either - which made life very difficult for the farm shop!

Only two ways to get into the village and one of them is completely
blocked but it isn't the one that BT said would be blocked off!

I sympathise with them - the road is too narrow (no dotted line) to be
digging by the roadside with *any* traffic going past. Some of it is
true single track with something of a paucity of passing places.

[Andy Burns]

Post by Roderick Stewart
When VDSL was first installed, there was a small modem supplied by
Openreach and a separate wireless router supplied by my ISP. I managed
to persuade the installer not to screw the modem to the wall, as I
hoped to be able to replace both boxes with a single one on a high
corner shelf at some future time when I'd learned more about the
system, which I was eventually able to do. That's what I have now.
I wonder if I were to upgrade to FTTP, would it be the same story
again?

Technically yes, you can get routers with SFP slot(s)

e.g. <https://mikrotik.com/product/RB960PGS>

and then instead of an ethernet copper or fibre SFP, you can get a GPON SFP

e.g. <https://www.fs.com/products/133619.html>

this setup is used in other countries, and I've had a half-arsed look into
whether it's feasible here.

Post by Roderick Stewart
I wonder if it would mean two boxes at first because the new
type of modem was too specialised and only available from Openreach,
but then single boxes becoming available later as the sy

It's not just your data coming down the fibre, it is the data for up to 32 or 64
customers in your vicinity from the passive splitter. The ONT ("modem") is
responsible for decrypting your traffic and filtering out everyone else's, so
what your router sees on the copper gigabit port is just your data in the clear.

Also the data that you send has to fit within your time slot(s) quite like old
2G mobile phones TDMA.

Probably BT are a bit precious about letting your kit do both those functions?

[Tweed]

Post by Andy Burns

Post by Roderick Stewart
When VDSL was first installed, there was a small modem supplied by
Openreach and a separate wireless router supplied by my ISP. I managed
to persuade the installer not to screw the modem to the wall, as I
hoped to be able to replace both boxes with a single one on a high
corner shelf at some future time when I'd learned more about the
system, which I was eventually able to do. That's what I have now.
I wonder if I were to upgrade to FTTP, would it be the same story
again?

Technically yes, you can get routers with SFP slot(s)
e.g. <https://mikrotik.com/product/RB960PGS>
and then instead of an ethernet copper or fibre SFP, you can get a GPON SFP
e.g. <https://www.fs.com/products/133619.html>
this setup is used in other countries, and I've had a half-arsed look into
whether it's feasible here.

Post by Roderick Stewart
I wonder if it would mean two boxes at first because the new
type of modem was too specialised and only available from Openreach,
but then single boxes becoming available later as the sy

It's not just your data coming down the fibre, it is the data for up to 32 or 64
customers in your vicinity from the passive splitter. The ONT ("modem") is
responsible for decrypting your traffic and filtering out everyone else's, so
what your router sees on the copper gigabit port is just your data in the clear.
Also the data that you send has to fit within your time slot(s) quite like old
2G mobile phones TDMA.
Probably BT are a bit precious about letting your kit do both those functions?

That’s the problem. The ONT box (modem) has the necessary security
credentials embedded within it to decrypt only your traffic. There would
have to be some foolproof method of moving that functionality to user
supplied equipment.

And yes, user supplied equipment would have the ability to mess up the
transmit timing if poorly implemented.

I think the optical side has to remain fully within the control of the
network provider.

[Andy Burns]

Post by Tweed

Post by Andy Burns
Probably BT are a bit precious about letting your kit do both those functions?

That’s the problem. The ONT box (modem) has the necessary security
credentials embedded within it to decrypt only your traffic. There would
have to be some foolproof method of moving that functionality to user
supplied equipment.
And yes, user supplied equipment would have the ability to mess up the
transmit timing if poorly implemented.
I think the optical side has to remain fully within the control of the
network provider.

One workable method would be for openreach to sell GPON SFPs pre-programmed with
your FTTP "credentials" for you to plug into your own SFP equipped router, then
they control it. Even then they'd probably worry about people extracting
information from the SFP.

Can't see the demand being high enough that they'll want to offer it though :-(

[Richard Tobin]

Post by Andy Burns
It's not just your data coming down the fibre, it is the data for up
to 32 or 64 customers in your vicinity from the passive splitter.
The ONT ("modem") is responsible for decrypting your traffic and
filtering out everyone else's, so what your router sees on the copper
gigabit port is just your data in the clear.

Is there an encryption key unique to the user stored in the ONT?

Post by Andy Burns
Also the data that you send has to fit within your time slot(s) quite
like old 2G mobile phones TDMA.

Do higher speed connections have more slots? Or is the limit imposed
elsewhere?

-- Richard

[Andy Burns]

Post by Richard Tobin
Is there an encryption key unique to the user stored in the ONT?

don't know if it's stored, or maybe the serial number of the ONT allows looking
up keys/credentials/whatever from a sidechannel over the fibre connection? maybe
even TR-069

Post by Richard Tobin

Post by Andy Burns
Also the data that you send has to fit within your time slot(s) quite
like old 2G mobile phones TDMA.

Do higher speed connections have more slots?

I think so, have a look at G.984.1, probably tells you lots of what is possible,
but not exactly how e.g. openreach use the standard

Post by Richard Tobin
Or is the limit imposed elsewhere?

[Martin Brown]

Post by Martin Brown
The only surprise is that *both* the internal wall termination box and
the fibre modem will each require their own separate mains power so a
dedicated double socket is needed near the point of entry.

The website you mentioned,
https://www.openreach.com/fibre-broadband/full-fibre-broadband-installation-checklist
implies that the two sockets are for the fibre modem and your router.
The "box ... on the inside" *is* the modem. That's what I have.
We'll install two boxes, one inside your property and one outside.
What is the external box for? I don't have one. The wire from the
pole (which consists of both the fibre and a copper phone connection)
comes straight through the wall.

Update from my doppelganger - the farm shop that sometimes gets bonded
to my phone line in bad weather and was a few days ahead of me for its
fibre installation (to try and get out of the mad house of dodgy copper
circuits). It did not go well...

It seems that for their commercial premises (farm shop) planning
permission is required (even though *their* phone line is underground).
I don't understand this but their engineer was quite certain about it.

I only have basic info as Saturday afternoon when it is crazy busy isn't
the best time to hold a long conversation. They don't expect to upgrade
before Xmas but with a bit of luck if my upgrade goes OK we won't be on
an involuntary party line this year when the water table rises.

(or maybe we will be for POTS voice calls over copper - I don't know)

[Jeff Gaines]

Post by Martin Brown
It seems that for their commercial premises (farm shop) planning
permission is required (even though their phone line is underground). I
don't understand this but their engineer was quite certain about it.

You could try uk.legal.moderated if you wanted to check?

[Andy Burns]

It seems that for their commercial premises (farm shop) planning permission is
required (even though *their* phone line is underground). I don't understand
this but their engineer was quite certain about it.

Engineer confused between "planning permission" and "wayleave" ?

[Martin Brown]

Post by Andy Burns

Post by Martin Brown
It seems that for their commercial premises (farm shop) planning
permission is required (even though *their* phone line is
underground). I don't understand this but their engineer was quite
certain about it.

Engineer confused between "planning permission" and "wayleave" ?

Tennant farmer so it could be they need landowners permission. It was a
very quick conversation in a busy shop. I will know more next week.

My own installation is scheduled for Wednesday. The box of bits has now
arrived and despite their warning to be in to accept it the thing
comfortably fits through a normal sized letterbox and looks to have been
designed with that in mind. Box is 43x19x4 cm and wrapped in a sealed
waterproof thermoplastic protective layer with the shipping label on it.

It looks rather like a stunted keyboard box labelled "BT Smarthub 2". It
is big flat and black and appears to have 4x GB ethernet connectors (end
one labelled WAN), 1x USB 1x phone and 1x broadband on the back.

I presume that it is their standard offering these days and can be used
in any configuration with or without its internal modem as required.