Higher Speed BB with FTTC - What's the Difference

[thescullster]

Hi all

Just had a circular from KC our one-and-only Internet provider in Hull area! Apparently they are discontinuing my current broadband plan and want me to move to a different tarif. If I move to a Fibre to the Cabinet offering I understand that they will deliver the service over our existing copper telephone wires for the final "mile".

I am trying to get response from KC on this, but what is the difference in technology between what we have now (a pretty poor ~4Mbits ADSL service) and the offered 50 or 75 Mbits services - apart from speed of course?

Is there any reason why my existing Netgear DG834 router couldn't handle this service? Will this need a different face plate splitter for phone signal separation?

The difficulty I have is that I have routed the incoming signal from the hallway master box up to the loft via telephone cable and done the splitting and distribution from there. I suspect that Mr KC will want to site a router at the master box location, where there is neither space nor power for the device.

Also, I prefer to retain a wired principle router and fixed network points for serious stuff and have a separate WAP for play time.

TIA

Phil

[Clive George]

Yes and yes. Different modem, different front bit.

Principal? No reason you can't have a separate router/wap plugged into the other box.

[Bod]

[Bob Eager]

Yes, that's how it works. Fibre from exchange to the 'cabinet' and then copper from there. Phone itself is copper all the way, they get merged at the cabinet instead of in the exchange.

The copper part is shorter, and that's where the losses/interference occur. There is also a different hardware protocol (VDSL rather than ADSL) which works better over those shorter distances and can squeeze a bit more speed from the remining portion of copper.

Yes, it probably doesn't understand VDSL. But if KC do it like BT, you'll be given a modem which will need to be connected to a router that can handle the authentication part. You'd need to check with them though.

Yes, and that will be supplied (if they do it like BT).

Yes, they will. You just need an extra twisted pair cable (e.g. Cat5) from the master socket to your existing split location.

*principal

They probably won't even supply anything wireless. BT don't. You get a white box with a cable to the socket splitter and an Ethernet socket (which cannot be wired straight into the network as it needs an authentication layer).

[Dave Plowman (News)]

A few extra feet of cable isn't going to make any difference - provided it is properly done. Who's to say the master socket can't be in the loft anyway? I moved mine to the cellar for the same sort of reasons and BT fibre were very happy with that. Since there were also unused mains sockets close by.

[Charles F]

I moved the fibre modem from the master socket to our utility room after installation and checking, linking via cat 5 and a cat 5 patch panel. BT were happy with that, but said that only cat 5/6 cable would be acceptable in this instance. Speed was unaffected.

Charles F

[John Rumm]

The final connection is made using VDSL rather than ADSL.

Yes, its not a VDSL capable router, and has no separate ethernet WAN port.

Yes, part of the upgrade involves an engineer visit to swap the face plate for one that includes a VDSL filter, and to provide a VDSL modem to connect direct to the master socket.

Not sure if KC do it differently, but openreach normally provide a single port ethernet presentation PPPoE modem. That needs to connect to the master socket. The actual routing and distribution can be done by a remote device connected to this box.

Some ISPs will provide an additional router with a ethernet WAN interface for connecting to the supplied box as a part of the package. Again don't know about KC.

That ought not be a problem.

[F]

I was able to choose the location for the router for my Plusnet FTTC (installed by BT). It just had to be within 30M of the master socket.

[newshound]

I just changed, and was surprised to find the plusnet "box" was a conventional wifi-router, while openreach supplied the VDSL modem. Same "small plug to small plug" connection as for ASDL so I also still have the router 15 metres from the incomer. But the Plusnet "technicolor" box seems less versatile than my older Netgear ADSL modem/router. I havn't yet figured out how to make that work instead of the Plusnet one.

[Andy Burns]

Well, if you only want to connect a single device to the modem, you

*could* use PPPoE authentication from that one PC/Laptop/whatever ...

[Dave Liquorice]

With proper, copper, cable. CCS screws up ADSL good and proper.

You'd get away with it being ina loft conversion with proper access stairs but not a loft accessed by a loft ladder even if the loft was fully boarded. I had a conversation with a BT linesman ages ago on this subject.

But presumably cellar stairs to get down there.

[dennis]

Maybe, maybe not.. BT were working on moving the line terminations to the cabinets too. When Marconi still existed we had DSLAM cards that could terminate the DSL/VDSL and the voice, the voice then went out either as VoIP over ethernet or 2M PCM links into the switch. BT want to dispose of the exchange buildings as they cost a lot.

We were also talking to KC at the same time, they were System X based.

[Bob Eager]

I stated what actually happens, not what might happen later.

I never use my line for voice anyway; I have multiple VoIP numbers (currently 11 of them)

[Bob Eager]

Yes. I have an option to use PPPoE from my firewall (which normally connects to the VDSL router) but haven't tried it out yet.

In fact I don't use the BT modem unless OpenReach are visiting. I have a Draytek 2860 VDSL router which works nicely, gives me more info and control, and does 3G fallback. I can connect the BT modem to its Ethernet WAN port if required.

[Dave Liquorice]

I don't understand that last sentance how can something "all the way" get "merged" somewhere enroute?

As I understand BTs FTTC, the copper side remains unchanged apart from jumpering to (from?) the fibre cabinet located close to an existing cabinet. The fibre doing the internetty thing may or may not run to the same exchange as the copper.

Hum, doesn't moving the POTS termination to distribution cabinets have implications regarding "the phone always works", even when the local power has been off for a week?

[Bob Eager]

The copper goes all the way. The signal from the fibre is merged in at the cabinet.

Before FTTC conversion, you have copper from exchange to local cabinet, and copper from cabinet to premises.

FTTC conversion unhooks the two bits of copper from each other, and they are led to the new green powered cabinet nearby. The fibre signal (the broadband) arrives at *this* cabinet from *an* exchange. The voice and broadband signals are combined here to go out on the copper to the premises.

[dennis]

The cabinets have backup batteries and if there are good enough reasons they can connect a generator. As there are only a few customers on each cabinet there isn't much chance of you getting a generator unless there is someone/thing important on the cabinet.

[charles]

The POTS service doesn't use power at the cabinets.

[thescullster]

Thanks to all respondents.

Unfortunately, the link between my hallway master box is either a 2 pair telephone cable (currently in use) or a 4 pair telephone cable (introduced as a spare).

Would one of these not be acceptable to simply extend the incoming phone line to the loft? Replacing this run with Cat 5 would be a nightmare, and I'm not a fan of running surface wiring around the front of the house.

Phil

[Mike Tomlinson]

In article , newshound writes

You can't. You need a router with an Ethernet WAN port. The one you have now has an ADSL WAN port.