Why didn't BT / Openreach keep developing their VDSL2 technology in the UK?

g67575

g67575

g67575

Soldato
Joined
30 Jun 2019
Posts
8,159
Openreach's 'Superfast' VDSL2 (FTTC) deployments never developed beyond profile 17a, and didn't even max out bandwidth on this profile, since all lines are capped at 80mbps.

The obvious next step could have been deployment of vectoring technology to all cabinets, plus upgrading any cabinets / other equipment that don't support vectoring. This could also be combined with greater backhaul capacity (to allow line speed caps to be removed), as required.

This could have been funded or partly subsidized by the government if necessary, as an intermediate step towards FTTP (which has not been prioritized by the government, with many not due for upgrades until 2026, or not at all).

I know what was hoped for G.Fast, but it never went anywhere, did it?
 
Last edited:
Why? Because the technology was of limited use and it made no sense to invest into something that would be ripped out regardless in a few years.

For once the government requirements of futureproofing speed and effectively mandating full FTTP was the right call.
 
I don't agree, what about the areas with VDSL2/FTTC, with no plans from providers for FTTP network deployments?

Add to this, the very slow deployment of FTTP in rural areas, when vectoring could have helped a great deal to improve speed and reliability of VDSL2 lines.

There was a backlash from many local councillors even with FTTC / Superfast upgrades from ADSL, who in some cases said it was a waste of money / didn't approve of the affect on the local area etc.

EDIT- Vectoring itself even on 17a profiles could allow for at least ~130mbps downstream (max rate), according to this guy, who's area was upgraded back in 2017 (but his line was still capped at 80mbps). Link here:
https://www.increasebroadbandspeed.co.uk/vdsl-vectoring-arrives-on-a-rural-fibre-broadband-cabinet

Vectoring largely solves the issues of crosstalk and signal attenuation over longer lines, on VDSL2. Germany is a good example of where vectoring has been widely deployed, with profile 17a widely available, and higher bandwidth VDSL2 profiles (like 35b) also available to millions of homes.

Ireland's network had vectoring planned from the start for their VDSL2 network, which makes me think the decision not to rollout vectoring was down to penny pinching or poor planning by Openreach.

The reason I think many living in the UK think VDSL2 is crap, is because it never received enough investment here, and simply isn't 'Superfast' for many.
 
Last edited:
I think there was a variety of factors involved including incompatible kit, getting the results for those on lines who needed it more, etc.

Sucks a bit though - where I live in the general vicinity there are almost 2000 premises which can only get ~3MBit/s ADSL and no plans to upgrade them to FTTC or FTTP before 2026! and like 4 premises, one of which is where I live, which can get ~30MBit FTTC. A few can get a 50MBit/s wireless internet service but it is quite limited. Mobile is very hit and miss - if you are in exactly the right spot you can get 30-60MBit 4G but many are stuck with between ~4 and ~13MBit.
 
Another likely benefit of Vectoring, would be the removal (or toning back) of the DLM system on most/all VDSL2 lines, as it simply wouldn't be needed anymore on all but the longest of lines (or lines with copper cable related problems).
 
Last edited:
MagicBoy said:
I'd rather more places got FTTC, than them upgrading the kit in already enabled places. 80Mbps is plenty.
Click to expand...

FTTC coverage is around 95% already. The low hanging fruit has been picked. Might as well upgrade those without FTTC, with a FTTP line now, they will get much better results, and maybe even pay less to use FTTP, with some ISPs.

The VDSL2 technology used is basically the same since 2012 (VDSL2 spectrum increased to ~17mhz), except for the addition of G.INP on Huawei cabinets. So, it's been pretty stagnant since then, in my view.

Openreach has said vectoring is very effective upto 500 meters from a FTTC cabinet (100mbps downstream at this distance, on 17a profile), with significant improvement on lines even beyond that distance.

I'm not suggesting that they will roll out vectoring at this point, merely pointing out that their VDSL2 development and investment in VDSL2 has been very poor, compared to the planned FTTP rollout, which will eventually cover 25 million + homes if all goes well.
 
Last edited:
Get on the 5% then!

Mum's village (population 1800 ish) was stuck on 4Mbps ADSL until a month ago, and that's only because the council paid OpenReach to sort it with grant money. The town about 5 miles away with the exchange, got FTTC'd in most areas 5 years before...
 
MagicBoy said:
Get on the 5% then!

Mum's village (population 1800 ish) was stuck on 4Mbps ADSL until a month ago, and that's only because the council paid OpenReach to sort it with grant money. The town about 5 miles away with the exchange, got FTTC'd in most areas 5 years before...
Click to expand...

Have you checked this map? It shows you the areas Openreach plans to upgrade to FTTP between now and December, 2026. Link here:
https://api.superfastmaps.co.uk/fibrecities/2.0/

My town is included in the plans, but work might not begin until 2026 (maybe even later?). Although, they haven't committed to specific dates, so I suppose they are trying to keep their options open.
 
There's no point putting effort into copper technologies to permit up-to 130Mbps downstream when the majority of lines will never sync at the maximum rate. Abandoning further FTTC development to shift focus to other technologies was the right call, even if it came with a G.fast misstep in the process.
 
Caged said:
There's no point putting effort into copper technologies to permit up-to 130Mbps downstream when the majority of lines will never sync at the maximum rate. Abandoning further FTTC development to shift focus to other technologies was the right call, even if it came with a G.fast misstep in the process.
Click to expand...

A lot of lines aren't even seeing half of the 80mbps that many ISP packages offer. If Openreach can't / won't do it, it's a choice governments can make, and one that I think many would support if they had bothered to ask people about improving their existing FTTC connection (even if it's only done with the support of people living in each local area).

Also, more than 60% of FTTC lines are within 500m or less of a cabinet, according to an Ofcom report:

Capture.jpg
 
Last edited:
It is being improved, with an FTTP build programme that is enabling around 50k properties each week.

If a line is currently struggling to hit 60Mbps then there is no copper access technology that will improve that - the line is too long (or too degraded) for G.fast or higher VDSL profiles. Enabling vectoring might add another 10Mbps of sync at the expense of taking resource away from an FTTP delivery programme.

I think your position that the government should have funded further VDSL development is based on your own situation rather than a consideration of what makes the most sense at a national level.
 
g67575 said:
Have you checked this map? It shows you the areas Openreach plans to upgrade to FTTP between now and December, 2026. Link here:
https://api.superfastmaps.co.uk/fibrecities/2.0/

My town is included in the plans, but work might not begin until 2026 (maybe even later?). Although, they haven't committed to specific dates, so I suppose they are trying to keep their options open.
Click to expand...

Only the affluent area full of premier league footballists is on the map. Shocker.

Cast your mind back to 2016 and BT as usual had done the profitable bits and left the rest. Local Council had to pay to get FTTC done with grant money for my area, despite being 400 yards from the main exchange.

At least they did FTTP for Mum's village. So she's seeing a 50x speed increase. :D
 
Caged said:
I think your position that the government should have funded further VDSL development is based on your own situation rather than a consideration of what makes the most sense at a national level.
Click to expand...

I guess we will never find out, cause the government never bothered to ask if this is something people would want, they only became concerned when they started to look bad in international comparisons, and couldn't get through Zoom calls smoothly!
 
Pretty much. Zoom calls is what had Mum hot under the collar and finally got her to break her purse out for better internet!

(She's half Yorkshire so a bit loath to unnecessary spending! Sorry Mum!)
 
g67575 said:
I guess we will never find out, cause the government never bothered to ask if this is something people would want, they only became concerned when they started to look bad in international comparisons, and couldn't get through Zoom calls smoothly!
Click to expand...

BDUK has been running since 2012 providing public funds to get locations up to superfast (>30Mbps) that weren't part of any commercial build, but it was never a stated goal to get to 100% coverage. The latest ramp up in FTTP deployment is for the most part happening without public subsidy (there are some tax incentives but it's not the same thing as local authorities awarding contracts to Openreach to build). If there was honestly a demand for higher spec VDSL deployments then operators other than Openreach could have come along and installed their own cabinets using the sub-loop unbundling product, and then proved the demand for it. There was one private company that did this, and the public Yorkshire Digital Region project ran out of money and folded in 2013. Altnets all sensibly chose to deploy full-fibre networks.

It's also sort of irrelevant - if an FTTC connection isn't achieving a high enough sync to hold a video call then having 35b enabled won't help. The only fix is to move the DSLAM closer to the end user, or improve the line quality substantially, at which point it's a better use of funds to roll FTTP.

The only additional development that would have made sense would have been installing the G.fast pods on telegraph poles or in chambers and reverse powering them (like FTTC in Australia), for some reason this ended up being moved to sit on the side of existing green cabinets providing improvements to a very small number of people, and Openreach sensibly decided to stop the rollout because in the best case scenario you're spending time and money on a 330Mbps network while your competitors are selling gigabit services. The NBN in Australia has now changed their approach and admitted it's pointless doing a lot of engineering work to deploy a 250Mbps-capable network and putting active equipment into pits in the ground for the sake of avoiding replacing the last ~20M of a line with fibre.

I'm sure when these projects were originally planned it made total sense to not jump immediately to FTTP, but the costs of fibre have been falling rapidly and the deployment methods now no longer mean that two engineers spend half a day at each house having to install blown fibre, so there's no longer any advantage to be had by presenting the connection to the house as copper so that your existing engineers can all work on it, you can just train them pretty quickly to work with a connectorized system.
 
kindai said:
For once the government requirements of futureproofing speed and effectively mandating full FTTP was the right call.
Click to expand...
tell my local council that please, who never arranged for any ducting to be installed when they renewed all of the pavements here last year.

we don't even feature on openreach list for FTTP this side of 2026.
 
There's no shortage of people who will only advocate upgrades for where they live, who insist it just isn't worth doing in other areas.

The reality is, most if not all of us would benefit from internet infrastructure upgrades, and when it's finally done, most can't imagine themselves going back again to an inferior connection.

Do they care if it's FTTP, or highly upgraded FTTC? I doubt it in most cases, particularly in the areas not due for FTTP upgrades.
 
The point though is that it's either/or - more focus on upgrades to the FTTC network takes resource away from building FTTP. Obviously if you're not currently scheduled to get FTTP then from your perspective you'd like to maybe have 80Mbps FTTC run at 140Mbps, but as far as a business model is concerned it's the right choice to focus on FTTP in areas where there is competition from Virgin Media and CityFibre.

You need to bear in mind that 35b was only ratified as a standard in 2015 and the vast majority of the FTTC build had completed by then - G.fast was also pretty much ready to launch at that point. Buying new VDSL line cards in 2015 would have been out of the question as the existing deployment was only a few years old, so any tweaks that were possible would have to be done in software on the DSLAMs. We've already seen how well a 3dB target SnR went on the terrible ECI cabinets.

If FTTP had remained expensive to roll out and competing networks weren't applying pressure then the development of VDSL2 would have continued, except it would have been called G.fast and it would have given you a variable rate product that was still not capable of reaching the speeds already being sold by competing providers. Binning that off early was entirely the right decision to make.

The question you're really asking is "should Openreach have invested more in copper access technologies rather than putting their focus entirely into fibre", and I disagree with you. I know it sucks if you're getting 70Mbps FTTC, need something faster, and FTTP isn't scheduled to get to you (this is me, with the except of the FTTP bit), but delaying FTTP while tweaking VDSL2 to get you to maybe 90Mbps just doesn't make sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom