• The joys of copper

    From Jeff Layman@Jeff@invalid.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband on Thu Dec 4 12:56:24 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    In mid-August I reported an intermittent lost internet connection to
    Zen; my router (FRITZ!box) event log showed several "DSL not responding" entries. Zen confirmed that there appeared to be a line fault (I'm
    FTTC). I should say that there has /never/ been a voice problem - the
    line has always been loud and clear with no clicks, etc.

    Within a couple of days Openreach appeared, and spent some time looking
    for the fault. They found a wiring issue between the inspection pit and
    the telephone pole 50m away. The fault was dealt with (perhaps by using
    a spare pair?).

    A few days later the connection issue reappeared. Openreach found a
    loose connector block at the the top of the telephone pole, and fixed
    it. A couple of days later the connection issue was back. Openreach
    spent some time testing the external wiring, and decided completely new cabling was required between the inspection pit and the telephone pole.
    It took a month for a trench to be dug and a new duct and cabling put
    in. After a few days the connection went down again.

    This time Openreach found a suspect wire loop in the DSLAM equipment in
    the street cabinet. It was tightened, and a new card put in. The
    internet connection was ok for a few days, but then went intermittent again.

    Openreach came again for the fifth time. This time the dropwire between
    the telephone pole and my house was replaced.

    So far, so good! No "DSL not responding" reports in the event log for
    five days. I wonder how much this cost Openreach in total for the five
    visits, and digging a new trench.

    All around where I live there are new estates with FTTP, but we aren't scheduled to have it UHFO. Fortunately, I don't stream much TV, but for
    those advocates of losing broadcast TV in favour of a fixed connection
    while they're still copper-connected, beware!
    --
    Jeff

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.telecom.broadband on Thu Dec 4 13:56:51 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 2025/12/4 12:56:24, Jeff Layman wrote:

    []

    All around where I live there are new estates with FTTP, but we aren't scheduled to have it UHFO. Fortunately, I don't stream much TV, but for those advocates of losing broadcast TV in favour of a fixed connection
    while they're still copper-connected, beware!

    I hadn't come across UHFO before; definite <grin> when I worked it out!
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

    "Usenet is a way of being annoyed by people you otherwise never would
    have met." - John J. Kinyon
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Andy Burns@usenet@andyburns.uk to uk.telecom.broadband on Thu Dec 4 14:03:21 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    Jeff Layman wrote:

    All around where I live there are new estates with FTTP, but we aren't scheduled to have it UHFO.

    There's two new roads tacked-on the end of this estate and those have
    fibre ... so it goes past my house ... They say we should get FTTP next
    year.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Nick Finnigan@nix@genie.co.uk to uk.telecom.broadband on Thu Dec 4 14:59:51 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 04/12/2025 14:03, Andy Burns wrote:
    Jeff Layman wrote:

    All around where I live there are new estates with FTTP, but we aren't
    scheduled to have it UHFO.

    There's two new roads tacked-on the end of this estate and those have fibre ... so it goes past my house ... They say we should get FTTP next year.

    All the poles along my road have 'Overhead fibre' warnings, probably for
    the main exchange connection to the local exchange, decades ago. No FTTP
    for us yet, and the cabinets are half way to the local exchange from us.

    Openreach have been around a lot the past week, usually 4 vans at a time around one pole but occasionally 8 vans and a cherry picker for 2 poles. Computer says "WerCOll be building in this area in the next year".
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Davey@davey@example.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband on Thu Dec 4 17:33:34 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Thu, 4 Dec 2025 13:56:51 +0000
    "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

    On 2025/12/4 12:56:24, Jeff Layman wrote:

    []

    All around where I live there are new estates with FTTP, but we
    aren't scheduled to have it UHFO. Fortunately, I don't stream much
    TV, but for those advocates of losing broadcast TV in favour of a
    fixed connection while they're still copper-connected, beware!

    I hadn't come across UHFO before; definite <grin> when I worked it
    out!



    You mean it doesn't stand for United Health And Financial Organization?

    There is a town called Hell in Michigan, there are numerous photos of
    the town sign with icicles hanging from it. It's not all that far
    from Climax, Michigan.
    --
    Davey.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Bob Eager@news0009@eager.cx to uk.telecom.broadband on Thu Dec 4 23:33:46 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Thu, 04 Dec 2025 17:33:34 +0000, Davey wrote:

    On Thu, 4 Dec 2025 13:56:51 +0000 "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>
    wrote:

    On 2025/12/4 12:56:24, Jeff Layman wrote:

    []

    All around where I live there are new estates with FTTP, but we
    aren't scheduled to have it UHFO. Fortunately, I don't stream much
    TV, but for those advocates of losing broadcast TV in favour of a
    fixed connection while they're still copper-connected, beware!

    I hadn't come across UHFO before; definite <grin> when I worked it out!



    You mean it doesn't stand for United Health And Financial Organization?

    There is a town called Hell in Michigan, there are numerous photos of
    the town sign with icicles hanging from it. It's not all that far from Climax, Michigan.

    A friend of mine cycled to Hell (in Norway):

    https://maps.app.goo.gl/oCdi1Br4ryjiT4PS9
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Graham J@nobody@nowhere.co.uk to uk.telecom.broadband on Fri Dec 5 08:25:01 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    Bob Eager wrote:

    [snip]

    A friend of mine cycled to Hell (in Norway):

    https://maps.app.goo.gl/oCdi1Br4ryjiT4PS9


    There's a well known company in Germany called Hell:

    <https://www.heliograph-holding.com/company/brands/hell/?lang=en>
    --
    Graham J
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.telecom.broadband on Fri Dec 5 12:03:24 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 2025/12/4 23:33:46, Bob Eager wrote:
    On Thu, 04 Dec 2025 17:33:34 +0000, Davey wrote:

    On Thu, 4 Dec 2025 13:56:51 +0000 "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>
    wrote:
    []
    I hadn't come across UHFO before; definite <grin> when I worked it out!



    You mean it doesn't stand for United Health And Financial Organization?
    <g>
    There is a town called Hell in Michigan, there are numerous photos of
    the town sign with icicles hanging from it. It's not all that far from>> Climax, Michigan.

    A friend of mine cycled to Hell (in Norway):

    https://maps.app.goo.gl/oCdi1Br4ryjiT4PS9
    In several Germanic languages, it just means light (e. g. hellblau is
    light [or sky] blue).
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From nospam@nospam@please.invalid (AnthonyL) to uk.telecom.broadband on Fri Dec 5 19:36:53 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Thu, 4 Dec 2025 14:59:51 +0000, Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk>
    wrote:

    On 04/12/2025 14:03, Andy Burns wrote:
    Jeff Layman wrote:

    All around where I live there are new estates with FTTP, but we aren't
    scheduled to have it UHFO.

    There's two new roads tacked-on the end of this estate and those have fibre >> ... so it goes past my house ... They say we should get FTTP next year.

    All the poles along my road have 'Overhead fibre' warnings, probably for
    the main exchange connection to the local exchange, decades ago. No FTTP
    for us yet, and the cabinets are half way to the local exchange from us.

    Openreach have been around a lot the past week, usually 4 vans at a time
    around one pole but occasionally 8 vans and a cherry picker for 2 poles. >Computer says "WerCOll be building in this area in the next year".

    I live in a small 1968 built estate. All the copper cables were neatly
    buried directly in the ground. FTTP + UHFO go well together though
    Virgin seem to have managed to put their cables to a high percentage
    of properties.

    Annoyingly fibre is at the road and the end of the garden.

    A small village/hamlet that I lived in for 30yrs, and never on the
    list for broadband so many had Wireless Internet (aerial pointing
    about 8 miles to top of city building - I can't recall the proper
    name). I then had a cantenna aerial setup from my office to line of
    site home 400yards away.

    6 months after I left they strung FTTP on the overhead telephone lines
    and connected anyone who wanted it!!
    --
    AnthonyL

    Why ever wait to finish a job before starting the next?
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Brian Gregory@void-invalid-dead-dontuse@email.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband on Fri Dec 5 23:37:21 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 04/12/2025 13:56, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
    I hadn't come across UHFO before; definite <grin> when I worked it out!

    Googles says it probably means Ultra High Frequency Oscillator!
    --
    Brian Gregory (in England).
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Davey@davey@example.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband on Fri Dec 5 23:43:38 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Fri, 5 Dec 2025 23:37:21 +0000
    Brian Gregory <void-invalid-dead-dontuse@email.invalid> wrote:

    On 04/12/2025 13:56, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
    I hadn't come across UHFO before; definite <grin> when I worked it
    out!

    Googles says it probably means Ultra High Frequency Oscillator!


    That matches my reference to Climax!
    --
    Davey.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Jeff Layman@Jeff@invalid.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband on Sat Dec 6 09:30:57 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 04/12/2025 14:03, Andy Burns wrote:
    Jeff Layman wrote:

    All around where I live there are new estates with FTTP, but we aren't
    scheduled to have it UHFO.

    There's two new roads tacked-on the end of this estate and those have
    fibre ... so it goes past my house ... They say we should get FTTP next
    year.

    Funnily enough, I had a letter from BT yesterday that "my home phone
    service is about to get a whole lot better". Nothing to do with FTTP of course, just a change at the exchange so I'll have to add the area code
    to numbers; I do that already. And they're adding various things (caller display, voicemail, call protect, etc) most of which I can already do
    with my DECT phone.

    Seems to me it's adding insult to injury that they're doing this instead
    of FTTP!
    --
    Jeff
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Andy Burns@usenet@andyburns.uk to uk.telecom.broadband on Sat Dec 6 09:53:09 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    Jeff Layman wrote:

    Funnily enough, I had a letter from BT yesterday that "my home phone
    service is about to get a whole lot better". Nothing to do with FTTP of course, just a change at the exchange so I'll have to add the area code
    to numbers; I do that already. And they're adding various things (caller display, voicemail, call protect, etc) most of which I can already do
    with my DECT phone.

    Seems to me it's adding insult to injury that they're doing this instead
    of FTTP!

    It feels as though the majority of people are giving up on having a home
    phone as well as a mobile?

    I still like a bit of resilience, which has been reduced by the
    POTS->VoIP switch, and ought to increase a little with the FTTC->FTTP
    switch, though I do have a UPS.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Davey@davey@example.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband on Sat Dec 6 10:28:42 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Sat, 6 Dec 2025 09:53:09 +0000
    Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

    Jeff Layman wrote:

    Funnily enough, I had a letter from BT yesterday that "my home
    phone service is about to get a whole lot better". Nothing to do
    with FTTP of course, just a change at the exchange so I'll have to
    add the area code to numbers; I do that already. And they're adding
    various things (caller display, voicemail, call protect, etc) most
    of which I can already do with my DECT phone.

    Seems to me it's adding insult to injury that they're doing this
    instead of FTTP!

    It feels as though the majority of people are giving up on having a
    home phone as well as a mobile?

    I still like a bit of resilience, which has been reduced by the
    POTS->VoIP switch, and ought to increase a little with the FTTC->FTTP switch, though I do have a UPS.

    I agree with the liking a bit of resilience. I liked having a 'phone
    line that didn't worry about a local power cut.
    Funnily enough, I have just bought (a non-APC) UPS for my PC setup,
    which would include my router. But I can't use it yet, because it
    detects a wiring fault with the wall socket, which has powered all my PC
    stuff for years. Until this is fixed, the UPS is just a very heavy
    doorstop.
    --
    Davey.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Bob Eager@news0009@eager.cx to uk.telecom.broadband on Sat Dec 6 10:45:38 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Sat, 06 Dec 2025 09:53:09 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:

    I still like a bit of resilience, which has been reduced by the
    POTS->VoIP switch, and ought to increase a little with the FTTC->FTTP
    switch, though I do have a UPS.

    I have been using VoIP for about 14 years, and when I had copper I was
    paying for 'line only' for the last few years.

    Now on FTTP, and the shole lot (VoIP PBX etc.) are on UPS (as they have
    been for years). Right at this momemnt I am calibrating that UPS after a battery change; it's humming away to my right.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Andy Burns@usenet@andyburns.uk to uk.telecom.broadband on Sat Dec 6 11:53:22 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    Davey wrote:

    I have just bought (a non-APC) UPS for my PC setup,
    which would include my router. But I can't use it yet, because it
    detects a wiring fault with the wall socket

    Got a cheapo plug-in tester? Could it be crossed live/neutral?
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Davey@davey@example.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband on Sat Dec 6 13:28:28 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Sat, 6 Dec 2025 11:53:22 +0000
    Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

    Davey wrote:

    I have just bought (a non-APC) UPS for my PC setup,
    which would include my router. But I can't use it yet, because it
    detects a wiring fault with the wall socket

    Got a cheapo plug-in tester? Could it be crossed live/neutral?

    Yeah, somewhere!! I keep meaning to find it, but other things with
    higher priority keep rearing their heads. Maybe tomorrow.....
    The electrician originally said he would come by towards the end of the
    week that's just finishing.

    I need some more round tuits. So does my electrician, I think.
    --
    Davey.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Davey@davey@example.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband on Sun Dec 7 11:51:56 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Sat, 6 Dec 2025 11:53:22 +0000
    Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

    Davey wrote:

    I have just bought (a non-APC) UPS for my PC setup,
    which would include my router. But I can't use it yet, because it
    detects a wiring fault with the wall socket

    Got a cheapo plug-in tester? Could it be crossed live/neutral?

    I unearthed <g> my DMM, and opened up the wall socket. CB in the CU
    kills power OK. Two red wires to the terminal marked 'L', two black
    wires to the terminal marked 'N', two green wires to one of the two
    terminals marked 'E' and the earth symbol. All looked good. Then
    measuring volts: L-N:241. L-E:241. N-E:0.
    I'm not sure what else I can do. The Eaton still won't run. My PC setup
    and the fridge-freezer all run fine, powered from this socket.

    Roll on electrician! Maybe I'll send Eaton a message, asking for help diagnosing what it's complaining about.
    --
    Davey.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sun Dec 7 12:08:43 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 2025/12/6 9:30:57, Jeff Layman wrote:
    On 04/12/2025 14:03, Andy Burns wrote:
    Jeff Layman wrote:

    All around where I live there are new estates with FTTP, but we aren't
    scheduled to have it UHFO.

    There's two new roads tacked-on the end of this estate and those have
    fibre ... so it goes past my house ... They say we should get FTTP next
    year.

    Funnily enough, I had a letter from BT yesterday that "my home phone
    service is about to get a whole lot better". Nothing to do with FTTP of

    Yes, I've had it too at one address. I don't _think_ it mentions "VoIP"
    at all. It mentions an improvement in "reliability and quality", or
    something like that. Well, the quality has never been a problem there -
    and of course the reliability will go _down_, as it now won't work if
    the power is off.

    course, just a change at the exchange so I'll have to add the area code
    to numbers; I do that already. And they're adding various things (caller display, voicemail, call protect, etc) most of which I can already do
    with my DECT phone.

    Yes, I noticed the bit about having to add the area code. You'd have
    thought that BT at least would have made that unnecessary. Yes,
    voicemail (1571) _will_ be something I didn't have before on that line.
    I was interested to read that it _won't_ work with answering machines -
    why? (I don't have one, but can't see why not; I always thought they
    simulated a 'phone as closely as possible.)

    Seems to me it's adding insult to injury that they're doing this instead
    of FTTP!

    It will actually _save_ them money - in the long run.

    The leaflet said I could have a free "adapter" for certain
    circumstances, if I went to a certain web address. I did; it showed the "adapter" as costing about 20, but there was a "get your free adapter"
    box, which I used, entering my number, and it said I could have. So I
    proceeded - and it wanted me to set up an account; I did (it involved
    them emailing me a six-digit number, but that was OK). Then, it asked
    for my mobile number, something like "so we can SMS you if there's a
    problem in future" (it's obviously really setting up the account so that
    EE can sell me other things in future) - and, it wouldn't let me past
    that point - no possibility of not having a mobile number. I eventually
    rang the number, and secured the adapters that way (well, we'll see).

    Apparently, also, an "engineer" will have to call; I said I could manage
    it all, but there seems no option.

    The leaflet mentions a battery-backed option - in fact as _I_ read it,
    it _implies_ you will get such; however, in my discussion, it seems it's
    _only_ for those with either telemonitoring equipment, or vulnerable in
    other ways.
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

    This was before we knew that a laboratory rat, if experimented upon,
    will develop cancer. [Quoted by] Anne (annezo@aol.com), 1997-1-29
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.telecom.broadband on Sun Dec 7 12:21:00 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 2025/12/7 11:51:56, Davey wrote:
    On Sat, 6 Dec 2025 11:53:22 +0000
    Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

    Davey wrote:

    I have just bought (a non-APC) UPS for my PC setup,
    which would include my router. But I can't use it yet, because it
    detects a wiring fault with the wall socket

    Got a cheapo plug-in tester? Could it be crossed live/neutral?

    I unearthed <g> my DMM, and opened up the wall socket. CB in the CU
    kills power OK. Two red wires to the terminal marked 'L', two black
    wires to the terminal marked 'N', two green wires to one of the two
    terminals marked 'E' and the earth symbol. All looked good. Then
    measuring volts: L-N:241. L-E:241. N-E:0.
    I'm not sure what else I can do. The Eaton still won't run. My PC setup> and the fridge-freezer all run fine, powered from this socket.
    Have you tried the Eaton (I assume that's the UPS) on other sockets in
    the house, and it works OK? If so, can you check (with power off of
    course) the live/neutral connectivity between the "OK" sockets and the
    "not OK" one(s)? (I'm assuming only one phase in the house.)

    Roll on electrician! Maybe I'll send Eaton a message, asking for help diagnosing what it's complaining about.

    How does it not run - does it just have a light (or display) that says
    socket fault, or is there more? (It doesn't have a serial port, or wifi connectivity, or such, through which it can explain itself?
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Jeff Layman@Jeff@invalid.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sun Dec 7 13:03:33 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 07/12/2025 12:08, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
    On 2025/12/6 9:30:57, Jeff Layman wrote:
    On 04/12/2025 14:03, Andy Burns wrote:
    Jeff Layman wrote:

    All around where I live there are new estates with FTTP, but we aren't >>>> scheduled to have it UHFO.

    There's two new roads tacked-on the end of this estate and those have
    fibre ... so it goes past my house ... They say we should get FTTP next
    year.

    Funnily enough, I had a letter from BT yesterday that "my home phone
    service is about to get a whole lot better". Nothing to do with FTTP of

    Yes, I've had it too at one address. I don't _think_ it mentions "VoIP"
    at all. It mentions an improvement in "reliability and quality", or
    something like that. Well, the quality has never been a problem there -
    and of course the reliability will go _down_, as it now won't work if
    the power is off.

    course, just a change at the exchange so I'll have to add the area code
    to numbers; I do that already. And they're adding various things (caller
    display, voicemail, call protect, etc) most of which I can already do
    with my DECT phone.

    Yes, I noticed the bit about having to add the area code. You'd have
    thought that BT at least would have made that unnecessary. Yes,
    voicemail (1571) _will_ be something I didn't have before on that line.
    I was interested to read that it _won't_ work with answering machines -
    why? (I don't have one, but can't see why not; I always thought they simulated a 'phone as closely as possible.)

    I think we're talking about two different letters here. There's nothing
    in mine about an answering machine not working. Mine isn't about VOIP
    (or FTTP requiring an ONT), and all changes will be done by an engineer
    at the exchange.

    I have read that a DECT built-in answerphone probably won't work because
    of the delay involved in the router's voicemail facility (see first line
    of reply here: <https://community.ee.co.uk/t5/Broadband-Landline/DECT-phone-and-VOIP/m-p/1478191/highlight/true#M108284>).
    I know that my FRITZ!box router has a voicemail facility so will
    probably use that when the time comes.


    Seems to me it's adding insult to injury that they're doing this instead
    of FTTP!

    It will actually _save_ them money - in the long run.

    The leaflet said I could have a free "adapter" for certain
    circumstances, if I went to a certain web address. I did; it showed the "adapter" as costing about 20, but there was a "get your free adapter"
    box, which I used, entering my number, and it said I could have. So I proceeded - and it wanted me to set up an account; I did (it involved
    them emailing me a six-digit number, but that was OK). Then, it asked
    for my mobile number, something like "so we can SMS you if there's a
    problem in future" (it's obviously really setting up the account so that
    EE can sell me other things in future) - and, it wouldn't let me past
    that point - no possibility of not having a mobile number. I eventually
    rang the number, and secured the adapters that way (well, we'll see).

    Apparently, also, an "engineer" will have to call; I said I could manage
    it all, but there seems no option.

    The leaflet mentions a battery-backed option - in fact as _I_ read it,
    it _implies_ you will get such; however, in my discussion, it seems it's _only_ for those with either telemonitoring equipment, or vulnerable in
    other ways.

    Yes, it'll be supplied free if you meet certain requirements; if not,
    you'll have to buy a UPS.
    --
    Jeff
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Davey@davey@example.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband on Sun Dec 7 13:51:38 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Sun, 7 Dec 2025 12:21:00 +0000
    "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

    On 2025/12/7 11:51:56, Davey wrote:
    On Sat, 6 Dec 2025 11:53:22 +0000
    Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

    Davey wrote:

    I have just bought (a non-APC) UPS for my PC setup,
    which would include my router. But I can't use it yet, because it
    detects a wiring fault with the wall socket

    Got a cheapo plug-in tester? Could it be crossed live/neutral?

    I unearthed <g> my DMM, and opened up the wall socket. CB in the CU
    kills power OK. Two red wires to the terminal marked 'L', two black
    wires to the terminal marked 'N', two green wires to one of the two terminals marked 'E' and the earth symbol. All looked good. Then
    measuring volts: L-N:241. L-E:241. N-E:0.
    I'm not sure what else I can do. The Eaton still won't run. My PC
    setup and the fridge-freezer all run fine, powered from this
    socket.

    Have you tried the Eaton (I assume that's the UPS) on other sockets in
    the house, and it works OK? If so, can you check (with power off of
    course) the live/neutral connectivity between the "OK" sockets and the
    "not OK" one(s)? (I'm assuming only one phase in the house.)

    It ran for the 24-hour pre-charge period in the kitchen, plugged in
    where the microwave oven normally is.

    Roll on electrician! Maybe I'll send Eaton a message, asking for
    help diagnosing what it's complaining about.

    How does it not run - does it just have a light (or display) that says
    socket fault, or is there more? (It doesn't have a serial port, or
    wifi connectivity, or such, through which it can explain itself?


    Instead of the 'I'm happy' green light, it flashes red/green/red/green
    ad infinitum. The manual (online-only, of course) does not mention this
    exact combination, but does say that a flashing red light indicates a
    fault with the wiring of the socket.

    Hmm. I have downloaded the software for USB connectivity, but was
    originally intending to get that operating after it was in place and in
    use, not needing it yet, but using it for controlled shutdown. It is
    meant to talk to the Desktop PC, which is situated where the Eaton is
    also intended to be. It would be a lot of work to power the UPS from a
    working socket and also have it talk to the PC to set up the
    communication. But it is worth remembering as an option, if nothing
    else works. But I don't even know if it would help anyway.

    More ideas welcome!
    --
    Davey
    Since it is a right faff to carry the heavy unit about the house, I
    will try Eaton Customer Support first. I will try it again back at the
    original socket, just to be sure it still works there.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Davey@davey@example.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband on Sun Dec 7 14:27:45 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Sun, 7 Dec 2025 12:21:00 +0000
    "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

    On 2025/12/7 11:51:56, Davey wrote:
    On Sat, 6 Dec 2025 11:53:22 +0000
    Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

    Davey wrote:

    I have just bought (a non-APC) UPS for my PC setup,
    which would include my router. But I can't use it yet, because it
    detects a wiring fault with the wall socket

    Got a cheapo plug-in tester? Could it be crossed live/neutral?

    I unearthed <g> my DMM, and opened up the wall socket. CB in the CU
    kills power OK. Two red wires to the terminal marked 'L', two black
    wires to the terminal marked 'N', two green wires to one of the two terminals marked 'E' and the earth symbol. All looked good. Then
    measuring volts: L-N:241. L-E:241. N-E:0.
    I'm not sure what else I can do. The Eaton still won't run. My PC
    setup and the fridge-freezer all run fine, powered from this
    socket.

    Have you tried the Eaton (I assume that's the UPS) on other sockets in
    the house, and it works OK? If so, can you check (with power off of
    course) the live/neutral connectivity between the "OK" sockets and the
    "not OK" one(s)? (I'm assuming only one phase in the house.)


    Roll on electrician! Maybe I'll send Eaton a message, asking for
    help diagnosing what it's complaining about.

    How does it not run - does it just have a light (or display) that says
    socket fault, or is there more? (It doesn't have a serial port, or
    wifi connectivity, or such, through which it can explain itself?



    More news.
    I took the unit back to the original socket where it had been for its
    24-hour pre-charge. And now it fails in the same way. I think a 'phone
    call to Eaton tomorrow might be the best plan. I'm glad I still have
    all the packing.
    I was wondering if it had been corrupted by the fault in the socket,
    but I can't find a fault, so I doubt that to be the case.
    'The thick plottens', indeed.
    --
    Davey.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sun Dec 7 14:44:31 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 2025/12/7 13:3:33, Jeff Layman wrote:
    On 07/12/2025 12:08, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
    On 2025/12/6 9:30:57, Jeff Layman wrote:
    On 04/12/2025 14:03, Andy Burns wrote:
    Jeff Layman wrote:

    All around where I live there are new estates with FTTP, but we aren't >>>>> scheduled to have it UHFO.

    There's two new roads tacked-on the end of this estate and those have
    fibre ... so it goes past my house ... They say we should get FTTP next >>>> year.

    Funnily enough, I had a letter from BT yesterday that "my home phone
    service is about to get a whole lot better". Nothing to do with FTTP of

    Yes, I've had it too at one address. I don't _think_ it mentions "VoIP"
    at all. It mentions an improvement in "reliability and quality", or
    something like that. Well, the quality has never been a problem there -
    and of course the reliability will go _down_, as it now won't work if
    the power is off.

    course, just a change at the exchange so I'll have to add the area code
    to numbers; I do that already. And they're adding various things (caller >>> display, voicemail, call protect, etc) most of which I can already do>>> with my DECT phone.

    Yes, I noticed the bit about having to add the area code. You'd have
    thought that BT at least would have made that unnecessary. Yes,
    voicemail (1571) _will_ be something I didn't have before on that line.
    I was interested to read that it _won't_ work with answering machines -
    why? (I don't have one, but can't see why not; I always thought they
    simulated a 'phone as closely as possible.)

    I think we're talking about two different letters here. There's nothing
    in mine about an answering machine not working. Mine isn't about VOIP
    (or FTTP requiring an ONT), and all changes will be done by an engineer
    at the exchange.
    You've made me get off my a* and retrieve the letter :-)
    Standard BT envelope, containing an A4 sheet folded in two, and an A5
    leaflet (also in practice an A4 sheet folded in two). The first is in
    the form of a letter, headed "Important upgrade to your home phone
    service". It starts
    "Hello,
    Good news! We're now upgrading you to Digital Voice, our new home phone service."
    I remembered right, neither the letter nor the leaflet mentions VoIP
    anywhere - they keep calling it Digital Voice. The letter (mine is dated "November 2025") says (in tiny print at the bottom back) PHME 1389; the (colour) leaflet is PHME 1390v1.

    I have read that a DECT built-in answerphone probably won't work because
    of the delay involved in the router's voicemail facility (see first line
    of reply here: <https://community.ee.co.uk/t5/Broadband-Landline/DECT-phone-and-VOIP/m-p/1478191/highlight/true#M108284>).
    I know that my FRITZ!box router has a voicemail facility so will
    probably use that when the time comes.

    The leaflet says "No, you won't be able to use a standalone answer
    machine, but you will have free BT Voicemail to record messages. Just
    dial 1571 to hear them." (No mention of _why_ such won't work, but from
    the general tone, I wasn't expecting any such explanation.)

    Seems to me it's adding insult to injury that they're doing this instead >>> of FTTP!

    It will actually _save_ them money - in the long run.
    []
    The leaflet mentions a battery-backed option - in fact as _I_ read it,>> it _implies_ you will get such; however, in my discussion, it seems it's
    _only_ for those with either telemonitoring equipment, or vulnerable in
    other ways.

    Yes, it'll be supplied free if you meet certain requirements; if not,
    you'll have to buy a UPS.

    The leaflet:
    "What if there's a power cut?
    If there's a power cut or your broadband's down, you won't be able to
    make calls using Digital Voice, including 999 calls.
    You could still use a mobile, which you should always keep charged.
    But for additional peace of mind, we'll send you a battery backup device
    - free of charge - ahead of your engineer visit."
    No mention there of needing to satisfy anything.
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Andy Burns@usenet@andyburns.uk to uk.telecom.broadband on Sun Dec 7 15:53:57 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    Davey wrote:

    Instead of the 'I'm happy' green light, it flashes red/green/red/green
    ad infinitum.
    <https://www.eaton.com/content/dam/eaton/products/backup-power-ups-surge-it-power-distribution/backup-power-ups/eaton_5e_ups/eaton-5e-ups---emea/eaton-dpq-5egen2-ups-manual-en-gb.pdf>

    "Green/Red LED alternative flashes every 0.5 second and audio alarm
    beeps every 1.5 second. The connected loads are exceed the. UPS capacity
    or Battery fault."


    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Jeff Layman@Jeff@invalid.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sun Dec 7 16:06:00 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 07/12/2025 14:44, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
    On 2025/12/7 13:3:33, Jeff Layman wrote:
    On 07/12/2025 12:08, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
    On 2025/12/6 9:30:57, Jeff Layman wrote:
    On 04/12/2025 14:03, Andy Burns wrote:
    Jeff Layman wrote:

    All around where I live there are new estates with FTTP, but we aren't >>>>>> scheduled to have it UHFO.

    There's two new roads tacked-on the end of this estate and those have >>>>> fibre ... so it goes past my house ... They say we should get FTTP next >>>>> year.

    Funnily enough, I had a letter from BT yesterday that "my home phone
    service is about to get a whole lot better". Nothing to do with FTTP of >>>
    Yes, I've had it too at one address. I don't _think_ it mentions "VoIP"
    at all. It mentions an improvement in "reliability and quality", or
    something like that. Well, the quality has never been a problem there -
    and of course the reliability will go _down_, as it now won't work if
    the power is off.

    course, just a change at the exchange so I'll have to add the area code >>>> to numbers; I do that already. And they're adding various things (caller >>>> display, voicemail, call protect, etc) most of which I can already do
    with my DECT phone.

    Yes, I noticed the bit about having to add the area code. You'd have
    thought that BT at least would have made that unnecessary. Yes,
    voicemail (1571) _will_ be something I didn't have before on that line.
    I was interested to read that it _won't_ work with answering machines -
    why? (I don't have one, but can't see why not; I always thought they
    simulated a 'phone as closely as possible.)

    I think we're talking about two different letters here. There's nothing
    in mine about an answering machine not working. Mine isn't about VOIP
    (or FTTP requiring an ONT), and all changes will be done by an engineer
    at the exchange.

    You've made me get off my a* and retrieve the letter :-)

    Standard BT envelope, containing an A4 sheet folded in two, and an A5
    leaflet (also in practice an A4 sheet folded in two). The first is in
    the form of a letter, headed "Important upgrade to your home phone
    service". It starts

    "Hello,

    Good news! We're now upgrading you to Digital Voice, our new home phone service."

    Nothing about Digital Voice on my letter.

    I remembered right, neither the letter nor the leaflet mentions VoIP
    anywhere - they keep calling it Digital Voice. The letter (mine is dated "November 2025") says (in tiny print at the bottom back) PHME 1389; the (colour) leaflet is PHME 1390v1.

    My cover letter is PHME1277. I can't see anything like PHME1277v1 on the leaflet, but is is a very dark colour!

    I have read that a DECT built-in answerphone probably won't work because
    of the delay involved in the router's voicemail facility (see first line
    of reply here:
    <https://community.ee.co.uk/t5/Broadband-Landline/DECT-phone-and-VOIP/m-p/1478191/highlight/true#M108284>).
    I know that my FRITZ!box router has a voicemail facility so will
    probably use that when the time comes.

    The leaflet says "No, you won't be able to use a standalone answer
    machine, but you will have free BT Voicemail to record messages. Just
    dial 1571 to hear them." (No mention of _why_ such won't work, but from
    the general tone, I wasn't expecting any such explanation.)


    Seems to me it's adding insult to injury that they're doing this instead >>>> of FTTP!

    It will actually _save_ them money - in the long run.

    []

    The leaflet mentions a battery-backed option - in fact as _I_ read it,
    it _implies_ you will get such; however, in my discussion, it seems it's >>> _only_ for those with either telemonitoring equipment, or vulnerable in
    other ways.

    Yes, it'll be supplied free if you meet certain requirements; if not,
    you'll have to buy a UPS.

    The leaflet:

    "What if there's a power cut?

    If there's a power cut or your broadband's down, you won't be able to
    make calls using Digital Voice, including 999 calls.

    You could still use a mobile, which you should always keep charged.
    But for additional peace of mind, we'll send you a battery backup device
    - free of charge - ahead of your engineer visit."

    No mention there of needing to satisfy anything.

    This thread might be of relevance: <https://community.bt.com/t5/Home-phone-including-Digital/How-does-one-get-a-free-battery-backup-when-applying-for-full/td-p/2334176>
    --
    Jeff
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Davey@davey@example.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband on Sun Dec 7 16:30:31 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Sun, 7 Dec 2025 15:53:57 +0000
    Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

    Davey wrote:

    Instead of the 'I'm happy' green light, it flashes
    red/green/red/green ad infinitum.
    <https://www.eaton.com/content/dam/eaton/products/backup-power-ups-surge-it-power-distribution/backup-power-ups/eaton_5e_ups/eaton-5e-ups---emea/eaton-dpq-5egen2-ups-manual-en-gb.pdf>

    "Green/Red LED alternative flashes every 0.5 second and audio alarm
    beeps every 1.5 second. The connected loads are exceed the. UPS
    capacity or Battery fault."



    That's not exactly my unit, a 3S, but I expect the strategy is similar.
    I don't hear a beep. There are no connected loads yet, so that isn't
    the problem. Battery Fault, on a unit that has only been plugged in and charged, seems the probable fault, but why? The manual for mine only
    mentions Green or Red lights, but not together. And I know that the
    socket is not at fault.
    I will be contacting Eaton. I know I should send it back to Amazon, but
    Eaton might have some other insight before I do that.

    Thanks for help.
    --
    Davey.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Andy Burns@usenet@andyburns.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sun Dec 7 17:35:27 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    J. P. Gilliver wrote:

    Yes, I've had it too at one address. I don'tthink it mentions "VoIP"
    at all. It mentions an improvement in "reliability and quality", or
    something like that. Well, the quality has never been a problem there

    They've got to phrase everything as "progress" ...

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Davey@davey@example.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sun Dec 7 17:47:43 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Sun, 7 Dec 2025 17:35:27 +0000
    Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

    J. P. Gilliver wrote:

    Yes, I've had it too at one address. I don'tthink it mentions "VoIP"
    at all. It mentions an improvement in "reliability and quality", or something like that. Well, the quality has never been a problem
    there

    They've got to phrase everything as "progress" ...


    It sounds like all those computer programme 'Updates' that take ages to
    sort out to resume operations again.
    --
    Davey.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.telecom.broadband on Sun Dec 7 22:52:11 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 2025/12/7 16:30:31, Davey wrote:
    On Sun, 7 Dec 2025 15:53:57 +0000
    Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

    Davey wrote:

    Instead of the 'I'm happy' green light, it flashes
    red/green/red/green ad infinitum.
    <https://www.eaton.com/content/dam/eaton/products/backup-power-ups-surge-it-power-distribution/backup-power-ups/eaton_5e_ups/eaton-5e-ups---emea/eaton-dpq-5egen2-ups-manual-en-gb.pdf>

    "Green/Red LED alternative flashes every 0.5 second and audio alarm
    beeps every 1.5 second. The connected loads are exceed the. UPS
    capacity or Battery fault."



    That's not exactly my unit, a 3S, but I expect the strategy is similar.
    I don't hear a beep. There are no connected loads yet, so that isn't
    the problem. Battery Fault, on a unit that has only been plugged in and charged, seems the probable fault, but why? The manual for mine only
    mentions Green or Red lights, but not together. And I know that the
    socket is not at fault.
    I will be contacting Eaton. I know I should send it back to Amazon, but
    Eaton might have some other insight before I do that.

    Thanks for help.

    Have you tried with a light load (such as a light!)? I could imagine
    some such units might not be happy with _no_ load - or, at least, might
    get themselves into some condition they cannot recover from if not loaded.
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

    "Grammar is there to help, not hinder." -- Mark Wallace, APIHNA,
    2nd December 2000 (quoted by John Flynn 2000-12-6)
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sun Dec 7 23:17:49 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 2025/12/7 16:6:0, Jeff Layman wrote:
    On 07/12/2025 14:44, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
    On 2025/12/7 13:3:33, Jeff Layman wrote:

    []

    I think we're talking about two different letters here. There's nothing
    in mine about an answering machine not working. Mine isn't about VOIP
    (or FTTP requiring an ONT), and all changes will be done by an engineer
    at the exchange.

    You've made me get off my a* and retrieve the letter :-)

    Standard BT envelope, containing an A4 sheet folded in two, and an A5
    leaflet (also in practice an A4 sheet folded in two). The first is in
    the form of a letter, headed "Important upgrade to your home phone
    service". It starts

    "Hello,

    Good news! We're now upgrading you to Digital Voice, our new home phone
    service."

    Nothing about Digital Voice on my letter.

    I remembered right, neither the letter nor the leaflet mentions VoIP
    anywhere - they keep calling it Digital Voice. The letter (mine is dated
    "November 2025") says (in tiny print at the bottom back) PHME 1389; the
    (colour) leaflet is PHME 1390v1.

    My cover letter is PHME1277. I can't see anything like PHME1277v1 on the leaflet, but is is a very dark colour!

    My leaflet is "Your useful guide to
    Digital Voice
    BT's new home phone service"; the front is greenish, with a purple
    diag/drawing of a house; the back is ble-purple, with the PHME 1390v1 in
    white (i. e. without the purple ink) at bottom right.

    []

    The leaflet mentions a battery-backed option - in fact as _I_ read it, >>>> it _implies_ you will get such; however, in my discussion, it seems it's >>>> _only_ for those with either telemonitoring equipment, or vulnerable in >>>> other ways.

    Yes, it'll be supplied free if you meet certain requirements; if not,
    you'll have to buy a UPS.

    The leaflet:

    "What if there's a power cut?

    If there's a power cut or your broadband's down, you won't be able to
    make calls using Digital Voice, including 999 calls.

    You could still use a mobile, which you should always keep charged.
    But for additional peace of mind, we'll send you a battery backup device
    - free of charge - ahead of your engineer visit."

    No mention there of needing to satisfy anything.

    This thread might be of relevance: <https://community.bt.com/t5/Home-phone-including-Digital/How-does-one-get-a-free-battery-backup-when-applying-for-full/td-p/2334176>

    Yes, people there agree about the vulnerability requirement (and one of
    them said the units are in short supply). IMO the above wording in the
    leaflet is at least very misleading - it doesn't give me "peace of mind"
    at all if they're not going to give me one unless I'm "vulnerable".

    How long was service available in a power cut under POTS? Obviously it's
    going to vary with lots of things, but having seen the battery _room_ somewhere, I'd imagine days, or at least a day. (Though _where_ I saw
    the battery room might not have been a telephone exchange; I forget
    where it was.)
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

    "Grammar is there to help, not hinder." -- Mark Wallace, APIHNA,
    2nd December 2000 (quoted by John Flynn 2000-12-6)
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Davey@davey@example.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband on Sun Dec 7 23:22:45 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Sun, 7 Dec 2025 22:52:11 +0000
    "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

    On 2025/12/7 16:30:31, Davey wrote:
    On Sun, 7 Dec 2025 15:53:57 +0000
    Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

    Davey wrote:

    Instead of the 'I'm happy' green light, it flashes
    red/green/red/green ad infinitum.
    <https://www.eaton.com/content/dam/eaton/products/backup-power-ups-surge-it-power-distribution/backup-power-ups/eaton_5e_ups/eaton-5e-ups---emea/eaton-dpq-5egen2-ups-manual-en-gb.pdf>

    "Green/Red LED alternative flashes every 0.5 second and audio
    alarm beeps every 1.5 second. The connected loads are exceed the.
    UPS capacity or Battery fault."



    That's not exactly my unit, a 3S, but I expect the strategy is
    similar. I don't hear a beep. There are no connected loads yet, so
    that isn't the problem. Battery Fault, on a unit that has only been
    plugged in and charged, seems the probable fault, but why? The
    manual for mine only mentions Green or Red lights, but not
    together. And I know that the socket is not at fault.
    I will be contacting Eaton. I know I should send it back to Amazon,
    but Eaton might have some other insight before I do that.

    Thanks for help.

    Have you tried with a light load (such as a light!)? I could imagine
    some such units might not be happy with _no_ load - or, at least,
    might get themselves into some condition they cannot recover from if
    not loaded.


    I can give it a try, although I would expect it to sit there with no
    load quite happily. The APC does.
    --
    Davey.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sun Dec 7 23:30:47 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 2025/12/7 17:47:43, Davey wrote:
    On Sun, 7 Dec 2025 17:35:27 +0000
    Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

    J. P. Gilliver wrote:

    Yes, I've had it too at one address. I don'tthink it mentions "VoIP"
    at all. It mentions an improvement in "reliability and quality", or
    something like that. Well, the quality has never been a problem
    there

    They've got to phrase everything as "progress" ...


    It sounds like all those computer programme 'Updates' that take ages to
    sort out to resume operations again.

    I have "letter" PHME 1389 in front of me now:

    "Why is it happening and is it mandatory?

    The existing landline has become outdated and needs to be replaced with
    a digital service. While this is a mandatory transition all UK providers
    are undertaking, we want to reassure you that this is a very
    straightforward upgrade. And it's happening to enhance the quality and reliability of your service.

    To move you over to Digital Voice, we'll send an engineer ..."

    How many errors!

    1. "has become outdated and needs to be replaced" - subjective.
    2. "All UK providers are undertaking" - PlusNet for one isn't (a
    subsidiary of BT!).
    3. "a very straightforward upgrade" - why an engineer then? Good that
    they're sending one, but if it's "straightforward", should be optional
    (but when I rang for my adapters, I asked, and no, you can't do without
    the engineer visit).
    4a and b. "enhance the quality of your service." I've never had any
    problem with its quality, and obviously the reliability will go _down_.
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

    "Grammar is there to help, not hinder." -- Mark Wallace, APIHNA,
    2nd December 2000 (quoted by John Flynn 2000-12-6)
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Bob Eager@news0009@eager.cx to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 8 00:36:23 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Sun, 07 Dec 2025 23:30:47 +0000, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

    1. "has become outdated and needs to be replaced" - subjective.
    2. "All UK providers are undertaking" - PlusNet for one isn't (a
    subsidiary of BT!).
    3. "a very straightforward upgrade" - why an engineer then? Good that
    they're sending one, but if it's "straightforward", should be optional
    (but when I rang for my adapters, I asked, and no, you can't do without
    the engineer visit).
    4a and b. "enhance the quality of your service." I've never had any
    problem with its quality, and obviously the reliability will go _down_.

    I am so glad that I moved to VoIP only, about 12 years ago!
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Bob Eager@news0009@eager.cx to uk.telecom.broadband on Mon Dec 8 00:42:26 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Sun, 07 Dec 2025 23:22:45 +0000, Davey wrote:

    On Sun, 7 Dec 2025 22:52:11 +0000 "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>
    wrote:

    On 2025/12/7 16:30:31, Davey wrote:
    On Sun, 7 Dec 2025 15:53:57 +0000 Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk>
    wrote:

    Davey wrote:

    Instead of the 'I'm happy' green light, it flashes
    red/green/red/green ad infinitum.
    <https://www.eaton.com/content/dam/eaton/products/backup-power-ups- surge-it-power-distribution/backup-power-ups/eaton_5e_ups/eaton-5e-ups--- emea/eaton-dpq-5egen2-ups-manual-en-gb.pdf>

    "Green/Red LED alternative flashes every 0.5 second and audio alarm
    beeps every 1.5 second. The connected loads are exceed the.
    UPS capacity or Battery fault."



    That's not exactly my unit, a 3S, but I expect the strategy is
    similar. I don't hear a beep. There are no connected loads yet, so
    that isn't the problem. Battery Fault, on a unit that has only been
    plugged in and charged, seems the probable fault, but why? The manual
    for mine only mentions Green or Red lights, but not together. And I
    know that the socket is not at fault.
    I will be contacting Eaton. I know I should send it back to Amazon,
    but Eaton might have some other insight before I do that.

    Thanks for help.

    Have you tried with a light load (such as a light!)? I could imagine
    some such units might not be happy with _no_ load - or, at least, might
    get themselves into some condition they cannot recover from if not
    loaded.


    I can give it a try, although I would expect it to sit there with no
    load quite happily. The APC does.

    What happens if you start it standalone (not plugged into the mains)? If
    it then starts, it's a wiring fault. If it doesn't, it's probably a
    battery fault.

    If that works OK, and it's a wiring fault, is there a good earth
    connection via the mains?
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Jeff Layman@Jeff@invalid.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 8 09:03:05 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 08/12/2025 00:36, Bob Eager wrote:
    On Sun, 07 Dec 2025 23:30:47 +0000, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

    1. "has become outdated and needs to be replaced" - subjective.
    2. "All UK providers are undertaking" - PlusNet for one isn't (a
    subsidiary of BT!).
    3. "a very straightforward upgrade" - why an engineer then? Good that
    they're sending one, but if it's "straightforward", should be optional
    (but when I rang for my adapters, I asked, and no, you can't do without
    the engineer visit).
    4a and b. "enhance the quality of your service." I've never had any
    problem with its quality, and obviously the reliability will go _down_.

    I am so glad that I moved to VoIP only, about 12 years ago!

    Why? I can see that VoIP can have an advantage for business users over
    POTS, but for most home users I can see definite disadvantages,
    especially for those who require reliability and, for example, a
    connection for emergency use. When I did an internet search on:

    voip advantage analogue

    I got a vast number of hits which discussed *business* advantages, but couldn't find one which specifically referred to home advantages.

    I also wonder, with the almost universal availability of mobile phone
    usage, if VoIP is a solution looking for a problem. What advantages, for example, does VoIP have over a mobile phone?

    You might find it strange that as the OP for this thread I am
    criticising the move to digital. Well, as I mentioned in my OP, "I
    should say that there has never been a voice problem - the line has
    always been loud and clear with no clicks, etc". So for over three
    months /if/ I had had VoIP instead of analogue, not only would I have
    had internet connection problems, but making simple voice calls would
    not have been possible as well. Fortunately, I was able to use my mobile
    phone as a hotspot when the broadband connection went down, so in a way
    I should repeat here the final sentence of the paragraph above.
    --
    Jeff
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Theo@theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 8 09:40:20 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    In uk.telecom.voip Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    I got a vast number of hits which discussed *business* advantages, but couldn't find one which specifically referred to home advantages.

    I also wonder, with the almost universal availability of mobile phone
    usage, if VoIP is a solution looking for a problem. What advantages, for example, does VoIP have over a mobile phone?

    Most domestic users run their 'landlines' in a basic way, so the flexibilty
    of VOIP is not something they would take much advantage of. Even less so,
    when substantially eroded by the limitations of BT/etc's digital voice
    product. The simplicity of POTS is to its advantage.

    But that's in isolation. Over fibre you have no choice, it's digital voice
    or nothing. The copper is too decrepit and costly to keep going (in
    aggregate, over decade timescales), especially for the tiny voice revenue. Doing nothing is not an option.

    Theo
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Davey@davey@example.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 8 10:08:34 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Mon, 8 Dec 2025 09:03:05 +0000
    Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    On 08/12/2025 00:36, Bob Eager wrote:
    On Sun, 07 Dec 2025 23:30:47 +0000, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

    1. "has become outdated and needs to be replaced" - subjective.
    2. "All UK providers are undertaking" - PlusNet for one isn't (a
    subsidiary of BT!).
    3. "a very straightforward upgrade" - why an engineer then? Good
    that they're sending one, but if it's "straightforward", should be
    optional (but when I rang for my adapters, I asked, and no, you
    can't do without the engineer visit).
    4a and b. "enhance the quality of your service." I've never had any
    problem with its quality, and obviously the reliability will go
    _down_.

    I am so glad that I moved to VoIP only, about 12 years ago!

    Why? I can see that VoIP can have an advantage for business users
    over POTS, but for most home users I can see definite disadvantages, especially for those who require reliability and, for example, a
    connection for emergency use. When I did an internet search on:

    voip advantage analogue

    I got a vast number of hits which discussed *business* advantages,
    but couldn't find one which specifically referred to home advantages.

    I also wonder, with the almost universal availability of mobile phone
    usage, if VoIP is a solution looking for a problem. What advantages,
    for example, does VoIP have over a mobile phone?

    You might find it strange that as the OP for this thread I am
    criticising the move to digital. Well, as I mentioned in my OP, "I
    should say that there has never been a voice problem - the line has
    always been loud and clear with no clicks, etc". So for over three
    months /if/ I had had VoIP instead of analogue, not only would I have
    had internet connection problems, but making simple voice calls would
    not have been possible as well. Fortunately, I was able to use my
    mobile phone as a hotspot when the broadband connection went down, so
    in a way I should repeat here the final sentence of the paragraph
    above.


    When I transferred my landline over to Zen's SOGEA Digital Voice, I
    could not receive calls from several of my neighbours, on the same
    exchange.I could call them, but not the reverse. Zen investigated, and
    BT found a problem in one of their cabinets. I didn't investigate
    further, as it was then working.
    So, 'improvement in reliability' proved to be a lie from the very start.
    --
    Davey.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Davey@davey@example.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband on Mon Dec 8 10:17:54 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Sun, 7 Dec 2025 22:52:11 +0000
    "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

    On 2025/12/7 16:30:31, Davey wrote:
    On Sun, 7 Dec 2025 15:53:57 +0000
    Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

    Davey wrote:

    Instead of the 'I'm happy' green light, it flashes
    red/green/red/green ad infinitum.
    <https://www.eaton.com/content/dam/eaton/products/backup-power-ups-surge-it-power-distribution/backup-power-ups/eaton_5e_ups/eaton-5e-ups---emea/eaton-dpq-5egen2-ups-manual-en-gb.pdf>

    "Green/Red LED alternative flashes every 0.5 second and audio
    alarm beeps every 1.5 second. The connected loads are exceed the.
    UPS capacity or Battery fault."



    That's not exactly my unit, a 3S, but I expect the strategy is
    similar. I don't hear a beep. There are no connected loads yet, so
    that isn't the problem. Battery Fault, on a unit that has only been
    plugged in and charged, seems the probable fault, but why? The
    manual for mine only mentions Green or Red lights, but not
    together. And I know that the socket is not at fault.
    I will be contacting Eaton. I know I should send it back to Amazon,
    but Eaton might have some other insight before I do that.

    Thanks for help.

    Have you tried with a light load (such as a light!)? I could imagine
    some such units might not be happy with _no_ load - or, at least,
    might get themselves into some condition they cannot recover from if
    not loaded.


    Although it would be normal to contact Amazon as the seller, I
    reckoned that contacting Eaton directly would be a more useful route. I
    was given an e-mail address to send the information to, so they will
    presumably issue me with an RMA and shipping instructions.
    --
    Davey.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 8 10:37:46 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 2025/12/8 10:8:34, Davey wrote:
    On Mon, 8 Dec 2025 09:03:05 +0000
    Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    On 08/12/2025 00:36, Bob Eager wrote:
    On Sun, 07 Dec 2025 23:30:47 +0000, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

    1. "has become outdated and needs to be replaced" - subjective.
    2. "All UK providers are undertaking" - PlusNet for one isn't (a
    subsidiary of BT!).
    3. "a very straightforward upgrade" - why an engineer then? Good
    that they're sending one, but if it's "straightforward", should be
    optional (but when I rang for my adapters, I asked, and no, you
    can't do without the engineer visit).
    4a and b. "enhance the quality of your service." I've never had any
    problem with its quality, and obviously the reliability will go
    _down_.

    I am so glad that I moved to VoIP only, about 12 years ago!

    Why? I can see that VoIP can have an advantage for business users

    Yes, Bob's comment after I'd detailed the _dis_advantages puzzled me too!

    over POTS, but for most home users I can see definite disadvantages,
    especially for those who require reliability and, for example, a
    connection for emergency use. When I did an internet search on:

    Exactly.

    voip advantage analogue

    I got a vast number of hits which discussed *business* advantages,
    but couldn't find one which specifically referred to home advantages.

    I also wonder, with the almost universal availability of mobile phone

    Ha!

    usage, if VoIP is a solution looking for a problem. What advantages,
    for example, does VoIP have over a mobile phone?

    You might find it strange that as the OP for this thread I am
    criticising the move to digital. Well, as I mentioned in my OP, "I

    Not at all!

    should say that there has never been a voice problem - the line has
    always been loud and clear with no clicks, etc". So for over three
    months /if/ I had had VoIP instead of analogue, not only would I have
    had internet connection problems, but making simple voice calls would
    not have been possible as well. Fortunately, I was able to use my

    Yes; IIRR, last time I had any prolonged problem with my broadband, I
    was still able to use the landline (on the same connection) - not least
    to talk to the ISP about the problems!

    mobile phone as a hotspot when the broadband connection went down, so

    That's fine if you have an unlimited (or large) data contract on your
    mobile (and good connection). I accept that most people these days do,
    but not all. (I for example have a mobile contract that costs me about 2
    pounds per 180 days, primarily in case of car breakdown. [It costs me 2
    pounds any day I use it, and nothing if I don't. The 180 days is to keep
    it active.])

    in a way I should repeat here the final sentence of the paragraph
    above.


    When I transferred my landline over to Zen's SOGEA Digital Voice, I
    could not receive calls from several of my neighbours, on the same
    exchange.I could call them, but not the reverse. Zen investigated, and
    BT found a problem in one of their cabinets. I didn't investigate
    further, as it was then working.

    I get the impression that there are lots of wrinkles like that with
    VoIP, just waiting to come to the surface.

    So, 'improvement in reliability' proved to be a lie from the very start.

    Definitely.

    As for copper being decrepit/expensive to maintain: fair enough (though
    I question it) where fibre is being installed anyway; but there are
    _lots_ of places (not all of them rural) where the broadband, final drop
    at least, is going to remain copper anyway for the foreseeable future,
    so is going to be maintained anyway.
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

    A lot of people think that being skinny is the happy ending, and its
    not. Being happy is the happy ending.
    - Sarah Millican, in Radio Times 3-9 March 2012
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 8 10:50:32 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 2025/12/8 9:40:20, Theo wrote:
    []
    But that's in isolation. Over fibre you have no choice, it's digital voice or nothing. The copper is too decrepit and costly to keep going (in aggregate, over decade timescales), especially for the tiny voice revenue. Doing nothing is not an option.

    Theo
    It's one of the many cases where the universal obligation doesn't gel
    with a commercial entity; perhaps the state needs calling back in. Bit
    like the similar obligation the Post Office frequently struggles with.
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Bob Eager@news0009@eager.cx to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 8 10:55:53 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Mon, 08 Dec 2025 09:03:05 +0000, Jeff Layman wrote:

    I am so glad that I moved to VoIP only, about 12 years ago!

    Why? I can see that VoIP can have an advantage for business users over
    POTS, but for most home users I can see definite disadvantages,
    especially for those who require reliability and, for example, a
    connection for emergency use.

    Cost. Cheaper rental and call charges without getting into silly
    contracts. Convenience of several very cheap numbers.

    I've always been on a UPS, so pretty well as reliable. No need to deal
    with BT.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Bob Eager@news0009@eager.cx to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 8 10:57:45 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Mon, 08 Dec 2025 10:37:46 +0000, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

    I am so glad that I moved to VoIP only, about 12 years ago!

    Why? I can see that VoIP can have an advantage for business users

    Yes, Bob's comment after I'd detailed the _dis_advantages puzzled me
    too!

    The only problem I've ever had with VoIP is when the physical line broke - which would have killed POTS too.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Davey@davey@example.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband on Mon Dec 8 11:02:45 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 8 Dec 2025 00:42:26 GMT
    Bob Eager <news0009@eager.cx> wrote:

    On Sun, 07 Dec 2025 23:22:45 +0000, Davey wrote:

    On Sun, 7 Dec 2025 22:52:11 +0000 "J. P. Gilliver"
    <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

    On 2025/12/7 16:30:31, Davey wrote:
    On Sun, 7 Dec 2025 15:53:57 +0000 Andy Burns
    <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

    Davey wrote:

    Instead of the 'I'm happy' green light, it flashes
    red/green/red/green ad infinitum.
    <https://www.eaton.com/content/dam/eaton/products/backup-power-ups-
    surge-it-power-distribution/backup-power-ups/eaton_5e_ups/eaton-5e-ups--- emea/eaton-dpq-5egen2-ups-manual-en-gb.pdf>

    "Green/Red LED alternative flashes every 0.5 second and audio
    alarm beeps every 1.5 second. The connected loads are exceed
    the. UPS capacity or Battery fault."



    That's not exactly my unit, a 3S, but I expect the strategy is
    similar. I don't hear a beep. There are no connected loads yet,
    so that isn't the problem. Battery Fault, on a unit that has
    only been plugged in and charged, seems the probable fault, but
    why? The manual for mine only mentions Green or Red lights, but
    not together. And I know that the socket is not at fault.
    I will be contacting Eaton. I know I should send it back to
    Amazon, but Eaton might have some other insight before I do that.

    Thanks for help.

    Have you tried with a light load (such as a light!)? I could
    imagine some such units might not be happy with _no_ load - or, at
    least, might get themselves into some condition they cannot
    recover from if not loaded.


    I can give it a try, although I would expect it to sit there with no
    load quite happily. The APC does.

    What happens if you start it standalone (not plugged into the mains)?
    If it then starts, it's a wiring fault. If it doesn't, it's probably
    a battery fault.

    If that works OK, and it's a wiring fault, is there a good earth
    connection via the mains?

    I left it unplugged, and pressed the On button. It started by flashing
    the lights as before, then the green one went stable, then it shut
    down. A second attempt went straight to green light, then shutdown.
    I have received a procedure from Eaton, which involves disconnecting
    one section of the battery pack, and charging again for 24 hours. More later.....
    --
    Davey.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Jeff Layman@Jeff@invalid.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 8 11:22:49 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 08/12/2025 09:40, Theo wrote:
    In uk.telecom.voip Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    I got a vast number of hits which discussed *business* advantages, but
    couldn't find one which specifically referred to home advantages.

    I also wonder, with the almost universal availability of mobile phone
    usage, if VoIP is a solution looking for a problem. What advantages, for
    example, does VoIP have over a mobile phone?

    Most domestic users run their 'landlines' in a basic way, so the flexibilty of VOIP is not something they would take much advantage of. Even less so, when substantially eroded by the limitations of BT/etc's digital voice product. The simplicity of POTS is to its advantage.

    And, I would argue, POTS has proved its reliability over many years.

    From <https://www.acome.com/en/publications/446-expert-opinions/2963-are-ftth-overhead-optical-networks-reliable-copper-networks>
    "For nearly a century, ACOME has been supporting the rollout of telecommunications networks. Over the last 50 years, copper
    telecommunications networks (50% developed by ACOME in France) have
    provided an extremely reliable service. In France, signal loss due to
    damaged passive infrastructure occurs statistically only twice in the
    lifetime of a copper line."

    But that's in isolation. Over fibre you have no choice, it's digital voice or nothing. The copper is too decrepit and costly to keep going (in aggregate, over decade timescales), especially for the tiny voice revenue. Doing nothing is not an option.

    It'll be interesting to see what the lifetime of optical fibre turns out
    to be. Most refs say around 25 years, but suggest it could be much
    longer (<https://www.prysmian.com/en/media/press-releases/prysmian-s-sirocco-cables-expected-lifetime-greater-than-50-years>).
    Against that, although "decrepit" (really?) much copper wiring has
    already far exceeded 50 years in use. I suppose that one advantage
    optical fibre cable has is that scrotes won't find it useful to steal,
    unlike copper. Oh, and we won't have to worry about what an EMP or
    Carrington Event might do (well, not to the optical cable, but the
    electronics at each end might be a teeny bit susceptible).

    I really don't think that reliability of copper is the driving force
    behind a move to optical cable, at least for domestic use.

    The increased speed isn't something that is of any interest to me and, I expect, most users. Perhaps there are large families of gamers and
    streamers who would benefit from 200Mb/s+ down/up.

    But, as we know, it's happening anyway. Cynical mode on...

    And it'll all have the same great advantages as have been stated for
    smart meters, solar panels, ASHPs, EVs, etc. It's only when we stop
    looking at those through the rose-coloured glasses we've been given to
    view them with will we start to get a balanced view.

    ...Cynical mode off
    --
    Jeff
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From JMB99@mb@nospam.net to uk.telecom.broadband on Mon Dec 8 12:47:05 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 08/12/2025 10:57, Bob Eager wrote:
    The only problem I've ever had with VoIP is when the physical line broke - which would have killed POTS too.


    At least you could listen on the line and often tell what had happened
    or was happening. Many routers do not give you much information with
    their LEDs.



    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Graham J@nobody@nowhere.co.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 8 13:11:52 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    Jeff Layman wrote:

    [snip]


    I also wonder, with the almost universal availability of mobile phone
    usage, if VoIP is a solution looking for a problem. What advantages, for example, does VoIP have over a mobile phone?

    In my experience, most mobile phone connections are crap. Just listen
    to any radio news programme where somebody is interviewed via their
    mobile phone. The quality may be tolerable for making an emergency call.

    Also, mobile coverage is very patchy - just not according to the mobile suppliers! Where I live I have FTTP, but the mobile phone only works outdoors, often only on high ground. And this is in Norfolk, not far
    from the Snetterton racetrack. I'm told the Hebrides has better mobile coverage! The lack of coverage mitigates against the use of mobiles for emergency calls.

    In all, mobile phones are really costume jewellery, and are often priced
    as such!

    By contrast VoIP gives very good voice quality.

    As to reliability, VoIP is really only any good in conjunction with
    FTTP. Anything that involves VDSL or ADSL in conjunction with SOGEA is extremely silly. The slightest break in the broadband service (from a
    nearby lightning strike, farmer's electric fence, or Christmas tree
    lights) will mean that the router re-negotiates its connection - taking
    a couple of minutes - then the VoIP server must re-establish its
    connection with the client phone.

    The problem with power cuts is the same for most users with DECT
    handsets, and reflects the lack of understanding on the part of users.
    Having said that, a router with an integrated rechargeable battery and
    remote monitoring by the ISP would be extremely easy to achieve; if
    mandated by OFCOM. After all, mobile phones contain rechargeable batteries!

    I see that SOGEA means that BT does not have to maintain its telephone exchanges, but the copper pairs to the end user still require - very
    expensive - maintenance. Further, line faults are often difficult and time-consuming to fix. SOGEA should never have been permitted; the
    pressure should have been applied to install FTTP.
    --
    Graham J
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Mark Carver@mark@invalid.com to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sat Dec 20 16:50:36 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 08/12/2025 13:11, Graham J wrote:

    As to reliability, VoIP is really only any good in conjunction with
    FTTP.-a Anything that involves VDSL or ADSL in conjunction with SOGEA is extremely silly.-a The slightest break in the broadband service (from a nearby lightning strike, farmer's electric fence, or Christmas tree
    lights) will mean that the router re-negotiates its connection - taking
    a couple of minutes -
    You keep saying this, clearly your own experience, but for those of us
    that live in a suburban or urban environment close to the cabinet, I can
    go for MONTHS without a single glitch on my VDSL connection.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Graham J@nobody@nowhere.co.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sat Dec 20 17:04:40 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    Mark Carver wrote:
    On 08/12/2025 13:11, Graham J wrote:

    As to reliability, VoIP is really only any good in conjunction with
    FTTP.-a Anything that involves VDSL or ADSL in conjunction with SOGEA
    is extremely silly.-a The slightest break in the broadband service
    (from a nearby lightning strike, farmer's electric fence, or Christmas
    tree lights) will mean that the router re-negotiates its connection -
    taking a couple of minutes -
    You keep saying this, clearly your own experience, but for those of us
    that live in a suburban or urban environment close to the cabinet, I can
    go for MONTHS without a single glitch on my VDSL connection.

    Yo8're right, sometimes you get a good reliable connection.

    But I see the people who don't get such reliability; and they're
    surprisingly common.

    But FTTP is so obviously better that it beggars belief that Openreach
    even thought to offer SOGEA or SOTAP. Why on earth did they not invest
    more in the fibre rollout instead of these half-hearted stop-gap solutions?
    --
    Graham J
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Trolleybus@ken@birchanger.com to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sun Dec 21 10:13:39 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Sat, 20 Dec 2025 16:50:36 +0000, Mark Carver <mark@invalid.com>
    wrote:

    On 08/12/2025 13:11, Graham J wrote:

    As to reliability, VoIP is really only any good in conjunction with
    FTTP.a Anything that involves VDSL or ADSL in conjunction with SOGEA is
    extremely silly.a The slightest break in the broadband service (from a
    nearby lightning strike, farmer's electric fence, or Christmas tree
    lights) will mean that the router re-negotiates its connection - taking
    a couple of minutes -
    You keep saying this, clearly your own experience, but for those of us
    that live in a suburban or urban environment close to the cabinet, I can
    go for MONTHS without a single glitch on my VDSL connection.

    I don't think I've EVER had a fault on my ADSL and VDSL connections.
    Can't remember the date I moved from ISDN to 0.5Mb with Bulldog but it
    was probably about the millenium.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Graham J@nobody@nowhere.co.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sun Dec 21 11:59:07 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    Trolleybus wrote:
    On Sat, 20 Dec 2025 16:50:36 +0000, Mark Carver <mark@invalid.com>
    wrote:

    On 08/12/2025 13:11, Graham J wrote:

    As to reliability, VoIP is really only any good in conjunction with
    FTTP.-a Anything that involves VDSL or ADSL in conjunction with SOGEA is >>> extremely silly.-a The slightest break in the broadband service (from a
    nearby lightning strike, farmer's electric fence, or Christmas tree
    lights) will mean that the router re-negotiates its connection - taking
    a couple of minutes -
    You keep saying this, clearly your own experience, but for those of us
    that live in a suburban or urban environment close to the cabinet, I can
    go for MONTHS without a single glitch on my VDSL connection.

    I don't think I've EVER had a fault on my ADSL and VDSL connections.
    Can't remember the date I moved from ISDN to 0.5Mb with Bulldog but it
    was probably about the millenium.


    But I see the people who don't get such reliability; and they're
    surprisingly common.

    FTTP is so obviously better that it beggars belief that Openreach even
    thought to offer SOGEA or SOTAP. Why on earth did they not invest more
    in the fibre rollout instead of these half-hearted stop-gap solutions?
    --
    Graham J
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Richmond@dnomhcir@gmx.com to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sun Dec 21 13:27:57 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    Anecdotal evidence isn't much on its own, but here is mine: My telephone
    had a lot of interference on it, and eventually died altogether, but the
    ADSL internet, and VOIP with Voipfone were still both working. I put
    this down to the wonders of error correction. The fault turned out to be
    in the copper wire connections on the outside of the house.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From noel@deletethis@invalid.lan to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 22 11:32:43 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Sun, 21 Dec 2025 13:27:57 +0000, Richmond wrote:

    Anecdotal evidence isn't much on its own, but here is mine: My telephone
    had a lot of interference on it, and eventually died altogether, but the
    ADSL internet, and VOIP with Voipfone were still both working. I put
    this down to the wonders of error correction. The fault turned out to be
    in the copper wire connections on the outside of the house.

    ADSL will work with only one pair, but be warned, VDSL will not :)
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From noel@deletethis@invalid.lan to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 22 16:48:54 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 11:32:43 +1000, noel wrote:

    On Sun, 21 Dec 2025 13:27:57 +0000, Richmond wrote:

    Anecdotal evidence isn't much on its own, but here is mine: My
    telephone had a lot of interference on it, and eventually died
    altogether, but the ADSL internet, and VOIP with Voipfone were still
    both working. I put this down to the wonders of error correction. The
    fault turned out to be in the copper wire connections on the outside of
    the house.

    ADSL will work with only one pair, but be warned, VDSL will not :)

    errrrr I mean with one of the pair
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From David Wade@g4ugm@dave.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 22 09:05:58 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 22/12/2025 06:48, noel wrote:
    On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 11:32:43 +1000, noel wrote:

    On Sun, 21 Dec 2025 13:27:57 +0000, Richmond wrote:

    Anecdotal evidence isn't much on its own, but here is mine: My
    telephone had a lot of interference on it, and eventually died
    altogether, but the ADSL internet, and VOIP with Voipfone were still
    both working. I put this down to the wonders of error correction. The
    fault turned out to be in the copper wire connections on the outside of
    the house.

    ADSL will work with only one pair, but be warned, VDSL will not :)

    errrrr I mean with one of the pair

    Whilst you all tell me that copper is great, on a number of occasions it
    has let me down and taken a long time to fix...

    ... its valuable, so a target for theives. So when we I was a student we
    lost access remote computer access as someone had nicked the copper...

    Not great, but at least it was only one pair, well two I think it was a
    4-wire leased circuit..

    Dave
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Clive Page@usenet@page2.eu to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 22 10:31:40 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 22/12/2025 09:05, David Wade wrote:
    On 22/12/2025 06:48, noel wrote:
    On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 11:32:43 +1000, noel wrote:

    On Sun, 21 Dec 2025 13:27:57 +0000, Richmond wrote:

    Anecdotal evidence isn't much on its own, but here is mine: My
    telephone had a lot of interference on it, and eventually died
    altogether, but the ADSL internet, and VOIP with Voipfone were still
    both working. I put this down to the wonders of error correction. The
    fault turned out to be in the copper wire connections on the outside of >>>> the house.

    ADSL will work with only one pair, but be warned, VDSL will not :)

    errrrr I mean with one of the pair

    Whilst you all tell me that copper is great, on a number of occasions it
    has let me down and taken a long time to fix...

    ... its valuable, so a target for theives. So when we I was a student we lost access remote computer access as someone had nicked the copper...

    Not great, but at least it was only one pair, well two I think it was a 4-wire leased circuit..

    Dave

    I was told that we have aluminium not copper wiring back to the cabinet
    which is about 250 m away. This must have been installed in the 1970s
    or 80s when this area was developed, and might have seemed a good idea
    at the time. But it seems to corrode more easily when water gets in to
    the cable ducts, and we've had several faults eventually fixed by some OpenReach technician finding an alternative pair that seems to work at
    least temporarily. But when I mentioned that we had aluminium cables,
    one of them told me "you are not supposed to know that"! Is that a
    widespread problem - I have no idea?

    I guess we'll go for fibre to the premises sometime next year, but I'm
    not looking forward to the disruption.
    --
    Clive Page

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Andy Burns@usenet@andyburns.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 22 10:45:21 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    David Wade wrote:

    Whilst you all tell me that copper is great, on a number of occasions it
    has let me down and taken a long time to fix...

    ... its valuable, so a target for theives.

    Do you think the thieves have learned yet the difference between copper
    and fibre?

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Nick Finnigan@nix@genie.co.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 22 11:08:49 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 22/12/2025 10:31, Clive Page wrote:

    I was told that we have aluminium not copper wiring back to the cabinet which is about 250 m away.-a This must have been installed in the 1970s or 80s when this area was developed, and might have seemed a good idea at the time.-a But it seems to corrode more easily when water gets in to the cable ducts, and we've had several faults eventually fixed by some OpenReach technician finding an alternative pair that seems to work at least temporarily.-a-a But when I mentioned that we had aluminium cables, one of them told me "you are not supposed to know that"!-a Is that a widespread problem - I have no idea?

    I had aluminium at a previous address, which was built erlier than that,
    but no idea when the GPO would have installed. IIRC the aluminium was
    visible in the part of the master socket.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From JMB99@mb@nospam.net to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 22 11:09:59 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 21/12/2025 10:13, Trolleybus wrote:
    I don't think I've EVER had a fault on my ADSL and VDSL connections.
    Can't remember the date I moved from ISDN to 0.5Mb with Bulldog but it
    was probably about the millenium.



    For a time I was getting lots of problems but turned out to be poorly
    crimped connection in the cabinet down the road.

    Happened again after someone had done some work in the cabinet. :-(




    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From David Wade@g4ugm@dave.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 22 12:20:45 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 22/12/2025 10:45, Andy Burns wrote:
    David Wade wrote:

    Whilst you all tell me that copper is great, on a number of occasions
    it has let me down and taken a long time to fix...

    ... its valuable, so a target for theives.

    Do you think the thieves have learned yet the difference between copper
    and fibre?


    I think they will figure it out quickly.


    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From David Wade@g4ugm@dave.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 22 12:29:26 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 22/12/2025 10:31, Clive Page wrote:
    On 22/12/2025 09:05, David Wade wrote:
    On 22/12/2025 06:48, noel wrote:
    On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 11:32:43 +1000, noel wrote:

    On Sun, 21 Dec 2025 13:27:57 +0000, Richmond wrote:

    Anecdotal evidence isn't much on its own, but here is mine: My
    telephone had a lot of interference on it, and eventually died
    altogether, but the ADSL internet, and VOIP with Voipfone were still >>>>> both working. I put this down to the wonders of error correction. The >>>>> fault turned out to be in the copper wire connections on the
    outside of
    the house.

    ADSL will work with only one pair, but be warned, VDSL will not :)

    errrrr I mean with one of the pair

    Whilst you all tell me that copper is great, on a number of occasions
    it has let me down and taken a long time to fix...

    ... its valuable, so a target for theives. So when we I was a student
    we lost access remote computer access as someone had nicked the copper...

    Not great, but at least it was only one pair, well two I think it was
    a 4-wire leased circuit..

    Dave

    I was told that we have aluminium not copper wiring back to the cabinet which is about 250 m away.-a This must have been installed in the 1970s
    or 80s when this area was developed, and might have seemed a good idea
    at the time.-a But it seems to corrode more easily when water gets in to
    the cable ducts, and we've had several faults eventually fixed by some OpenReach technician finding an alternative pair that seems to work at
    least temporarily.-a-a But when I mentioned that we had aluminium cables, one of them told me "you are not supposed to know that"!-a Is that a widespread problem - I have no idea?


    Figures from searches suggest that 15% of the network is aluminium,
    typically from installs in the late 1970s early 1980s.

    I guess we'll go for fibre to the premises sometime next year, but I'm
    not looking forward to the disruption.


    If you stick with BT or EE there will be little disruption even if you
    retain a "landline" number. Their box autoconfigures and you can plug
    any existing devices into its "pots" socket. If you disconnect the BT
    line (If you had copper they would probably re-claim the copper, but I
    don't think they bother with ali) you can patch the router across into
    any house wiring.

    Dave




    If you drop your "landline" no disruption for most with any ISP.


    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Andy Burns@usenet@andyburns.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 22 12:37:38 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    Trolleybus wrote:

    I don't think I've EVER had a fault on my ADSL and VDSL connections.

    I didn't have faults with ADSL1, when it was upgraded to ADSL2+ I
    started getting multiple line drops per day, since upgrading to VDSL it
    has been rock solid (even remaining up during thunder storms).

    None of which means I won't take FTTP as soon as it becomes available
    (XGS-PON in this area, next year according to openreach).

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Clive Page@usenet@page2.eu to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 22 19:08:42 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 22/12/2025 12:29, David Wade wrote:
    On 22/12/2025 10:31, Clive Page wrote:
    On 22/12/2025 09:05, David Wade wrote:
    On 22/12/2025 06:48, noel wrote:
    On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 11:32:43 +1000, noel wrote:

    On Sun, 21 Dec 2025 13:27:57 +0000, Richmond wrote:

    Anecdotal evidence isn't much on its own, but here is mine: My
    telephone had a lot of interference on it, and eventually died
    altogether, but the ADSL internet, and VOIP with Voipfone were still >>>>>> both working. I put this down to the wonders of error correction. The >>>>>> fault turned out to be in the copper wire connections on the
    outside of
    the house.

    ADSL will work with only one pair, but be warned, VDSL will not :)

    errrrr I mean with one of the pair

    Whilst you all tell me that copper is great, on a number of occasions
    it has let me down and taken a long time to fix...

    ... its valuable, so a target for theives. So when we I was a student
    we lost access remote computer access as someone had nicked the
    copper...

    Not great, but at least it was only one pair, well two I think it was
    a 4-wire leased circuit..

    Dave

    I was told that we have aluminium not copper wiring back to the
    cabinet which is about 250 m away.-a This must have been installed in
    the 1970s or 80s when this area was developed, and might have seemed a
    good idea at the time.-a But it seems to corrode more easily when water
    gets in to the cable ducts, and we've had several faults eventually
    fixed by some OpenReach technician finding an alternative pair that
    seems to work at least temporarily.-a-a But when I mentioned that we had
    aluminium cables, one of them told me "you are not supposed to know
    that"!-a Is that a widespread problem - I have no idea?


    Figures from searches suggest that 15% of the network is aluminium, typically from installs in the late 1970s early 1980s.

    I guess we'll go for fibre to the premises sometime next year, but I'm
    not looking forward to the disruption.


    If you stick with BT or EE there will be little disruption even if you retain a "landline" number. Their box autoconfigures and you can plug
    any existing devices into its "pots" socket. If you disconnect the BT
    line (If you had copper they would probably re-claim the copper, but I
    don't think they bother with ali) you can patch the router across into
    any house wiring.

    Dave




    If you drop your "landline" no disruption for most with any ISP.


    Unfortunately we are with Plusnet, who don't do landlines in their fibre offering. So have to decide whether we really need to retain the
    landline or not. If we do, I gather it's possible to switch to using EE
    who do support landlines.
    --
    Clive Page

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Andy Burns@usenet@andyburns.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 22 19:24:21 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    Clive Page wrote:

    Unfortunately we are with Plusnet, who don't do landlines in their fibre offering.-a So have to decide whether we really need to retain the
    landline or not.-a If we do, I gather it's possible to switch to using EE who do support landlines.

    It's also possible to switch from Plusnet FTTC to Plusnet SOGEA, and
    then port the released PSTN number to a.n.other VoIP provider, such as voipfone. You might be without the landline for a few days, and you
    will lose the ability to send/receive SMS on DECT phones.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From noel@deletethis@invalid.lan to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Tue Dec 23 08:02:13 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 12:37:38 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:

    Trolleybus wrote:

    I don't think I've EVER had a fault on my ADSL and VDSL connections.

    I didn't have faults with ADSL1, when it was upgraded to ADSL2+ I
    started getting multiple line drops per day, since upgrading to VDSL it
    has been rock solid (even remaining up during thunder storms).

    This!


    None of which means I won't take FTTP as soon as it becomes available

    Different country, but I've resisted for reasons above, VDSL is more than
    fast enough, and very reliable - even though I'm in an area prone to
    lightning strikes. I could do a FTTP upgrade at home (wont cost me
    anything anyway) but for what, using the same as I do now with maybe 5ms
    less latency... nah... if it aint broke, don't break it.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Andy Burns@usenet@andyburns.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 22 22:04:49 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    noel wrote:

    I could do a FTTP upgrade at home (wont cost me
    anything anyway) but for what

    Not relying on batteries in a roadside cabinet?

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From noel@deletethis@invalid.lan to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Tue Dec 23 08:20:52 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 22:04:49 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:

    noel wrote:

    I could do a FTTP upgrade at home (wont cost me anything anyway) but
    for what

    Not relying on batteries in a roadside cabinet?

    3 weeks ago we a violent storm that took out power for 9 hours (and 2
    rather big trees on my property alone), my generator and UPS's kept me
    all going, the node's batteries depleted after 6.5 hours - apparently
    those on fibre also went dark at same time
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Andy Burns@usenet@andyburns.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Mon Dec 22 22:32:35 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    noel wrote:

    the node's batteries depleted after 6.5 hours - apparently
    those on fibre also went dark at same time

    Does the telco in your country use GPON, or some other fibre technology?
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Davey@davey@example.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Tue Dec 23 00:26:38 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 19:24:21 +0000
    Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
    Clive Page wrote:

    Unfortunately we are with Plusnet, who don't do landlines in their
    fibre offering.-a So have to decide whether we really need to retain
    the landline or not.-a If we do, I gather it's possible to switch to
    using EE who do support landlines.

    It's also possible to switch from Plusnet FTTC to Plusnet SOGEA, and
    then port the released PSTN number to a.n.other VoIP provider, such
    as voipfone. You might be without the landline for a few days, and
    you will lose the ability to send/receive SMS on DECT phones.

    My Zen SOGEA line will accept SMS messages on my DECT 'phones, but not
    send them. So I can receive the strange 100mph voice interpretations of
    various confirmation codes, but I can't send anything SMS.
    --
    Davey.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Graham J@nobody@nowhere.co.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Tue Dec 23 08:23:10 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    Davey wrote:

    [snip]

    My Zen SOGEA line will accept SMS messages on my DECT 'phones, but not
    send them. So I can receive the strange 100mph voice interpretations of various confirmation codes, but I can't send anything SMS.

    My VoIP service (from Voipfone) receives SMS messages and reads them to
    me. But the hardware, either desk phones or handsets, has a small
    screen and could in principle display such messages. But Voipfone tell
    me this isn't possible. Anybody care to speculate why this is?
    --
    Graham J
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Andy Burns@usenet@andyburns.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Tue Dec 23 08:27:32 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    Graham J wrote:

    My VoIP service (from Voipfone) receives SMS messages and reads them to me.

    Fairly sure that's BT doing the SMS to speech, not voipfone. For me
    that's not worth having, compared to using SMS features in the DECT
    handsets. Anyway almost nobody calls my landline, let alone sends text messages to it.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Tue Dec 23 10:50:05 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 2025/12/23 8:23:10, Graham J wrote:
    Davey wrote:

    [snip]

    My Zen SOGEA line will accept SMS messages on my DECT 'phones, but not>> send them. So I can receive the strange 100mph voice interpretations of
    various confirmation codes, but I can't send anything SMS.

    My VoIP service (from Voipfone) receives SMS messages and reads them to
    me. But the hardware, either desk phones or handsets, has a small
    screen and could in principle display such messages. But Voipfone tell
    me this isn't possible. Anybody care to speculate why this is?


    Speculating only, as requested :-) : maybe the handsets-receiving-SMS
    uses (used) special tones that don't pass uncorrupted through the CoDecs
    VoIP uses. In much the same way as fax machines, and analog MoDems,
    don't work reliably through anything where the voice signal is
    encoded/decoded, other than BT's original CoDec.
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Andy Burns@usenet@andyburns.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Tue Dec 23 11:05:35 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    "J. P. Gilliver" wrote:

    maybe the handsets-receiving-SMS
    uses (used) special tones that don't pass uncorrupted through the CoDecs
    VoIP uses. In much the same way as fax machines, and analog MoDems,
    don't work reliably through anything where the voice signal is encoded/decoded, other than BT's original CoDec.

    I think the fixed line sms service operated using 1200baud modem tones
    (like CLI) after a voltage reversal on the line, but they're killing it
    off ...

    <https://www.bt.com/help/landline/set-up-and-use-bt-text>
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Trolleybus@ken@birchanger.com to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Wed Dec 24 10:05:03 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Tue, 23 Dec 2025 11:05:35 +0000, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk>
    wrote:

    "J. P. Gilliver" wrote:

    maybe the handsets-receiving-SMS
    uses (used) special tones that don't pass uncorrupted through the CoDecs
    VoIP uses. In much the same way as fax machines, and analog MoDems,
    don't work reliably through anything where the voice signal is
    encoded/decoded, other than BT's original CoDec.

    I think the fixed line sms service operated using 1200baud modem tones
    (like CLI) after a voltage reversal on the line, but they're killing it
    off ...

    <https://www.bt.com/help/landline/set-up-and-use-bt-text>

    Yes, they use FSK encoding. A compatible handset recogises the calling
    address and stores the message appropiately.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From noel@deletethis@invalid.lan to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Wed Dec 24 20:46:08 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 22:32:35 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:

    noel wrote:

    the node's batteries depleted after 6.5 hours - apparently those on
    fibre also went dark at same time

    Does the telco in your country use GPON, or some other fibre technology?

    gpon and pockets of ng-pon2
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Andy Burns@usenet@andyburns.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Wed Dec 24 11:41:22 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    noel wrote:

    Andy Burns wrote:

    noel wrote:

    the node's batteries depleted after 6.5 hours - apparently those on
    fibre also went dark at same time

    Does the telco in your country use GPON, or some other fibre technology?

    gpon and pockets of ng-pon2

    I'd expect the fibre headend to have generator backup as well as battery ...

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Wed Dec 24 14:08:39 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 2025/12/24 10:5:3, Trolleybus wrote:
    On Tue, 23 Dec 2025 11:05:35 +0000, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk>
    wrote:

    "J. P. Gilliver" wrote:

    maybe the handsets-receiving-SMS
    uses (used) special tones that don't pass uncorrupted through the CoDecs >>> VoIP uses. In much the same way as fax machines, and analog MoDems,
    don't work reliably through anything where the voice signal is
    encoded/decoded, other than BT's original CoDec.

    I think the fixed line sms service operated using 1200baud modem tones
    (like CLI) after a voltage reversal on the line, but they're killing it
    off ...

    <https://www.bt.com/help/landline/set-up-and-use-bt-text>

    Yes, they use FSK encoding. A compatible handset recogises the calling address and stores the message appropiately.

    Do those tones work through the CoDecs used on VoIP? (Does the system
    sending them even bother trying if the number is on VoIP, assuming it
    "knows" that fact?)
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

    Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Andy Burns@usenet@andyburns.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Wed Dec 24 14:15:09 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband


    J. P. Gilliver wrote:

    Do those tones work through the CoDecs used on VoIP?

    Yes 1.2/1.3/2.1/2.2 kHz

    (Does the system sending them even bother trying if the number is on
    VoIP, assuming it "knows" that fact?)

    As said, the system is going away ...

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Trolleybus@ken@birchanger.com to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Thu Dec 25 08:54:47 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Wed, 24 Dec 2025 14:08:39 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver"
    <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

    On 2025/12/24 10:5:3, Trolleybus wrote:
    On Tue, 23 Dec 2025 11:05:35 +0000, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk>
    wrote:

    "J. P. Gilliver" wrote:

    maybe the handsets-receiving-SMS
    uses (used) special tones that don't pass uncorrupted through the CoDecs >>>> VoIP uses. In much the same way as fax machines, and analog MoDems,
    don't work reliably through anything where the voice signal is
    encoded/decoded, other than BT's original CoDec.

    I think the fixed line sms service operated using 1200baud modem tones
    (like CLI) after a voltage reversal on the line, but they're killing it >>> off ...

    <https://www.bt.com/help/landline/set-up-and-use-bt-text>

    Yes, they use FSK encoding. A compatible handset recogises the calling
    address and stores the message appropiately.

    Do those tones work through the CoDecs used on VoIP? (Does the system
    sending them even bother trying if the number is on VoIP, assuming it
    "knows" that fact?)
    I don't know but doubt it.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Graham J@nobody@nowhere.co.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Thu Dec 25 15:57:53 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    Trolleybus wrote:

    [snip]


    Do those tones work through the CoDecs used on VoIP? (Does the system
    sending them even bother trying if the number is on VoIP, assuming it
    "knows" that fact?)
    I don't know but doubt it.

    In 2010 I set up VoIP for a client.

    A few years later her elderly father who lived in a "granny annexe"
    connected only by Ethernet and therefore using a VoIP phone - needed a
    panic alarm. So I tried one from Tunstall.

    The Tunstall device didn't work through VoIP. It tried - it
    continuously made calls to its mother-ship and made all the right
    bleeping sounds, but never established proper communication.

    Tunstall - once I found somebody who could understand the issue -
    admitted that it would not work through VoIP. Worryingly they didn't
    seem to have a new product in design that would work. I checked again recently, and I think that they now do.
    --
    Graham J
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Theo@theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Thu Dec 25 17:44:11 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    In uk.telecom.voip Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
    Trolleybus wrote:

    [snip]


    Do those tones work through the CoDecs used on VoIP? (Does the system
    sending them even bother trying if the number is on VoIP, assuming it
    "knows" that fact?)
    I don't know but doubt it.

    In 2010 I set up VoIP for a client.

    A few years later her elderly father who lived in a "granny annexe" connected only by Ethernet and therefore using a VoIP phone - needed a
    panic alarm. So I tried one from Tunstall.

    The Tunstall device didn't work through VoIP. It tried - it
    continuously made calls to its mother-ship and made all the right
    bleeping sounds, but never established proper communication.

    Tunstall - once I found somebody who could understand the issue -
    admitted that it would not work through VoIP. Worryingly they didn't
    seem to have a new product in design that would work. I checked again recently, and I think that they now do.

    The telecare industry has been a significant impediment to the transition to VOIP. They've been continuing to offer kit which will only work on the PSTN long after the writing was on the wall, and refuse to upgrade customers (who are paying a monthly subscription) to newer tech without making them buy a whole new system, something which the users are in the worst place to understand the necessity for.

    There should have been an ethernet or mobile network based system available
    for years, but the telecare providers were happy to continue to push their outdated tech.

    (to be fair in ~2010 the PSTN switch off was only a cloud on the horizon,
    but there's no excuse for the providers not to done their transition by now)

    Theo

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From noel@deletethis@invalid.lan to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Fri Dec 26 12:40:58 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Wed, 24 Dec 2025 11:41:22 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:

    noel wrote:

    Andy Burns wrote:

    noel wrote:

    the node's batteries depleted after 6.5 hours - apparently those on
    fibre also went dark at same time

    Does the telco in your country use GPON, or some other fibre
    technology?

    gpon and pockets of ng-pon2

    I'd expect the fibre headend to have generator backup as well as battery
    ...

    ha ha if they didn't provide it to VDSL for all those years before
    moving towards FTTP, they wont do it for fibre - I note however the
    carriers do for their tier1 backbones and commercial customers, problem
    is residential fibre is via a government controlled network

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Andy Burns@usenet@andyburns.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Fri Dec 26 07:22:48 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    noel wrote:

    Andy Burns wrote:

    I'd expect the fibre headend to have generator backup as well as battery
    ...

    ha ha if they didn't provide it to VDSL for all those years before
    moving towards FTTP, they wont do it for fibre
    for BT, VDSL equipment is in over 30,000 street cabinets, GPON equipment
    is in around 1,000 exchange buildings ...

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Tweed@usenet.tweed@gmail.com to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Fri Dec 26 07:57:00 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
    noel wrote:

    Andy Burns wrote:

    I'd expect the fibre headend to have generator backup as well as battery >>> ...

    ha ha if they didn't provide it to VDSL for all those years before
    moving towards FTTP, they wont do it for fibre
    for BT, VDSL equipment is in over 30,000 street cabinets, GPON equipment
    is in around 1,000 exchange buildings ...



    My CityFibre connection is both battery and generator backed at the head
    end. I checked with them. Of course, I need to be able to power the
    equipment at my end.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From noel@deletethis@invalid.lan to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Fri Dec 26 19:00:53 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Fri, 26 Dec 2025 07:22:48 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:

    noel wrote:

    Andy Burns wrote:

    I'd expect the fibre headend to have generator backup as well as
    battery ...

    ha ha if they didn't provide it to VDSL for all those years before
    moving towards FTTP, they wont do it for fibre
    for BT, VDSL equipment is in over 30,000 street cabinets, GPON equipment
    is in around 1,000 exchange buildings ...

    Your lucky, however, please correct me if i'm wrong, isn't BT still a
    private company? As in not government owned? You have that luxury, our residentials being a government clusterf..k means penny pinching, however
    the private telcos in particular Telstra, who owned all the copper /and/ ducts, could have done this, but the govt stepped in and paid them for
    those assetts because they didn't.

    There has been a large outcry here in recent times over telcos mobile
    failures for 000 (our version of 999)following deaths from many unable to reach 000, in particular when out of range of their telco and phones
    (some of which ARE in fact 4G) not network hopping to even a a full scale competitors network to enable that emergency call - as is required by the
    govt (but all governments make rules and laws to do stuff they know SFA
    about, Australia's govt in particular) it's all over 3G closure by all
    telcos, there is substantial push to re-activate copper for POTS, unlike
    many parts of the world where the customer VDSL pairs terminate at a
    node, and the node passes the exchange pairs back to the exchange for
    POTS, this mob of xxxx's cheaped out and abandoned copper landline
    services - except if you are in a rural area only able to get broadband
    by LTE or satellite (those folks are lucky enough to keep their home
    phones without any internet service the rest of us not so lucky). the
    rest of us need VoIP, where before it had a good uptake from those who
    wanted the better call quality, cheaper calls, and geeks :)

    Not sure what current state of mobile reception is in UK, but in Aus, its
    next to useless if you live outside of a city or major town.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From David Woolley@david@ex.djwhome.demon.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Fri Dec 26 12:03:06 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 26/12/2025 02:40, noel wrote:
    ha ha if they didn't provide it to VDSL for all those years before
    moving towards FTTP

    Fibre head end sites are few in number, and can be over 10km away, but
    VDSL is maybe only 100m away. I think the factors that affect the
    ability to provide backup power are very different.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Abandoned Trolley@that.bloke@microsoft.com to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Fri Dec 26 12:10:36 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 26/12/2025 12:03, David Woolley wrote:
    On 26/12/2025 02:40, noel wrote:
    ha ha-a if they didn't provide it to VDSL for all those years before
    moving towards FTTP

    Fibre head end sites are few in number, and can be over 10km away, but
    VDSL is maybe only 100m away.-a I think the factors that affect the
    ability to provide backup power are very different.


    at one time various bits of kit in cabinets were powered by local
    batteries which were kept kept going by float charge via the copper - I
    dont think thats an option any more though
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From noel@deletethis@invalid.lan to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Fri Dec 26 23:02:11 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Fri, 26 Dec 2025 12:03:06 +0000, David Woolley wrote:

    On 26/12/2025 02:40, noel wrote:
    ha ha if they didn't provide it to VDSL for all those years before
    moving towards FTTP

    Fibre head end sites are few in number, and can be over 10km away, but
    VDSL is maybe only 100m away.

    negative, VDSL (VDSL2 w/vectoring which is typically referred to just
    VDSL here since none of the original VDSL tech has been in use for over
    10 years) is up to 1.2km's away, within 300m for 100mb/s, my parents line
    is 920m from their node, they get 55mb/s down and 15 up.

    I think the factors that affect the
    ability to provide backup power are very different.

    still doesnt change how (poorly) they desgined the broadband residential fibre, its a residential service do you think the govt cares if kids can download their pr0n during prolonged blackouts.

    all business/enterprise fibre links (as mentioned earlier) are bought off
    the telcos, they install it connecting into their network directly,
    because the govt only took possession of ducts and copper, all the fibre assetts belong to telcos, since they laid it, it belongs to them, and
    is not used in teh govts clusterf..k, not to mention enterprises have SLA
    and 1:1 dedicated symmetric bandwidth unlike any residential service
    which is has a contention ration of between 15:1 to 30:1
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Graham J@nobody@nowhere.co.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Fri Dec 26 13:01:49 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    noel wrote:

    [snip]

    Not sure what current state of mobile reception is in UK, but in Aus, its next to useless if you live outside of a city or major town.

    Much the same. Remote locations like the Shetland Islands are very
    good, I'm told, but rural areas within 100km of London are pretty poor.
    The signal outdoors on high ground is usually OK, but inside a building there's often nothing.

    Of course the mobile operators deny this.
    --
    Graham J
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From noel@deletethis@invalid.lan to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Fri Dec 26 23:03:57 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Fri, 26 Dec 2025 13:01:49 +0000, Graham J wrote:

    noel wrote:

    [snip]

    Not sure what current state of mobile reception is in UK, but in Aus,
    its next to useless if you live outside of a city or major town.

    Much the same. Remote locations like the Shetland Islands are very
    good, I'm told, but rural areas within 100km of London are pretty poor.
    The signal outdoors on high ground is usually OK, but inside a building there's often nothing.

    Of course the mobile operators deny this.

    naturally :)
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sat Dec 27 15:32:45 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 2025/12/26 15:6:51, Tweed wrote:
    Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
    noel wrote:

    [snip]

    Not sure what current state of mobile reception is in UK, but in Aus, its >>> next to useless if you live outside of a city or major town.

    Much the same. Remote locations like the Shetland Islands are very
    good, I'm told, but rural areas within 100km of London are pretty poor.
    The signal outdoors on high ground is usually OK, but inside a building
    there's often nothing.

    Of course the mobile operators deny this.



    For another viewpoint, I travel a lot in rural Northumberland. Mobile coverage has improved no end in the last few years. Rarely am I unable to
    get a Vodafone 4G signal. Mind you, thererCOs very few folk campaigning against base station masts.

    Basically, there's very few folk altogether! That's what's nice about Northumberland :-)
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

    An Englishman, even if he is alone, forms an orderly queue of one.
    (George Mikes in "How to be an Alien".)
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sat Dec 27 15:37:48 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 2025/12/26 13:2:11, noel wrote:

    []

    still doesnt change how (poorly) they desgined the broadband residential fibre, its a residential service do you think the govt cares if kids can download their pr0n during prolonged blackouts.

    No, but it will lose them some votes if voters die because they can't
    make emergency calls. (I don't mean ones already registered as
    vulnerable, just ordinary folk.)

    However, that's probably going to have to actually happen a few times
    before anything is done.
    []
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

    An Englishman, even if he is alone, forms an orderly queue of one.
    (George Mikes in "How to be an Alien".)
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From David Woolley@david@ex.djwhome.demon.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sat Dec 27 16:06:16 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 26/12/2025 09:00, noel wrote:
    Your lucky, however, please correct me if i'm wrong, isn't BT still a
    private company? As in not government owned? You have that luxury, our residentials being a government clusterf..k means penny pinching, however

    What is your country? These are UK newsgroups, but the above only makes
    sense if you are writing in a non-UK context.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Davey@davey@example.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sat Dec 27 16:23:24 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On Sat, 27 Dec 2025 16:06:16 +0000
    David Woolley <david@ex.djwhome.demon.invalid> wrote:

    On 26/12/2025 09:00, noel wrote:
    Your lucky, however, please correct me if i'm wrong, isn't BT still
    a private company? As in not government owned? You have that
    luxury, our residentials being a government clusterf..k means penny pinching, however

    What is your country? These are UK newsgroups, but the above only
    makes sense if you are writing in a non-UK context.

    He refers to 'Aus' at the bottom of his post. May be a clue. Is he
    related to Rod Speed, heaven forbid?
    --
    Davey.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Tweed@usenet.tweed@gmail.com to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sat Dec 27 16:53:02 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
    On 2025/12/26 13:2:11, noel wrote:

    []

    still doesnt change how (poorly) they desgined the broadband residential >> fibre, its a residential service do you think the govt cares if kids can
    download their pr0n during prolonged blackouts.

    No, but it will lose them some votes if voters die because they can't
    make emergency calls. (I don't mean ones already registered as
    vulnerable, just ordinary folk.)

    However, that's probably going to have to actually happen a few times
    before anything is done.
    []


    You can already make emergency text messages via satellite with a modern iPhone. Within the next year or two voice calls via satellite will be
    available for all users of modern mobile phones (uk) So the perceived need
    for a copper pair to the exchange to make an emergency call after a long
    power cut will fall away.

    Anyway, if the mobile network collapses they wonrCOt be able to send you an ambulance once the current TETRA based system is turned off in favour of
    the Emergency Services Network, which is largely dependent on EErCOs mobile network.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sun Dec 28 02:58:20 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 2025/12/27 16:53:2, Tweed wrote:
    J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
    On 2025/12/26 13:2:11, noel wrote:

    []

    still doesnt change how (poorly) they desgined the broadband residential >>> fibre, its a residential service do you think the govt cares if kids can >>> download their pr0n during prolonged blackouts.

    No, but it will lose them some votes if voters die because they can't
    make emergency calls. (I don't mean ones already registered as
    vulnerable, just ordinary folk.)

    However, that's probably going to have to actually happen a few times
    before anything is done.
    []


    You can already make emergency text messages via satellite with a modern iPhone. Within the next year or two voice calls via satellite will be

    Remember, there are folk who don't have even a dumb mobile 'phone, let
    alone a smartphone, let alone an iPhone. Folk who don't see they need
    the extra expense.

    available for all users of modern mobile phones (uk) So the perceived need for a copper pair to the exchange to make an emergency call after a long power cut will fall away.

    If they're going to provide - both hardware and contract - a fobile
    moan. Which, of course, they're not.


    Anyway, if the mobile network collapses they wonrCOt be able to send you an ambulance once the current TETRA based system is turned off in favour of
    the Emergency Services Network, which is largely dependent on EErCOs mobile network.

    Indeed. And any amateur radio fallback almost certainly already doesn't
    exist, let alone in a year or two.
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

    I long for the commercialised Christmas of the 1970s. It's got so
    religious now, it's lost its true meaning.
    - Mike [{at}ostic.demon.co.uk], 2003-12-24
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Tweed@usenet.tweed@gmail.com to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sun Dec 28 08:46:02 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
    On 2025/12/27 16:53:2, Tweed wrote:
    J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
    On 2025/12/26 13:2:11, noel wrote:

    []

    still doesnt change how (poorly) they desgined the broadband residential >>>> fibre, its a residential service do you think the govt cares if kids can >>>> download their pr0n during prolonged blackouts.

    No, but it will lose them some votes if voters die because they can't
    make emergency calls. (I don't mean ones already registered as
    vulnerable, just ordinary folk.)

    However, that's probably going to have to actually happen a few times
    before anything is done.
    []


    You can already make emergency text messages via satellite with a modern
    iPhone. Within the next year or two voice calls via satellite will be

    Remember, there are folk who don't have even a dumb mobile 'phone, let
    alone a smartphone, let alone an iPhone. Folk who don't see they need
    the extra expense.

    Well they will have to rely on their neighbours or a passing stranger.
    Everyone having access to their own landline phone is a relatively new
    thing. Growing up in the 1960s, my parents had the only phone on the
    street.

    Ubiquitous voice access via satellite is going to be a game changer for
    those in difficulty. Normal use is going to cost an extra subscription.
    IrCOve not seen any rules regarding emergency calls, but I expect OfCom will mandate it to be available to any handset, just as the current terrestrial system is.

    The fallout from the Australian emergency call failure revealed something I hadnrCOt really thought about. TheyrCOve switched off 3G, but crucially theyrCOve
    also turned off 2G. This means to make a voice call you need a phone that
    is able to use VoLTE (ie VOIP). TheyrCOve been trying to disable phones that canrCOt do this in an attempt to get old phones off the network. In the UK we are still maintaining a residual 2G service which should allow older phones
    to make voice calls.


    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sun Dec 28 10:36:02 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 2025/12/28 8:46:2, Tweed wrote:
    J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
    On 2025/12/27 16:53:2, Tweed wrote:
    J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
    On 2025/12/26 13:2:11, noel wrote:

    []

    still doesnt change how (poorly) they desgined the broadband residential
    fibre, its a residential service do you think the govt cares if kids can >>>>> download their pr0n during prolonged blackouts.

    No, but it will lose them some votes if voters die because they can't
    make emergency calls. (I don't mean ones already registered as
    vulnerable, just ordinary folk.)

    However, that's probably going to have to actually happen a few times
    before anything is done.
    []


    You can already make emergency text messages via satellite with a modern >>> iPhone. Within the next year or two voice calls via satellite will be

    Remember, there are folk who don't have even a dumb mobile 'phone, let
    alone a smartphone, let alone an iPhone. Folk who don't see they need
    the extra expense.

    Well they will have to rely on their neighbours or a passing stranger. Everyone having access to their own landline phone is a relatively new
    thing. Growing up in the 1960s, my parents had the only phone on the
    street.

    I too grew up in the 1960s. And yes, my grandma didn't get one until the
    '70s (I think when her US brother visited).

    But: that _is_ 50 years ago!

    And sadly "neighbours or a passing stranger" is also a societal change
    since then.


    Ubiquitous voice access via satellite is going to be a game changer for
    those in difficulty. Normal use is going to cost an extra subscription.

    I can't see that happening in the UK, except possibly for some _very_
    remote areas (probably mostly Scotland, if at all). At least, not for
    some time. Technically, yes, administratively/financially, no - for some decades at least.

    IrCOve not seen any rules regarding emergency calls, but I expect OfCom will mandate it to be available to any handset, just as the current terrestrial system is.

    I hope I'm wrong above. Have you heard some plans to give universal
    satellite access in UK (at other than huge cost to the users)?


    The fallout from the Australian emergency call failure revealed something I hadnrCOt really thought about. TheyrCOve switched off 3G, but crucially theyrCOve
    also turned off 2G. This means to make a voice call you need a phone that
    is able to use VoLTE (ie VOIP). TheyrCOve been trying to disable phones that

    And is, presumably, 4G or above capable too.

    canrCOt do this in an attempt to get old phones off the network. In the UK we are still maintaining a residual 2G service which should allow older phones to make voice calls.

    And is fairly solid.

    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

    Never raise your hand to your children. It leaves your mid-section
    unprotected
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Tweed@usenet.tweed@gmail.com to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sun Dec 28 11:21:48 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
    On 2025/12/28 8:46:2, Tweed wrote:
    J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
    On 2025/12/27 16:53:2, Tweed wrote:
    J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
    On 2025/12/26 13:2:11, noel wrote:

    []

    still doesnt change how (poorly) they desgined the broadband residential
    fibre, its a residential service do you think the govt cares if kids can
    download their pr0n during prolonged blackouts.

    No, but it will lose them some votes if voters die because they can't >>>>> make emergency calls. (I don't mean ones already registered as
    vulnerable, just ordinary folk.)

    However, that's probably going to have to actually happen a few times >>>>> before anything is done.
    []


    You can already make emergency text messages via satellite with a modern >>>> iPhone. Within the next year or two voice calls via satellite will be

    Remember, there are folk who don't have even a dumb mobile 'phone, let
    alone a smartphone, let alone an iPhone. Folk who don't see they need
    the extra expense.

    Well they will have to rely on their neighbours or a passing stranger.
    Everyone having access to their own landline phone is a relatively new
    thing. Growing up in the 1960s, my parents had the only phone on the
    street.

    I too grew up in the 1960s. And yes, my grandma didn't get one until the
    '70s (I think when her US brother visited).

    But: that _is_ 50 years ago!

    And sadly "neighbours or a passing stranger" is also a societal change
    since then.


    Ubiquitous voice access via satellite is going to be a game changer for
    those in difficulty. Normal use is going to cost an extra subscription.

    I can't see that happening in the UK, except possibly for some _very_
    remote areas (probably mostly Scotland, if at all). At least, not for
    some time. Technically, yes, administratively/financially, no - for some decades at least.

    IrCOve not seen any rules regarding emergency calls, but I expect OfCom will >> mandate it to be available to any handset, just as the current terrestrial >> system is.

    I hope I'm wrong above. Have you heard some plans to give universal
    satellite access in UK (at other than huge cost to the users)?


    The fallout from the Australian emergency call failure revealed something I >> hadnrCOt really thought about. TheyrCOve switched off 3G, but crucially theyrCOve
    also turned off 2G. This means to make a voice call you need a phone that
    is able to use VoLTE (ie VOIP). TheyrCOve been trying to disable phones that

    And is, presumably, 4G or above capable too.

    canrCOt do this in an attempt to get old phones off the network. In the UK we
    are still maintaining a residual 2G service which should allow older phones >> to make voice calls.

    And is fairly solid.


    Vodafone are signed up with ASTSpaceMobile and I believe EE and O2 are
    signing up with Starlink. Both systems are still in their infancy at the moment. They are starting with text messages (as per the current iPhone capability) but are likely to be offering voice and very low speed Internet
    in the next couple of years. Yes, you will have to pay an extra
    subscription for general use but IrCOm willing to bet that they will accept emergency calls from any handset. Ofcom rules aside, I canrCOt see any mobile network willing to accept the negative publicity of a death because a subscription had not been paid. The introduction of a full service
    coincides reasonably nicely with the full withdrawal of copper landlines.
    It certainly answers the need for communications should your local cell
    site(s) fail.

    Copper landlines will go because they are increasingly uneconomic. The per minute voice revenue that helped pay for the service has gone. Most people
    now rely on mobile phones and increasingly fibre broadband. They arenrCOt willing to pay for a copper pair for an emergency. So the economies of
    scale for exchange fed copper pairs has vanished. Or put another way, most people arenrCOt willing to pay an extra couple of hundred pounds per year
    just so somebody else can make that unlikely emergency call during that unlikely prolonged power cut, which is what it boils down to. Once the economies of scale are lost the full economic cost of an exchange fed
    copper line would run into many thousands a year. I canrCOt see many willing
    to pay that.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From David Woolley@david@ex.djwhome.demon.invalid to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sun Dec 28 12:16:52 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 28/12/2025 02:58, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
    Indeed. And any amateur radio fallback almost certainly already doesn't
    exist

    Raynet still existed as of November 13th, this year <https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/02771954/filing-history>,
    although I don't know what the current membership is. Their web site is
    a little less current.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sun Dec 28 18:42:26 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    On 2025/12/28 11:21:48, Tweed wrote:
    J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
    On 2025/12/28 8:46:2, Tweed wrote:

    []

    Ubiquitous voice access via satellite is going to be a game changer for
    those in difficulty. Normal use is going to cost an extra subscription.

    I can't see that happening in the UK, except possibly for some _very_
    remote areas (probably mostly Scotland, if at all). At least, not for
    some time. Technically, yes, administratively/financially, no - for some
    decades at least.

    IrCOve not seen any rules regarding emergency calls, but I expect OfCom will
    mandate it to be available to any handset, just as the current terrestrial >>> system is.

    []

    canrCOt do this in an attempt to get old phones off the network. In the UK we
    are still maintaining a residual 2G service which should allow older phones >>> to make voice calls.

    And is fairly solid.


    Vodafone are signed up with ASTSpaceMobile and I believe EE and O2 are signing up with Starlink. Both systems are still in their infancy at the moment. They are starting with text messages (as per the current iPhone capability) but are likely to be offering voice and very low speed Internet in the next couple of years. Yes, you will have to pay an extra
    subscription for general use but IrCOm willing to bet that they will accept emergency calls from any handset. Ofcom rules aside, I canrCOt see any mobile

    Yes - but that still assumes everyone will _have_ such a handset.

    network willing to accept the negative publicity of a death because a subscription had not been paid. The introduction of a full service
    coincides reasonably nicely with the full withdrawal of copper landlines.
    It certainly answers the need for communications should your local cell site(s) fail.

    Will provision of such - both hardware and contract - _replace_ the
    copper landline when it is withdrawn? I can't see the companies funding
    that.


    Copper landlines will go because they are increasingly uneconomic. The per

    Yes.

    minute voice revenue that helped pay for the service has gone. Most people now rely on mobile phones and increasingly fibre broadband. They arenrCOt willing to pay for a copper pair for an emergency. So the economies of
    scale for exchange fed copper pairs has vanished. Or put another way, most people arenrCOt willing to pay an extra couple of hundred pounds per year just so somebody else can make that unlikely emergency call during that unlikely prolonged power cut, which is what it boils down to. Once the

    Agreed. But, as usual, it's not been thought through - or probably has,
    but not admitted to.

    economies of scale are lost the full economic cost of an exchange fed
    copper line would run into many thousands a year. I canrCOt see many willing to pay that.

    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

    "Not an electronic sausage!"
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Tweed@usenet.tweed@gmail.com to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.telecom.voip on Sun Dec 28 18:59:02 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

    J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
    On 2025/12/28 11:21:48, Tweed wrote:
    J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
    On 2025/12/28 8:46:2, Tweed wrote:

    []

    Ubiquitous voice access via satellite is going to be a game changer for >>>> those in difficulty. Normal use is going to cost an extra subscription. >>>
    I can't see that happening in the UK, except possibly for some _very_
    remote areas (probably mostly Scotland, if at all). At least, not for
    some time. Technically, yes, administratively/financially, no - for some >>> decades at least.

    IrCOve not seen any rules regarding emergency calls, but I expect OfCom will
    mandate it to be available to any handset, just as the current terrestrial >>>> system is.

    []

    canrCOt do this in an attempt to get old phones off the network. In the UK we
    are still maintaining a residual 2G service which should allow older phones
    to make voice calls.

    And is fairly solid.


    Vodafone are signed up with ASTSpaceMobile and I believe EE and O2 are
    signing up with Starlink. Both systems are still in their infancy at the
    moment. They are starting with text messages (as per the current iPhone
    capability) but are likely to be offering voice and very low speed Internet >> in the next couple of years. Yes, you will have to pay an extra
    subscription for general use but IrCOm willing to bet that they will accept >> emergency calls from any handset. Ofcom rules aside, I canrCOt see any mobile

    Yes - but that still assumes everyone will _have_ such a handset.

    Well there will be a period of chaotic transition. However most handsets
    get replaced after a number of years.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2