Sign in / up

back to article UK.gov pushes ahead with legal right to 10Mbps

Folk will have a legal right to minimum broadband speeds of 10Mbps by 2020, with the government having today rejected a voluntary proposal by dominant telco BT. Currently, just over a million premises in Blighty, or 4 per cent of properties, cannot get speeds of 10Mbps, according to Ofcom. After mulling its options, the …

COMMENTS

Post your comment
House rules Send corrections
Add to 'My topics' unstar *

Page:

  1. DRendar

    As much as I would want this to go through - It's very likely to get pushed back upon on the grounds that it's fundamentally impossible without billions in investment.

    In order to get at least 10Mbps to the most rural locations (such as where my parents live for example) would require digging up the roads to lay fiber to every cabinet - even ones with just 2 or 3 houses on them. It's just not economically feasible.

    That is unless they go the Indian route and string fiber over the existing telegraph poles... THAT could certainly work - although I hope they do a better job than they do in India... Some of the fiber runs we have out there are comical (Over trees, across roads, nailed to crumbling buildings...).

    14 5 Reply
    1. Gio Ciampa
      Reply Icon

      "not economically feasible"

      And spending £100+ billion (and counting) saving a few minutes on a train journey from London to Birmingham is...?

      44 5 Reply
      1. DRendar
        Reply Icon

        Re: "not economically feasible"

        "And spending £100+ billion (and counting) saving a few minutes on a train journey from London to Birmingham is...?"

        I have no clue what you're on about, but I'm pretty damn sure that BT haven't spent a penny making anyones train journeys shorter... so your point is...?

        7 35 Reply
      2. Oddlegs
        Reply Icon

        Re: "not economically feasible"

        And spending £100+ billion (and counting) saving a few minutes on a train journey from London to Birmingham is...?

        While I don't disagree that the price of HS2 is excessive the purpose isn't only to make journeys between London and Birmingham a little faster. It will also free up capacity on the existing lines making for a far nicer experience on them.

        0 0 Reply
        1. Roland6 Silver badge
          Reply Icon

          Re: "not economically feasible"

          It will also free up capacity on the existing lines making for a far nicer experience on them.

          That's the joke or lie!

          HS2 isn't due to be around until 2034 at the earliest, however, Network Rail et al are already taking decisions, such as implementing new timetables in 2018 that reduce capacity on the existing London-Birmingham and London-Nottingham lines...

          Additionally, where I live, it is currently under 1 hour into London, under the new timetable, the new 'fast' service will take 1 hour 15 minutes! Naturally, the price will also be increased.

          5 0 Reply
        2. ukgnome
          Reply Icon

          @ Oddlegs

          You don't seem to understand how the rail network is strung together. The rail network has nothing to do with passengers and everything to do with freight.

          0 0 Reply
    2. GruntyMcPugh Silver badge
      Reply Icon

      Wet String,...

      "go the Indian route and string fiber over the existing telegraph poles"

      I think that's the only er,... well, it's more economic,.... it's not actually economic for a company, but it's less costly, so I think that's the only reasonable way to achieve it. Unless some way of using the power grid could be used, a several hundred Kilowatt version of Homeplug?

      Anyway, that fibre must be agnostic, there's no point hooking up a rural location and then telling the residents they cannot choose their provider. So the first thing the govt needs to do is to stump up some cash, and then also get Openreach and Virgin to agree a standard. Something the Govt should have done ages ago, we should have had a common network.

      4 0 Reply
      1. Microchip
        Reply Icon

        Re: Wet String,...

        There were trials years ago for running broadband over the power lines ( http://www.silicon.co.uk/workspace/liverpool-to-trial-200-mbps-powerline-broadband-17089?inf_by=5a3a4b1f671db8d9668b4913 ), in a similar vein to how powerline ethernet works, with kit at the substations for sending it over the last mile. They could possibly revive the tech and put a bid in that way, though I'm not sure how viable it became in the end, though other countries have deployed it successfully. It's all about which is cheaper and causes less interference in the end I suppose.

        2 0 Reply

        1. This post has been deleted by its author

    3. Aitor 1
      Reply Icon

      Errr, no.

      You dont need to dig.

      I assume they have electricity.

      If it really is three houses, use LTE with format1 or 2, and thats it. No need to dig, and plenty of BW for everyone.

      this wont work if you have mountains or obstacles, but tends to be way cheaper than digging.

      1 2 Reply
      1. GruntyMcPugh Silver badge
        Reply Icon

        Re: Errr, no.

        LTE? There have been similar stories to this one, bemoaning the lack of mobile coverage in various UK places, again, rural areas, but also along motorway corridors. It's the same problem, investment vs return, and who is going to pick up the bill. Just a few miles out the city, where I walk my dogs, I can't get a mobile data connection, but there are settlements near by. It is hilly, so line of sight is an issue. LTE isn't a panacea.

        6 0 Reply
    4. AndrueC Silver badge
      Reply Icon
      Meh

      As much as I would want this to go through - It's very likely to get pushed back upon on the grounds that it's fundamentally impossible without billions in investment.

      Maybe, maybe not. El Reg has neglected to mention is that there is a cost threshold. Above this amount, the customer has to chip in. The only cost to the taxpayer or other CPs will be whatever the basic cost is. The same scheme has been in place for voice lines for a long time. Openreach swallow the first £4k then the customer pays the rest (called excess construction charges).

      So the only difference is that when you demand high speed internet instead of being able to say 'No, sod off!' Openreach will have to say 'Certainly, that'll be £20,000 please'.

      What's going to matter is the base charge. I haven't seen any indication yet of what that's going to be. £4k is probably too low (leaving too much to the customer) but as you say, make it a reasonable amount and it becomes a burden on the CP.

      11 0 Reply
    5. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      "That is unless they go the Indian route and string fiber over the existing telegraph poles"

      .... seems to be the way they did things in Cupertino 15-20 years ago when I was there - phone, broadband, cable tv, electricity all came to the house via wires from a utility pole in the garden.

      3 0 Reply
      1. AndrueC Silver badge
        Reply Icon
        Meh

        "That is unless they go the Indian route and string fiber over the existing telegraph poles"

        That assumes there is space on the poles and that they can carry the extra weight. I honestly don't know how likely that is.

        0 0 Reply
    6. Kevin Johnston
      Reply Icon

      Stringing Fibre

      If memory serves there have been two UK-wide projects to spread fibre. One rack along railway lines and the other wound the fibre around the ground line on pylons. I recall seeing an wonderful Heath Robinson device which pulled itself along the cable slowly rotating as it went feeding the fibre out like a spider.

      2 0 Reply
      1. Martin an gof Silver badge
        Reply Icon

        Re: Stringing Fibre

        wound the fibre around the ground line on pylons

        The name you are looking for is Energis. I remember back in my dial-up days with Demon, dialling-in via their Energis lines was slightly cheaper than via their BT lines.

        There is one run around here where the fibre wasn't strung along the protective earth line, but along one of the power wires. If you don't mind Google Street View, try here or here for two views of the same line.

        M.

        2 0 Reply
    7. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Or just use wireless Internet to cover rural areas

      Just install a 4G mast in rural areas and you can cover a large area of ground without running loads of cables (except to the mast)

      4G will give you more than 10Mb/s up and down

      0 6 Reply
    8. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      (Over trees, across roads, nailed to crumbling buildings...)

      As per much of the Openreach infrastructure in rural wales!

      1 0 Reply
  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The turn of the millenium called...

    I've heard that this will come with a 100GB cap a month, too.

    3 5 Reply
    1. short
      Reply Icon

      Re: The turn of the millenium called...

      It's easy to mock, but some of us are stuck on glorified dial-up. The line here delivered a flaky 300kbps when I killed it. Fortunately I'm in a decent 4G area, so as long as I'm prepared to pay £1/G, I can have a usable service - which I need for both work, and reading ElReg...

      3 3 Reply
      1. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: The turn of the millenium called...

        I'd rather be stuck with my crappy speed and unlimited bandwidth than 10 Mbps at 100GB a month.

        5 0 Reply
      2. DRendar
        Reply Icon

        Re: The turn of the millenium called...

        £1 per gig!?

        Christ dude - look up Three or Giffgaff. I pay about £18/month for unlimited 4G (including 30Gig hotspot use)

        10 0 Reply
        1. Jim Willsher
          Reply Icon

          Re: The turn of the millenium called...

          Great if you have coverage from Three/Giffgaff. I have 4G coverage only from EE (and 8Mb from BT ADSL), so I pay £60/month for 100GB and I get about 70Mbps.

          0 0 Reply
          1. Steve Todd
            Reply Icon

            Re: The turn of the millenium called...

            I think your mistake there is using BT ADSL. Pretty much any LLU ISP will give you a better deal. Even if you can’t get LLU you should be able to get a wholesale BT product from someone else for less.

            As for EE, look for special offers (which they pretty much have to give in order to compete) and move package.

            0 1 Reply
            1. Roland6 Silver badge
              Reply Icon

              Re: The turn of the millenium called...

              >I think your mistake there is using BT ADSL. -1 vote

              In the 'remote' parts of the UK don't expect third-party LLU equipment to be particularly performance or new, I've repeatedly seen this, even though my line is circa 20m longer than my neighbours, I got better speed off the BT LLU than they got off the Sky LLU - however it was still sub 512kbps... Basically, the numbers of subscribers doesn't justify regular tech refresh.

              >you should be able to get a wholesale BT product from someone else for less. +1 vote

              Generally, this also means you are likely to get a lower contention ratio and thus able to make better use of the limited available bandwidth.

              >As for EE, look for special offers +1 vote

              Agree, also do the online speed check using your full details a couple of times over a few days and then wait for them to call you, then you can negotiate a deal...

              1 0 Reply
          2. Roland6 Silver badge
            Reply Icon

            Re: The turn of the millenium called...

            >I have 4G coverage only from EE (and 8Mb from BT ADSL), so I pay £60/month for 100GB and I get about 70Mbps.

            The problem with Three (and others) is getting a sensible data allowance and piece of equipment.

            For example: Three's HomeFi currently gives you 40GB pcm for £24, which if you want more than this (without incurring the 1p/MB out of bundle charge) you have to resort to SIM swapping with a 40GB SIM at £17 pcm. Whereas with EE you can get 100GB and 200GB data only plans. However, the Three HomeFi (a Huawei’s B310 Wireless Router) is better suited to the task of being the home network router than the EE dongles.

            Personally, I would purchase a router like the B310 (available from Amazon for around £100), add the external antenna and drop the EE SIM into it.

            Obviously, you can try putting a phone SIM into a mobile broadband dongle, but since Three will detect and block them, I've never really bothered, and accepted that the mobile networks don't really want high volumes of home/tethered traffic over their networks.

            0 0 Reply
        2. short
          Reply Icon

          Re: The turn of the millenium called...

          I can only see 9G/Mo for £18 om Giffgaff - what am I missing?

          0 0 Reply
          1. Steve Todd
            Reply Icon

            Re: The turn of the millenium called...

            >I can only see 9G/Mo for £18 om Giffgaff - what am I missing?

            Giffgaf have gone down hill. They do an “always on” plan for £20, but throttle you back to about 380k beyond 9GB of usage.

            If Three works in your area you can have 30GB of teathered or mobile data for £20,

            0 0 Reply
          2. Baldrickk
            Reply Icon

            Re: The turn of the millenium called...

            I can only see 9G/Mo for £18 om Giffgaff - what am I missing?

            Almost a decade.

            They did unlimited data when they started out, but stopped offering it about 8-ish years ago I believe - at least for phone plans.

            A 4G mobile internet connection might have better deals.

            0 0 Reply
          3. DRendar
            Reply Icon

            Re: The turn of the millenium called...

            > I can only see 9G/Mo for £18 om Giffgaff - what am I missing?

            Ew looks like GG have gone downhill - I currently pay £18 to Three. Unlimited data, Unlimited Roaming (which for me is a lifesaver) and 30Gig hotspot.

            Remember you can always haggle.

            Might be worth trying ID (Carphone Warehouse) Which uses the EE network - last I checked they were OK for DataSIMs.

            --edit-- Looks like you can only get 15Gig for £25 quid now on ID... SMH

            0 0 Reply
        3. handleoclast
          Reply Icon

          Re: The turn of the millenium called...

          @DRendar

          I'm on £15/month for 30G (but all hotspottable). Since most of the data gets used at home on a real computer with a real keyboard (phone k/b is too fiddly) the extra £3/month for unlimited (but all bar 30G of it only usable on the phone) wouldn't really be worth it.

          For those looking for the £15/month SIM, you're out of luck. Three no longer offer it, but if you already have that package you can continue with it.

          Oh yeah, I only get 200 minutes of talk time, but since I'm an antisocial bastard and never call anybody, the unlimited talk time for an extra £3/month isn't much use either.

          0 0 Reply
      3. }{amis}{
        Reply Icon
        Joke

        Re: The turn of the millenium called...

        Come back ISDN all is forgiven ;->

        2 0 Reply
    2. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: The turn of the millenium called...

      "I've heard that this will come with a 100GB cap a month, too."

      Lol, my last letter from Virgin Media said I had downloaded 17TB !

      1 0 Reply
      1. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: The turn of the millenium called...

        17TB? Nice!

        Honestly, I don't see how anyone can used a capped connection in this day and age.

        People buy games from Steam, the PlayStation Network, not to mention the updates which can be somewhat large - FFXV being a good example of that which is now into 40GB+ of patches.

        Not sure how much bandwidth 4K streams use on Netflix, but I'm gussing they're into the 10GB range.

        I guess it won't matter in the long run since by the time 2020 rolls around this entire idea will be horribly outdated. (The fact it's outdated now notwithstanding.)

        0 0 Reply
        1. Martin an gof Silver badge
          Reply Icon

          Re: The turn of the millenium called...

          Not sure how much bandwidth 4K streams use on Netflix

          In another thread recently I had cause to look it up. Netflix recommends a 25Mbps connection for 4k viewing. Making some wild assumptions (it's certainly a variable rate, and the actual figure will therefore depend heavily on content), let's call the video stream 20Mbps.

          20Mbps is around 2MBps of real data, which is 120MB/min, which is 7,200MB/hr or approximately 7GiB per hour.

          If you watched all your television as 4k Netflix streams, and watched an average of - let's say - four hours a day (possibly an underestimate, particularly if there are children in the house), that would equate to well over 800GiB per month, just for TV.

          Whether you could actually find four hours a day of 4k to watch is another matter :-)

          M.

          2 0 Reply
      2. Roland6 Silver badge
        Reply Icon

        Re: The turn of the millenium called...

        >Lol, my last letter from Virgin Media said I had downloaded 17TB !

        Big iCloud user are we? :)

        https://discussions.apple.com/thread/7344937?start=0&tstart=0

        0 0 Reply
  3. short

    Other than 'grudgingly',

    How are BT going to deliver this?

    As few FTTC boxes as possible, and hope that advances in *DSL will allow them to keep up with any increase in obligated speed?

    Bite the bullet and overprovision, with some FTTP as well?

    Something wireless?

    Just ignore it, say they're working as hard as they possibly can, and swallow any fines that arrive?

    3 0 Reply
    1. Gio Ciampa
      Reply Icon

      Re: Other than 'grudgingly',

      I'll wager the last one...

      7 1 Reply
    2. AndrueC Silver badge
      Reply Icon
      Meh

      Re: Other than 'grudgingly',

      Just ignore it, say they're working as hard as they possibly can, and swallow any fines that arrive?

      No. As I pointed out in my earlier reply - this is not forcing BT to install a decent connection everywhere. It is only preventing them refusing point blank. If it goes through it just means they have to give a price.

      So instead of "No, don't want to" they can just say "Sure. That's going to cost £30,000 but don't worry we cover the first £4,000". Please make your cheque payable to...

      11 0 Reply
    3. robidy
      Reply Icon

      Re: Other than 'grudgingly',

      Break up BT and let OpenReach keep its profits...worked for previous USO's just look at the NZ model.

      1 0 Reply
    4. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      "a cost of £600m – which it planned to recoup by hiking up bills"

      IIRC, they were proposing to put up wholesale bills by £7 per month (presumably forever).

      By my calculation, across 20m households, that works out at £1.68bn per year. Nice little earner??!

      Adding £2.50 per month per line, for one year only, would cover the £600m outright.

      1 0 Reply
  4. GruntyMcPugh Silver badge

    So Openreach get to pick up the bill?

    How does 'regulation' of this market work exactly? It's a free market, with our illustrious govt selling off their interest in it to the private sector. Now they think they can make a private company spend it's cash at their command? Does Virgin Media have the same obligation? Kcom?

    Is it right to make a dominant provider more dominant by tying rural locations down to one supplier? Shouldn't the govt get telecoms companies to jointly own rural infrastructure, so they locals can choose who provide their service?

    This seems like so much stinky wind from govt officials, a declaration without any reasonable plan. But then Tony Blair proposed 'Broadband Britain' in 2001, then spent all the cash bombing Iraq instead.

    5 7 Reply
    1. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: So Openreach get to pick up the bill?

      It's not a free market except in some selected areas. Most of the country outside cities is dependent on BT's OpenReach infrastucture. That is what they inherited or were gifted. As this proposal is for a USO, it is not unreasonable that the effective monopoly supplier, for whatever reason that is, is obligated to provide a decent service.

      6 3 Reply
      1. GruntyMcPugh Silver badge
        Reply Icon

        Re: So Openreach get to pick up the bill?

        I don't think any provider is 'obligated' to sell at a loss in a 'free market'.

        4 1 Reply
        1. GruntyMcPugh Silver badge
          Reply Icon

          Re: So Openreach get to pick up the bill?

          Ah, the costs have been clarified, that BT can charge for the connection and are only liable for the first £4k, so this announcement isn't really any benefit to the rural customer, and BT aren't obliged to sell at a loss.

          3 0 Reply
      2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge
        Reply Icon

        Re: So Openreach get to pick up the bill?

        "That is what they inherited or were gifted."

        I think you're trying to say it's what the shareholders bought at privatisation from a government that didn't want to invest more in building up the infrastructure. And, of course, you're ignoring all the investment BT put into it in the intervening decades. Or do you think all that fibre was in the ground back in the '80s?

        5 1 Reply
        1. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: So Openreach get to pick up the bill?

          > Or do you think all that fibre was in the ground back in the '80s?

          What fibre? The proposed USO is for merely 10mb/s, so fibre is hardly needed. In areas where fibre has been rolled out, it's already exceeding this modest target. In the intervening 30+ years, BT have been getting line rental, from which one imagines they might just out of the goodness of the hearts do a touch of investment. No, BT's record on infrastructure at the national level really cannot be defended.

          3 4 Reply
          1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge
            Reply Icon

            Re: So Openreach get to pick up the bill?

            "What fibre?"

            The fibre that was used to roll out FTTC after BT were finally allowed to do that once the others had finished cherry picking the areas where they were prepared to lay cable.

            4 1 Reply
    2. AndrueC Silver badge
      Reply Icon
      Meh

      Re: So Openreach get to pick up the bill?

      Is it right to make a dominant provider more dominant by tying rural locations down to one supplier?

      This proposed legislation doesn't actually do that. The legislation is only defining the USO framework, not who should provide it. Of course BT are certain to put their hat into the ring (or might be forced to) but in theory at least any CP could choose become a provider if they wanted to. Don't all rush at once :-/

      0 0 Reply

  5. This post has been deleted by its author

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

Forgotten password ?

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon