David, Yes backhaul is expensive too, some expect it for nothing! ;) crazies even sell it for just about nothing!
Pulling fibre to one cabinet costs x building to 10 homes costs x *10. Yes there are variances and different situations but it never costs less to do FTTP over something where there is an opportunity for aggregation. It might well be that your location there is no point in aggregating (such as we have done in Cornwall). Neil. > On 17 Aug 2017, at 13:08, David Derrick <d...@enta.net> wrote: > >> On 16/08/2017 22:28, Neil J. McRae wrote: >> On 16 Aug 2017, at 21:46, David Derrick <d...@enta.net> wrote: > > >>> g.fast sounds like another half-arsed excuse not to do fibre >>> properly. On our island pretty much everyone only gets a flaky >>> 1Mbps, by the time you've patched it up to do g.fast how much extra >>> would it have been to just go full fibre? >> >> David Across the country -£billions. > I wasn't talking about across the country though, I was talking about a > specific location with really bad infrastructure. Our house is just under 2km > from the exchange and the sync speed is 1Mbps down with frequent drops. To > get g.fast you're going to be running fibre most of the way to us anyway > (perhaps as close as over the road), adding a cabinet with all its gubbins > inside as well as upgrading the kit in the exchange plus its backhaul. Add a > bit more fibre and you don't need any cabinets, OK you'll need different kit > in the exchange with I assume a different cost but you'll still need to > upgrade the link off the island. > > Where you have a village, running fibre to the middle and then g.fast for the > final bit to avoid the fiddly last hop to each property probably does > represent a sizeable saving. It just seems to me that there are cases where > the short term savings might not be so great. > -- > David Derrick > Systems & Network Engineer > Entanet International Ltd > 0330 100 0330 >
