A Question of Competitive Limits as Openreach Ponders UK Fibre Cable Size
Openreach (BT) has told ISPreview they’re reviewing new options with broadband operators (CPs) for making better and more efficient use of their existing cable ducts. This occurred after a dispute was raised over one operator’s deployment of large 51.2mm optical diameter (OD) multitube cabling (the limit is normally 25mm to a single cable/subduct diameter).
Granted, cable size isn’t exactly the sexist of topics to discuss, but for network operators engaged in the national race to deploy faster full fibre (FTTP) broadband and Ethernet infrastructure across the UK, it can be a big deal. This is particularly true if one operator is allowed to do something that others believe they cannot within Openreach’s ducts, which tends to raise competition concerns.
Openreach are required by Ofcom to open their existing underground cable ducts and overhead poles for use by rival networks to help them run new fibre, which forms part of the regulated Physical Infrastructure Access (PIA) product. But naturally there is often only a limited amount of spare duct space available, which varies between locations and can make it tricky to balance fair and efficient use of the infrastructure.
Advertisement
Operators that wish to use such PIA ducts are normally required to submit a formal Notification of Intent (NOI) to Openreach, which typically recommends up to 25mm for a single cable/subduct diameter. But operators could get around this by having, for example, 2 x 25mm subduct and placing 2 NOIs on the same duct section. However, even if you pay for 2 x 25mm, you generally aren’t allowed to then do things like put in 1 x 35mm etc.
What’s the issue?
The problem is that contractors, who we believe may have been working for Zayo (they haven’t responded to our request for comment), were recently spotted deploying a “50mm multi tube” (actually 51.2mm) cable through an older part of Openreach’s PIA duct network (example) – not an easy or cheap task. This seems to be on four diverse routes between Docklands and Slough, where other operators might have tried to do the same if they thought it was allowed.
However, several rival operators, many of which expressed to ISPreview how they’d long been told that 25mm was to be considered a “maximum” limit, have raised questions over whether this is fair competition. Not to mention the potential risk of adding to duct congestion (i.e. locking out other operators through the same duct, which can be particularly galling if the cable doesn’t end up being fully utilised) or causing physical damage to the network (big cabling is often less flexible, which can sometimes cause issues).
Given the recent push by Openreach to crackdown on poor adherence to other PIA rules (e.g. the whereabouts drama), some operators feel like this is one creep that shouldn’t be allowed and may lead to widespread deployment of cabling that is “simply too large“. But Openreach seem to be keeping more of an open mind, which perhaps reflects the pressures they face from Ofcom over the need to provide an equal opportunity of access.
Advertisement
A spokesperson for Openreach told ISPreview:
“Having investigated – we’re confident that rules to ensure fair access by other operators to our network of ducts and poles have been adhered to.
More than 170 companies have signed up to sharing our network infrastructure, and use around a third of our duct and pole estate – so it’s important that we strike a balance between overly restricting Communication Providers (CPs) when building their networks and avoiding attempts to simply block or restrict others from using the infrastructure.
The feedback we get from alt-nets for this service is also extremely good. Our NPS (net promoter) score is +29.2 and we’re delighted with the way it’s working, but we’re always looking for ways we can further improve the service we provide to our CP customers.”
Openreach also confirmed that, in their product descriptions, they do state that CPs can install multiple cables of varying diameters, and will then be charged for multiple 25mm units per duct. But the operator appeared to indicate that, currently, they do not state the maximum size of cable or sub duct or apparatus that the CPs can use (altnets dispute this), as they do not want to inadvertently stifle CP innovation.
However, in light of the recent concerns, Openreach have told ISPreview that they will be discussing with CPs options for making better and more efficient use of their infrastructure in the near future. We understand that one option here could involve asking CPs to obtain specific prior written consent to install any cables or sub-duct which is more than 25mm in diameter.
Such consent would, says Openreach, need to take into account things like whether suitable space is available, as well as an expectation that the provider would need to use the full capacity installed (i.e. within the 12-month build period – this could be tricky as not all fibres are always lit / fully utilised right away) and whether the CP can show they will comply with the best industry practice etc.
The hope is that this might help to protect the network against inefficient or unfair future use, but much will depend upon how CPs respond. The catch here is that, strictly speaking, Openreach’s own PIA rules state that the offending operator (as well as any others that may have done this elsewhere before) “must immediately rectify or disconnect the Customer Apparatus or BT will do so, at the Customer’s cost and expense.”
Advertisement
Some altnets may yet push for that outcome and, if Openreach fails to comply, the issue could still end up being raised with Ofcom.
Mark is a professional technology writer, IT consultant and computer engineer from Dorset (England), he also founded ISPreview in 1999 and enjoys analysing the latest telecoms and broadband developments. Find me on X (Twitter), Mastodon, Facebook and Linkedin.
« Business Focused UK Broadband ISP Merula Acquired by Rydal Group
Advertisement
Leave a Reply
Privacy Notice: Please note that news comments are anonymous, which means that we do NOT require you to enter any real personal details to post a message. By clicking to submit a post you agree to storing your comment content, display name, IP, email and / or website details in our database, for as long as the post remains live.
Only the submitted name and comment will be displayed in public, while the rest will be kept private (we will never share this outside of ISPreview, regardless of whether the data is real or fake). This comment system uses submitted IP, email and website address data to spot abuse and spammers. All data is transferred via an encrypted (https secure) session.
NOTE 1: Sometimes your comment might not appear immediately due to site cache (this is cleared every few hours) or it may be caught by automated moderation / anti-spam.
NOTE 2: Comments that break our rules, spam, troll or post via known fake IP/proxy servers may be blocked or removed.
Latest UK ISP News
- FTTP (5904)
- BT (3616)
- Politics (2677)
- Business (2392)
- Openreach (2382)
- Building Digital UK (2311)
- Mobile Broadband (2099)
- FTTC (2073)
- Statistics (1870)
- 4G (1771)
- Virgin Media (1721)
- Ofcom Regulation (1552)
- Fibre Optic (1452)
- Wireless Internet (1444)
- FTTH (1384)
Just a quick reminder that BT PLC has been a private company for forty years, when the new owners bought it for the asking price set by the previous owners (HM Government). The vast majority of the current ducting has been laid or replaced by this PLC.
I can’t imagine any other scenario where such a company would be legally compelled to assist its competitors in such a way.
Having worked for British Telecom, BT, Openreach for 30 years I know first hand that there are still thousands of miles of old duct still in service including earthenware and even asbestos and even more cabling buried direct in ground. Lead sheathed paper insulated cable still in use and a lot of the network is in a poor state of disrepair since Openreach gave up on quality checks on the copper network it’s now reverted to what it was in the 1980,s bodge it and scarper mentality get the clear at any cost.
Better than digging a load of new ducts, is it not? People complain enough about the digging for new cables as it is. BT is still a monopoly in some places, so it is only right that they should be told to allow other providers to use their ducts and poles. I bet BT don’t do it for free.
Need to fix their infrastructure, for months there was a broken cover on a road close to me, clearly labelled BT, so certainly belong to them.
They were handed that monopoly conpanies customers and network. While they may have replaced much of it, the wayleaves and goodwill were all done so while any competitors were excluded. Therefore they are expected to support competition on an ongoing basis, given that circa 80 year period was during the time telecom networks were being rolled out nationally.
See also similarities to Electricity, Gas, railways etc etc Its not that hard to understand.
Such mandatory assistance is not common, but not without precedent.
Railway trackage rights occasionally, most recently access to Heathrow airport (the rail line is owned by the airport, which also runs the Heathrow Express).
“See also similarities to Electricity, Gas, railways etc etc Its not that hard to understand.”
Where do electricity and gas DNOs have to allow competing DNOs to use their poles and pipes? Of course there aren’t any such competitors because it is understood that it is a natural monopoly. Energy supply is competitive, but every supplier has to pass on the DNO charges to the customer. Much like the Openreach GEA model.
Open access railway operators go through a very rigorous process to ensure that they cannot meaningfully undercut franchised operators – ie the opposite of what is being permitted in telecoms. In general they serve niches that no one else wants to serve, eg direct trains between London and Hull.
There are better comparisons to the postal system, where Royal Mail is forced to deliver its competitors mail in places where the “competition” do not want to do it themselves, while also being permitted to charge less than Royal Mail.
Sick of hearing BT is the best thing that could have happened to the UK or that they now own the infrastructure and paid for it in good terms. Yes they bought it but they bought a monopoly so they also bought with it the regulatory rules and regulations that come with it, including the ones that didn’t exist at the time. BT used it’s dominant position to delay the introduction of fibre to the UK causing huge harm to businesses and consumers who had to live with poor internet connectivity for decades. Now the Altnets are teaching BT a good lesson in competition which is long overdue. In the end will be have a better broadband market in the UK as the BT abuse of position forced the regulator’s hand and pushed investment into Altnets. These Altnets also benefited with a jump in technology but mostly going XGS-PON which supports 10Gb internet and beyond and it’s now going to force BT to deploy XGS-PON to compete as well as getting VM to upgrade to XGS-PON their cable network.
“Need to fix their infrastructure, for months there was a broken cover on a road close to me, clearly labelled BT, so certainly belong to them”
That is a mistake often made . Contractors will often replace a broken cover with whatever they happen to have available. Not unusual to find the wrong covers on box’s
“Yes they bought it but they bought a monopoly so they also bought with it the regulatory rules and regulations that come with it, including the ones that didn’t exist at the time. ”
Taking this argument at face value, this also applies to the utility companies (why aren’t they required to provide pole access to telecoms companies at a pittance?) and to Virgin Media, whose predecessors only existed as a result of government granted regional monopolies.
Even with everything rigged in their favour (BT was blocked from rolling out fibre or TV services, which also meant no appetite for early variants of DSL aimed at TV distribution) they were still a huge financial failure.
We are not the US. Anyone can dig up the street if they like, to provide that fibre service that BT allegedly “delayed” using “its dominant position” (nonsense). But why should Openreach, and only Openreach, be subject to onerous rules on physical access?
Whilst it is true that anyone can get the required powers/approvals to come in and lay their own fibre, the issue is for a long time BT/Openreach have been in a position that lets them strike down any serious attempts at competition.
If a local or smaller competitor shows signs of deploying in an area or estate that is poorly served by the Openreach infrastructure, BT/Openreach will sometimes use this as a trigger to suddenly come in and upgrade things killing the alternative project. Companies as large as BT Group and VMO2 don’t need to be the leaders, their size ensures that as long as they do “just enough” they’ll always maintain their market position.
Their lower build-out costs combined with the fact that as the incumbent they have a much easier time getting customers onboard very quickly makes the finances of any alternative operation become completely unfavourable.
We even saw this in my suburban area – ADSL2+ was the only option available for years as Virgin Media had the market cornered. Eventually, VDSL became available, and we were not planned for FTTP until somewhere post-2026. CityFibre came in, and within a year Openreach had rolled FTTP out to the majority of the area seemingly without any notice!
So some company could utilise a duct and then charge others a premium for using their subduct.
Cunning
The problem here is that zayo have been allowed to do something we would of done if we were aware it was allowed. Instead we’ve been told 25mm is a hard maximum and various vendors make subduct bundles explicitly for this (at 25mm).
If you’ve got a 51.2mm duct in a 95mm ID duct there’s not really space for anything much else.
51.2mm also takes up >4x the space as 25mm duct how much are they paying? It had better be ~5× the normal upto 25mm rate or I’m sure legal action will be sought, I’m aware it’s being considered regardless.
2″ thick multitube optical cable?! How many properties could that provide?
Zayo don’t don’t do FTTP, they are a core provider rather than access
The problem may start to disappear once BT start to recover the old copper cables
Too late most of the fibre builds will be over
The comic bandwagon trundles on.
I can’t think of a better way to slow economic growth or progress at this stage in this country, other than Brexiting, of course, than by allowing a ramshackle collection of under-capitalised comms installation companies cherry-pick there way around locations country-wide, installing different quality of systems, to differing standards and fighting skirmishes with competitors en passant. All that’s needed now is to get the lawyers involved and well all be back in JRM’s favourite century . . . the 14th century . . whereupon the technology will by then match the system of governance – techno-fuedalism.
Thank Christ the conversion to North Sea Gas wasn’t organised on this basis.
There must be a right bunch of tits running these organisations
Well said