Slashdot Mirror


BT Plans Move To IP Telephony, Starting Next Year

pure_equanimity writes "The BBC have published an article saying that BT are planning to migrate from a PSTN to an IP network, a move to cost 3bn. They say that broadband will become ubiquitous, with customers having the ability to plug any device in to get access. They also say that current cheap broadband products will more than likely not be viable in five years time. They plan to start rolling out in 2006, and cover the vast majority of customers by 2009."

78 of 228 comments (clear)

  1. Wow - That's unexpected by Nurgled · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This was the last thing I expected from BT after their faffing about with getting DSL sorted out a few years back. This should be interesting...

    Too bad I'm not a BT customer. I wonder what will become of all of the mini-telcos which currently hang off BT's network.

    1. Re:Wow - That's unexpected by iserlohn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Definitely, considering how expensive ADSL and broadband in general is in the UK, and the stranglehold BT has on providing wholesale ASDL in the market.

      The only reason they are doing this most likely to tap into the mobile and other new markets, and it looks like a risky investment. No-one knows what the market would be like 2 years down the road, let alone 5 years.

    2. Re:Wow - That's unexpected by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's obviously data corruption on your ultra-cheap broadband ;)

    3. Re:Wow - That's unexpected by iserlohn · · Score: 3, Interesting

      25/mth is quite good in the UK actually, but 25 pounds = 45 USD. You could probably get 1.5mbs with a good provider in the US for $35, and in Canada for less than $25 ($20 USD). In Japan and HK, you get 10+mbs for around $20 USD.

      Telewest has just increase it's bandwidth by 50% though (no change in the plan price though). 512->768k, 1.0->1.5m etc. It's great and probably a good deal if you want 1mbs and don't have bulldog in your area.

    4. Re:Wow - That's unexpected by Chep · · Score: 2, Informative

      Where are you locked in, Greece?

      Here the urban (unbundled) rate is 29.90€ for 5M/384k (TV-DSL and VoIP off) or 2M/384k (TV-DSL and VoIP on), and you can find providers starting at 12.99€/month for 512/128.

      Outside of cities (non-unbundled rate), of course, the standard France Telecom gouging comes back, and prices are between 29.90€ for 1024/128 and 35€ for 512/128 (depending on the ISP, the base carrier being always FT).

  2. So... by macshune · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "They also say that current cheap broadband products will more than likely not be viable in five years time. They plan to start rolling out in 2006, and cover the vast majority of customers by 2009."

    So they are gonna hook customers up right before the prices go up? I thought prices would go down as time marches on? What about all that "dark fiber"?

    1. Re:So... by Tooky · · Score: 4, Informative

      So they are gonna hook customers up right before the prices go up? I thought prices would go down as time marches on? What about all that "dark fiber"?

      Reading the article I took it to mean that cheap broadband IP telephony products would be unviable in 5 years time, not broadband internet per se.

    2. Re:So... by Znork · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Indeed, that's what they say. However, as ip telephony can be expected to use a miniscule fraction of the bandwidth on a broadband connection, and IP telephony service isnt that expensive to set up, they'd have to figure out a way to lock you in, easiest by controlling and raising the price on your broadband as it would be much harder to control and overcharge for IP telephony service.

    3. Re:So... by AllUsernamesAreGone · · Score: 4, Funny

      This is BT. Control and Overcharge are their middle names. Actually their full name is Bastard Control Crumbling Infrastructure Bad Support Incompetent Overcharge Telecom. They shorten it to BT so they can fit it on the trucks and use the cover name "British Telecom".

      They'd have no problems at all in controlling or overcharging for IPT, especially with the Toothless Wonder regulator (whose best threats seem to be things like "Oh, go on, please drop your prices, pretty please with a picture of Tony on the top"... although anything with a picture of President Blair on it is probably a serious threat now I think about it..)

  3. PSTN? by OverlordQ · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'll admit I had to look this one up, if ya woulda said POTS, I would of known right off the bat.

    Public Switched Telephone Network btw.

    --
    Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    1. Re:PSTN? by PowerBert · · Score: 3, Funny

      Rubbish!

      Back in my day PSTN was "Packet Switched Telephone Network". It was called that because it used packet switching to route information. Whoever heard of Public switching?

      Public switching:

      1. An outdated communications protocol used before IP on the original internet in 1500BC. It was slow by todays standards, had no means of error checking and could not gaurentee delivery. It's still used today, but only at childrens parties where it is more often referred to as Chinese whispers.

      2. A method for routing humans around the world. It is used mostly at airports and train stations to route people to their destination via the most efficient link. Two people may travel to the same destination, but be switched through different routes. As a result people may arrive in a different order. Unfortunately the protocol has no method for reordering people, which is why the Airtours REP protocol is often used in conjunction with this network.

    2. Re:PSTN? by stoborrobots · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's a Switched Telephone Network for Public use... as opposed to Private Automatic Branch eXchange...

      "Public Switching"... Heh!

    3. Re:PSTN? by Alioth · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, PSTN does stand for Public Switched Telephone Network - the public bit meaning not private (as in PABX - Private Automatic Branch eXchange).

      Packet switching on telephone networks is a relatively new thing (compared to the history of automatic telephone switching). Until 20 years ago, most telephone switching was still done by electromechanical machines (google for Strowger Telephone Exchange) - huge rooms full of physical switches (uniselectors, bidirectional selectors) and relays which moved and clattered as subscribers dialed telephone numbers; the tones (such as ringing, number unobtainable, engaged etc) generated by a motor-driven machine. If you go to the London Science Museum, they have part of one of these exchanges you can play with.
      Trunk calls were routed using analogue frequency division multiplexing rather than packet switching. Signalling between mechanical telephone exchanges was done at voice frequencies (for example, the famous 2600Hz tone - in Britain, the frequency was different and it was known as 2VF - if you listen to some Radio 4 radio plays you'll find the sound engineers still like inserting the 'pip' sound when someone answers a call which you heard when the 2VF signalling wasn't quite fully supressed from reaching the subscriber's phone. These 'pip' sounds probably disappeared from the public network 20 years ago but the sound engys at the BBC seem to like them).

    4. Re:PSTN? by Some+Bitch · · Score: 3, Informative

      I suggest you do a little checking then I believe you will find an apology is in order. The P in PSTN is "Public" and always has been.

      "packet switched telephone network" gives 61 results on Google (all from idiots).

      "Public switched telephone network" gives around 119000 results.

      I rest my case.

    5. Re:PSTN? by Alioth · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sometimes they even put the old 'purring' dialtone into modern radio plays! The last Strowger exchange in Britain disappeared in the early 90s, the purring dialtone hasn't been on the public phone network since then. They also sometimes have the dialtone come back when the remote caller hangs up - in reality, you get the NU (number unobtainable - beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep) when the remote end hangs up if they were the person who calls you, if you were the caller, the line doesn't clear down until you replace the handset or a timeout period is reached.

      Actually, there's some website out there with a recording of the demo of 2VF signalling. It is _so_ quintessentially British. You can probably find it by Googling.

      Actually, that's a neat trick. If you call someone and are having an argument, and they hang up on you, don't put the phone down. If they pick it up again (probably to call and whine at one of their girl friends about what a nasty man you are) you'll still be there :-)

  4. Yea... by Deltan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Good Luck with that BT. There are tons of people out there with old rotary phones still, utilizing pulse dialing. They're not going to get some old lady to change her pots phone for some fancy IP phone.

    1. Re:Yea... by Tranzig · · Score: 2, Informative

      I don't how things happen there but many elderly switched to ISDN here a couple years ago, only because they were persuaded by the ads. They don't know Internet at all, and their only reason for swiching was: ``They said it's faster''.

    2. Re:Yea... by Zog+The+Undeniable · · Score: 4, Informative

      All BT's exchanges have been System X (digital) for a few years now, but pulse-dialling still works in software, should you want it. The main reason some people still have dial phones is that they were hardwired to the wall, and it's an offence to get anyone but BT to install a modern plug-in wall box. At a cost.

      --
      When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
    3. Re:Yea... by curator_thew · · Score: 4, Informative

      "They're not going to get some old lady to change her pots phone for some fancy IP phone"

      Did you comprehend the article? This is more about their internal network, rather than the customer equipment.

      They will convert their entire internal network into VOIP, so even if you have an old analog POTS line, your calls will be VOIP'd between exchanges.

      Naturally, once they have a native internal VOIP network, then they're in a better position to offer interesting VOIP services directly to the customer. But a vast majority of customers will still be using analog POTS.

      It's hardly surprising: if they don't do this then they will fall behind in offering the kinds of innovative services that upstart VOIP vendors can offer. It also makes for better service integration and interoperation with future 4G technologies, etc.

    4. Re:Yea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, BT provided the conversion for free. This cost them a lot of money and engineers time but the trade off was that they could then sell more equipment and digital services to those customers, and make the money back plus profit. They could have an engineer doing nowt but travelling an area doing socket conversions and make money still, no problems. But when there isn't enough conversions to be done, they start to loose money. The number of conversions is low and the number of extra services they could sell to those who were converting was small; the customers who found all those features useful had converted long ago. So BT were doing free conversions for customer from whom they couldn't make any significant revenue from. So they started to charge for the conversions.

    5. Re:Yea... by a5cii · · Score: 2, Informative

      This isn't the case.

      BT still use System X, System Y and UXD5B exchanges.

      System X (digital) is the newest, has most available select services - call barring, divert and so on - supports ADSL

      System Y (digital) is the second newest, has a lot of available select services - call barring, divert and so on but certain select services have different configuration options - supports ADSL

      UXD5B (analogue) is the oldest still in use on the Public BT Network, customers cannot get diverts put on when their line is broken with this kind of exchange, a lot of select services arent available. - does not support ADSL

      Its 4.15pm and i am off to work, call 151 and maybe ill chat to you - 151 BT faults

  5. rims? by narkotix · · Score: 3, Interesting

    do people in britain (and other countries) suffer from the RIM syndrome? ie being on a remote integrated multiplexor? or even being pairgained? If its common over there, does that mean BT will be ugprading all their exchanges?

    --
    We played dungeons and dragons for 3 hours.....then i was slain by an elf
    1. Re:rims? by natd · · Score: 2, Funny
      Even worse. Lookup Milton Keynes.

      --
      Only big ligs use sigs.
    2. Re:rims? by Brie+and+gherkins · · Score: 3, Funny

      WTFAYBOA?

      Good God man, what the blazes?

      I have phone, I plug in wall, I call my mamma. No thankyou multiplexor pargainer, not today, Goodbye!

      --
      If I promise to be a good boy can I have some better karma?
    3. Re:rims? by Dogers · · Score: 3, Informative

      I can only assume you mean DAC's? Where a cable is split into effectively 2 seperate lines (limiting your modem dialup to 28k, no matter what)

      Yes, they use it a lot here, but I dont think its an exchange limitation (generally anyway) - it seems to be more of a local box/cabling thing.. when we had an extra 3 lines put in the engineer said if we got 1 more, BT would have to upgrade the cable from the exchange to the subbox, then to our house! He also mumbled something about that probably helping them justify updating the exchange to DSL as well, but being students at the time, we couldnt afford the "chance" of DSL for the cost of another line :(

      --
      I am a viral sig. Please copy me and help me spread. Thank you.
    4. Re:rims? by squaretorus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My new house suffers from this, but a quick hour on the phone to BT persuaded them that this 'sucked' and that upgrading my line was a 'good idea' so that I could get broadband.

      For anyone in a similar position, heres how I did it. Remember at all times that the person you are talking to is a thick bastard who couldnt get a real job and hates his/her life and just wants to go home.

      Is my phoneline split? I can only get 28Kbps on my dial up! Can I get broadband - I know my exchange is enabled.
      "Your line fails the test sir - you cant get broadband"
      "But is my line split? I beleive I read that if your line is split BT has to replace it if you order broadband on an enabled exchange"
      "I dont think thats right sir - where did you see that?"
      "In flight magazine probably - BA"
      "I'll ask my supervisor"
      "Hello - supervisor here - you have a line issue"
      "I want a new line because I suspect its shared and I want broadband and you have to change the line" ...
      to cut a long story short (well - okay - lonng) I just repeated this about 2 dozen times until they booked me an engineer to replace the line. I dont think its true - but these guys just want an easy life so hassle them into giving you the line. Oh - but remember - when they say "where did you read it" say "Fortune" or "In flight magazine" not "/."

    5. Re:rims? by jadel · · Score: 2, Informative

      This is quite common in Australia. Basically a pair gain allows one copper pair to multiplex multiple conversations (commonly two, but it may be more) allowing more phones to be connected without having to drag more copper through the conduits to peoples houses. A rim is a different device, basically a miniature exchange that connects via fibre optic cable to the main exchange building to avoid having to drag each individual copper pair all the way back.
      Being on either device basically guarentees that you will be unable to get ADSL, although Telstra the company that owns the phone lines will now attempt to transpose over to plain copper if they are cajoled enough.
      For more information on the Australian broadband experience have a look at whirlpool.

  6. Charge by the MB by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You can bet their charging scheme will change to p/minute to p/MB of data. That way they can cash in on all the "free" telephony.

    1. Re:Charge by the MB by Brie+and+gherkins · · Score: 3, Funny

      I personally enjoy spending incalcuable amounts of money for telephony. I have a 200+ special, but only on the same network, 25p peak unless I call my grandmother after texting twice in which case it's 17p per minute, unless I'm in the lounge when there's a leisure discount. Coupled with a supersaver from Virgin, Wannabeatelco, provided that I prefix 17 digits to the number then I can get additional discounts. Do you remember walking to the red phonebox and waiting, striking up a conversation with others in the queue, 5p pieces in hand? Simple and tangible is good

      --
      If I promise to be a good boy can I have some better karma?
  7. Cheap broadband products by funkytwig · · Score: 3, Informative

    "cheap broadband products will more than likely not be viable in five years time"

    BT don't do any cheap broadband products, only expensive overpriced ones :-)

  8. bandwidth capacity? by Ubi_NL · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Does anyone have an idea how all this phone traffic is going to affect the load on the entire internet? I assume it's UDP but stil... I have the feeling the backbone routers are busy enough already with all the other traffic

    --

    If an experiment works, something has gone wrong.
    1. Re:bandwidth capacity? by tokachu(k) · · Score: 3, Informative

      Uncompressed telephone-qualtiy audio as PCM takes up 64 kbps (8 KB/s), just like an ISDN channel.

      It will certainly not be as bad, load-wise, as installing high-speed Internet access.

    2. Re:bandwidth capacity? by Nurgled · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I imagine that the majority of phone call traffic will never leave BT's network, since the uptake of IP telephony in the rest of the world is still quite small.

      Even if similar moves are made in other countries, I'm sure BT have some connections that could keep it local until it hits the remote exchange.

  9. Re:So what numbers will we use by mrchaotica · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Well, everyone will just register a .phone domain for themselves, so you can just call them by name.

    God help you if you're John Smith!

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  10. Re:So what numbers will we use by ciroknight · · Score: 3, Informative

    Most likely they'll continue to use phone numbers. It's too much of an investment to try to change the number system, and on top of that, it'd be much harder for a traditional telephone to call an IP number.

    Basically, they're turning the voice data into packets and then sending the packets across their network, improving the effeciency of their lines. There's been a lot of discussion about this lately actually. Either way, I wish the american phone companies would get on the ball...

    --
    "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
  11. Re:So what numbers will we use by ZombieEngineer · · Score: 5, Funny
    When you go to IPv6, it makes it nigh impossible for sales people to cold call your unlisted IP address.

    ZombieEngineer

  12. UK is temporatily unavailable. by Big+Nothing · · Score: 4, Funny

    Phone service to the UK is temporatily unavailable due to the Sasser.Q virus. Please try again later.

    --
    SIG: TAKE OFF EVERY 'CAPTAIN'!!
  13. Powersource? by sirdude · · Score: 2, Interesting

    From what I understand, currently phones work when there's a power outage because the current copper line network always has a mild voltage in it.. Just wondering if that will change if the phones are connected via a fibre network..

    1. Re:Powersource? by Baricom · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ...currently phones work when there's a power outage because the current copper line network always has a mild voltage in it.

      They work because the phone company has backup power - batteries and generators. See How Stuff Works.

      However, you bring up an interesting point about fiber - unlike copper, you need to provide power for the devices on either end. From the article:

      We anticipate that millions of people will use the phone in the same way...

      This makes me think that the VOIP network may have copper wiring along the last mile, meaning it's very similar to how most phone companies are set up today. Nothing new to see here.

      More on how the telephone network works (fascinating stuff) can be found here.

    2. Re:Powersource? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Don't worry. The government will restore your conversation from their backups as soon as power is restored :/

    3. Re:Powersource? by NotWulfen · · Score: 3, Informative

      That mild voltage is supplied by the central office via huge banks of batteries supplying a 48V DC feed.

      Since a lot of COs and switching centers already have this massive infrastructure for supplying DC power most (if not all) internetworking equipment can be obtained in DC power supply versions.

      So yes, the equipment at the CO will stay up through a power outage because it'll still be powered by those 48V batteries, equipment at the customer end is a completely different thing... but unless it's a full FTTH solution there are options for getting power to the CPE, like power over ethernet (if they use an ethernet last mile), and iirc there are power distribution solutions for coax if they decide to go that route.

  14. The Skype Telephone by Beautyon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    When Skype come out with their telephone kit that plugs straight into the new BT network will BT cut off people trying to use another handset? They might, but they wont get away with it.

    This is going to be the biggest revolution in telephony the UK has ever seen. Whilst a Skype handset might not connect you to phones that are not on their network, if enough people use it, it could supplant the BT network and destroy their business.

    I wonder how they are going to charge for the service, obviously line rental, which will be the minimum they will be able to collect from each user, but taking into consideration the ease with which people will be able to switch providers, their churn rate will be very high indeed.

    Basically, they are going to spend 3 billion to put themselvs out of business. Great!

    --
    ATH0 Bitcoin: 1DnwFLXczVZV8kLJbMYoheUrpqHesjxrSi
    1. Re:The Skype Telephone by Oakey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't see the big deal about Skype, to me it just appears to be like any other Instant Messaging service, no? I can do exactly the same thing with MSN, although according to the site they say MSN's audio quality is lower.

      However, as I said, it seems nothing more than another IM client, and you can bet your ass MS will go right ahead and implement a similar thing into Messenger.

      --
      "Dre don't get as high as me.... I'm Cheech and Chong" - Snoop Dogg
    2. Re:The Skype Telephone by onion2k · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Basically, they are going to spend 3 billion to put themselvs out of business. Great!

      Wrong. They've realised that things like Skype will put them out of business if they don't move on, so they're shifting away from traditional voice comms and entirely into data comms. They'll change their pricing accordingly too, probably to a charge based on the amount of data you use rather than an amount of time.

      Its the old style voice telcos that are going to be disappearing.

  15. Re:So what numbers will we use by WarwickRyan · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The backend is going to be IP based you fool. So we'll still have telephone numbers etc, but BT will route all of the call data via IP. So, basically, they'll reduce the already tiny operating costs even more, whilst attempting to bump up the cost of xDSL even further. They'll probably argue along the lines of "Mr X uses much more bandwidth now so we have to charge more". The excess bandwidth being Mr X's telephone calls, which he is already paying for.

  16. background info by dncsky1530 · · Score: 3, Informative

    This might help:
    The public switched telephone network (PSTN) is the concatenation of the world's public circuit-switched telephone networks, in much the same way that the Internet is the concatenation of the world's public IP-based packet-switched networks. Originally a network of fixed-line analog telephone systems, the PSTN is now almost entirely digital, and now includes mobile as well as fixed telephones.

  17. Grreat...but by Lorhk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It fills me with dread to hear this news. I'm living in an area where BT have still not yet managed to install a DSL network. To hear that they've got more plans when they haven't even finished their old broadband roll out after god knows how many years seems plain stupid. It makes me angry.

  18. Re:Who the f*ck is BT? ;-) by Brie+and+gherkins · · Score: 3, Funny

    Yes old chum. Try taking The Times for a few weeks, you'll soon understand what the Empire is about.

    --
    If I promise to be a good boy can I have some better karma?
  19. Not going to happen... by MancDiceman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is a fairy tale dreamt up for investors, and you can expect within 2 years an announcement that it's all much harder than expected.

    The UK phone network is not a simple beast, and not like any other phone network in the world. I suspect they're putting down the plan and hoping that they can start angling for some government "investment" to replace the absolute crud we have in place at the moment.

    I would advise caution however, when BT announce anything at all. Remember this is the company who announced "universal" broadband 15 years ago and sat on the technology when it became available until they were effectively bullied into it.

    1. Re:Not going to happen... by elleomea · · Score: 2, Interesting

      To be fair this is also the company that wanted to roll out fibre connections to every home in the UK, but were stopped by Thatcher.

  20. Re:Who the f*ck is BT? ;-) by Conor+Turton · · Score: 2, Informative

    Yes, it is British Telecom. Originally it was public owned and was the only telco in the UK with the exception of Kingston Communications, a Hull City coucil run telco only available to the residents of Kingston Upon Hull. B.T was then privatised. It is the largest Telco in the UK. With the exception of a few cable companies operating in limited areas and Kingston Communications, B.T still owns most of the telephone exchanges in the UK and if you want to provide a DSL/Phone service you have to do it over their lines.

    --
    Conor "You're not married,you haven't got a girlfriend and you've never seen Star Trek? Good Lord!" - Patrick Stewart
  21. Re:Who the f*ck is BT? ;-) by l-ascorbic · · Score: 3, Informative

    BT is BT. Sure, officially they are British Telecommunications plc, but it's not like you'd bother looking up what AT&T stood for, when all you needed to know was "it's a big telco".

  22. As usual... by dj245 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The press conference sounds like this is a very good thing. However, Voip for an entire country is a really bad idea. My personal experience with consisted of dropped calls, bad connections, lag, and echos. Not to mention the week of one-way voice, where people could hear me but I couldn't hear them; which finally gave me no choice but to cancel the service.

    The technology for this just isn't ready. The internet wasn't designed for having all these low-latency desiring services tacked onto it, and not everyone has a 50ms ping. What worries me about this is that the brits don't seem to have a choice in the matter, and are being shepherded into this under the guise of "new technology, newer is better".

    The sad truth is the individual pieces work ok, but put the ISP, the routers, the voip boxes together, and you've got one hell of a mess.

    --
    Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    1. Re:As usual... by Xrikcus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But it's a very different thing trying to use VOIP over the internet itself, general public data networks with little by way of service guarantees, and converting a managed telecom backbone network to use IP.

    2. Re:As usual... by AliasTheRoot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Who said they were using the Internet to provide the backbone for their IP network?

  23. Re:So what numbers will we use by eyeye · · Score: 2, Insightful

    UK people already have 11 digit telephone numbers (more or less) so that would be an improvement!

    I dont trust BT to make a success of this as they are total shite at dealing with internet technologies.

    --
    Bush and Blair ate my sig!
  24. Its not just the network , its IP itself by Viol8 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The Internet Protocol was originally designed for non realtime applications. In the last few decades it has been shoehorned into various realtime applications , IP telephony being one, online games being another. And it sort of works. But not very well without a HELL of a lot of high end hardware to help it along. Some things are best left to propriatary protocols , they do one thing and they do it well. Speech is one of these things that would be better served with one of these (and in fact a lot are used). I simply don't understand this headlong rush into using IP for everything , its a general purpose protocol for sure but this means its a jack of all trades master of none. Isn't it time that companies who should know what they are doing ignore all the hype and bandwagons with fairly flat tyres from the startups desperate to flog VOIP to stay afloat and use their expertese to design something for the 21st century , not use an overworked protocol from the 1970s?

  25. An opportunity for you to be proved right by Andy+Smith · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What I think would be interesting is if people who are familiar with the technology would explain how this changeover could be done in such a way as to have (a) the most negative impact on consumers and (b) the most unfairly anti-competitive impact on the telecoms industry.

    Then in six years we can look back at this thread and see if that's how BT did it.

  26. Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    the majority of BT users rent their phones for an annual cost that is far greater than buying one.. check out the House of Lords report. So it should be easy for BT to send them a new one, because they already own the rented one.

  27. Regulator approval by WarwickRyan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's worth pointing out that this may not be a done deal.

    In the UK the telecoms industry has until recently been regulated by an organisation called Oftel. They have recently been replaced by a much broader regulator called Ofcom (http://www.ofcom.org.uk/).

    Their job is to try and ensure that the communications industry as a whole remains competitive. Which generally involves keeping BT on a short leash.

    This is the first major announcement from BT since Ofcom came into existence, so they may want attempt to use this as an opportunity to stamp their authority on BT. Though if Oftel is anything to go by they'll probably be BT's lapdogs..

  28. Cheap? by FrostedWheat · · Score: 3, Funny

    They also say that current cheap broadband products will more than likely not be viable in five years time

    BT have cheap broadband products? Yikes, they've kept that well hidden!

  29. Will this be going to IPV6 or IPV4? by Afty0r · · Score: 4, Insightful

    One of these would be extremely good for the UK and very forward thinking, the other would be investing money in a technology already straining to bursting point...

    And on another note, how cool will it be to have links like <a href="phonecall:phone.mydomain.com">Phone Me!</a> on websites - how long until we have that I wonder?

    1. Re:Will this be going to IPV6 or IPV4? by Viol8 · · Score: 4, Funny

      "how cool will it be to have links "

      About as cool as the sun. Thats just what you'd need , loads of phone calls from people who "just want to ring for a laugh" or people who click accidentaly or people who phone up to tell you your page sucks whereas if they had to actually dial the number they might not bother. Still , it'll probably happen. Every crap idea ends up in browsers eventually.

  30. This is more than just IP Telephony by Tooky · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The article briefly mentions converging land line and mobile services. Tie that in with recent articles about bluephone and BT OpenZone and things start to look very interesting for telephony in the uk!

  31. BT coward.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    I work for BT and have known about this for a few weeks now, seems like a move in the right direction

    1000 people will have it tested in the south of England in 2005 I belive

    Now they just have to start offering good internet and phone products to win customers back ;)

  32. Re:It's a nice idea... by Alioth · · Score: 2, Interesting

    BT have done it before. They moved from a mostly mechanically switched local exchange network (all the old Strowgers) and old-school electronic exchanges to System X/System Y digital exchanges for the entire country in approximately ten years. This was a phenomenal amount of work.

    The reason broadband has taken so long is that it doesn't make them much money. The reason they managed to switch the entire network, trunk routes and all, from analogue and mechanical switching to an all digital network is this: it took 25 engineers to keep a single 10,000 line Strowger exchange operating, and six System X echanges can be kept running by a single engineer. If it makes economic sense, BT can move fast enough. If changing their infrastructure to IP will make them/save them enough money, they will do it.

  33. Fears people have. by TheRealJFM · · Score: 2, Informative

    BT (British Telecom) used to be a public subsiduary of the British post office (I believe). However, despite the fact it is its own company, it is *heavily* regulated by Ofcom, the telecom regulator. Basicly, about 90% of UK broadband providers provide ADSL (Asymectrical DSL - meaning faster Dl that Ul) from BTs network. This wasn't the case but Ofcom forced BT to allow other networks to run on the network at low cost, and also forced BT to allow very cheap rates for commercial isps to offer unlimited 56k dialup. Whatever network BT develop will be available to all comers, no matter which company, and this is assured by both UK monopoly law and Ofcom. However, I think the benefits for the UK will be huge, and everyone should benefit from that, not just BT. Think about it, a fibre based network running over the entire country, and if you RTFA you will see they are talking about linking in wit the 3rd generation mobile phone network (already IP based obviously), meaning you could have a single number for mobile, internet and "standard" phone. I think this has been in BT's pipeline for a long time, and I personally think it will be a good thing, provided Ofcom keep up to their end of the bargain. Oh, one thing though. Will it be encrypted, or will it be "tap friendly"?

    --
    Joseph Farthing
    http://josephfarthing.com
  34. Re:So what numbers will we use by sploxx · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes, and I *really, really* hope they have made provisions to switch to IPv6 or are doing everything on top of IPv6.

    It would be a pain in the a** to update all the people's IP telephones from IPv4 to IPv6 (If it would be possible at all). And that would hamper the spread of IPv6 alot.

    They are brave enough to switch to IP, hopefully they're also brave enough to switch to IPv6.

  35. Official name is simply 'BT', not British Telecom by blorg · · Score: 3, Informative

    ...they changed the trading name from British Telecom to 'BT' in 1991 and the corporate name to BT Group plc in 2000. You will find it hard to actually even find a reference to 'British Telecom' on bt.com.

  36. Re:Who the f*ck is BT? ;-) by cybergibbons · · Score: 2, Informative

    Connect up a fax machine - if that blows up, then you can get somewhere as BT need to provide at least a 4800 or 9600 bps (can't remember which) fax connection can be established.

  37. Core Network by davetza · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think a lot of people including the press are missing the point here. The main thing here is not VoIP or fibre it is that BT are going to be migrating all of their services onto ONE IP network off of there existing PSTN, ATM and IP networks.

    Obviously while this will eventually have implications for end users (BT are talking of a broadband dialtone) the main benefits will be a big cost saving for BT and the ability to quickly deploy new services onto the network.

  38. Utter rubbish... by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 2, Informative

    Uh, you're post is complete and utter rubbish. STD (area) codes have always been specific to an area, dependent on where you're calling and never where you're calling from.

    The reason why people would give out the name of the area that they lived in is that, back in the days when the system was set up when overlaying the alphabet onto the digits 0-9 had more significance in the UK, part of the name would correspond to the area code. In fact, the area codes themselves derived from the place names.

    This area coding was taken so seriously that in some instances people wrote to the Post Office (because that's who ran the telephone system back then) to demand that their area codes were changed so that the numbers corresponded to more affluent places. For example, people living in the suburb of Anytown would rather have an area code refering to the posher neighbouring suburb of Sometown, so they'd petition for that area code to apply to them too. In many instances, because people in Anytown were reluctant to have a phone installed and answer the phone "Anytown 1212" (or whatever their number was) this held up uptake of telephony services to the point where the Post Office acquiesced and gave people the Sometown area code (or a derivation of it) that they wanted.

    I learnt all this almost 15 years ago from a BT engineer of 20 years experience. Ask any older BT engineer and they'll confirm this for you.

    --

    "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
  39. Sensible switch-over by Julian+Morrison · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Right now, phones pay for broadband.

    Once the public gets seriously into VOIP, which they will, phones are going byebye. So broadband will have to pay for itself.

    Only sensible, really.

  40. Check out your connection... by fiji · · Score: 2, Informative

    [I posted this to the other VoIP thread, but it is a useful tool]

    You can simulate a VoIP call and get the MOS voice quality score. So if you want to see how your Wireless setup fares, visit testyourvoip.com.

    Even if you don't care about VoIP, it is a useful test of the latency and bandwidth of your connection. VoIP is pretty sensitive to late packets so this tool highlights connectivity problems.

    -ben

  41. roads by smallguy78 · · Score: 2, Funny

    BT will spend around 3bn on the project - more than the annual spend on Britain's main roads

    By about 2.9bn judging from our motorways

    --
    Nothing costs nothing
  42. Not as good as it seems... by ratb3rt · · Score: 2, Informative

    Apparently, no matter how successful the fibre trials are, only new builds or big business will get fibre from the exchange. No good for 99% of the population....

  43. Out of business? by ShepyNCL · · Score: 3, Insightful

    BT seem to be gearing up for something, or reacting to something. Its strange for them to have such a flurry of activity as they have had of late, normally they are quite the epitome of corporate dawdling on products and issues.

    Seems that they are wanting to seriously get themselves some press time, and in my opinion are using some clever marketing to do so.

    Look at the ammount of new services / announcements / products they are kicking out the door at the moment listed on El Reg.

    In my opinion, this is nothing short of marketing genius. Anyone who cries out against the obvious censorship issues risks being labelled. It pushes this kind of activity under ground. so who does this really protect? the only real benefit i see from this is accidental visiting of sites, from bad links, spam or whatever. It certainly wont stop any actual people wishing to view child pornography from getting to it.

    BT have made an unprecedented movement to block this content, thereby championing themselves with many different groups of society (churches, parents, police, etc etc) - but the same fanfare that has delighted these groups has warned any of the sickos that actually want to view this content that they cant use BT services to get their kicks. OK then, so they go elsewhere. No one would continue to use a service they know can not suit their needs, as underground or sick as those needs may be, they will simply move to another provider that doesnt block in this way.

    Marketing genius - Champion yourselves with lots of the country, by actually bringing little to no benefit to them or anyone else.

    Then sharp on the heels of this announcement, tell the people who you have just delighted that you are going to be saving them a lot of money soon by changing the infrastructure of your network etc and routing your calls using VOIP. Thinking of leaving BT? They seem to be keen to impress and promise lots, all within a week. something strange is going on, i just cant figure out what, heh.

  44. Italy already carries 80% of phone calls as data by optical-damage · · Score: 4, Informative

    Telecom Italia already carries 80% of its national backbone telephone calls on an IP based network infrastructure, and something like 40% of their international calls.

    This is the back-end of the service, multiplexing together thousands of calls over high speed (2.5 and 10Gb/second) network links. The network also uses class of service and many other configuration setups to ensure a consistent quality of service for the traffic flow. You can be sure everything will be massively resilient. In addition this traffic won't traverse the public Internet at all, but will be on a private network (though gatewayed to the Internet for connectivity to other services). This will allow BT to guarantee they wont be hit by Internet related issues like congestion, black-hole routing and so on. Dont compare this service to public Internet VoIP, its NOTHING like it.

    Personally I think this is a fantastic move, and will really help the UK take advantage of up and coming technologies over the next decade.

    PS there is already an Internet standard to map IP addresses to public phone numbers, and there is also work on integrating VoIP into the DNS infrastructure!