iDNET to Migrate Entire UK Phone Network to All-IP with BT

[Simon]

I switched to FTTP with IDNet today (Faversham, North Kent), and changed my landline number to VoIP. I bought a VoIP adapter to keep my old phone setup (which includes a TrueCall call blocker) and ported my old number.

Using Sipgate's VoIP service on PAYG, there's no line fee, and as I rarely called out on the landline, it's almost free (although it cost £30 to port the old number). Dropping the landline fee means I'm getting more than twice the old speed (going up to Ultrafast Basic at ~160mbps) for roughly the same cost.

Have you actually used the new phone service yet?  Just wondering what the call quality is like.

[zappaDPJ]

I switched to FTTP with IDNet today (Faversham, North Kent), and changed my landline number to VoIP. I bought a VoIP adapter to keep my old phone setup (which includes a TrueCall call blocker) and ported my old number.

Using Sipgate's VoIP service on PAYG, there's no line fee, and as I rarely called out on the landline, it's almost free (although it cost £30 to port the old number). Dropping the landline fee means I'm getting more than twice the old speed (going up to Ultrafast Basic at ~160mbps) for roughly the same cost.

There's more useful information there than I've managed to find since I first heard about it

Thanks for posting

[Simon]

I don't really want to be messing about using different providers for different bits and pieces.  I'm hoping, when the time comes, there will be a simple all-in-one package to switch to, like I am on at the moment with IDNet.

[L2020]

Have you actually used the new phone service yet?  Just wondering what the call quality is like.

For Sipgate and most VoIP the call quality is comparable to analogue (unless were on a fairly rubbish or long line in which case it will sound better), Sipgate Basic don't as yet support any HD Codecs, but that is often a mute point anyway as you need the other end to support the exact same Codec, plus with PSTN break in/out the call quality gets the lowest common denominator of the PSTN network. 

I get mobile calls diverted to my Sipgate number at the moment and the call quality does sound good but it is only using the G.711 codec covering a range of 300-3400Hz, with that codec being from 1970s and at around 64kbit/sec uncompressed.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.711  It's free to use as out of patent so that makes it popular today 

[L2020]

I have no answers but this appears to suggest in order to switch off PSTN, every line will need to be fully FTTP.
https://www.computerweekly.com/news/252500643/Openreach-extends-analogue-phone-programme-switch-off-to-further-700000-homes-and-businesses

It doesn't require FTTP.  There will be two kinds of switch off, one is PSTN (analogue telephones), the other is copper.  Copper will be around for quite some time until everyone is on FTTP, and those still on copper will continue to receive their ADSL or VDSL data, and will run their VoIP over that.  Openreach have some very low data products for people not wanting Internet but still wanting a phone line and at lower prices, think it is 500Kbit/sec, enough for voice calls but too little to do much on the Internet.

[dlorde]

Have you actually used the new phone service yet?  Just wondering what the call quality is like.

No, I've not used it in anger - only just to verify it was working, phoning myself from my mobile.

[peasblossom]

I don't really want to be messing about using different providers for different bits and pieces.  I'm hoping, when the time comes, there will be a simple all-in-one package to switch to, like I am on at the moment with IDNet.

I hope we just get switched and we hardly notice the difference. (Except that they will have told us it's switching.)

[nowster]

I've had a free SIPGate incoming number for a few years. I've never had any problems with it. It's routed in to my Asterisk server which has a few SIP phones hanging off it. The call quality is identical to a landline.

[andrue]

At last!  Something on the BBC about this:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-58233420

"But Ben Wood, of CCS Insight, says: "For the vast majority of people, the landline is now just an annoying tax they have to pay when they want internet access.""

We will still have to pay line rental (or most of it anyway). Line rental pays for the repair and maintenance of the cable and although fibre should be more resilient than copper it can still suffer damage from tree roots and errant diggers. The only alternative to line rental is 'pay at time of need' which would be horribly expensive.

Getting rid of the voice service aspect will reduce the line rental slightly but only by a couple of quid and you might find you have to pay that to a VoIP provider anyway.

[Terryphi]

dlorde,
What did the transition to FTTP involve physically? For instance, was it necessary to dig up your drive? Does FTTP connect to the existing internal wiring in the property?

[L2020]

dlorde,
What did the transition to FTTP involve physically? For instance, was it necessary to dig up your drive? Does FTTP connect to the existing internal wiring in the property?

It varies so much it doesn't matter what happens with someone else's install, yours may be completely different.  If your telephone cable comes from overhead poles that is how they will give you FTTP.  If your telephone cable comes up from underground near the house, that is how they will usually install FTTP.  Typically underground cable is laid in pipes (ducting), so you can easily add other cables, they push rods through then pull back a blue rope, then can pull through a new cable.  Sometimes these pipes have become blocked with dirt or have collapsed, this may mean digging up the road, pavement or somewhere on your property to fix the problem.  Sometimes cable is DIG, direct in ground.  So no pipe to allow adding more cables, in this case they will need to dig up drive or garden perhaps.

FTTP doesn't carry electricity, it is just light, and so there is nothing to connect to existing wiring.  You may continue to receive a telephone line via the existing copper wires, or the master socket becomes dead, and you need to treat the phone socket they put on the router as the new master socket for your telephones.

[Postal]

You may continue to receive a telephone line via the existing copper wires, or the master socket becomes dead, and you need to treat the phone socket they put on the router as the new master socket for your telephones.

If IDNET are going to a VOIP based system as preparation for the whole country having FTTP then even if your communication with the outside world comes down copper wires to your house your existing phone service will no longer work and you will need to have a router with an external adaptor or built in phone socket.  Your existing master socket will no longer work for voice calls even though your are connected through a copper phone wire.

That then brings a trap for the unwary.  Many people now use dedicated VOIP providers like Sipgate as they usually work out cheaper than the services provided by ISPs/major telecomms providers.  You can port your existing number to the VOIP provider but unless the losing supplier (in our case IDNET) has the right processes in place, porting the number may cause a cease of your existing phone connection and with it your internet service.  Just another thing to watch out for in the murky underworld of internet providers and connections.

[zappaDPJ]

That then brings a trap for the unwary.  Many people now use dedicated VOIP providers like Sipgate as they usually work out cheaper than the services provided by ISPs/major telecomms providers.  You can port your existing number to the VOIP provider but unless the losing supplier (in our case IDNET) has the right processes in place, porting the number may cause a cease of your existing phone connection and with it your internet service.  Just another thing to watch out for in the murky underworld of internet providers and connections.

I've read that given that scenario it's also possible you may lose the ability to retain your phone number. I have no idea how true it is, I'm still trying to sort the wheat from the chaff.

[robinc]

This of course had to happen sooner or later - fills me with confidence for the future 

https://www.theregister.com/2021/09/02/uk_voip_telcos_revil_ransom/

[stan]

I wonder if I may add to this thread regarding the proposed VOIP changes in 2025.

I'm a long standing subscriber to IDNet and did call IDNet a few weeks ago to ask what was planned in the run up to 2025.  It did, initially, strike me that I was asking about something that was far from finalised however I was put through to Steve Waters who was well and truly clued up (so much so that I had a bit of trouble keeping up with much of the terminology).

The upshot seemed to me to be that, at this point in time, I could upgrade from basic ADSL to Fibre To The Cabinet and could order new VOIP phones to use with my "landline" but that the cost for sufficient new instruments to replace the existing cordless and corded in my home was quite substantial. I gathered that the new phones would plug in to the router (be that the existing one or a new one if required ... more expense).

The possibility of using my existing cordless and corded phones seemed to revolve around provision of an adaptor box but there seemed to be a slight element of uncertainty surrounding this option.

I left the matter in abeyance and hoped it would all go away - but I'm not sure that it will.

Today my next door neighbour (who has FTTC) and was with TalkTalk until recently told me that his new provider (Sky) has given him a new router into which he has simply plugged his existing corded/cordless phones - he no longer plugs the phone(s) into the old BT box as he did before. No adaptor box was needed and it all works as before  i.e he's still got a landline with dial tone. The changeover from TalkTalk to Sky was, for him at least, seemingly uneventful.

My question is - if Sky can come up with a simple and painless transfer from the old landline arrangement  ... to the new VOIP arrangementthen why is the IDNet procedure less so?

I've decided to simply ignore the matter until such time as it all appears to be more straightforward.  I'd much prefer not to have to change provider as life with IDNet is so simple at the moment and even if I do pay a bit more I'm happy with that and am hoping they'll contact me at some point to tell me how easy it will be to change to VOIP.

Is that wishful thinking? 

[zappaDPJ]

After a lot of research and some discussion we've decided to ditch our land line.

[stan]

I suspect that's the way many are going.
Up until recently it seemed as necessary as having mains gas, electric and drainage but, of course, in reality a land line is, for loads of people, nothing like as significant nowadays. I havent worked out if doing away with it does actually mean you save the full land-line costs that I currently pay. If it did then that must surely offset the additional costs of making more mobile calls, even with me being on PAYG at 3 pence per minute. But I suspect it's not that simple.

[Simon]

I don't have a good mobile signal at home, so ditching my landline isn't really an option for me at the moment.  Besides, I like my phone number, and would want to migrate that to any new service when the time comes. 

[robinc]

The upshot seemed to me to be that, at this point in time, I could upgrade from basic ADSL to Fibre To The Cabinet and could order new VOIP phones to use with my "landline" but that the cost for sufficient new instruments to replace the existing cordless and corded in my home was quite substantial. I gathered that the new phones would plug in to the router (be that the existing one or a new one if required ... more expense).

The possibility of using my existing cordless and corded phones seemed to revolve around provision of an adaptor box but there seemed to be a slight element of uncertainty surrounding this option.

Today my next door neighbour (who has FTTC) and was with TalkTalk until recently told me that his new provider (Sky) has given him a new router into which he has simply plugged his existing corded/cordless phones.

My question is - if Sky can come up with a simple and painless transfer from the old landline arrangement  ... to the new VOIP arrangement then why is the IDNet procedure less so?

If you take the bones out of this, IDNet are saying that you can install an ATA box which will plug in to a network point on your router. This just handles the conversion to VOIP. An upgrade to FTTC will need a new router into which you would be able to plug your phone directly (it incorporates an ATA box).

This is just like the old days of switching to digital TV. Everyone started off with a Freeview box=ATA then TVs came out with it built in.

All that has happened to your neighbour is that Sky have provided a new router with the ATA gubbins built in.

From what I gather from earlier posts IDNet are concerned to make sure that folks do not go off and buy some cr*ppy old ATA box of fleabay and than expect them to help if it doesn't work. I do not know if they are planning to allow you to buy an 'approved' ATA box from them or whether they've decided to drop the idea and just go to 'needs new router' which may be the less problematic solution long term.

Having said that, my mobile supports Voice over Wifi and 4G Calling (LTE). I have found that Vioice over Wifi (VOIP) is a bit rough whereas LTE is crystal clear. The good bit is that whilst our normal 2G signal is a bit poor, 4G is good and that is what is used for LTE.

I still have huge concerns the a lot of older folks are just not going to be able to manage this switch over, especially with the emergency services address registration providing a new scammers' honey pot.

[stan]

I'm grateful for anything that fleshes out the, rather vague, position Idnet are maintaining at the moment. I would have thought customers might have been a little better informed in order to outline (in simple terms for the benefit of their less tech savvy users) what might be available to them and giving them the opportunity to make an early upgrade if such a thing was readily available.
So thank you Robin for the reply.

[nowster]

You'll need a VoIP FXS (Foreign Exchange Subscriber) box which will convert from VoIP to analogue telephone. It also needs to generate the ringing current. Many use the US wiring system and have RJ11 sockets. You'd need to use an adapter to convert to BT wiring and also provide the necessary ring capacitor that many UK phones need.

Note that the ATA (Analogue Terminal Adapter) may only have the capacity to provide ringing current to a lower number of phones than a proper exchange line, meaning that not all phones may ring on an extension system.

They very often need carefully setting up to match the impedance characteristics that the UK spec phone needs so that it doesn't cause echo on the call. This is the most problematic aspect with off the shelf kit. Most stuff out there is designed for the US market which has a different setup.

[Simon]

Why can't they just leave things alone?  This is like saying they're going to change the every day light bulb and you're going to need a degree in engineering to work the new ones.  A telephone is a basic necessity.  I hope this changeover isn't going to be as complicated as it sounds. 

[stan]

I'm genuinely pleased to have had some responses to my post and I've read "nowster"s reply but a litlle bit of despair has returned.

I'm 70 years of age and not senile - but not tech savvy beyond the basic stuff.  I've had computers since the year 2000 and have got mobile phones and can even claim to have worked for Post Office Telephones in the City of London in the late 1960s fixing phones with dials!!!

But "nowster" speaks of things that, frankly, not everyone is going to understand.  There are people (probably people of my age and older) who haven't mastered the technology (and the terminolgy that goes with it) which others take for granted. It can be slightly irritating to have to ask an advisor to explain what this or that acronym stands for.  When I spoke to Steve Waters it was clear HE knew what he was talking about  ....  but he assumed that I, also, was on the same level of understanding hence me needing to ask the meaning of numerous phrases and acronyms that meant nothing to me.  I'm a customer, not an IT technician.

My point at the outset was that I thought IDNet should be making some sort of initial contact with their DOMESTIC customers (all of them, not just the clever ones) .... [and please note I didn't say there that they should be reaching out to their customers  ] ..... and should be explaining, in words of one syllable if need be, what is proposed and what is likely to be required in terms of line upgrades or replacement routers or new equipment in the home and the likely cost implications too.

Apologies if the first signs of frustrations are creeping in.

[Simon]

I don't think we need to panic about this just yet, and I would hope that IDNet will be more forthcoming with information as the time approaches for the changes, which I believe isn't going to be for another few years. 

It won't be long before we won't be able to buy a proper car any more either.  At least not one that does more than 35 miles before it needs plugging in for six hours.  I know that's a wild exaggeration, but the point is, there was a time when new technology made things better.  Now, all it seems to do is make our lives more difficult.

Or, am I just getting old?

[stan]

I suspect we're both getting old (probably at the same pace too).

I think what resurrected the topic for me was when my neighbour recently showed me his new router and showed me his existing phones plugged into it and said how straightforward it was ... no engineer visit, no terchnical terms, he was simply told to plug the phone into the router socket instead of the BT socket ... and that was that.  And I'm contrasting that with the initial calls to IDNet when the ladies I spoke to were most definitely not clued up and needed to pass over to Steve Waters and that was going from one extreme to the other - but the supply of new VOIP instruments wasn't straightforward and the alternative of an ATA (adaptor box to allow me to use my existing phones) wasn't straightforward either.

I was struck by the cost of new IP phones too.  I can't remember now how much but to replace half a dozen cordless phones and a base station (plus it's respective power supply which doesn't come with it)  mean't I need to send the Mrs out on the streets and sell my prized collection of Ming vases. And I bet it's not just a matter of plugging them in and they'll work straight away - life's never that easy.

And now I read what "nowster" has written and that didn't make it sound any easier to grasp.

Apparently it's beneficial for me to buy any new IP phones direct from IDNet because they need to be "set up" or "pre-configured" before I can use them.  I don't disbelieve that coz I don't know any better - if that's what needs to happen then that's what needs to happen ... but I confess it sounds ridiculously complicated to have to configure a perishing phone before I can use it at home. I Googled it and it got so involved and was the cause of so much dispute and disagreement that I gave up trying to make sense of it.  There's an equal amount of technical debate concerning the ATA adaptor boxes too (as "nowster" touched on earlier.)

If it means anything to anyone the router I have here at home is a Billion  Bipac   8800 AXL R2


Other contributors to this topic have spoken about SIPGATE.  Well, to be honest, I didn't know what SIPGATE was until I Googled it and having Googled it I'm darn sure I don't need to complicate my life by entering to some additional contract with an independant firm in order to provide me with a landline service which I already have.  And I don't want to hear how advanced the SIPGATE service is and how many advanced facilities it offers me coz I neither want nor need them.

The prime reason I've been with IDNet since 2008 is the ease of contact with them.  A simple phone call and I'm usually through to someone in the UK who can sort me out. It's not coz they're cheaper than anyone else ... I'm prepared to pay more than my neighbour who was with TalkTalk and is now with Sky because I don't want a huge organization passing me round the universe - but my neighbour does seem to have had life made easy for him during the move away from one to the other. He said the hardest part was getting a new email address notified to his contacts.

Apologies again for the rant.