---

@millernet wrote:

My colleague once said that he had the feeling that the whole thing works like this:

Swisscom builds and pays, Fredy says how it should be built and would ideally like to use the infrastructure for free.

He doesn’t care that a lot of time is wasted.

---

That’s not true. Fredy rents Layer 1 or dark fiber to the end customer and the space required in the headquarters for his Swisscom equipment. Of course, a backbone connection to other headquarters is also required. POP’s. You can find a detailed invoice here: https://blog.init7.net/de/rentabilitatsrechnung/

….

---

LOL

The link you provided says: “Our Fiber7 services are available in large parts of Switzerland, but unfortunately not everywhere. As much as we would like to offer Fiber7 to every household - the expansion is not feasible in all localities. Technical challenges or a too Low market potential can mean that developing an area is not worthwhile.”

With P2MP the calculation would look a little different. It would also be worthwhile to expand areas that would not be worthwhile with “pure, genuine” P2P. Bullying and bullying so that the best solution has to be implemented, but you don’t want to put a meter of fiberglass in the ground and then complain that it’s just not worth it everywhere… I find that a bit shabby.

January, so be it. If someone still doesn’t have a glass connection in 10 years, they’ll know where to thank…

@kaetho Exactly, that’s clearly stated in this article. If the ComCo allows itself to be harnessed to Künzler’s cartel law and defends its interests brilliantly, then so be it. A better move to defend one’s own interests would have been Init7 or Fredy Künzler couldn’t succeed at all! It can no longer be changed. Swisscom did not want to allow any regulations in the area of ​​fiber optic networks and is now left with a mess. Lost the battle but won the war? Let’s see. Swisscom will be able to maintain its market share and will still have a “monopoly” on Layer 1. A superstructure simply won’t be worth it.

---

@millernet wrote:
Thank you for your comments. My question comes from the fact that I was able to observe the change from type 1 to type 2 at some locations, including my home address. A few months ago the text said Type 1 and suddenly Type 2. The BEP has definitely been upgraded and a splitter installed.

Interesting, I’ll see if I can see anything about your location. This is a change of status, and there are many such statuses. Type 2 is the most general, which is set when the target date is set to a far-far-away date.

Conversely, does this mean that type 1 still has an appointment in the foreseeable future?

Please do not confuse them: P2P and P2MP are not technologies, but simply construction methods. Ok, an optical splitter is a technology, but physics if you will. The technology in physics is, for example, BX or PON.

Even the 3rd ISP cannot afford to use a port (laser) for every customer. That’s why they also use PON, with the splitter being inserted in front of the “optical patch panel” in the control center. That’s why they want the fiber from the headquarters directly to the customer. And they also use BBCS (Layer 2) from us, because unless they have a minimum of n customers in an area, according to the profitability calculation, the costs of setting up at the headquarters and the monthly costs are not worth it. I’m still missing the fiber access node there, or does he mean the switches? It can’t be that you have 98 SFP in there.

TWDM PON

Yes, it could be the future, but even then the 3rd ISP would not have their own fiber but only their own color in the spectrum. But again there is an element in between like with P2MP that someone has to build and maintain. In addition, the 3rd ISP then again depends on the device that splits the spectrum. The story is exciting, but today it is still very expensive and actually obsolete, since the ComCo says that you have to have a P2P line for every customer. We would have gone in this direction, but at the moment it is simply not necessary.

House connection (= BEP)

I don’t really understand what @Werner wrote.
The fact is that today you install 4 fibers from the BEP to the OTO (old BX installations often only had 2 fibers). From the BEP, either all 4 fibers go to the control center or 1-2 fibers go to the optical splitter, which is installed in the street or in the BEP itself. If @millernet has BEP and OTO installed, but no one is allowed to order services on them, then the direct fibers from the BEP to the central office are missing, so the feeder and drop have too few fibers. The feeder now has to be tightened so that on the route where P2MP exists today, each usage unit gets at least one fiber to the control center. Then extend the drop from the feeder to the house if necessary (e.g. with MFH). If the communities were proactively involved and, for example, informed us about planned road work or even planned the empty pipes/route, that would be enormously helpful. But unfortunately that’s not the case. Depending on the location, the migration will unfortunately take time (years, but only 1 digit).

---

@dawust wrote:

Conversely, does this mean that type 1 still has an appointment in the foreseeable future?

---

There are no “types”, this was simply the listing from @millernet. There is a plan date and a status for an address, which can have several characteristics. A date can even be in the past, but the status is set to postponed. But you have to change the date first before the status can be reset. It’s not a simple system issue, as there can be many exceptions to exceptions. Example: BEP was planned for April 20, 2023, and that morning there was an excavator from the neighboring construction site on the shaft. So the status is set to “Postponed” but without a date because you don’t know when you can go there again in the planning. The construction crews are planned and perhaps a slot is taken or the expansion is postponed to the end of the tranche. As soon as you have a new appointment, the status and date are adjusted (can be seen in the checker).

@robbieB

I took the liberty of consulting our line program regarding your zip code. There are mainly Zores canals in the streets. A cable pull is theoretically possible. In practice, countless work holes often have to be opened in order to be able to pull in a feeder. In the past, the lead-copper cables were wrapped with jutte rags and tar (additional insulation against moisture penetration). Over the decades, these tend to stick to the Zores. If there are several cables in the Zores, pulling the cable without holes is practically impossible. Especially if the Zores does not run completely straight between two cable ducts - which is often not the case. The more cables there are in the Zores, the more difficult it becomes. With a Zores that runs through the entire village, it inevitably has branch points. These hinder a cable pull again. Here too, work holes are necessary.

There are already fiber optic cables on the main street that were installed years/decades ago. However, these are intended for other purposes and do not end in the FTTH cabinet (OMDF) in the local headquarters but in a dedicated cabinet. This means that even if there were enough reserve fibers, converting to FTTH would be impossible or extremely complicated.

And then there is the fact that not every fiber optic cable belongs to Swisscom. There is the so-called FTTO here. Here a company pays a large amount of money to connect its headquarters with fiber optics. This also applies to the fiber optic cable between the headquarters and the company location. So-called “private cable”. Here you cannot simply use fibers for FTTH expansion. And these fibers also end in a completely different cabinet than intended for the FTTH connections.

And last but not least; The fiber optic cables that run through your village are also not sufficient for a comprehensive FTTH P2P expansion. Either way, additional cables would be necessary.

At some point you will also have fiber optics expanded - I am convinced. However, expanding it in your village is quite complex. Perhaps a road renovation is planned, during which Swisscom will lay new pipes and then use them for an FTTH expansion. But here too there is a BUT; The pipes between the local headquarters and your place of residence must of course also be able to be followed.

You see; A comprehensive FTTH expansion under today’s sewerage requirements would be extremely complex and, above all, very expensive! Like RogerG. As already mentioned, there are fixed budgets. This budget is calibrated and set annually. So you can’t just quickly connect a village like yours with FTTH.

@PatrickS Thank you very much for the detailed (deeper)

Background information.

Ouh Dear, In summary, either the ‘GWP’(“Works”) supports/cooperates with you or we will have to wait ‘longer’ in the village (with around 400-450 NE) until the fiber optics are blown into the pipes. That’s unfortunate. I’ve only been living there for 5 years (the seller of the new MFH tipped me off to a GF expansion by 2021). But when you hear that Zores are mainly used over the area and no cable pipe blocks, well… I suspect that this is due to the municipality’s lack of planning, considering that a number of new buildings have been built in the last 10 years and road renovations coordinated by the building authority….

@Roger G

I would also like to abuse this thread for a moment.

In April the cables were pulled and the BEP was installed in the house. But our address has been written in the Checker for years: “Unfortunately, the expansion of this location has been postponed, etc.”

Do you possibly know more?

Greetings Tom

@Heinekentom

Salu Tom

The information in the checker is taken from our systems. As soon as there is an end date for the expansion, this will be displayed in the checker.

You can’t always assume that when Drop and BEP are built, a commissioning date will be entered and displayed in the checker. But at least something is happening for you 😉

Is it a new building or renovation?

If you like, you can send me your address (please via private message). I’ll then look in our systems to see if I can find anything about it. This is how we can RogerG. relieve a little pressure 🙂

I wish you a nice evening!

Greetings

Patrick

@PatrickS and @RogerG and all others:

Thank you for the detailed reactions!

💐 or 🍻

I may have understood the business part of prioritization. That’s why the city and the more densely populated Aglo communities in Kt. ZH received glass first. Gives more profit in the short term / sooner and can be used to finance the more expensive rural or mountain region connections. With a planned EBITDA of 4.6-4.7 billion for 2023, I consider the argument to be complaining at a high level.

😉

Regarding the communities: A few years ago they built the sewerage system for the separation system. The community invited people to the singing hall and provided information. Mr. Andiroid then asked whether empty conduits would also be installed for Swisscom’s fiber optic connection. The sewer system runs parallel to the copper route. Apparently both requests were not answered. I think there are communication problems here and there. After the drop was moved at the end of the year and only a small 80×80cm loop shaft was needed, I could also understand why “you” didn’t respond.

👍

On the technical side: What I still don’t understand is the technical prioritization of the drops before the feeder. The “last mile” was also rebuilt after the backbones. If you argue that there are too few fibers in the feeders to the DSLAM, then this was already known at the Green Table 10/15 years ago. I don’t understand your technical argument with FTTO, clogged Zores and scarce fiber reserves, even if I can understand the reasons given. Or to put it another way: Given the reasons given, what is a new insight that has emerged in the last 20 years?

😬

On politics: I wasn’t there at the “Green Table”. What I understood is that back then there should have been 4 fibers per participant-Anschluss and today “suddenly” only one fiber per ₁₀ connections should be possible. A factor of 50-100 cannot be a calculation error!? In an environment that has been liberalized since the 1990s, I understand that competition drives down prices and the monopolistic technology P2MP does not. Higher price, higher profit, bigger bonus, stronger market power. Fredy can complain about the de-facto monopoly, right?

😠

Finally: It is clear to me that my arguments are just above the regular regulars’ table level. With the Swisscom prize for the years 2019-2022 it was possible to build a tube of the Gotthard base tunnel. Is that really not enough for a comprehensive upgrade of the Swiss-wide feeders? Not even those that would have had to be built after 2019?

💸

I’m still looking forward to all the reactions to this thread and wish everyone an enjoyable summer!

🍹🏝️😎

@andiroid

Of course, there are always two sides when it comes to civil engineering 😉 and mistakes happen - including on the part of Swisscom.

Now about your technical approach. Of course, with the mCAN expansions, a 432 Fs cable could have been inserted into each slot.

In order to remain as fact-based as possible, I report on my own experiences.

Well, we have already mentioned many times that many pipe systems are full of capacity. A so-called mini fiber optic cable can usually be inserted. It’s usually no longer enough for a big “beating” like a 432 Fs GGT. A 288Fs is sometimes too small for P2P. You are in a dead end.

A mini cable can also be pulled in up to 300m. If the pipe section is longer, you will have problems with the tensile force. The cable could be damaged. Outside the cities it is therefore out of the question. That leaves GGT cables. Depending on the sewer system and its occupancy, the 432 is unsuitable. So you resort to the 288 or 192 (smaller outside diameter, therefore a little more flexible to retract). These in turn may no longer be sufficient.

The basic idea of ​​the mCAN was to bring high bandwidths as quickly as possible to areas where there is no UBB Anschluss yet. Swisscom made this promise in 2013 and achieved it. This required the insertion of fiber optic cables into the shafts and the installation of the “signal converters” in the shaft.

I can’t judge whether and what the idea was at the time regarding dimensions. I was not part of the project group. After a pilot phase, the necessary processes were mapped and built according to guidelines. It’s no use discussing why, why, why. We won’t be able to provide the answers and we won’t change the whole fact.

---

@PatrickS wrote:

@robbieB

Sorry that I can’t give you better information. At the same time, I would also like to state that I cannot/do not want to give any binding information. Especially in the FTTH environment, expansion plans and projects can change suddenly - cooperation agreements, road renovations, etc. That’s why; Be patient, yes - a lot is still possible 😉

It is in Swisscom’s interest to connect all houses with FTTH. Preferably immediately. But as we all know, this would be a huge financial investment. There are areas where it is relatively easy - but unfortunately there are also areas or mountain villages where it is simply not worth it. RogerG has already gone further. explains in detail that a construction always has to be amortized within a certain time horizon. Furthermore, enormous resources are required in the field of civil engineering, which are not limitless. There is a shortage of skilled workers.

That’s why we have to be patient.

Oh dear communities… in my work at Swisscom I have already worked in several departments and specialist areas. I was also responsible for civil engineering projects. Communities often did not inform us about projects. Or only when the road renovations were almost finished. It is impossible to plan an entire project perimeter/needs analysis within one working day.

And so it happened as it had to happen; In areas where it was necessary to expand the pipes, none could be built because some of the trenches had already been compacted again.

Or an anecdote from the troubleshooting service as “Good Night Gschichtli”; A road was renewed including various works pipes (Swisscom was informed too late) and the surface covering has already been installed. Suddenly a cable malfunction. On site, a hole had to be opened in the new decking for the enclosure. You can imagine that the enthusiasm on the part of the community/canton was very limited 😉 During the renovation work, an excavator hit our Zores and damaged 2 lead cables. In order to avoid costs and construction delays, the Zores was straightened and covered. The lead cables were not damaged externally. However, because the copper cores in lead cables were insulated with paper, the paper on the copper cores tore. There were small hairline cracks in the lead jacket. Over time, moisture built up in the cable and the error messages increased.

Greetings

---

Hey @PatrickS Everything’s fine, as it is. Thanks anyway for your detailed information on the subject of fiber optic networks and the expansion potential in my location/(dense) settlement area.

Yes, my expectation would be if the community or The building department should tear up our streets for renovations so that they also take you on board. And otherwise there will be a KoPa with the GWP!

Cheerz

Maybe this will interest someone here. Over the next 8-10 years there could be federal support for fiber optic expansion in unprofitable areas.

The federal government’s high-broadband strategy report was published today:

To implement the federal government’s high broadband strategy, the Federal Council is proposing a funding program - as required in the postulate. It should only initiate network expansion on a subsidiary basis where private investments are lacking and can demonstrably not be profitable. All wired ones should be included
Can benefit from connections that cannot provide a performance of at least 1 Gbit/s and
where there is corresponding demand, but no expansion can be expected due to the high expansion costs. The program should focus primarily on the only wired technology that is considered future-proof, FTTH.

[https://www.bakom.admin.ch/bakom/de/home/das-bakom/organisation/legal-foundations/bundesratsgeschaefte/hochbreitbandnetz\_schweiz.html](https://www.bakom.admin.ch/ bakom/de/home/das-bakom/organisation/legal-basis/bundesratsgeschaefte/hochbreitbandnetz_schweiz.html)

Here is another post from July 5th, 2023:

[https://www.watson.ch/digital/wirtschaft/699663028-glasfibro-schlamassel-von-swisscom-koennte-noch-2023-geloest- Werden] (https://www.watson.ch/digital/wirtschaft/699663028-glasfibro-schlamassel-von-swisscom-koennte-noch-2023-geloest- Werden)

🫤

I also got a P2MP cable pulled in. But since then… Federal Court forever, because fellow Berbers sense disadvantages. Can they prove that too?

Really an ‘awkward’ question, sorry that I have to answer you like that. So, obviously there is evidence that has been proven. Otherwise the ComCo wouldn’t go into it at all, especially that the Federal Court had also confirmed this with the precautionary measures! Point! Comco should make a decision or result by the end of the year. And yes, in the future only P2P construction will be used, you just have to be patient until your Anschluss is returned. Being rebuilt!!

Cheerz

@diJis

At the time, people were talking about unbundling the last mile when it came to the copper network.

This was then declared a law and this guaranteed Swisscom’s subscription competitors that they would be able to rent a direct copper line between the headquarters and the end customers from Swisscom at any time.

When it came to the fiber optic network, the Federal Council wanted to write the same principle into the law during the last revision of the Telecommunications Act in 2018, but this was then rejected by Parliament (with a relatively narrow vote).

A very intensive lobbying activity by Swisscom is said to have played an important role 🙂

That’s why Swisscom, with its technical idea of ​​preventing free access to the “last mile” in the fiber optic network, has not already been stopped directly by the Telecommunications Act, but because this would also create a potentially competitive and monopoly-like situation on the last mile fiber optic network. was only temporarily slowed down by antitrust law.

In a sense, by actually enforcing competition law, the courts are only improving Parliament’s “sloppy” work on the Telecommunications Act, which was influenced by lobbying. 🙂

Since I accuse Parliament of “sloppy” work in the last revision of the Telecommunications Act, I have now briefly researched the respective arguments for protecting or not protecting the last fiber optic mile in the deliberations in the National Council.

The end result on the question of the last fiber optic mile in autumn 2018 was:

“In order to guarantee effective competition, Parliament is proposing a different approach. The Federal Council should report every three years on the development of costs and access to fiber optic connections.”

Of course, everyone has to decide for themselves whether they want to classify this as sloppy or as a simple refusal to work by the legislative authority in the Telecommunications Act.