My friend Ivan has:

- Landline with associated phone number from BT;

- ADSL broadband from Zen.

He needs to prepare for the discontinuation of POTS at the end of 2025.

He wants to retain his existing router (for reasons I could explain in a
separate post). He intends to port his landline number to Voipfone.

So far he has:

1) Set up an account with Voipfone and bought an ATA. These have been
tested and work with the free phone 056 number that Voipfone issued.

2) Asked Zen to convert his broadband service to SoGEA. This is so the
broadband service is separated from the landline number, so that number
can be ported to Voipfone in future. The conversion is planned to take
place on 29 April.

The conversion to SoGEA includes converting the service to VSDL (i.e.
FTTC). This should improve the broadband reliability as well as speed.
There's no hope of FTTP from Zen - probably ever - since County
Broadband and CityFibre both have fibre available at Ivan's location.

The order acknowledgement from Zen warns that the landline number will
stop working with the conversion to SoGEA. I'm surprised that Zen is
able to force BT to cancel the landline number simply because of the
conversion to SoGEA.

Can anybody explain?

I am aware that the reverse does happen: if you were to port a landline
number away from BT it would cancel any broadband service associated
with that landline irrespective of the fact that the broadband might be
from another supplier.

Can anybody report their own experience?

--
Graham J

On Sun 14/04/2024 09:27, Graham J wrote:
> My friend Ivan has:
>
> - Landline with associated phone number from BT;
>
> - ADSL broadband from Zen.
>
> He needs to prepare for the discontinuation of POTS at the end of 2025.
>
> He wants to retain his existing router (for reasons I could explain in a
> separate post).  He intends to port his landline number to Voipfone.
>
> So far he has:
>
> 1) Set up an account with Voipfone and bought an ATA.  These have been
> tested and work with the free phone 056 number that Voipfone issued.
>
> 2) Asked Zen to convert his broadband service to SoGEA.  This is so the
> broadband service is separated from the landline number, so that number
> can be ported to Voipfone in future.  The conversion is planned to take
> place on 29 April.
>
> The conversion to SoGEA includes converting the service to VSDL (i.e.
> FTTC).  This should improve the broadband reliability as well as speed.
> There's no hope of FTTP from Zen - probably ever - since County
> Broadband and CityFibre both have fibre available at Ivan's location.
>
> The order acknowledgement from Zen warns that the landline number will
> stop working with the conversion to SoGEA.  I'm surprised that Zen is
> able to force BT to cancel the landline number simply because of the
> conversion to SoGEA.
>
> Can anybody explain?
>
> I am aware that the reverse does happen: if you were to port a landline
> number away from BT it would cancel any broadband service associated
> with that landline irrespective of the fact that the broadband might be
> from another supplier.
>
> Can anybody report their own experience?
>
>
Don't see the issue with Zen as CityFibre are a carrier for Zen - at
least they are around here.

Graham J wrote:

> I'm surprised that Zen is able to force BT to cancel the landline number
> simply because of the conversion to SoGEA.

They couldn't do anything *other* than that, a SOGEA line (unlike a FTTC
line) cannot have a PSTN number.

Woody wrote:

[snip]

>>
> Don't see the issue with Zen as CityFibre are a carrier for Zen - at
> least they are around here.

OP here.

I was wrong, the other supplier is Gigaclear - and Zen tell me that
"there are no plans for Zen to sell connections via Gigaclear"

--
Graham J

Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
> My friend Ivan has:
>
> - Landline with associated phone number from BT;
>
> - ADSL broadband from Zen.

So that's WLR3 (wholesale line rental 3) I think, the way that broadband and
analogue phone come from different providers.

> The order acknowledgement from Zen warns that the landline number will
> stop working with the conversion to SoGEA. I'm surprised that Zen is
> able to force BT to cancel the landline number simply because of the
> conversion to SoGEA.
>
> Can anybody explain?

He's moving from a line with WLR3 voice plus separate ADSL on top, to a line
with SOGEA. Since SOGEA is a non-voice product there's no way for BT to
continue to provide service: they don't have a (consumer) product for
running digital voice over somebody else's broadband.

BT will probably send a letter saying 'we can't provide service any more -
if you changed your mind you can stop the change'. But stopping it is all
you can do, you can't move to a different BT product (unless you take BT
broadband too).

Given he has a changeover date booked, I'd be in touch with Voipfone so they have
the porting request in to take effect for the same day or the next day.

He could also ask Zen to take over the number at the same time, but better
to port to Voipfone.

Theo

Andy Burns wrote:
> Graham J wrote:
>
>> I'm surprised that Zen is able to force BT to cancel the landline
>> number simply because of the conversion to SoGEA.
>
> They couldn't do anything *other* than that, a SOGEA line (unlike a FTTC
> line) cannot have a PSTN number.

This isn't logical.

The reason for the existence of SoGEA is - as I understand it - to
provide a method of identifying the broadband service without needing a
phone number. The copper pair to the exchange (or perhaps to the green
cabinet) still exists. The rental for SoGEA pays for (a proportion of)
the cost of the copper pair. A phone service could still exist on that
line and its rental would then have to pay (a proportion of the cost of
the copper pair) and for the exchange equipment to support voice calls.

So it is purely an administrative issue, and provides a one off income
for Openreach.

The reverse is - logically - also true. There is no engineering reason
why a SoGEA line cannot have a PSTN service. It must be purely an
administrative issue.

--
Graham J

Theo wrote:

[snip]

>>
>> Can anybody explain?
>
> He's moving from a line with WLR3 voice plus separate ADSL on top, to a line
> with SOGEA. Since SOGEA is a non-voice product there's no way for BT to
> continue to provide service: they don't have a (consumer) product for
> running digital voice over somebody else's broadband.

[snip]

Thanks.

--
Graham J

Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
> Andy Burns wrote:
> > Graham J wrote:
> >
> >> I'm surprised that Zen is able to force BT to cancel the landline
> >> number simply because of the conversion to SoGEA.
> >
> > They couldn't do anything *other* than that, a SOGEA line (unlike a FTTC
> > line) cannot have a PSTN number.
>
> This isn't logical.
>
> The reason for the existence of SoGEA is - as I understand it - to
> provide a method of identifying the broadband service without needing a
> phone number. The copper pair to the exchange (or perhaps to the green
> cabinet) still exists. The rental for SoGEA pays for (a proportion of)
> the cost of the copper pair. A phone service could still exist on that
> line and its rental would then have to pay (a proportion of the cost of
> the copper pair) and for the exchange equipment to support voice calls.
>
> So it is purely an administrative issue, and provides a one off income
> for Openreach.

No, SOGEA is technically a different thing. In a traditional ADSL or FTTC
setup the lower frequencies are available for voice - I think it's up to
38kHz. That's why you need microfilters, to filter out the DSL in the kHz
and MHz from interfering from your voice signal.

In SOGEA the whole frequency band is available for DSL - that means the
DSLAM could decide to use the voice frequencies in order to get some more
bandwidth. That's why it can't coexist with a voice service.

Whether the DSLAMs actually do use the voice frequencies I don't know - I'd
guess the benefits of doing so are fairly limited.

Anyway, the main motivation of SOGEA is that Openreach wants to remove the
copper pair from the cabinet to the exchange, so they can then remove the
exchange. They move you onto SOGEA and VOIP so you no longer need the pair,
then behind the scenes dig up the pairs, remove their gear from the
exchange, move out and stop leasing it.

They don't want to put you on a product which still uses that copper pair
because a single one of those would block the whole exchange removal
programme.

Theo

Theo wrote:

[snip]

>> So it is purely an administrative issue, and provides a one off income
>> for Openreach.
>
> No, SOGEA is technically a different thing.

Perhaps.

> In a traditional ADSL or FTTC
> setup the lower frequencies are available for voice - I think it's up to
> 38kHz. That's why you need microfilters, to filter out the DSL in the kHz
> and MHz from interfering from your voice signal.

True, but probably only up to about 5kHz. Voice is digital throughout
the system except for the copper pair from you to the exchange.

> In SOGEA the whole frequency band is available for DSL - that means the
> DSLAM could decide to use the voice frequencies in order to get some more
> bandwidth. That's why it can't coexist with a voice service.

That may be true. Can you point to a trustworthy link that confirms it?

> Whether the DSLAMs actually do use the voice frequencies I don't know - I'd
> guess the benefits of doing so are fairly limited.

Agreed.

> Anyway, the main motivation of SOGEA is that Openreach wants to remove the
> copper pair from the cabinet to the exchange, so they can then remove the
> exchange. They move you onto SOGEA and VOIP so you no longer need the pair,
> then behind the scenes dig up the pairs, remove their gear from the
> exchange, move out and stop leasing it.
>
> They don't want to put you on a product which still uses that copper pair
> because a single one of those would block the whole exchange removal
> programme.

That's a reasonable explanation. So it would be even more profitable
for them to convert everybody to FTTP. But as far as I can tell, there
will be a small proportion of users who will never get FTTP, nor any
sort of digital connection because they live too far away from any
relevant fibre concentrator. So I can see copper pairs and exchanges
existing for at least 20 years yet ...

--
Graham J

On 14/04/2024 10:05, Andy Burns wrote:
> Graham J wrote:
>
>> I'm surprised that Zen is able to force BT to cancel the landline
>> number simply because of the conversion to SoGEA.
>
> They couldn't do anything *other* than that, a SOGEA line (unlike a FTTC
> line) cannot have a PSTN number.

When I was SOGEA'd last month, my phone number was recognised by this OR
site.......

https://www.broadbandchecker.btwholesale.com/#/ADSL

.....right up to the moment (around 17:00 hrs on the day) the phone
service ceased.

From that moment onwards, bunging in my (now dead) PSTN number returns
an error message.

In other words, there are changes straight away 'under the bonnet@

(As I would have expected)

On 14/04/2024 14:09, Theo wrote:

> In SOGEA the whole frequency band is available for DSL - that means the
> DSLAM could decide to use the voice frequencies in order to get some more
> bandwidth. That's why it can't coexist with a voice service.
>
> Whether the DSLAMs actually do use the voice frequencies I don't know - I'd
> guess the benefits of doing so are fairly limited.

I gather it also depends whether you have a 'fresh connection' or
whether you've just been SOGEA'd to the 'product'.

I still have dial tone (that I can't make 'go away' by dialling, if you
get my drift), and still 50v on the line, so clearly no extra bandwidth
for my line.

I've encountered other SOGEA'erers who do have silence, and no volts,
(and they've been converted from FTTC/PSTN)

Graham J wrote:
> Theo wrote:
>
>> Whether the DSLAMs actually do use the voice frequencies I don't
>> know - I'd guess the benefits of doing so are fairly limited.
>
> Agreed.
My router can display a graph of bits per bin, not easy to tell the
lowest actual bin number from the graph, I think the lowest 6 or 7 bins
of 3.4kHz each are a guard band for POTS, so probably BT wouldn't want
to use them until all POTS lines in a cab are dead?
My router claims it already has enough bandwidth available to run at
85.7/25.6, but it's capped to 79.9/19.9, so adding a handful more bins
probably wouldn't change anything anyway?
>> Anyway, the main motivation of SOGEA is that Openreach wants to
>> remove the copper pair from the cabinet to the exchange, so they
>> can then remove the exchange. They move you onto SOGEA and VOIP so
>> you no longer need the pair, then behind the scenes dig up the
>> pairs, remove their gear from the exchange, move out and stop
>> leasing it.
>>
>> They don't want to put you on a product which still uses that copper pair
>> because a single one of those would block the whole exchange removal
>> programme.
>
> That's a reasonable explanation.  So it would be even more profitable
> for them to convert everybody to FTTP.
Not sure ... they already have the VDSL cabinets, so until those start
failing, the most profitable thing is just to stop providing POTS
through them
> But as far as I can tell, there will be a small proportion of users
> who will never get FTTP, nor any sort of digital connection because
> they live too far away from any relevant fibre concentrator. So I
> can see copper pairs and exchanges existing for at least 20 years yet
> ...
Some, yes; but as far as possible they will try to retain the copper
only for the last few hundred yards, not the miles back to the exchange.

Mark Carver wrote:

> I still have dial tone (that I can't make 'go away' by dialling, if you
> get my drift), and still 50v on the line, so clearly no extra bandwidth
> for my line.

Maybe one day they'll un-jumper the E-sides of the FTTC cabinet, or
pull-out the PSTN line cards at the exchange?

Mark Carver wrote:

> When I was SOGEA'd last month, my phone number was recognised by this OR
> site.......
>
> https://www.broadbandchecker.btwholesale.com/#/ADSL

For months now, that site only ever gives me

"We are sorry but the checker is unavailable at the moment.
Please try again later."

I'm with Plusnet, so I'd expect my number to be visible to BT.

> ....right up to the moment (around 17:00 hrs on the day) the phone
> service ceased.
>
> From that moment onwards, bunging in my (now dead) PSTN number returns
> an error message.

I think you've said you can't be arsed with VoIP, so presumably you
didn't try to use your 30-day "right to port"?

On 14/04/2024 15:17, Andy Burns wrote:
>
> Graham J wrote:
>
>> Theo wrote:
>>
>>> Whether the DSLAMs actually do use the voice frequencies I don't
>>> know - I'd guess the benefits of doing so are fairly limited.
>>
>> Agreed.
>
> My router can display a graph of bits per bin, not easy to tell the
> lowest actual bin number from the graph, I think the lowest 6 or 7 bins
> of 3.4kHz each are a guard band for POTS, so probably BT wouldn't want
> to use them until all POTS lines in a cab are dead?
>
> My router claims it already has enough bandwidth available to run at
> 85.7/25.6, but it's capped to 79.9/19.9, so adding a handful more bins
> probably wouldn't change anything anyway?
>
>>> Anyway, the main motivation of SOGEA is that Openreach wants to
>>> remove the copper pair from the cabinet to the exchange, so they
>>> can then remove the exchange.  They move you onto SOGEA and VOIP so
>>> you no longer need the pair, then behind the scenes dig up the
>>> pairs, remove their gear from the exchange, move out and stop
>>> leasing it.
>>>
>>> They don't want to put you on a product which still uses that copper
>>> pair
>>> because a single one of those would block the whole exchange removal
>>> programme.
>>
>> That's a reasonable explanation.  So it would be even more profitable
>> for them to convert everybody to FTTP.
>
> Not sure ... they already have the VDSL cabinets, so until those start
> failing, the most profitable thing is just to stop providing POTS
> through them
>
>> But as far as I can tell, there will be a small proportion of users
>> who will never get FTTP, nor any sort of digital connection because
>> they live too far away from any relevant fibre concentrator.  So I
>> can see copper pairs and exchanges existing for at least 20 years yet
>> ...

Standard range for FTTP is 58km, so around 36 Miles. OpenReach says it
can deliver FTTP up to 98km from the exchange. Not sure what percentage
of the population that covers, but no one is to far providing Openreach
can lay a fibre.

https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2019/09/a-look-at-openreachs-compact-fttp-broadband-ont-and-mini-olt.html

I expect some remote users where its expensive to lay fibre will be hung
out to dry..

>
> Some, yes;  but as far as possible they will try to retain the copper
> only for the last few hundred yards, not the miles back to the exchange.
>
Dave

On 14/04/2024 15:29, Andy Burns wrote:
> Mark Carver wrote:
>
>> When I was SOGEA'd last month, my phone number was recognised by this
>> OR site.......
>>
>> https://www.broadbandchecker.btwholesale.com/#/ADSL
>
> For months now, that site only ever gives me
>
>     "We are sorry but the checker is unavailable at the moment.
>     Please try again later."
>
> I'm with Plusnet, so I'd expect my number to be visible to BT.
>
>> ....right up to the moment (around 17:00 hrs on the day) the phone
>> service ceased.
>>
>>  From that moment onwards, bunging in my (now dead) PSTN number
>> returns an error message.
>
> I think you've said you can't be arsed with VoIP, so presumably you
> didn't try to use your 30-day "right to port"?

No, the number has floated away into obscurity by now.........

On 14/04/2024 14:21, Graham J wrote:
> Theo wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>>> So it is purely an administrative issue, and provides a one off income
>>> for Openreach.
>>
>> No, SOGEA is technically a different thing.
>
> Perhaps.
>
>> In a traditional ADSL or FTTC
>> setup the lower frequencies are available for voice - I think it's up to
>> 38kHz.  That's why you need microfilters, to filter out the DSL in the
>> kHz
>> and MHz from interfering from your voice signal.
>
> True, but probably only up to about 5kHz.  Voice is digital throughout
> the system except for the copper pair from you to the exchange.
>
>> In SOGEA the whole frequency band is available for DSL - that means the
>> DSLAM could decide to use the voice frequencies in order to get some more
>> bandwidth.  That's why it can't coexist with a voice service.
>
> That may be true.  Can you point to a trustworthy link that confirms it?
>
>> Whether the DSLAMs actually do use the voice frequencies I don't know
>> - I'd
>> guess the benefits of doing so are fairly limited.
>
> Agreed.
>
>> Anyway, the main motivation of SOGEA is that Openreach wants to remove
>> the
>> copper pair from the cabinet to the exchange, so they can then remove the
>> exchange.  They move you onto SOGEA and VOIP so you no longer need the
>> pair,
>> then behind the scenes dig up the pairs, remove their gear from the
>> exchange, move out and stop leasing it.
>>
>> They don't want to put you on a product which still uses that copper pair
>> because a single one of those would block the whole exchange removal
>> programme.
>
> That's a reasonable explanation.  So it would be even more profitable
> for them to convert everybody to FTTP.  But as far as I can tell, there
> will be a small proportion of users who will never get FTTP, nor any
> sort of digital connection because they live too far away from any
> relevant fibre concentrator.  So I can see copper pairs and exchanges
> existing for at least 20 years yet ...
>

Usenet and forums seem to be full of misleading claims about the end of
the analogue phone service.

My understanding is Openreach will retain their street cabinets in areas
where they have no FTTP service. BT customers will still use a copper
pair to the cabinet for digital services, just as they do now. The
difference will be that their voice phone service becomes VoIP instead
of analogue, even for the tiny number who don't want broadband. There
also seems to be a possible plan to provide a few vulnerable customers
with an analogue service generated at the cabinet but that is even more
confused.

MikeS wrote:

> Usenet and forums seem to be full of misleading claims about the end of
> the analogue phone service.
>
> My understanding is Openreach will retain their street cabinets in areas
> where they have no FTTP service. BT customers will still use a copper
> pair to the cabinet for digital services, just as they do now. The
> difference will be that their voice phone service becomes VoIP instead
> of analogue, even for the tiny number who don't want broadband.

So what's misleading? That *is* the end of analogue phone service for
those customers.

> There also seems to be a possible plan to provide a few vulnerable
> customers with an analogue service generated at the cabinet but that
> is even more confused.
I'm not sure where the analogue service is going to be "recreated".

Andy Burns wrote:

[snip]

>> There also seems to be a possible plan to provide a few vulnerable
>> customers with an analogue service generated at the cabinet but that
>> is even more confused.
> I'm not sure where the analogue service is going to be "recreated".

For the particular instance I am aware of, the customer has been told:

"We have had extended talks with both Openreach and BT. As a result we
have been assured that there was no chance of connection to any digital
pathway but that our copper line would remain available even after the
general cut off date."

(Note: this was verbal: there is nothing in writing!)

This user is in a very rural location (not far from Holbeach in
Lincolnshire), and the copper pair runs well over 8km to the nearest
exchange. There is a mobile phone signal, but it is so weak that it
does not work inside the property.

So far as I am aware, there is no "green cabinet" anywhere along the
(tortuous) route that the copper pair takes to the exchange.

So where would the analogue service be re-created?

--
Graham J

Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
> For the particular instance I am aware of, the customer has been told:
>
> "We have had extended talks with both Openreach and BT. As a result we
> have been assured that there was no chance of connection to any digital
> pathway but that our copper line would remain available even after the
> general cut off date."
>
> (Note: this was verbal: there is nothing in writing!)
>
> This user is in a very rural location (not far from Holbeach in
> Lincolnshire), and the copper pair runs well over 8km to the nearest
> exchange. There is a mobile phone signal, but it is so weak that it
> does not work inside the property.
>
> So far as I am aware, there is no "green cabinet" anywhere along the
> (tortuous) route that the copper pair takes to the exchange.
>
> So where would the analogue service be re-created?

I'm guessing it's somewhere like this:
https://www.telecom-tariffs.co.uk/codelook.htm?xid=68766&cabinets=12525

There's one FTTC cabinet and then the rest are exchange-only lines with no
FTTC available.

Looks like Holbeach is/was in the target area of Upp FTTP but things got a
bit sticky:
https://www.lincsonline.co.uk/spalding/news/government-to-force-sale-of-local-broadband-firm-to-protect-9290579/

Looks like they've been bought by Virgin Media, so now impossible to find
out their coverage area.

Theo

Graham J wrote:
> This user is in a very rural location (not far from Holbeach in
> Lincolnshire), and the copper pair runs well over 8km to the nearest
> exchange.  There is a mobile phone signal, but it is so weak that it
> does not work inside the property.
>
> So far as I am aware, there is no "green cabinet" anywhere along the
> (tortuous) route that the copper pair takes to the exchange.
>
> So where would the analogue service be re-created?
I didn't realise we were talking about your "favourite site" again :-)
I was talking about the SOTAP for analogue service we're told will be
available for people who could have xDSL but don't want it, just want t
keep something that acts like a copper voice circuit.
Clearly that doesn't describe this location, but it is not going to get
a copper/fibre broadband service any time soon, you've investigated
microwave/wifi too ... why not just bite the bullet and go with
Starlink? Wasn't there some form of voucher scheme to help in these
difficult cases?
the website says the whole UK is covered with 125Mb down/25Mb up, with
25ms latency, unlimited data for £225 install and £75 to 95/month ...

Theo wrote:

[snip]
>
> Given he has a changeover date booked, I'd be in touch with Voipfone so they have
> the porting request in to take effect for the same day or the next day.

We know:

If you try to port a conventional landline number to a VoIP service you
lose the broadband service on that line, thereby defeating the object of
moving to VoIP. So you have to convert your broadband service to SoGEA
first. Then on the conversion date you lose the landline service.

Now Voipfone tell me that they cannot port-in a landline number until
after the SoGEA conversion has completed. This takes typically a week.
But since an Ofcom ruling last year, the landline number is supposed to
be held for a month to allow porting.

So for a week the landline number will not work. Callers will hear the
"unobtainable" tone.

Why did Ofcom allow this? Surely a port-in can be completed in a matter
of minutes, so there should be no need for an unreasonable loss of service?

What is the proper mechanism to ensure SoGEA and number porting can take
place simultaneously?

--
Graham J

Graham J wrote:
> Voipfone tell me that they cannot port-in a landline number until
> after the SoGEA conversion has completed. This takes typically a
> week. But since an Ofcom ruling last year the landline number is
> supposed to be held for a month to allow porting.
General Condition C7.6(b)
<https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0023/256343/unofficial-consolidated-general-conditions-May-2023.pdf>
> So for a week the landline number will not work.  Callers will hear the
> "unobtainable" tone.
I haven't heard the end result from the neighbour who "lost" her fifty
year old PSTN number in a VDSL->SOGEA conversion, last I heard was that
EE needed five days to reclaim it.
> Why did Ofcom allow this?  Surely a port-in can be completed in a matter
> of minutes, so there should be no need for an unreasonable loss of service?
>
> What is the proper mechanism to ensure SoGEA and number porting can take
> place simultaneously?
Not sure there is one, I don't think I'd trust many ISPs to get it right
either, A&A probably being the exception, but that's not much use unless
you're already with them ...

On 14/04/2024 13:08, Theo wrote:
> Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
>> My friend Ivan has:
>>
>> - Landline with associated phone number from BT;
>>
>> - ADSL broadband from Zen.
>
> So that's WLR3 (wholesale line rental 3) I think, the way that broadband and
> analogue phone come from different providers.
>
>> The order acknowledgement from Zen warns that the landline number will
>> stop working with the conversion to SoGEA. I'm surprised that Zen is
>> able to force BT to cancel the landline number simply because of the
>> conversion to SoGEA.
>>
>> Can anybody explain?
>
> He's moving from a line with WLR3 voice plus separate ADSL on top, to a line
> with SOGEA. Since SOGEA is a non-voice product there's no way for BT to
> continue to provide service: they don't have a (consumer) product for
> running digital voice over somebody else's broadband.
>
> BT will probably send a letter saying 'we can't provide service any more -
> if you changed your mind you can stop the change'. But stopping it is all
> you can do, you can't move to a different BT product (unless you take BT
> broadband too).
>
> Given he has a changeover date booked, I'd be in touch with Voipfone so they have
> the porting request in to take effect for the same day or the next day.
>
> He could also ask Zen to take over the number at the same time, but better
> to port to Voipfone.

Why? Is it based on price, service, or something else? I must say that
although technically reasonably competent, I am not looking forward to
the coming changes as there are too many options and not everything is
clear.

As it happens I have the same setup as the OP mentions - BT phone and
Zen broadband FTTC (fixed price Unlimited Fibre 1, more than ample for
my needs at £22 a month). Other than the supposedly fixed date for SOGEA
by the end of 2025, there's no date set for any change, and it's
unlikely to be anytime soon (the installers are too busy with the new
estates being built around here!), so I doubt we'll see FTTP here before
the end of the decade at the earliest. My BT Pots "Home Saver plan" is
£21.99 a month for unlimited calls, which was useful in the past
although must less so these days. So together I pay £528 a year. No
doubt I could shop around for something cheaper, but Zen's reliability
is very good, and the price is fixed until I am forced to change.

According to <https://www.zen.co.uk/phone/digital-voice>, Zen's Digital
Voice will cost £6 a month. However, nothing on their pages mentions
line rental. In January they sent me an annual email "Your annual best
tariff notification from Zen", which notes the price for "Unlimited
Fibre 1 and Digital Voice (18 Month Contract)" is £38 a month. This
equates to £456 a year. Note too that the current cost for an 18 month
contract for Unlimited Fibre 1 is £32 a month - almost 50% more than I
currently pay, although this is for 35Mbps download rather than the
31Mbps I have at present.

So where does line rental now come in to this? If I go with Zen's
digital voice does it mean that they take over the line rental charge
from BT? Out of interest, have Zen been paying BT something for the use
of their cables (optical or copper) to allow me to use Zen's broadband
service? What do messages 14 and 15 here mean
<https://community.bt.com/t5/Bills-Packages/Line-Rental-Saver/td-p/2299882/page/2>?
Message 15 would appear to suggest that I've been paying BT /and/ Zen
for the line, but I can't believe that's the case.

--
Jeff

Jeff Layman wrote:
> Zen's Digital Voice will cost £6 a month. However, nothing on their
> pages mentions line rental.
What line? If you move to SOGEA with digital voice, the former will
include the price of the copper circuit and the latter will be delivered
over the broadband.