What do you understand that RSPs buy from fibre owners?
l2tp transit in most cases, though I'd expect some might be set up with carrier ethernet from a convenient location owned by 'the fibre owner'...
l2tp transit in most cases, though I'd expect some might be set up with carrier ethernet from a convenient location owned by 'the fibre owner'...
L2TP transit does not exist. L2TP is used mostly in our industry between a LAC (@ the wholesaler's end) and LNS (@ the RSP end). But before that they require first a connection on layer-3. Consequently this is used in aggregation models in which the RSP doesn't want to be bothered with purchasing individual connectivity to POIs, but simply expects one State hand-off point.
With the second part of your answer, you are closer to the truth. Outside metro CBD areas, the majority of the connectivity between a POI and POP is setup by Ethernet connectivity. This is also where the problem is, it is again paid per Mbps where the price is determined by distance and competition.
In other words, there are three possible congestion points: (1) CVC, (2) backhaul, (3) IP Transit. Each of those congestion points also have their own contention ratio. It is a myth that congestion is resolved by taking away one congestion point. This is typical to Australia (as non third world country) as maximizing profits is more important to our Industry then driving demand.
Last point, note that in many cases, the argument is used that I write about non contested bandwidth. This is incorrect. One can have a shared resource, set a contention ratio that still does not affect the maximum achievable last mile speeds of individuals. Obviously that is not so profitable, but this is in fact the trend at large overseas.
We call that network management. /s
Coming up on sunrise is the nbn fast enough channel 7
Coming up on sunrise is the nbn fast enough channel 7
So what happened? Who was interviewed?
So what happened? Who was interviewed?
Jason Clare for Labor and Josh Frydenberg for Libs. It was a non-event with the ongoing politicisation of the NBN that almost literally ended with hosts rolling their eyes and not impressed.
Jason Claire and some numpty bs artist from the libs saying the mtm is technically superior. I don't think it went all that well for fttp. The arguements weren't clear and Jason couldn't really go into detail about the policy. So the question was is the coalitions nbn obsolete before is finished never really got answered :( still its on a show that calls Gretel killeen a journalist
Jason Claire and some numpty bs artist from the libs saying the mtm is technically superior. I don't think it went all that well for fttp. The arguements weren't clear and Jason couldn't really go into detail about the policy. So the question was is the coalitions nbn obsolete before is finished never really got answered :( still its on a show that calls Gretel killeen a journalist
As said, the MTM will largely be retained. Even Shorten said it, a reason Clare is cautious on attacking MTM in the event Labor wins the election. It would look bad if Clare use tough words on MTM but retain it.
Shorten and Clare are different to Rudd and Conroy. Shorten has used vague words such as schould, it's a sign of a full backtrack on full FTTH.
The opposition leader conceded that Labor will not undo the progress the government has made on National Broadband Network (NBN).
Just got the end of it but sounded like political slogans, not going to sway anyone from their party affiliations. Waleed's project slot was by far the best to date, it had enough meat to get through to the people with a bit of common sense.
Genetic Modified Zealot writes...
As said, the MTM will largely be retained.
No � MTM will be *stopped*, a big difference to what you are saying.
Josh followed the 'Liberal Li(n)e of .... Labor will keep the nbn (meaning MTM) � just like Morrison did in the last day or two. He didn't have the honesty (or the intelligence?) to realise that Labor will leave the little bit of MTM that can't be undone (replaced) economically, and admit that Labor will 'start again' on FTTP for those areas that the coalition didn't get round to doing.
The best part about the MTM is that they spent so much time buggerising about the change of direction of the technology that didn't really achieve anything of real significance as far as the majority of households are concerned.
Along with 'all those refugees from Syria' , that are yet to be cleared for entry here, they have demonstrated just how totally inept their so-called government really is.
No � MTM will be *stopped*, a big difference to what you are saying.
I have to agree with this, it indeed sounds like what Shorten is basically saying is that what FTTN has been done to date will stay, and no more will occur, they'll do all new builds as either full fibre or at least FTTdP.
No � MTM will be *stopped*, a big difference to what you are saying.
Genetic Modified Zealot writes... ............ As said, the MTM will largely be retained.
Yeah. What precious little they did achieve. It will be very revealing, if the coalition come in second in the vote, to see just how many actual premises were passed, or ready for service, or connected.
Josh and Morrison and the whole lot of the coalition pollies will push the Zealot's half truth all the way to the election.
Genetic Modified Zealot writes...
As said, the MTM will largely be retained. Even Shorten said it, a reason Clare is cautious on attacking MTM in the event Labor wins the election. It would look bad if Clare use tough words on MTM but retain it.
We should really have a no spin policy on these forums and leave it for the politicians. What Clare stated was they can't pull out the existing nodes, which is fairly valid given that by June there will be ~2m build contracts in place. It would be irresponsible to halt the rollout at this stage.
Shorten has used vague words such as schould, it's a sign of a full backtrack on full FTTH.
You should have left it at shorten used vague words, so let's challenge him on it. Instead you fall back onto Libs talking points. At least Kingforce presents and argues his view on MTM rather than parroting politicians
You should have left it at
I can stand zealots, but blinded zealots, no. (Reasoning, analysis and clear thinking aren't part of their genetics.)
What Clare stated was they can't pull out the existing nodes, which is fairly valid given that by June there will be ~2m build contracts in place. It would be irresponsible to halt the rollout at this stage.
That makes sense! After all to keep the Techo's, heavy gamers, heavy down loaders, work from home people happy, all the LNP has to do is make "available" the option for people to pay for a FTTP connection if they really have a need for one. The "Pay" word will put many off, "everything in life is not free!!!!" It should be an option at a "reasonable" cost.
Trouble with the above is how many people have actually been able to successfully order a FTTP connection in a FTTN area. ????NONE???? That problem needs to be addressed ASAP as it will put an end to many peoples gripes about FTTN.
heavy gamers, heavy down loaders, work from home people
Way to get yourself taken seriously... Nothing's changed has it...
Trouble with the above is how many people have actually been able to successfully order a FTTP connection in a FTTN area. ????NONE???? That problem needs to be addressed ASAP as it will put an end to many peoples gripes about FTTN.
This is a key area that NBN and the government of the day needs to address. The current process is clearly broken and inefficient, which is no surprise given the info I have on NBN using inadequate designs and work processes with offshore.
To date I haven't seen anyone able to order FoD at a "reasonable price". Options with FTTdP, skinny fibre and a general long term approach to fibre as a utility could assist to bring this down in price. If Telstra can run copper to all customers for $299 (excluding trenching), then I'm sure NBN can develop an appropriate cross subsidised business model
That makes sense! After all to keep the Techo's, heavy gamers, heavy down loaders, work from home people happy, all the LNP has to do is make "available" the option for people to pay for a FTTP connection if they really have a need for one.
but it is costing as much to build a FTTN connection as it is for a FTTP connection at the roll out level, so why settle for the second rate, non-upgradeable product?
but it is costing as much to build a FTTN connection as it is for a FTTP connection at the roll out level, so why settle for the second rate, non-upgradeable product?
+1.
This is a key area that NBN and the government of the day needs to address. The current process is clearly broken and inefficient, which is no surprise given the info I have on NBN using inadequate designs and work processes with offshore.
Its not just the process though is it? its a unavoidable problem with FTTN design � its not just running fibre out the driveway, it has to be run all the way back to the node, duplicating all that trenching etc.
Its not just the process though is it? its a unavoidable problem with FTTN design � its not just running fibre out the driveway, it has to be run all the way back to the node
Do the ISAM's nbn are using support the ability to use FTTH connections?
Genetic Modified Zealot writes...
It would look bad if Clare use tough words on MTM but retain it.
Ala the lies Turnbull used sooner faster cheaper etc.
Way to get yourself taken seriously... Nothing's changed has it...
It worked!!!
Sorry but its a fact of life that the majority of voters think that that is the primary use / uses of FTTP.
ie heavy gamers, heavy down loaders, work from home people
You might disagree but its not me you need to convince its all the LNP and swing voters you need to talk to.
Personally FTTN is all I'll ever need. I'm using a Vodafone USB dongle at the moment.
FTTN will give me more / cheaper data, that's all I need. Speed with USB Dongle or FTTN is more than adequate for my needs and just about every other "voting" "Old Fart".
Convincing other "Old Farts" like myself is the challenge you have before you.
Lots of luck with that!.
Convincing other "Old Farts" like myself is the challenge you have before you.
Old Farts become sick Old Farts. The number of Old Farts (and therefore sick Old Farts) in Australia is increasing at an exponential rate.
Read this.
http://www.abc.net.au/techno
Old Farts are always among the first to complain that Health Care is under-funded, yet here is a tool with the potential to free up billions of tax dollars.
Old Farts who argue against spending on the NBN are stupid Old Farts.
Do the ISAM's nbn are using support the ability to use FTTH connections?
I believe they do support GPON, but NBNCo design does not. The FoD is deployed by connecting to a multiport upstream of the node.
Its not just the process though is it? its a unavoidable problem with FTTN design � its not just running fibre out the driveway, it has to be run all the way back to the node, duplicating all that trenching etc.
Not only the process, but when they are quoting several thousands for someone who has a node outside of their property then there is a real issue. Trenching will only be required when conduits don't exist such as in certain rural areas, and new skinny fibre trials demonstrated that they can also run the fibre more easily requiring less remediation. Costs of FoD particularly in urban areas should be more cost effective than what they are today.
Also the process determines that the first FoD connection pays for effectively the full infrastructure, and future connection just pay for the additional extension (unless both have it done at the same time). Their business model should really be based on a cross-subsidised and even charge basis, ala Telstra copper, if they were serious about FoD take up.
I see that there are clear options post Skinny Fibre trial, FTTdp, and long term strategic approach to fibre to all streets to effectively reduce the FoD to a reasonable price.
Convincing other "Old Farts" like myself is the challenge you have before you.
I am convinced as I do believe in throwing good money after bad which is what the coalition is doing buying/leasing Telstra's badly decayed/neglected copper network.
Old farts who can add 2+2 can be convinced if the mainstream media came on board solidly.
work from home people
There is nothing wrong with this part. Getting the millions of office workers working from home one or two days per week would be great. They'd save money and travel time (yay, sleep in). Far fewer cars on the road means less pollution and less pressure on expanding the road network. All that could save billions per year right there, and some bonus environment points too.
Do the ISAM's nbn are using support the ability to use FTTH connections?
the ISAM chassis can be used for a FOD system, but he way nbn� have installed them they cannot be used as they have no spare slots for the fibre cards
Also remember that each node is installed with 1 1Gbps link back to the FAN/AAS
And using the ISAM in a node means that any power loss at the node means no connection, whereas a full GPON link from the FAN will continue to run due to the batteries and generators at the FAN location
GPON FTTP is not just about speed or bandwidth, it is also about reliability
Ala the lies Turnbull used sooner faster cheaper etc.
Malcolm Turnbull's cut-price National Broadband Network is facing mounting delays and rising costs, according to a damning internal progress report obtained by Fairfax Media.
That should read "Malcolm Turnbull's cut-throat Over-priced' National Broadband Network
I curious as to what cut off dates Labor would be applying to FTTN. FTTN planning starts in June for my area (4DRR), election could be in July.
Personally I'm happy to wait a while longer for FTTP or FTTdp.
I curious as to what cut off dates Labor would be applying to FTTN. FTTN planning starts in June for my area (4DRR), election could be in July.
Personally I'm happy to wait a while longer for FTTP or FTTdp.
Build contracts would be the most likely cut off point, but it depends also on what is written in the contracts. NBN have suggested that the contracts are not tech specific, but you'd expect there would be a clause for financial penalty if the tech changes after contract is issued.
You could probably also expect a 6-12 delay as well if they do halt new build contracts. That's due to nbn having to return to Design Phase for either FTTdP or FTTP. I'd also suggest it's an open question on how geared up nbn is on FTTdp as well as the supply chain readiness for fibre and associated components.
Edit: 4DRR as of Nov 2015 was due to issue contract instruction in Oct 16. You may still get lucky yet
Personally FTTN is all I'll ever need.
If that is true � and as someone just on the right side of 70 I believe you are wrong!
But what about the person who purchases your property after your demise.... having an inferior internet service will lower the value your estate can ask....
And your children if they inherit the house, would appreciate faster broadband would they not..... etc
That sort of attitude � "I'm all right Jack, the future can take care of itself" is what has got Australia (and the rest of the world) in the disastrous state it is in. Politicians are the worst offenders but ordinary people are starting to think that way as well.
Don't be so bloody selfish � think of the future and that the need for very high speeds is already there for many, and just around the corner for most. If we are going to be the innovative country build high speed internet access for all, build it once and build it correctly the first time!
Build contracts would be the most likely cut off point, but it depends also on what is written in the contracts.
The Caretaker Conventions was mentioned in estimates.
a) The nbn Board and Management are aware of the caretaker conventions.
b) nbn has discussed the caretaker conventions with Government.
c) nbn observes and abides by the caretaker conventions as set out by the Department of
Prime Minister and Cabinet.
Whether that will affect current contracts, maybe at least delay them, remains to be seen.
You could probably also expect a 6-12 delay as well if they do halt new build contracts.
And the contracts for supply of nodes, fibre etc. will be let well before the commencement of the build. They will already have the gear on order and won't want to turn it into expensive door stops.
I'd suggest any works scheduled in say the next 12 months as FTTN will be implemented that way � unless someone is prepared to write off a lot of expensive gear.
You could probably also expect a 6-12 delay as well if they do halt new build contracts.
6-12 Months? sadly pretty much what I expected, though as per your edit (Oct Contract) we may get lucky, though the recent doc leak shows "Work Released for Design/Contract Instruction issued to Delivery Partner" Feb-2016, October is "Work Released for Build/Contract Instruction", not sure of the difference between the two.
I must admit that with our sync rate (2Mbps) even FTTN would probably be a big improvement, but I'd still rather wait for Fibre. Usual irony � under Labour we were scheduled for 2014.
I'd also suggest it's an open question on how geared up nbn is on FTTdp as well as the supply chain readiness for fibre and associated components.
I have wondered about that, unlike FTTP it must be yet another design from scratch delay. That is a problem.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cfj_CitUYAEhr-2.jpg:large
2 new pillars next to an older one, same configuration across the road.
Saw contractors during the week digging large holes next to the nodes.
Popped in today to find holes near each node excavated, it looks like they are uncovering the large power cable conduits near the nodes, they may be having problems connecting the power to them?
The Caretaker Conventions was mentioned in estimates.
but they only come into play once the election is called.
Until then nbn� could in theory issue contracts to install string to every property in Australia.
Oh wait, that's right, it currently seems to be anything but fibre
2 new pillars next to an older one, same configuration across the road.
Why would they be installing new pillars?
Why would they be installing new pillars?
Well it's all commercial there no housing, each block is the size of 4 houses(?) the internet in Osborne Park is extremely terrible with lots of ports never being available.
May have something to do with the sheer amount of nodes they are putting down
It really makes me sick knowing our NBN is destroyed and people took the bait about what malcolm turnbull lied about regarding the "sooner, faster, cheaper".
We all seem to be a bunch of fools to the government.
2 new pillars next to an older one, same configuration across the road.
We have one of those sorts of set ups in Bunbury (WA), except they aren't neatly spaced a part like that, they are within kicking distance of each other (the kicking distance of a toddler).
On the corner of Blair Street and Stirling Street right next to the traffic lights https://goo.gl/maps/58VmjYQhkkk. GMaps isn't quite up to date (2015) but the 2 new ones (both look to be NBN based on the names on them, though I would need to grab a better shot from my dashcam) are right next to this one, basically making a sort of triangle shape.
It really makes me sick knowing our NBN is destroyed
It's not destroyed, but like you I am very angry about the fact it will now take 10-20 years to get this fixed.
We would have had fttp by 2022, as it is we may not even have it by 2032.
The LNP should be and will be hammered for their lack of vision and the total mess we now find ourselves in.
If the ALP don't win, then we will have 3 more years of the same � this is when we can be sure it has been ruined � unless the LNP actually backflip.
This could be interesting.
http://www.themorningbulleti
NBN Forum
Shadow Minister for Communications Jason Clare, Senator Jan McLucas and ALP Candidate for Capricornia, Leisa Neaton invite you to attend a forum about the National Broadband Network.
This forum is designed to tell locals how Labor will deliver on this critical project. We believe the NBN needs to be rolled out on an equitable basis around the country so people in regional areas like Central Queensland are not disadvantaged.
We all seem to be a bunch of fools to the government.
We did elect them after all.
But what about the person who purchases your property after your demise
If they want FTTP they will pay for FOD, if they are big on welfare they will do nothing more than whinge
And your children if they inherit the house, would appreciate faster broadband would they not..... etc
I can assure you that paying for FOD out of their inheritance would not be a problem for them.
Don't be so bloody selfish
I'm not, Im a realist. At present I'm due to get FTTN in the next 12 months / two years???
If I had a need for FOD I would pay for it.
think of the future and that the need for very high speeds is already there for many
Not for me! Im not in anyway jealous that a mere 20klms away from my home FTTP has already been rolled out.
build it once and build it correctly the first time!
Too true! It's a pity that Conroy and Co didn't think about that.
He was more worried about telling Telco Execs that he could make them "wear red under pants on their head" than getting the FTTP rolled out on schedule.
By the way, how's the roll out in Tasmania going?
PS even Shorten is changing his tune.
"Mr Shorten confirmed that Labor would adopt the Turnbull Government�s multi-technology mix.�
https://delimiter.com.au/201
So it looks like a change to FTTP in existing FTTN areas and a full FTTP roll out for everywhere else is looking like nothing more than wish full thinking.
As a realist I will not lose any sleep over the issue.
I would dearly love to see Jason Clare change some of the language when referring to the FTTN if Labor wins in 2016.
Not, "We will finish the FTTN', but, 'We'll do as little of it as we are legally compelled to.".
If I had a need for FOD I would pay for it.
My reading of some of the threads here, by people far more expert than me, gives me the impression that although NBN people claim you can upgrade FTTN to FTTP, depending on some configuration at the node, it may not be technically possible in all cases.
http://www.nbnco.com.au/.../
Is there any data on what tier people are choosing?
I keep seeing the claim that people are only choosing 12/1, but this points to the fact they aren't.
depending on some configuration at the node, it may not be technically possible in all cases.
Seems to be worse than that in that NBN appear to be actively doing everything in their power to discourage people applying for or getting FoD.
So basically FoD is a furphy, something mentioned to try and keep the pro-fibre lobby quiet.
Too true! It's a pity that Conroy and Co didn't think about that.
He was more worried about telling Telco Execs that he could make them "wear red under pants on their head" than getting the FTTP rolled out on schedule.
Yes, there is no doubting that they got it wrong is some respects � and the LNP used that as electoral fodder.... but they promised that they would "get it right" and guess what � they have the same (or worse) massive cost over runs and delays to implement an inferior system. It is new ground and neither side of politics has a clue so in reality this should have been expected.
People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones and the LNP didn't have any better grasp of the NBN than the Labor party did � arguably their understanding is far worse.
It is just a pity the the kiddies that make up the LNP and the Labor party can't grow up and think about what is best for the country rather than trying to score petty political points against the other � and it is a pity that the Australian public can't see through their childish behaviour and press for politicians who care about what they can achieve rather than focussing on what the other side hasn't achieved!
Honestly kids in kindergarten probably have a better idea of co-operation than those childish individuals in our Parliament.
depending on some configuration at the node, it may not be technically possible in all cases
If that's the case something should be done to rectify ASAP.
If only to satisfy the people that are posting that they want / require nothing other than FTTP.
Availability of FOD will quieten them one way or another.
ie If they want it bad enough they will pay up.
If they dont pay up they are just whingers making noise!
If they dont pay up they are just whingers making noise!
At any cost then?
FOD isn't even available from what I can see � every time someone has tried, they've over quoted by 50%.
What about the fact we are spending 56 billion without a guaranteed speed and 1/3 the roi (or worse) of fttp?
What about the fact they promised 25mbs for 29.5 billion by 2016 and have failed on all metrics?
Why should Australia pay for a second rate nbn that doesn't deliver on any metric?
If they want FTTP they will pay for FOD...
It seems pretty clear that at some point in the future, internet with FTTP speeds will be every bit as necessary to the vast majority of people as the ordinary telephone has been for the past 100 years.
People will not be charged for that one by one. It will all have to be done again. The money being p*ssed into the wind right now will all have been for nothing.
p.s., we're headed for the wall with an ageing population. That will be fun.
PS even Shorten is changing his tune.
"Mr Shorten confirmed that Labor would adopt the Turnbull Government�s multi-technology mix.�
He doesn't have a choice!
To draw any conclusion other than "The Libs broke the NBN to the point where the parts they've broken have to stay broken for the foreseeable future" is simply being dishonest.
To take it a step further and infer support for MTM is ludicrous in the extreme and more likely trolling than anything else.
Genetic Modified Zealot writes...
As said, the MTM will largely be retained.
As said, you must be really scared of the election outcome to come out with a lie like that.
Shorten has used vague words such as schould, it's a sign of a full backtrack on full FTTH.
I'm sure you see signs that reconfirm your preconceptions wherever you look... doesn't mean they exist.
It should be an option at a "reasonable" cost.
It's not an option at any cost.
That problem needs to be addressed ASAP as it will put an end to many peoples gripes about FTTN.
Given that the fundamental problem with FTTN is that you're spending the same amount of money as you would for FTTP only to require the same amount of money again for the inevitable (according to everyone including Turnbull) replacement with FTTP, it wouldn't do anything of the sort.
It worked!
So did the lie about 25Mbps to everyone by the end of 2016 (after all, it got your luddite friends elected) � that doesn't make it in any way true or worth repeating.
I'm not, Im a realist.
No realist believes that paying twice to achieve the same outcome as paying once is sensible.
If they want FTTP they will pay for FOD...
Well I'm sorry but you wouldn't because you couldn't! I don't believe there is any way at all that the FTTN designed network can support FFTP. If there is, I'd like someone to offer me convincing evidence -and not just wishy-washy words! If you are connected to FTTN and you want FTTP then payment or not, you are in for an intergenerational wait.
I keep seeing the claim that people are only choosing 12/1, but this points to the fact they aren't.
That's the percentages for FTTN, I don't know of the other technologies. Why people choose to take those speeds could have outside factors, like the co-existence period, congestion, CVC, poor Telstra website advertising higher tiers, etc.
And..
33.6
nbn costing 56 billion. Turnbull � still using dialup.
To take it a step further and infer support for MTM is ludicrous in the extreme and more likely trolling than anything else.
I watched that peoples forum on Sky News. I wasn't happy with Shorten's answer on the NBN. It opened the door for exactly the sort of comments that Fifield was spewing in that delimiter article. If the ALP are going to make the NBN an election issue, Shorten really needs to come up with a better narrative and work on his delivery.
If their basic position is that the LNP has screwed things up too much to go back to their old policy, but they will strategically switch from a "Cheap as Possible with lots of copper" approach to a "Future proof with more fibre", then he needs to make that clear.
What about the fact we are spending 56 billion without a guaranteed speed and 1/3 the roi (or worse) of fttp?
reading the answers to QON from Senate Estimates this one is an eye opener
Q129
(f) As stated in the Wholesale Broadband Agreement (WBA), if the Access Virtual Circuit (AVC) does not peak between the Peak Information Rate (PIR) range once in a 24 hour period, the service is considered faulty and a trouble ticket needs to be raised.
nbn� AVCs are sold in "bands"
for FTTN the highest band listed is 25-100 in the download direction.
So providing that you obtain a PIR of 25 Mbps once in a 24 hour period, then there is not a fault on your connection.
Pay for 100 Mbps and obtain the same as someone paying for a 25 Mbps connection
what a crock of shite
...
I keep seeing the claim that people are only choosing 12/1, but this points to the fact they aren't.
Well, I'm fortunate enough to have FTTP and the other day received a flyer from Telstra, inviting me to "sign up for the NBN" It was all about how much I could download. Not a word about upload � and more to the point, nowhere was there ANY mention of speed tiers. No wonder Joe Average only gets a slow connection! (Oh and like I'd sign up with Telstra over my dead body!)
Yes, RM does have a lot to answer for too.
We certainly remember what his lot was doing.
If that's the case something should be done to rectify ASAP.
nbn� have not said how they are actually going to deliver FOD in a FTTN area.
There is shown in the network design documents a multiport upstream of node.
This would permit a maximum of 6 FOD connections if only one fibre circuit to a node is being provisioned, or 4 FOD connections if 2 fibre circuits are being provisioned.
It was believed that FOD connections were going to be run from this multiport, from conversations with techs on the ground.
But there is no definitive design in the network design documents.
nbn� could decide to pull the FOD connection all the way back to the FAN, or even worse, claim they have to pull it all the way back to the FAN but actually connect it to a multiport and charge for all the extra fibre to "up the ante" as it were.
With no actual publicly available written policy or design document then FOD is not a real product, just at best a "pilot/trial" or at worst a "talking point"
I keep seeing the claim that people are only choosing 12/1, but this points to the fact they aren't.
No, that's what fifeild and Morro would have you believe. The fact is, they are connecting at 12/1 due to the default arrangements. But choosing higher speeds when they can.
I don't know of many isps who will accept your order to connect you to 100mps straight up. Telstra certainly don't.
With no actual publicly available written policy or design document then FOD is not a real product, just at best a "pilot/trial" or at worst a "talking point"
It's classic vapourware.
It's classic vapourware.
I have a hunch that FOD will be delivered by the backhaul carriers supplying the nodes, rather than the NBN themselves :)
If the hunch is correct, then I expect we will see these services pop up in around 6-12 months time once there is marketable and hungry customer base.
Jason
I would dearly love to see Jason Clare change some of the language when referring to the FTTN if Labor wins in 2016.
I'd be happy if he made a clear policy statement, that they would (re)commit to rolling out the NBN designed to meet future demand and not a short sighted political objective. I'd like to see a policy that accounts for TCO, and long term benefits.
It is possible that some of the more recent technologies that have become or are becoming commercially available might play a part in the interim, but there should be a long term plan that should be worked to.
nbn� AVCs are sold in "bands"
for FTTN the highest band listed is 25-100 in the download direction.
We have know this for some time, hopefully the media catch on though.
Also, during the coexistence period the 25-100/5-40 range becomes 12-100/1-40.
I have a hunch that FOD will be delivered by the backhaul carriers supplying the nodes, rather than the NBN themselves :)
Huh? The FTTN cabinets are fed via NBN Co's LDN as I understand it. There might be some temporary solutions in areas on temporary FANs but in the end I thought it was to be NBN owned and operated.
Do you know something we don't? ;)
I'd like to see a policy that accounts for TCO, and long term benefits.
Totally agree.
I'd actually like Jason Clare, Mitch Fifield and Scott Ludlam to sit down together and try to actively start de-politicizing the NBN.
I'm not talking about some huge love-in, just a pragmatic agreement to step back from technology 'backing' and to give Morrow a clearer mandate around TCO and long term benefits.
Politics has got us into this mess, some diplomacy and deal making could get us out.
I'd be happy if he made a clear policy statement, that they would (re)commit to rolling out the NBN designed to meet future demand and not a short sighted political objective.
+1
That is a narrative we can all agree with. They can tie it in with the similar narrative around funding the Gonski scheme. They can take the position that they are looking after Australia in the present and future, instead of the LNP shortsightedness. I live in hope that this is their plan, but as I said in my previous message, Bill Shorten needs to work on his lines and delivery because it didn't come across that way in the sky news forum a few days ago.
Huh? The FTTN cabinets are fed via NBN Co's LDN as I understand it. There might be some temporary solutions in areas on temporary FANs but in the end I thought it was to be NBN owned and operated.
Do you know something we don't? ;)
No � other than traveling around the country a lot looking at installations..
https://www.facebook.com/Ausbbs/posts/1057887737601859
Rockingham (there are countless examples in SE QLD too) where the node is only near an Optus Fibre placard � nothing else is marked nearby.
Other areas are directly fed from Telstra. There are a tonne of nodes in QLD that are directly on Optus fibre runs too.
In Victoria, an unnamed carrier did many, many FTTB installations � I have entry notices here from people I know in those buildings � and they are not NBNCO :P
I'm just speculating � but that's where innovative ideas come from :)
Jason
I'm not talking about some huge love-in, just a pragmatic agreement to step back from technology 'backing' and to give Morrow a clearer mandate around TCO and long term benefits.
Yeah, I'd love to see a statutory body (created by legislation) that could oversee medium to long term infrastructure projects and the like. I am not sure Infrastructure Australia is the right body as it does not seem apolitical.
The body would be staffed by subject matter experts, with smaller project teams for the oversight of particular projects. They would take advice from all stakeholders, industry, end users, business sector etc. I feel very strongly that the consultation/advice needs to be inclusive and wide ranging. Only asking the crooks how to reform the jail is a little short sighted imho.
The creation of a specific project group and the funding would be done by way of legislation to provide certainty and restrict the ability of the government of the day to revoke it.
Perhaps even the modest profits from something like the NBN could be used to fund or build other projects.
But the overarching principle of the organisation would be Australia's prosperity and not political self interest of the government of the day.
If the hunch is correct, then I expect we will see these services pop up in around 6-12 months time once there is marketable and hungry customer base.
Ng-PON 2 speed trials with 1 to10 gbps in current FTTH areas might help that along.
I'm just speculating � but that's where innovative ideas come from :)
Very interesting, good business for Telstra and Optus I guess and also explains why they aren't kicking up a stink about FTTN.
mumbles something about '...not a dollar more, not a dollar less...'
It might also explain the exorbitant quotes for FoD (TCP Technology Switch), NBN Co need to build their own fibre path as they were using 3rd party fibre for FTTN backhaul.
This also fits in with my theory that some FTTN cabinets were suffering backhaul congestion due to under-provisioned 3rd party backhaul due to cost cutting.
I wonder if we will ever know what is really going on?
Which is why it should never had been a GBE
I am less worried about the legal structure of NBN Co. I am more worried about how their direction is influenced.
In other words, the SoE being taken out of politician's hands directly. A little more like how the judicial system works, the government can make laws but don't get to direct judges about actual decisions.
It might also explain the exorbitant quotes for FoD (TCP Technology Switch), NBN Co need to build their own fibre path as they were using 3rd party fibre for FTTN backhaul.
It gets much, much worse � imagine the situation of a housing development in a FixedWireless area.
Developer on the wrong side of a rise, and falls into a coverage blackhole. Developer must build pit and pipe.
Development is 7KM from an NBN Fixed-Wireless tower � NBN will only install Fibre to the new estate � if the developer wants it he must pay for fibre to be installed � 7KM.
The block of land next to him has Fixed Wireless and therefore the developer has no additional costs to make the land marketable.
No cost recovery for the developer for the 7KM of fibre � has to be put into the cost of the land.
If that sort of thing can happen with land developers � what chance does small business have, dealing with the same NBN Company for FOD?
The only solution in the above case is, private operator (Point to Point Wireless to the headend for the estate) � because even Telstra wont touch it, despite there being longhaul fibre on the property itself!
Jason
That should read "Malcolm Turnbull's cut-throat Over-priced" National Broadband Network
Or perhaps it should be 'Malcolm Turnbull's Memorial To Mismanagement' Non Broadband Network, aka the MTM?
:-(
He doesn't have a choice!
To draw any conclusion other than "The Libs broke the NBN to the point where the parts they've broken have to stay broken for the foreseeable future" is simply being dishonest.
All Labor has to do is, promise "Much Faster, Much Cheaper, Much Sooner Broadband" than MTM.
Get into power, RENEG on the 200billion defense contract. Take the cash and build the damn fibre network day in and day out 24/7 (pay those penalty rates and get the job done).
After all its ok for the LIBs to do it right? Reneg original contracts, spend 200 billion on "Maybe wars in the future".
Well we maybe need the internet too, so how can you be definite that we dont need fibre in the future?
I'd rather piss another 200billion on NBN instead of defense stuff that we probably won't need. If we get invaded then we are stuffed anyway. World war 3 is already here then.
If we get invaded then we are stuffed anyway.
As comedian Henning Wehn said recently (after Panama papers revelations), we don't need to fear invasion when the dictators, leaders and power brokers of potential invaders own large swathes of property here � they won't want to risk their investments.
Get into power, RENEG on the 200billion defense contract. Take the cash and build the damn fibre network day in and day out 24/7 (pay those penalty rates and get the job done).
Just reclassify the NBN as an information warfare asset, that coincidentally has massive civilian benefits to the country.
if the hunch is correct, then I expect we will see these services pop up in around 6-12 months time
At the rate of ONLY 2 per FTTN, as that is all the spare fiber included in the run (4 fibers per node, IIRC). So it's really a WOFTAM for most of us to even consider FOD.
(Double post � due to lack of modern Internet standards)
All Labor has to do is, promise "Much Faster, Much Cheaper, Much Sooner Broadband" than MTM.
Ahem. Haven't we heard 'cheepa fasta' being used recently, to our obvious and universal detriment?
At the rate of ONLY 2 per FTTN, as that is all the spare fiber included in the run (4 fibers per node, IIRC). So it's really a WOFTAM for most of us to even consider FOD.
Fibre is a transmission medium, it is not transmission equipment.
Termination of bandwidth from one fibre (carrier) and then new fibre within the pit network.
Given that you can already do it from the Telstra and Optus fibre junctions that I point out � and NBN are extending their own fibre from these points to their other nodes.
The capital cost for the equipment is more than overcome by the fact you have no CVC cost � and the NBN does your marketing for you, to help realise demand.
It is too complex for NBN to do, but I foresee carriers who already do fibre, pushing into FTTN areas, very, very hard. There are plenty of people working from home, and $300 per month, given the economic benefit they gain (fuel costs alone!) to get carrier/business grade fibre is very cost effective...
Jason
Just reclassify the NBN as an information warfare asset
Careful, or you might be the recipient of a one-way ticket to a Turnbull Public Re-education Compound.
It's said the Prime Minister and former Communications Minister is very alert to any attempts to raise public awareness about the shortcomings of his Glorious New Dawn Comms Bonanza MTM.
In fact he still asserts his MTM is vastly better than that fusty old NBN that nobody needed or wanted, and which would have cost nearly as much as his much superior cans n string political thought bubble.
It's said the Prime Minister and former Communications Minister is very alert to any attempts to raise public awareness about the shortcomings of his Glorious New Dawn Comms Bonanza MTM.
Bring...it...on.
Ahem. Haven't we heard 'cheepa fasta' being used recently, to our obvious and universal detriment?
Seems like the masses fell for that Bullcrap last time. They'd probably be stupid enough to fall for it again.
BTW, what gives the right to the PM to direct 200 billion into defense project just like that (if it passes the senate)?
Man the clowns have too much power, too much to sabotage their own country and its current and future tax payers.
In fact he still asserts his MTM is vastly better than that fusty old NBN that nobody needed or wanted, and which would have cost nearly as much as his much superior cans n string political thought bubble
The point, for people like me, is to understand and work out what needs to be done to fix the mess � because, in my personal view, too many people have a terminal view of the project, and its going to cause even more untold damage to the competitive telecommunications industry otherwise.
We need technical people and engineers to be supportive of telecommunications in general � because it bleeds into the public perception. At the moment, because of the ongoing shit-fight about access technology, a company like Telstra gains an overwhelming majority of new NBN customers in the FTTN/B world � a sure sign of market failure.
Jason
Bring...it...on.
Let all the sheeple be informed, and then arise in righteous rage at how they have been misled!
I have a hunch that FOD will be delivered by the backhaul carriers supplying the nodes, rather than the NBN themselves :)
how are they going to do this when the nodes have no cards in them for fibre connctions and the 192 connection nodes have no room for the fibre cards.
Would this also mean that the FOD will not be a GPON circuit from the FAN but will rely on the node and its backaul and battery backup?
and $300 per month, given the economic benefit they gain (fuel costs alone!)
Serious? We could have had FTTH for circa $100 PM with the full GPON setup, rather than the nobbled version that we would get with FTTN/FoD.
I'm well aware of what fibre is, and am well aware what is required to be able to get fibre to a site.
Who are these "fibre providers" that are going to be able to install a 32-way split in the FTTN cabinet and then be able to reticulate through to 20-32 homes per fibre?
It aint gonna happen!
NBN won't allow a third party to install any additional equipment into their node cabinet (not that there is any room) and the current cable scheme for FTTN only shows 4 fibres per node.
FoD is only a SOP to the MSM who can then say that it "is" an option.
Do it right, do it once ....
We will regret this MTM mess for decades to come!
my personal view, too many people have a terminal view of the project, and its going to cause even more untold damage to the competitive telecommunications industry otherwise.
A tremendous, albeit still largely unrecognised, benefit of the (real) NBN was that for the first time ever, it would provide an equal-access platform for the whole industry, so all service providers could actively compete for enduser business on � yes � that well-known level playing field.
The Turnbull MTM has to all intents and purposes destroyed any possibility of that outcome.
a sure sign of market failure.
That market failure has been obvious, in fact for many years, to everybody involved with the industry, except for those who may have been blinded by perceptions of political or corporate self-interest.
If the ALP don't win, then we will have 3 more years of the same
Even if the Labor party do win and only last one term we shall be in no better position as the Coalition will just change to whatever flavour a certain American (ex aussie ) citizen fancies if they regained power after that one term of Labor.
how are they going to do this when the nodes have no cards in them for fibre connctions and the 192 connection nodes have no room for the fibre cards.
How big is a media converter?
Why do you think that a carrier who is already at a node (Lets pretend Optus, but it could be any of 6 different carriers) would need to use the NBN Node for anything?
Private companies are not beholden to the design regulations of the NBN and can get the fibre to the paying customer however they like.
Today, in almost the entire metro area and suburbs, as well as regional areas, you can order Telstra fibre. Telstra Top-hats have fibre backhaul, so you can imagine the network reach.
If you are going to use more than 200Mbits of bandwidth and you use it for your at-home business, you would find it very, very cost effective.
Non-NBN Carriers can use the Telstra ducting network (or power polls, etc) and run their own fibre to customer premises. Given the CVC Usage charging for the NBN, is much cheaper and provides a better quality of service, and NBN gets none of the revenue.
You will note that I am not talking about delivering mass-consumer base services � I am talking about the high-end customer, the technical consumer, and the well connected business person.
The entire model is broken and is going to be exploited by someone.
Jason
At the moment, because of the ongoing shit-fight about access technology, a company like Telstra gains an overwhelming majority of new NBN customers in the FTTN/B world � a sure sign of market failure.
Partly because of the NBN(Co) charging regime which forces ISPs to be VERY conservative with CVC bandwidth (and that impacts on funds for backhaul as well). Most of the other large ISPs have been found severely wanting in peak time speeds and as Telstra seem to be able to afford more � at least in the short term � they are attracting customers from the other ISPs in droves.
Lets face it. paying for a 100/40 and getting 1 Mbps at peak is really not what most people expect. TPG and their slow upgrade policy for the iiBorg companies is further compounding the issue.
too many people have a terminal view of the project, and its going to cause even more untold damage to the competitive telecommunications industry otherwise.
And for very good reason. I've been involved in comms network planning for the last 45 years and can't say I've ever seen a disaster of this magnitude. It is the deaf listening to the blind who are looking at the project plan � and none of them have any competence other than how to thread a string through the hole in two tin cans.
The NBN dream has turned into a nightmare � and I can't see this changing but I can see our international rating dropping even further. I'll be holding on to ADSL for as long as possible � ISPs can afford to provide it at reasonable contention ratios.... and it works as well at peak as off peak � unlike the current NBN implementation.
Why do you think that a carrier who is already at a node (Lets pretend Optus, but it could be any of 6 different carriers) would need to use the NBN Node for anything?
well only about 10% of the nodes around here would have a non-nbn� fibre run within 200 metres.
Media convertors are not necessarially big, I have a fibre to 10base-2/10base-T convertor around here that was used in a decnet and ethernet enviroment.
But who wins if Telstra, Optus, Opticom, TPG/PIPE/AAPT, all decide they want to put a media convertor in a node? There isn't really that much spare room in one
How would power be supplied to them?
And how would this fit in with Telstra and Optus signing "build no competing network" agreements?
Most of the other large ISPs have been found severely wanting in peak time speeds and as Telstra seem to be able to afford more � at least in the short term � they are attracting customers from the other ISPs in droves.
They can afford it because the government is paying for both the network upgrade to the CAN, the transmission in the IEN, the leasing of the dark fibre, as well as paying them to disconnect each customer from "Telstra copper"
They could spend $1000 per connection on extra CVC bandwidth alone because of this fact. Across their 180k adds in 6 months, this would work out to be something like 20GBit of extra capacity!
181,000 customers
$1,000 cash toward CVC
$181,000,000 Total Pool
$60,333,333 Pool per year
$5,027,777 Per Month
251,389 Mbits CVC
How does anyone compete with this?
Jason
Non-NBN Carriers can use the Telstra ducting network (or power polls, etc) and run their own fibre to customer premises.
considering it took NBN 3 years to negotiate a pole access agreement with AUSGRID and a very large number of poles were replaced to enable the running of fibre I cannot see it taking place very quickly.
AUSGRID then got to install the fibre at a 600 mm clearance from the power lines, greatly restricting who can actually work on that fibre due to electrical safety regulations
How big is a media converter?
Why do you think that a carrier who is already at a node (Lets pretend Optus, but it could be any of 6 different carriers) would need to use the NBN Node for anything?
Private companies are not beholden to the design regulations of the NBN and can get the fibre to the paying customer however they like.
But they are bound by the wholesale requirements for services 25Mbps or greater.
However, the 1km extension of existing network assets is where that might get interesting... AIUI NBN Co have not bought the fibre that feed either Telstra's or Optus' nodes in their HFC network.
I have always thought this could get interesting.
I have a hunch that FOD will be delivered by the backhaul carriers supplying the nodes, rather than the NBN themselves :)
Third party backhaul carriers supplying the nodes? I very much doubt there are any of those. But even if there were, whose conduits are they going to use to deliver FoD? nbn�'s? Or the Telstra ones they have leased exclusive access to nbn� to?
And then there are the no compete provisions in the nbn� act. The FoD provider would be required to wholesale the product. And that's assuming the Fed Gvt doesn't impose carrier conditions on them to prevent them overbuilding nbn en-mass.
well only about 10% of the nodes around here would have a non-nbn� fibre run within 200 metres.
I have just done a fibre build quote that is 2KM of civil works, and for more than 100Mbit of bandwidth, including the build, it is CHEAPER than NBN with CVC.
The build cost is around $100,000.
No one in the business space even considers that NBN is a solution to them, and therefore any revenue in the NBN corporate plan for business services should be reduced to almost $0.
If the entire project is therefore predicated on consumer revenues alone, and no network that I am aware of, including the PSTN, has ever been built on consumer access alone, then there needs to be substantial write downs of the assets.
Currently the consumer is expected to fund an inefficient network build, today, based on forecast revenues that cannot be met, using CVC Usage charging that is designed to recover the build costs of the access network, and it is resulting in a poorer experience than DSL because of artificial restrictions on the usage available.
None of this has anything to do with FTTN or FTTP � because business users are not using FTTP because of CVC cost.
Jason
The FoD provider would be required to wholesale the product.
In WA, today, I see an existing FTTP network(3rd party) and NBNco planning an FTTN Build.
Who is overbuilding what?
Jason
But they are bound by the wholesale requirements for services 25Mbps or greater.
I am not sure any of them have a problem with this � carriers are terrible at selling services to end-customers and gaining large take up.
3rd party GPON networks are already way cheaper than NBN, and often provider fixed price / unlimited backhaul from the port to the capital city.
Jason
And then there are the no compete provisions in the nbn� act. The FoD provider would be required to wholesale the product. And that's assuming the Fed Gvt doesn't impose carrier conditions on them to prevent them overbuilding nbn en-mass
Wait, are you suggesting that no private company is going to come in, after the NBN and install GPON?
Of course they will.
Jason
whose conduits are they going to use to deliver FoD? nbn�'s? Or the Telstra ones they have leased exclusive access to nbn� to?
What happens to carriers who already have their own fibre in Telstra conduits?
What happens to carriers who already have their own fibre in Telstra conduits?
They will be prevented from extending to any FoD customer because nbn� own (at least) the LIC.
Wait, are you suggesting that no private company is going to come in, after the NBN and install GPON?
Yes I am suggesting this. NBN FTTN is a huge barrier to entry for any prospective GPON overbuilder, as if there wern't already enough others.
And besides, WTF is all this alleged 3rd party fibre? There is only one company with significant (and it's by no means widespread) fibre in Telstra's conduits controlled by nbn�, and that company has entered into a binding agreement not to overbuild nbn�.
And besides, WTF is all this alleged 3rd party fibre?
There is an unbelievable amount of fibre that runs around random places in our suburbs, mostly between Telstra exchanges � much of it uses Telstra conduit.
Where I live (40Km out of Perth) there is a residential street with Telstra, Amcom, Optus and AArnet � NextGen is also nearby.
and that company has entered into a binding agreement not to overbuild nbn�.
And has now reduced the size of its government and enterprise divisions as a response, as investors, no doubt shift their money and built entities that CAN overbuild. They are a little smarter than this!
They will be prevented from extending to any FoD customer because nbn� own (at least) the LIC.
Sorry, I live in a building FTTN area, and I am close enough to a fibre path where I am considering paying my own money for corporate fibre. A carrier can lease Telstra ducting for a $/m/year, this is around 150m away. Are you saying this will be impossible ?
Jason
I am close enough to a fibre path where I am considering paying my own money for corporate fibre
What do you consider the cost's shall be to realise your dream ?
Yes I am suggesting this. NBN FTTN is a huge barrier to entry for any prospective GPON overbuilder, as if there wern't already enough others.
You are going to find the next 12-24 months very interesting then � because a huge number of your assumptions and preconceptions are about to aligned with reality.
FTTN is no barrier to overbuild � in fact, its just begging for it.
Jason
Sorry, I live in a building FTTN area
As do I, and yes, I am *very* sorry about it.
What do you consider the cost's shall be to realise your dream ?
$10k build cost seems pretty reasonable.
Living in a unit complex, and having the ability to resupply bandwidth to 2 small businesses using wireless actually means I will make money within 2 years.
Technical people, and those who really, really want good internet access have always found a way to solve their problem. Malone brought the dialup POP to his house :) Many farmers in WA use DSL via 2 repeater hops, etc.
Justifying the expense and developing ways to recoup the costs are all a basic part of business � so I would hope that any small business operator (there are 2 million of them!) would consider the same thing � if they were able to get a better understanding of the technology and its how it works and what its limitations are.
Ill also be offering free internet to my elderly neighbours, who just use mobile and ADSL today. Their costs reduce to cheaper than the NBN can ever deliver.
A bit of community and a willingness for technical people to get out there, and it could happen all across the country.
Jason
FTTN is no barrier to overbuild � in fact, its just begging for it.
Let the cherry picking commence, and taxpayer's money wasted with lost revenue. The ROI will dwindle to nothing.
Let the cherry picking commence, and taxpayer's money wasted with lost revenue. The ROI will dwindle to nothing
The revenue for business services was never, ever going to be there � and without business revenue, the costs to a consumer for raw consumption are simply, far beyond the costs they can pay.
Therefore the government should either write off the investment thus far, and make the best of it, or, nationalise all the telecommunications companies and re-monopolise the market, and prevent any hint of private investment opportunity, ever again.
Jason
Therefore the government should either
All current politicians committing political suicide... I like it! I'm quite fed up with the lot of them.
Ill also be offering free internet to my elderly neighbours,
Buggar I live in the eastern states but I like your logic.
I wonder had those 2 million small business operators voted labor then how many of them would have got FTTP without shelling out big dollars ?
They could spend $1000 per connection on extra CVC bandwidth alone because of this fact. Across their 180k adds in 6 months, this would work out to be something like 20GBit of extra capacity!
They don't need to. They run their own fibre from the POI back to their main data centers. Afaik some POIs are actually at existing telstra exchanges. They already have fibre there. So they don't need buy overpriced CVC. It's the game they designed for them to win. Why would they be stupid enough to buy CVC.
have just done a fibre build quote that is 2KM of civil works, and for more than 100Mbit of bandwidth, including the build, it is CHEAPER than NBN with CVC.
But that's the "N" in NBN � National.
I suspect it would have been viable to cover a much smaller portion of the population for a lot lower cost (eg 90% for $10bn) and would have substantially reduced CVC charges and the like � but then we would have been shutting out, I suspect for good, a decent proportion of the population from broadband...
No different to blackspot subsidies for country mobile networks in the past, just done in a different way
--
I agree the decision to allow limited competition, particularly TPGs FTTB network, was stupid � it is simply cherry picking
All current politicians committing political suicide
Is there really that much money that needs to be written off for the current NBN build?
I mean, compared to the interest payments today on the deficit, what is another $10billion over 10 years? Easily absorbable in the current climate.
Before you could do such a thing, you would first you need a plan on what you are going to do for the nation's telecommunications needs, after you "make the change".
Whatever that is going to be, lets assume it is a good plan, and acceptable to the voting public.
If the Liberal party went out there with such a bold move, I have no idea what Labor would even consider as an appropriate response.
With the value of the company that built the network less than $0, its assets can be sold at their cost prices to the private sector.
This should attract overseas investors as well as local funds, because the network is already there and cheaper than its equipment cost.
With a lower cost base in which to operate, and with good margins and revenue, these new private telcos could be compelled to divert revenues into a USO-type fund to continue network upgrades to the rest of the nation � lets say a 20% levy on total revenue generated by the entity group. They could all bid for work themselves and in effect force continual investment in network expansion projects deems required by the "NBN".
All pretty basic, but requires someone with "guts" to do it.
Jason
I agree the decision to allow limited competition, particularly TPGs FTTB network, was stupid � it is simply cherry picking
Well your preferred FTTN/MTM is what made it viable for TPG to bother doing FTTB.
Buggar I live in the eastern states but I like your logic.
Thanks. It is a pretty basic one that drives most people into small business in the first place � a comic book store owner often wants to save money, so opened the store and uses it as a personal library as well as a shop :)
If the required (or perceived) need is there for something, then people can, and should make it happen � action, not pontificating.
I wonder had those 2 million small business operators voted labor then how many of them would have got FTTP without shelling out big dollars ?
Its not the same service � what I order can be upgraded to 10GE if I wanted, and its the same speed both ways. I can order point to point services from my site to another fibred site and it will travel via the actual network path, not into some CVC/NNI construct.
GPON is shared, and like shared phone systems like Party-Lines, they are not suitable for even a basic business need. A basic business need is what drives some people to still use FAX and PSTN.
Jason
The revenue for business services was never, ever going to be there � and without business revenue, the costs to a consumer for raw consumption are simply, far beyond the costs they can pay.
Do you honestly believe that? Why?
I work for a small business that would be all over FTTP services, we would probably have two services at work and I would end up with a second service at home for work purposes. I don't think we are unique.
We are never going to pay tens of thousands of dollars for fibre, but we will use FTTP for the right price. NBN Co hadn't introduced the enterprise grade services yet, if that is competently delivered and promoted I think there will be real revenue from business.
I concede that enterprise might be a different story, but small and medium businesses sure. I don't see how they couldn't increase ARPU.
[edit] grammar
GPON is shared, and like shared phone systems like Party-Lines, they are not suitable for even a basic business need. A basic business need is what drives some people to still use FAX and PSTN.
Surely nbn could give uncontested 1:1 line offerings like other countries do?
Do you honestly believe that? Why?
With the current model of the CVC, carriers will do what they can to avoid it.
I concede that if the CVC model changes, then yes, general business use (SOHO) (low latency, 1:1 contention, and 1 day fault restore) is viable.
The reliability of the FTTP service, for the cost to deliver it, for small business use � a site that has 5-20 employees is simply not there, and you are often better off building multiple Point-to-Point wireless connections.
We are never going to pay tens of thousands of dollars for fibre, but we will use FTTP
You don't have to � the $10k I suggested assumed a total upfront cost. Most minor builds can be absorbed by carriers over 3 year terms � even that $100k one I pointed out earlier....
I concede that enterprise might be a different story, but small and medium businesses I don't see how they couldn't increase ARPU.
How much FTTP has actually been rolled out into business areas, for one? If the network mostly exists in residential areas, then SOHO use is going to be mostly it. The businesses I see in Mandurah, for example, have all been sold by Telstra, phone services rather than reasonable internet services, and the experience has not been good. I'm sure Telstra increased their ARPU, with $150/pm phone offerings, but the businesses are not generating more revenue because of it.
A small business offering that requires upgrades to the line speed, and costs substantially more when you actually start using it � is not driving innovation � is it a bad joke to these people who have just done "the upgrade"....
Jason
Its not the same service � what I order can be upgraded to 10GE if I wanted, and its the same speed both ways. I can order point to point services from my site to another fibred site and it will travel via the actual network path, not into some CVC/NNI construct.
P2P fibre was and is on the product roadmap, I suspect they were waiting until the transit network and permanent FANs and POIs were constructed.
I wonder if we will ever see what was planned come to fruition?
Got some pics?
They already have fibre there. So they don't need buy overpriced CVC.
They don't need to purchase fibre backhaul... but they (and all other ISPs) must purchase the virtual circuit capacity that is CVC.... it connects the customer (on the NBN) to the POI where the ISP has access..... so if you want traffic to flow to or from the NBN then you must purchase CVC capacity.
preferred FTTN/MTM is what made it viable for TPG to bother doing FTTB.
Preferred pfff. You obviously don't read my posts well and just assume that someone who is not of the FTTP at any cost brigade prefers FTTN.
I suspect TPG would have cherry picked away with city apartments under Labors model anyway. 3yrs earlier and $20 cheaper will get you lots of clients and 100/40 is 100/40 no matter what the delivery method
I suspect TPG would have cherry picked away with city apartments under Labors model anyway
Who do you think did many NBN FTTB installations? Hint: Building Access notices in Melbourne give it away.
Preferred pfff. You obviously don't read my posts well and just assume that someone who is not of the FTTP at any cost brigade prefers FTTN.
I suspect TPG would have cherry picked away with city apartments under Labors model anyway. 3yrs earlier and $20 cheaper will get you lots of clients and 100/40 is 100/40 no matter what the delivery method
Labor plan could easy of remove 12 and 25 mbps speed tier and compete in price with TPG, but MTM can't. It'll look bad if people pay for 100mbps and only getting 25mbps. Under MTM you'll be paying same amount for 25mbps for the next 10 years.
You obviously don't read my posts well and just assume that someone who is not of the FTTP at any cost brigade prefers FTTN.
On the contrary, it is posts like /forum-replies.cfm?t=2518480#r6 that make it clear that you believe the lies told by the Coalition and endorse their "alternative".
I suspect TPG would have cherry picked away with city apartments under Labors model anyway.
Your suspicion is unwarranted, not least because they didn't bother doing so until after the election.
3yrs earlier
Really?
100/40 is 100/40 no matter what the delivery method
Wrong, the delivery method has a massive impact on latency, reliability, upgradability, useful life, etc.
On the contrary, it is posts like /forum-replies.cfm?t=2518480#r6 that make it clear that you believe the lies told by the Coalition and endorse their "alternative".
Ignoring the last 8 words which are clearly anti Coalition policy and FTTN. As I said in my previous post...
Your suspicion is unwarranted, not least because they didn't bother doing so until after the election.
Doesn't prove much given there was barely an NBN at that point � and TPG needed no new legislation to do what they did. We would still be nowhere near a completed rollout � so plenty of opportunity for cherry pickers
Ignoring the last 8 words which are clearly anti Coalition policy and FTTN.
No, just recognising your repetition of baseless claims used in favour of MTM.
Doesn't prove much given there was barely an NBN at that point
Huh? If the aim of TPG was to cherry pick high value locations before the NBN arrived, why would they wait until the NBN rollout was halted in favour of MTM some time in the future?
No one in the business space even considers that NBN is a solution to them
Funny, I work with at least 40 businesses that completely disagree with you. If you mean enterprise business, then you are correct. Bit for small and medium business, NBN FTTP is a Godsend...
BTW, don't forget that FTTP to consumers is also the other end of the pipe for enterprise business, and that allows a whole area of development that we haven't even begun to tap yet.
why would they wait until the NBN rollout was halted in favour of MTM some time in the future?
Federal Election was 7 September 2013
https://en.wikipedia.org
TPG Announces FTTB � Late September 2013
http://www.itnews.com.au
TPG Acquired AAPT � December 2013
http://www.zdnet.com/article
Complaint to the ACCC April 2014
https://www.accc.gov.au/
the ACCC received a complaint that TPG�s plans would breach the level playing field provisions. The principal concern expressed in the complaint was that TPG�s pre-existing fibre networks were not capable of supplying superfast carriage services to residential or small business customers as at 1 January 2011, and that TPG was, by proceeding with its current plan, or in combination with other investments made after 1 January 2011, seeking to make those networks capable of supplying superfast carriage services to those customers without complying with the level playing field provisions.
I think that these could perhaps be related, and while TPG could have rolled it out at any time, they were likely well aware of their need to comply with level playing field provisions.
Jason
If they want FTTP they will pay for FOD
You are forgetting that costs for goods are now an international marketplace. If we must spend many thousands of dollars on connections that the rest of the world are able to get for less than a hundred, then our cost of doing business increases dramatically (again) and we lose revenue. How do you compete in a Global Market when your own government will not give you the ability to compete on an equal basis?
That made me laugh. However there are just so many narrow minded people about the nbn. I've just been arguing with that Steve shark tank bloke on Twitter who is part owner of pipe networks so wrote about cvc and avc charges being the real constraint of the nbn yet when I said fair call. Let's open the network, no speed charges, how will fttn fare against fttp the old ad hominem debate came up, off site back up at 1500pm under telstra at 50 50 vs 100 for 100/40 on the nbn, why should I subsidise you? Because if you are going to spend 56 billion plus on a network it should be fibre. Simple
Funny, I work with at least 40 businesses that completely disagree with you. If you mean enterprise business, then you are correct. Bit for small and medium business, NBN FTTP is a Godsend...
For "Internet Access" which is a 2010 product, then yes, FTTP is more than suitable.
I would not have a range of NBN plans on our website that were "Designed for Small Business" if I did not think that it was suitable :)
For the "Digital Economy" ie: businesses that demand internet to be as reliable as the lights or the water, as it stands today, it is less of a solution, and more of "if you cannot get something else". The lack of being able to even claim 1:1 contention on the end-access (and therefore in contract) is a real deal breaker for many.
Jason
Steve shark tank bloke on Twitter who is part owner of pipe networks
TPG Telecom purchased PIPE Networks in March 2010.
Steve helped BUILD Pipe Networks, which the market saw as a truly remarkable company � so much so, they paid $373 Million for it.
I don't think Steve really cares about the money in this � I think he wants to ensure that the industry is not destroyed by thoughtless politicians � because it is the telecommunications networks that connects our IT and Innovation Industries.
Jason
I think that these could perhaps be related, and while TPG could have rolled it out at any time, they were likely well aware of their need to comply with level playing field provisions.
Many thanks for the history.. I assume essentially you are saying TPG needed the AAPT network (and resultant reach) to comply
Many thanks for the history.. I assume essentially you are saying TPG needed the AAPT network (and resultant reach) to comply
No idea � but I don't think a company that has been as successful as TPG would not consider what has happened in the past, and not plan for it. They seem to be exceptional on the strategic front.
That is to say, it was clear to anyone since 2010 that if you invested in a very big network, and became a monopoly, you would have many obligations. In fact, given that is what many others were asking for with the ACCC and Telstra, it would be hard to deny such things to a new monopoly. And as time indicated, there was a new carrier licence condition imposed.
Jason
The lack of being able to even claim 1:1 contention on the end-access (and therefore in contract) is a real deal breaker for many
Not for the small and medium businesses I have been working with. I'm talking doctors, dentists, pool supply companies, engineers, HVAC companies, and even some media specialists...
They all require the bandwidth, but even a 20:1+ contention on 100/40 is fine for now. Keep in mind that they are all used to far worse, but none of them can afford the leap to a $10k install with huge (relatively) monthly fees.
While the contention is certainly a problem at the moment, it is fairly quick and easy to fix over time as we see how it plays out...in fact it's already easing up for many. Those small businesses who require 1:1 (in my experience) are rare indeed...
I don't think Steve really cares about the money in this � I think he wants to ensure that the industry is not destroyed by thoughtless politicians � because it is the telecommunications networks that connects our IT and Innovation Industries
And Thank God for him...that is true leadership BTW.
Jason Clare for Labor and Josh Frydenberg for Libs. It was a non-event with the ongoing politicisation of the NBN that almost literally ended with hosts rolling their eyes and not impressed.
I have to disagree. Yes the hosts rolled their eyes but I'd suggest that was at the ineptness of Frydenberg's responses. The questioner knew the right answer and his specific question got fluff from Frydenberg and Clare called Fry a liar and said why. Clare appeared in control IMO.
This is just the beginning. LNP will not get away with trivialising.
Waleed's project slot was by far the best to date
Yep � no pollies involved in discussion....
Continues here: /forum-replies.cfm?t=2519390
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét