[AusNOG] Government sets parameters for NBN

[Jake Anderson]

So because 3% of the population would be getting satellite  (which seems 
to be something heavily in demand already, with the whole 
over-subscription and stop sale thing) the whole project should be scrapped?

I reckon covering 93% of the population with the best thing available 
and 5-6% with decent wireless it really is pretty good and probably 
worth the $1bn it costs to roll that over the MTM (read the review, in 
detail, ignore the peak spend figure and look at the actual cost full 
FTTH is $1Bn more than MTM).

Now you are going to have 20% of the population covered with glass, and 
80% covered with a mismash of crap, and the same 3% on satellite are 
still on that.

btw, regarding the satellite latency problem, whilst its not ideal I 
know of at least a few places with GEO birds that people are running 
voice links over. For non "trained" people (ie people who don't know its 
a satellite service) they seem to not have much in the way of trouble 
with it.

I like to call it The "Malcom Turnbull Mess" option btw.

On 09/04/14 17:37, Ross Wheeler wrote:
>
> On Wed, 9 Apr 2014, Greg Anderson wrote:
>
>> In my opinion, the FTTH was expensive but invaluable, however this
>> technology mix (lets call it PN for public network) is not going to 
>> solve a
>> majority of the problems we have in place today - only the dire ones 
>> (like
>> pair gain problems preventing any kind of fixed line networking at all).
>
> Lets not lose sight of the great number of people who were never going 
> to get glass ANYWAY under the original scheme. There have been flaws 
> at every stage of this thing, it's just how many people were affected, 
> and how noisy those people were (or politically influential).
>
> When the highest population-density areas (read, those who already had 
> ADSL2, wireless and multiple other technologies from a variety of 
> vendors - ie the metro areas particularly) were going to get their 
> feeble 5 megabits services upgraded to hundred megabits+ over glass, 
> all those people who were stuck with dial-up modems (or aspired to 
> have a line good enough to use a dial-up modem), or who limped along 
> with 256Kbps adsl1 (because it was the best they could get), or were 
> forced back to high-latency, expensive, unreliable satellite services 
> that are entirely unsuitable for voice or real interactive 
> applications) - were unlikely to actually see any benefit ANYWAY.
>
> Expensive solutions or not, don't fool yourself that EITHER party was 
> going to actually deliver FTEP. (Fiber-To-EVERY-Premesis)
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog