[AusNOG] CCC and Terria "rage against coalition"

Wed Oct 21 23:58:00 EST 2009

Actually Conroy is doing a great job of telling the truth very  
carefully and getting his audience to fill in the gaps.

He is saying:

The 10% end up with copper loops and WiMax/LTE/satellite but no fibre.

And,

The 90% end up with fibre and no copper in the end game.

That's entirely consistent.

Further options include: NBNCo could end up with the USO and any  
retailer could provide the service. Or Telstra could keep it's copper  
and remain responsible. There are lots of endgames.

Cheers,

jsl

On 21/10/2009, at 10:58 PM, Ben Grubb <ben at techwiredau.com> wrote:

> Some good points raised. I've bolded the point I am confused about.
>
> Another:
>
> September 15
>
> TONY JONES: But in short - just to cut you short there - just to  
> finish or see if I can get an actual answer to the question: in the  
> end, what you don't want to see is two separate networks.
>
> STEPHEN CONROY: Well we've said we want to build a wholesale-only,  
> open access network, and I think if you look at what's transpired  
> over the last 15 to 20 years, the competing infrastructure model has  
> failed to deliver competition. And what we're looking to do is  
> introduce a wholesale-only company. We welcome Telstra, Optus, any  
> of the other potential vendors to be part of our network. And if  
> that turns out to be a partnership with Telstra, it would see, as we  
> lay the copper - the fibre into the homes, we'd be taking the copper  
> out. And we - the NBN Co. would become the sole connection from the  
> curb to the home. So, yes, that is one of the options that may come  
> from the discussions that are taking place at the moment.
>
> http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2008/s2687024.htm
>
> Today:
>
> Journalist: Senator, who's going to take responsibility for  
> providing phone services to 10 per cent of households who don't get  
> access to the fibre optic cables?
>
> Let's be clear. It's unfortunate that Senator Minchin is struggling  
> to understand the difference between a broadband service and a phone  
> line. No one has suggested that the copper lines in the 10 per cent  
> are suddenly going to vanish or that they're going to be cut off or  
> that they're going to be pulled out, which is exactly what Nick  
> Minchin's suggesting.
>
> There's nothing in this legislation whatsoever that suggests that,  
> except we are strengthening the universal service obligation. So the  
> universal service obligation is what pays, via a levy today paid to  
> Telstra to provide that service. And nothing is changing. And for  
> Nick Minchin to not understand the difference between delivering a  
> broadband network over wireless and satellite and a copper-based  
> phone service is just embarrassing.
>
> -- 
> Ben Grubb
>
> On 21/10/2009, at 11:17 PM, Bevan Slattery wrote:
>
>> I have to completely agree.  There are many holes in the  
>> legislation and logic.  I think with the appropriate time/ 
>> consulting/feedback this could be very worthwhile.  But there are  
>> some extraordinary inconsistencies with the legislation, public  
>> comment by politicians and industry types.  In a doorstop interview  
>> today Sen Conroy said:
>>
>> "Let's be clear. It's unfortunate that Senator Minchin is  
>> struggling to understand the difference between a broadband service  
>> and a phone line. No-one has suggested that the copper lines in the  
>> 10 per cent are suddenly going to vanish or that they're going to  
>> be cut off or that they're going to be pulled out, which is exactly  
>> what Nick Minchin's suggesting."
>>
>> I am confused.  So when Telstra are forced to split under the  
>> current legislation and handover it's network to  NBN Co (or  
>> whoever) who is actually responsible for maintaining those  
>> exchanges and it's associated copper.  I thought Telstra were not  
>> going to operate a fixed line service under the separation model?
>>
>> Anyone?  Foreman from the CCC?
>>
>> [b]
>>
>> From: Grahame Lynch [mailto:grahamelynch at commsdaymail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, 21 October 2009 9:58 PM
>> To: Bevan Slattery
>> Cc: ausnog at ausnog.net
>> Subject: Re: [AusNOG] CCC and Terria "rage against coalition"
>>
>> I'm intrigued by this idea that you can one hand legislate to  
>> compel Telstra to divest any ownership ties to a fixed network and  
>> become a pure retailer but on the other hand - in the same bill -  
>> you can legislate even greater requirements than today for Telstra  
>> to be responsible for fixed network delivery in the bush via the USO.
>>
>> Seems to me like a fairly irreconcilable twin set of obligations to  
>> me. The government line is that it will all be figured out down the  
>> track which I guess is fair enough - if you're also prepared to  
>> relax the apparently urgent deadline for the legislation itself and  
>> the requirement for Telstra to commit to the terms of its  
>> separation before it knows the terms of its obligations in terms of  
>> USO and so forth.
>>
>> Somebody in the Department has made a mess of this one.
>>
>> 2009/10/21 Bevan Slattery <Bevan.Slattery at staff.pipenetworks.com>
>> http://www.arnnet.com.au/article/323020/rage_against_coalition_industry_
>> lashes_opposition_fights_against_telstra_separation
>>
>> Bit over the top??  I'd like to see the legislation look at solving  
>> the
>> real/future problems such as reduce the negotiate/arbitrate process  
>> for
>> regulated (rather than only declared as proposed in the legislation)
>> bottleneck infrastructure such as duct access (NBN) and towers (4G/ 
>> LTE)
>> rather than mainly focus on the copper world.
>>
>> I'm trying to think why the violent reaction from CCC and TERRIA?   
>> Is it
>> no longer 'cool' to ask questions?
>>
>> [b]
>> _______________________________________________
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Grahame Lynch
>> Ph/SMS: +668 1701 7664
>> Skype: grahame.lynch
>> URL: www.commsday.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20091021/72a8ac3a/attachment.html>