[AusNOG] Long live the NBN. The NBN is dead?! [personal]

[Tim McCullagh]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Brooks" <pbrooks-ausnog at layer10.com.au>

> Forget about the magic 100Mbps for the moment - in the context of the
> non-plan outlined yesterday, they will have enough trouble reaching the
> 12 Mbps "minimum peak" threshhold.
>
> Who remembers where the magic 12 Mbps threshold comes from?
> It was first outlined in Telstra's ADSL2-based FTTN proposal at their
> technology briefing in November 2005, and released as an ASX announcement.
> They proposed spending ~$3.1B to deploy FTTN - active fibre-fed cabinets
> - to shorten the maximum copper line length to around 1.5 km.
>
> As it happens, 12 Mbps is the ADSL speed that can be guaranteed at a
> copper loop distance of 1.5km, under worst-case mutual interference from
> nearby DSL lines.
> Since then, 12 Mbps has been used as the 'magic benchmark'  - not
> because of any analysis that indicates this is sufficient for any
> purpose, or is some sort of inflexion point on a
> economic-benefit-to-the-nation curve, but because it is doable with DSL.
>
>
> So...Telstra calculated $3.1 bn required to bring 12 Mbps to around 4
> million homes in the 5 capital cities - less than 50% of the population.
>
> The coalition apparently plans to spend ~$2.7 bn to bring 12 Mbps min
> line speed to 97% of the population, without mentioning FTTN or what
> proportion of the 97% would be served by copper (where they only budget
> ~ $750 million compared to Telstra's $3.1billion ) and the remainder by
> some new fixed wireless networks.
>
> This 'policy' appears to be badly thought out back-of-envelope numbers
> that simply doesn't add up.
>

What absolute rubbish.  I find it difficult to make such a statement when 
the details of what is being proposed is not clear at this time.

The coalitions annoncement is no more a back of the envelope than the NBN 
mark 1 2 3 etc.

The issue that is being overlooked is that there have been some new 
developments in DSL and cable technologies and just perhaps the coalition 
has been talking to some carriers that have suggested they they can get more 
than 12 Mbps out of existing infrastructure.   I would suggest the 12 Mbps 
that the coalition are referring to is based on some Wimax fixed wireless or 
LTE information they have been given and or that relates to the so called 
sat speed under the current NBN proposal which is to be deployed in regional 
areas. Without the details of the coalition plan it is difficult to say what 
they are proposing.  It is also difficult to make the assertions above as 
well.

It is worth pointing out that Telstra has 100Mbps on the cable network in 
Melbourne, but the take up has been low and doesn't justify the roll out in 
other cities.  Until such time as there is some well researched analysis of 
customer demand and price curves then I can't see any reason why the 
government via NBNco should overbuild 2 cable networks in the capital cities 
and a functioning DSL network without some real justification.   I don't 
call feeding consultants justification, and most if not all the support I am 
seeing for NBN is coming from such groups, I certainly am not seeing it from 
my customer base, that is the ones that have to pay for it.

The real test should be to ask those proposing NBN ftth whether they sign 
the front of the cheque or the back.   We should discard all those replies 
that sign the back due to conflict of interest, then we will have a clear 
idea as to the real demand, and I would suggest the numbers supporting NBN 
will be much lower.  That noisy minority always seem to think they are or 
represent the majority

If the government has money to risk it should go on doing something about 
sorting out how to put more water into the murry darling basin  (bradfield 
scheme).  Now there is a name of a man with a vision  Google bradfield 
scheme.   Now that is a project that would make a difference, it is not 
overbuilding existing water projects and there is a need.  Inland rail is 
another scheme to get the trucks off the highways.    Fix up out ports 
infrastructure so that we can as a nation export more products and earn an 
income as a nation, just to name a couple of alternative uses for such 
funds.  Each of these would have a far larger impact on Australian then 
stringing fibre up on power poles  (dumb idea) to replace a network that 
already functions and is underground.  It is a similar arguement to that of 
replacing your car with a new one every year becasue it will go faster even 
though the need hasn't changed you can still only drive at the speed limit 
which hasn't changed.  We don't do this and our 2 3 or 4 year old cars all 
do the same job.

regards

Tim