[AusNOG] NBN: "i want a pony! but can I afford it"

[Mark Smith]

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 15:53:51 +0930
Matthew Moyle-Croft <mmc at internode.com.au> wrote:

> 
> On 13/08/2010, at 2:27 PM, John Edwards wrote:
> 
> 
> On 13/08/2010, at 2:11 PM, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
> 
> I really want, given I have some kids, to have a broadband future here in Oz.   I'd like to not have bandaid after bandaid that is the current suggestions.   I'd REALLY like to have a vibrant communications industry with a lot of options for local loops/backhaul etc.
> 
> Time will solve that problem for you - given another change of government it is unlikely that they'll still be kids by the time any broadband plan is fully executed.
> 
> Awesome - so you're saying we're stuck with what we've got?   Bravo John, very forward looking.
> 
> 
> Keep in mind that there were kids in regional areas starting high-school in 2007 (when the government of the day announced the previous national broadband plan) who may be leaving school soon never having had access to a broadband connection at home. Ask them whether they care if it's 12 megs or 100.
> 
> So, we've failed so far, so we should continue to fail?
> 
> 
> The wrong solution may not be better than no solution at all, but it's still a better result than the wasteful flip-flopping between different plans that stifle other investment.
> 
> 
> Come on John, I've been in or around this industry for the best part of two decades.   I spend my time dealing with Telstra and getting DSLAMs installed, so I'm intimately familiar with the industry, regulation, it's successes and failures.
> 
> At the moment, I'm so deeply disappointed that, on this list, no one can articulate a way forward other than "NBN is bad for me and so I don't want it", so let's not change the familiar status quo.
> 
> Even Mark resorted to "well, let's just wait and see, because we've been waiting and seeing for 2 decades".
> 

Not quite what I said. What I am saying is lets make sure the fixed
infrastructure only model is the right thing to do, because there are
obvious fundamental changes to the way people are using
telecommunications - they're going mobile. What is the risk of waiting
a year or two to see if that trend continues? Come to think if it, that
trend has only emerged so prevalently since the last election i.e.
since an NBN arrived on the political agenda. 4 or so years ago the
trend might not have been anywhere as near as obvious as it is now.

Thinking about it a bit more, I think 3G and the iPhone were the game
changers that have emerged in the last 3-4 years. 3G provided enough
bandwidth to provide a close to a low end broadband Internet access
experience, unlike it's mobile predecessors, and the iPhone provided
enough screen real estate and performance that using one to access the
Internet was close enough to accessing it using a laptop or a desktop.

> If _we_ the industry can't articulate what the future looks like, then we'll end up with it being decided for us or having nothing change (because we can't explain why or what) and so we end up grumbling for another few decades and be no better off.
> 

So if the Labor government hadn't come along 4 or so years ago with an
NBN policy, what were the industry's plans to overcome this issue that
is supposedly so urgent to address? I don't remember the industry
articulating any major plans for the future. Did the industry have a
vision for the future, or does it need governments to provide one for 
it?

In the last four years, new DSLAMs have still been deployed. New Wimax
networks have been deployed, as have FTTH networks into housing
developments and major 3G networks. It actually seems that the industry
had a plan, if only a reactionary one driven by customer demand,
_despite_ the NBN and the consequential risks associated with deploying
new access infrastructure that may be obsoleted within the next 5 or
so years. This is also despite there being no guarantee of being
compensated for that infrastructure if customers are forced onto the
NBN.

> Come on.   What does the future look like?   If we want regulations changed, then how would that happen to be fair?   How we would setup things so that we could improve region by region, area by area in a way that makes more sense?
> 
> Can we devolve telecommunications local loops to councils with some national standards to the builds can be done when roads are upgraded by the local councils and thus have relevancy to the people in the area?  (eg. like Austria and other countries)?
> 
> Surely there are some people with ideas?   I'm interested in more than just "well, we bandaid a bit for a few years and hope that "technology fixes it for us"!
> 
> MMC