[AusNOG] NBNCo releases its response to industry consultation

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

On 25/03/2010, at 4:29 PM, Shane Short wrote:

As already pointed out, the cost to provide such a service would be extremely prohibitive-- I personally thing GPON was the only real, sensible solution, especially given that most of the opposition to the NBN seems to be cost related.

Yep.  I think no one has an issue with the idea of P2P being the best but only if it's actually viable to do.   Ultimately the network will be a bit of a mix as residential get GPON, I'm sure the business side (paying more) will get PtP.


There's no real point comparing australia to most other FTTx deployments in the world, our vastness and population density makes things much, much harder-- Poking around Wolfram Alpha, it turns out that The Netherlands (the entire country) is about half the size of Victoria alone and the population density is 488 people/km^2, where-as Australia is 2.77 people/km^2.

I think to be fair we'd need to work out the density/km^2 where we want to cover with FTTx.

MMC



-Shane

On 25/03/2010, at 1:41 PM, Curtis Bayne wrote:


A commitment to a P2P network is one way to ENSURE open access is an option.

DWDM over existing OF to exchanges = wavelengths between any two points in the same city for peanuts. Private, layer 2 networks between groups of people are possible without AGVC costs. 1Gbps drops to teleworkers - imagine the ability to build highly diverse private cloud infrastructure by dropping elastic compute nodes into your employees houses. No VPN. Total control. Out there, but not unachievable with this architecture.

Perhaps you could use that old 155meg ATM gear you scabbed from work that sits in your garage/bits box doing nothing for a private link to your mum's house - the possibilities here are endless!

-----Original Message-----
From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net> on behalf of Matthew Moyle-Croft
Sent: Thu 3/25/2010 3:17 PM
To: Bryn Loftus
Cc: ausnog at ausnog.net<mailto:ausnog at ausnog.net>
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] NBNCo releases its response to industry consultation

It's worth noting a few things about the Amsterdam experience:

Their AVERAGE distance per service was 3 metres - 120km for 40k services.  It's a fairly small geography they're building into which has a lot of MDUs.  Guarantee the distance in Oz is a lot longer.

It'd be nice to have a core or pair per house hold.  But not at any expense.

MMC

On 25/03/2010, at 3:08 PM, Bryn Loftus wrote:

This article (while very mainstream) has some interesting point on PON vs direct fibre- and some costs.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/03/how-amsterdam-was-wired-for-open-access-fiber.ars

bryn




On 25/03/2010, at 3:23 PM, lists wrote:

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dasmo" <dasmo at dasmo.net<mailto:dasmo at dasmo.net>>
To: <ausnog at ausnog.net<mailto:ausnog at ausnog.net>>

Using PON is a bit short sighted.

Why is that?

It is power efficient ( less green house emmissions for the true believers)
It can deliver 1Gb or more symentrical connections
It can do L2 or L3

I often see the argument against PON but I rarely if ever see reasons why, I
would be interested to see the reasons why


If you're going to spend the money to roll out a nationwide network, you
might as well only do it once.

The cost of  point to point would make an already dubious business plan even
less affordable.

The biggest cost is not so much the cable as the duct access.  In brownfield
deployments that can be very high.  $70 per meter is not out of the
question.   Duct access at $6 to $8 per year can add up to.   If you put it
on power poles then fine, but expect long delays when trucks trees and wind
bring it down as will happen.


regards

Tim

_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog


_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

--
Matthew Moyle-Croft
Peering Manager and Team Lead - Commercial and DSLAMs
Internode /Agile
Level 5, 162 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Email: mmc at internode.com.au<mailto:mmc at internode.com.au>    Web: http://www.on.net<http://www.on.net/><http://www.on.net/>
Direct: +61-8-8228-2909      Mobile: +61-419-900-366
Reception: +61-8-8228-2999        Fax: +61-8-8235-6909



_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

<ATT00001..txt>

--
Matthew Moyle-Croft
Peering Manager and Team Lead - Commercial and DSLAMs
Internode /Agile
Level 5, 162 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Email: mmc at internode.com.au<mailto:mmc at internode.com.au>    Web: http://www.on.net<http://www.on.net/>
Direct: +61-8-8228-2909      Mobile: +61-419-900-366
Reception: +61-8-8228-2999        Fax: +61-8-8235-6909

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20100325/8ee9faf3/attachment.html>