[AusNOG] Alternative to NBN?

Fri May 20 22:23:55 EST 2011

Reality is the opposite of what you propose.

Higher speed wireless = more bandwidth available for a given slot of time on the air. An increase in bandwidth means that a given user will use a proportionately smaller amount of RF air time to consume the same amount of data = more free air time and more users and a higher peak throughput for the network.

Well that would be the idea but in reality that is rarely ever the case. As more bandwidth is supplied the more people have the tendency to use it.

Increasing a quota allocation in terms of GB/month will cause users to eat up more RF air time, not making the network faster. That will do the opposite. 

The current increasing amounts of quota being given away is to entice people away from their current providers as people are getting stung with large data charges not to mention putting the boot into Vodafone whilst they’re at it.

Also, with the move to LTE + the opening up of new spectrum (Joolia is salivating at the prospect of the $ from the digital dividend and so is given set top boxes to old farts to hurry them the hell off her way out of debt) , telcos can do more with the existing towers. I think I read somewhere that the 700Mhz spectrum freed up from the digital dividend will easily allow THREE NextG quality competitors (in *addition* to NextG at 850Mhz) using the 20Mhz LTE deployment model. 

NextG is already pretty amazing - LTE will wipe the floor with it. 

Yeah it’s not bad but boy does it suck in Perth CBD. Congestion is shocking at times and as you move away from the CBD the better it gets. However I also like to point out that speed isn’t always the main issue. You have to consider response time as well. Wireless networks suck in this regard and what I rather see is better response with moderate speed. Start off at ADSL1 styled performance with decent response times then move up from there. Consistency would be nice too!

Clap your peepers on this: http://www.speedtest.net/result/1039968978.png

This is out of a NextG Ultimate USB modem in the Sydney CBD (which people such as yourself would no doubt argue is congested). 

Yeah that’s not bad but can you follow that up with more demonstrations? Scientific method to prove the theory that you can consistently sustain those rates. J

Regards,

Mark Stewart

From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of David Connors
Sent: Friday, 20 May 2011 12:07 PM
To: AusNOG
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Alternative to NBN?

On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Mark Stewart <mark at nabc.com.au> wrote:

The sad part about people harping on about Wireless Internet technology is that they don’t understand it terribly well. 

Indeed.  

Higher speed wireless requires a tighter bandwidth signal which means that it does work so well in densely populated areas so the Telco’s are forced to put more towers in to compensate for this issue. More towers means more money to put those towers in, approval from council etc. to put said towers in place, strong opposition from the general public about why more of these towers have to put installed and finally more maintenance!

Reality is the opposite of what you propose.

Higher speed wireless = more bandwidth available for a given slot of time on the air. An increase in bandwidth means that a given user will use a proportionately smaller amount of RF air time to consume the same amount of data = more free air time and more users and a higher peak throughput for the network.

Increasing a quota allocation in terms of GB/month will cause users to eat up more RF air time, not making the network faster. That will do the opposite. 

Also, with the move to LTE + the opening up of new spectrum (Joolia is salivating at the prospect of the $ from the digital dividend and so is given set top boxes to old farts to hurry them the hell off her way out of debt) , telcos can do more with the existing towers. I think I read somewhere that the 700Mhz spectrum freed up from the digital dividend will easily allow THREE NextG quality competitors (in *addition* to NextG at 850Mhz) using the 20Mhz LTE deployment model. 

NextG is already pretty amazing - LTE will wipe the floor with it. 

Clap your peepers on this: http://www.speedtest.net/result/1039968978.png

This is out of a NextG Ultimate USB modem in the Sydney CBD (which people such as yourself would no doubt argue is congested). 

Not to mention that weather and other atmospheric conditions can adversely affect these towers which will limit their capabilities. You must also factor in the topology of the terrain and how these wireless technologies fail to work in valleys and for a lot of the Perth hills.

On these alone it’s not to understand why the current NBN plan is more superior than any other suggested plan.

I don't think I have ever seen anyone suggest that wireless is technically superior to fibre. To suggest people are arguing that completely misses the point - which largely centres around the business case.

Most of the arguments I have seen (which are completely lost on most people on this list) centre around the cost of the NBN, whether people will actually sign up for it and have a use for it, and whether or not a lot of people are happy enough with wireless at a poofteenth of the cost (both to build and buy as an end punter).

I suspect a lot of iPad toting Gen-Y people will be happy enough with a few gig of NextG data on their iPad. They can buy that at retail for less than the price of NBN's entry-level wholesale price, if memory serves.

According to this: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/more-staff-than-customers-on-nbn-books/story-fn59niix-1226058566125 NBN Co has 784 staff and 607 customers. Meanwhile Telstra is adding 50,000 customers a month to NextG and it only cost them a billion to build and they did it over a 12 month period. 

In other words, Telstra put 82x the number of people on NextG per month as are on the NBN in total.

Some random Friday afternoon Googling that does not qualify as quality research but might open your eyes a bit:  

http://thebernoullitrial.wordpress.com/2010/08/07/australian-isp-market-share-2009-2010/

+

http://www.lifehacker.com.au/2010/08/telstra-signing-up-50000-next-g-broadband-users-a-month/

would put NextG ahead of Optus (number 2 on that list) for broadband subscribers. 4 x the size of TPG. 7 x the size of Internode. Using old HSDPA tech, not the LTE future, and (once JG hands out free STBs) there is enough spectrum for 3x the number of providers of this quality. 

Stop that think about that next time you write wireless off. 

Fibre is definitely better for fixed scenarios and I'll be getting my tax payer subsidised fibre connected as soon as it rolls past my front door - but I'd rather see the money spent on any number of other government initiatives for which there will never be a market solution.

-- 
David Connors |  <mailto:david at codify.com> david at codify.com |  <http://www.codify.com> www.codify.com
Software Engineer
Codify Pty Ltd
Phone: +61 (7) 3210 6268 | Facsimile: +61 (7) 3210 6269 | Mobile: +61 417 189 363
V-Card:  <https://www.codify.com/cards/davidconnors> https://www.codify.com/cards/davidconnors
Address Info:  <https://www.codify.com/contact> https://www.codify.com/contact

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20110520/829219e1/attachment.html>