[AusNOG] NBN Battery backups

[Damien Morris]

That was great, can we just use "Michael Bevan" as a synonym for the
NEXTDC CEO henceforth?

Battery backed NBN NTU is a good concept but has fallen short due to the
large overhead vs actual requirement. I think our favourite MP, Mr Conroy,
made a good point when he said a decent quantity of people already rely on
mobile phones as their primary device or use a cordless phone which
becomes useless in a blackout anyway.

>From business and environmental standpoints ditching the NTU battery is a
good idea, the luxury of DC current supplied by POTS will give way to
newer technology and those that need it can replicate it through a variety
of end user UPS solutions. The lower overhead will get passed on to the
consumer so everyone wins.


On 13/10/11 12:05 PM, "Rod" <rod at rb.net.au> wrote:

>Sigh - Attribution name was incorrect - I meant Bevan Slattery, not
>Michael
>Bevan.
>
>Rod
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net
>[mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Rod
>Sent: Thursday, 13 October 2011 11:41 AM
>To: ausnog at lists.ausnog.net
>Subject: Re: [AusNOG] NBN Battery backups
>
>Apologies if I repeat what others may have said. I deleted many replies to
>this thread without reading them because I misread one of the first posts
>and thought it was referring to NBN data centres, not the NTU. I have no
>great interest in how NBN backs-up their equipment in data centres,
>however
>the NTU is a different story.
>
>I think the NTU should be part of the NBN and therefore the responsibility
>NBN. My current opinion, is not as yet fully decided due to my lack of
>reliable knowledge on how the NTUs work, where they will be installed
>(outside houses, under floors etc, centralised frames for multi-unit
>developments etc) and how they are constructed (how easily can the battery
>be changed?). 
>
>Why do I think the NTU should belong to the NBN?
>
>Assuming the customer can't/isn't allowed to change the NTU/batteries,
>then
>smaller RSPs do not have the ability to service boxes on connections in
>all
>states of Australia. One of the stated aims of the NBN is to foster
>competition and I can see the ability to service NTUs may hinder
>competition
>for small RSPs. Can the customer change the battery? How do they know it
>is
>faulty? I do not know.
>
>I read Michael Bevan's reply and think he also has some valid points for
>people wanting to obtain services from different suppliers. I assume
>people
>can get 2 voice services from different providers on one NTU (eg shared
>house scenario) so if a 'lead' provider is appointed, which one is it?
>
>Rod
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net [mailto:ausnog-
>> bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Narelle
>> Sent: Wednesday, 12 October 2011 4:16 PM
>> To: Tom Wright
>> Cc: ausnog at ausnog.net
>> Subject: Re: [AusNOG] NBN Battery backups
>> 
>> On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 6:49 PM, Tom Wright <tom.c.wright at gmail.com>
>wrote:
>> > Err more interesting is how on earth is passing the responsibility
>> > onto the RSPs supposed to work?
>> 
>> Presumably the logic behind this is that RSPs are the ones who will
>> have the relationship with the customer, hence it is they who would
>> liaise with said customer in the replacement of said battery.
>
>I sure hope not :)
>
>1. NBN Co. are the only ones with true visibility to the ONT
>infrastructure
>via network management.  RSP's don't have access (nor should have access
>to
>this) 2. Which RSP would be responsible?  I had two (2) "RSP's" servicing
>my
>house Telstra for voice and iiNet for DSL.  Which one has the
>responsibility?  In a house serviced by Foxtel (PayTV), iiNet (Internet)
>and
>Optus (voice) over an NBN service which of those three RSP's are
>responsible
>(particularly considering point 1) 3. RSP's would (most likely) have no
>idea
>or certainty when the battery was installed 4. RSP's will not enjoy the
>low-impact/land access powers provided to NBN Co. and cannot enter the
>property without consent
>
>RSP's are retail service providers and their responsibility is everything
>beyond the NTU. NBN Co's responsibility is up to and including the NTU.
>If
>they decide to put batteries in or not that's their commercial decision.
>But if they do it must be their (or the customers) responsibility not the
>RSP..
>
>I don't read much about NBN matters these days (life's sooooo much less
>frustrating outside telco :)), nor Whirlpool for that matter and am not
>sure
>if this is what they're thinking or not.  All I'm doing is highlighting
>why
>the whole concept of trying to shift the responsibility of the maintaining
>network infrastructure to Retail Service Providers is inefficient,
>impractical, confusing and ultimately may put more lives at risk than it
>saves.  I mean if you know you don't have battery backup then you can plan
>for that.  If you think you have battery backup and don't, well that's
>where
>problems happen and the finger pointing starts.
>
>I don't care which way they go with this in terms of with or without
>battery
>for the punter, but for remote or high risk persons (health) then a
>battery
>should be standard (and probably is).  For $20-$50 extra get the battery
>and
>NTU that allows monitoring and provide the certainty any reasonable person
>would be expecting from a "battery backed up"/critical first line service.
>
>Like I said NBN Co. may already be doing this.  I'm just hoping this
>doesn't
>somehow fall into the realm of the RSP.
>
>Cheers
>
>[b]
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>AusNOG mailing list
>AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog