[AusNOG] Screw the NBN, says TPG: We’ll do our own FTTB

[Paul Wallace]

That reads like a string argument and thanks for that Paul.

notwithstanding the above, the simple point I was trying to make was that this legislation should never have ever been contemplated in the first place and should now be reversed.

Stephen Conroy should then be investigated for negligence.




On 17/09/2013, at 5:29 PM, "Paul Brooks" <pbrooks-ausnog at layer10.com.au<mailto:pbrooks-ausnog at layer10.com.au>> wrote:

On 17/09/2013 2:09 PM, Grahame Lynch wrote:
This is what the legislation says:

A network unit that belongs to a telecommunications network (other than the national broadband network) must not be used to supply a fixed-line carriage service if:

However S141C:
Certain installations and connections are not taken to be an extension, alteration or upgrade

                   For the purposes of this Part, if:

                     (a)  a line<http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ta1997214/s7.html#line> is or was installed for the purposes of connecting particular premises to a telecommunications network<http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ta1997214/s7.html#telecommunications_network>; and

                     (b)  the installation of the line<http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ta1997214/s7.html#line> enables or enabled the occupier of the premises to become a customer in relation to carriage services<http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ta1997214/s7.html#carriage_service> supplied using the network; and

                     (c)  the premises are in close proximity to a line<http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ta1997214/s7.html#line> that forms part of the infrastructure of the network; and

                     (d)  the network is capable of being used to supply a superfast carriage service<http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ta1997214/s142a.html#superfast_carriage_service>; and

                     (e)  the network came into existence before 1 January 2011;

neither the installation of the line<http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ta1997214/s7.html#line> mentioned in paragraph (a), nor the connection of the premises, is taken to be an extension, alteration<http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ta1997214/s142a.html#alter> or upgrade<http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ta1997214/s142a.html#upgrade> of the network.

So if the main  fibre trunk cable was already passing the building prior to 1 January 2011, they could extend it into the basement and claim it was already "in close proximity" to the building, so is not an extension, alteration or upgrade - so isn't required to provide a L2 bitstream service.

Similarly S141B allows new network extensions of less than 1 kilometre to be allowed, provided the network being extended existed prior to 1 Jan 2011.

Somehow, I suspect they've covered these things off before making the announcement.

P.

_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20130917/50d2b6b3/attachment.html>