Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
Buying anything on Amazon? Please use the Geekzone Amazon aff link.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
3569 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 62

Trusted
WorldxChange

  Reply # 328746 11-May-2010 07:31 Send private message

A couple of links that may be of interest and add some light on industry thoughts around this. 

Telecom sponsered Info Site for FTTH
http://www.brightspark.org.nz/

TCF industry standard on Premisis Wiring Code of practice.
http://www.tcf.org.nz/news/399fed17-0ac0-416b-972f-4806e3356849.html







Yes I am a employee of WxC (My Profile) ... but I do have my own opinions as well Wink

             

https://www.facebook.com/wxccommunications

5977 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 112

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 328751 11-May-2010 07:45 Send private message

By the way the lovely pink Cbus cable is rated to 600V to allow its use in a switch board.

Cyril



1629 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 71

Trusted

  Reply # 330969 17-May-2010 16:58 Send private message

An example of fibre rollout happening already:

The "Hamilton Fibre Network" is owned by HFN on essentially the same business model proposed for nationwide deployment, with shareholders including city council and the lines company. Management of the network is subcontracted to an "Operator" that also sells both dark and lit fibre (Ethernet; ie both Layer 1 & 2) to service providers and directly to large customers like schools/university. The "Operator" is owned by one of HFN's shareholders (instead of being owned by HFN) so there is an arms-length relationship, and I think this means its compatible with the government's CFH requirements. They have only connected some of the high priority commercial and educational users so far, and havent connected any residential users yet.

I am thinking this is the business model that some of the other regions will probably adopt, but wondering what will happen to the Auckland network, which is already a complicated place. HFN submitted that their operator must offer Layer 2 service because otherwise the first retailer/ISP into a multi-tenant building would basically have a localised monopoly. The operator instead sells ethernet service to ISPs where required.

In Australia they are arguing for "overbuild protection", to prevent Telstra from installing their own network wherever new fibre goes in. At least the rules here prevent large incumbents from negotiating volume discounts, which should level the NZ playing field.

Its also going to be interesting how they provide emergency 111 phone service, which has to continue even where a customer stops the service. Maybe a SIP router could handle failover if the 111 system has problems, since police call centres etc would likely be on the fibre network too.




Qualified in business, certified in fibre, stuck in copper, have to keep going  ^_^



1629 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 71

Trusted

  Reply # 331441 18-May-2010 16:22 Send private message

Apparently one of the reasons for the government's "open access" model is that users should be able to locally link to content and applications from multiple providers. For example you can get alternative IPTV, or remnotely monitor/backup work security cameras (or home security for that matter), replicate offsite "business continuity" servers, or buy locally hosted cloud applications. One idea was that remotely answer your home doorbell over a connected security system while you are at work.

The theory is that multiple bandwidth intensive applications from different providers can be used on the same connection, and some of them might require different VLANs or QoS ? without changing ISP. The local performance limiter should be the contention on the access systems, instead of bottlenecks we now have on ADSL bitstream even between users in the same area. However It looks like fibre ISPs might buy/wholesale Layer2 bitstream as well, so could be confusing. I hope its compulsory for all ISPs to locally peer anyone who wants to, and I guess the fibre co would have to be allowed to run a Layer3 peering exchange at the CO.

I guess we can assume that kiwis will do more than just download in the future. Eventually NZ might become a net exporter of information and financial services too, if we are innovative enough!




Qualified in business, certified in fibre, stuck in copper, have to keep going  ^_^

627 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

  Reply # 331482 18-May-2010 17:20 Send private message

webwat: Apparently one of the reasons for the government's "open access" model is that users should be able to locally link to content and applications from multiple providers. For example you can get alternative IPTV, or remnotely monitor/backup work security cameras (or home security for that matter), replicate offsite "business continuity" servers, or buy locally hosted cloud applications. One idea was that remotely answer your home doorbell over a connected security system while you are at work.

The theory is that multiple bandwidth intensive applications from different providers can be used on the same connection, and some of them might require different VLANs or QoS ? without changing ISP. The local performance limiter should be the contention on the access systems, instead of bottlenecks we now have on ADSL bitstream even between users in the same area. However It looks like fibre ISPs might buy/wholesale Layer2 bitstream as well, so could be confusing. I hope its compulsory for all ISPs to locally peer anyone who wants to, and I guess the fibre co would have to be allowed to run a Layer3 peering exchange at the CO.

I guess we can assume that kiwis will do more than just download in the future. Eventually NZ might become a net exporter of information and financial services too, if we are innovative enough!

This sounds like it was almost verbatim taken from the Singapore NGNBN initiative, where they have aimed for the same thing.

Of course, nobody has answered how you deal with home networking in the case of multiple service providers.  It gets hideously ugly.  I raised this with the Singapore iDA on numerous occasions, and also with Nucleus Connect (the opco in Singapore).  I've also spent time discussing it with NBNCo in Australia, which at least has thankfully realised it's a problem albeit not yet come up with a solution for it.

11510 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 669

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 331485 18-May-2010 17:25 Send private message

Are you talking about because they only spec a single fiber to the house, if you want multiple ISPs in the house? That would be a big concern of mine since depending how many people I have living here there could be 3 adsl connections active at once.




Richard rich.ms

627 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

  Reply # 331488 18-May-2010 17:35 Send private message

richms: Are you talking about because they only spec a single fiber to the house, if you want multiple ISPs in the house? That would be a big concern of mine since depending how many people I have living here there could be 3 adsl connections active at once.

Assuming xPON is being used, that doesn't matter as a typical ONT has 2-4 (or more) Ethernet interfaces on it.  Active Ethernet can offer the same functionality with a smart NTU (although at a much higher price-point).

My concern is more around the home network, assuming the follow scenario (which is unlikely, but it is one that the NBN proponents often use):

- 1 home, say 3.5 people
- 1 ISP (service #1)
- 1 PayTV provider (service #2)
- 1 Telephony provider (service #3)
- 1 'other' service provider (service #4) - this could be a nailed-up VPN to your office; or another TV provider, or some other ondemand/ASP type service such as the security scenario that was mentioned by webwat.

Assume all of these are delivered over IP.

I have one home router; and one wifi network.  How do I integrate all of these services?  It's very difficult - not impossible - but very difficult; and presents major challenges in end-to-end service management for any of the service providers.

The layer 3 model actually starts to make a lot more sense in this approach rather than the layer 2 models; or a mix of layer 2 + layer 3.  This has been discussed recently in Australia with the Comms Alliance and NBNCo teams.



11510 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 669

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 331524 18-May-2010 18:39 Send private message

I would assume in those cases you would patch the pay tv provider thru to the pay tv box, the ISP to a firewall router and then to the internal wiring, the telephony provider to the phone or pabx or whatever.

If the ports are there and able to be configured like that, I dont see a problem so long as there is sufficiant cables between the ONT and the homes patch panel area.




Richard rich.ms

627 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

  Reply # 331529 18-May-2010 18:48 Send private message

richms: I would assume in those cases you would patch the pay tv provider thru to the pay tv box, the ISP to a firewall router and then to the internal wiring, the telephony provider to the phone or pabx or whatever.

If the ports are there and able to be configured like that, I dont see a problem so long as there is sufficiant cables between the ONT and the homes patch panel area.

That's one way of looking at it.

But that way of thinking is not aligned with the "converged and digital home" view that has been portrayed as the awesome model of the future.

So, let me add a couple of curves to it:

1) What if I want to watch TV on my PC as well?
2) What if I want my IP-TV (which may have an integrated STB) to be able to play movies from my NAS?
3) What if I want to make video or voice calls via my telephony provider from my PC?
4) What if I don't want to use fixed networking, but want to use WiFi for all of these?
5) What if I want to be able to manage my home alarm from my PC, which is per your proposal on a separate physical LAN?
6) What if the "other service provider" is a second ISP?

This is where it gets horribly complex, because you are effectively bringing multiple separate L3 domains into the home, which very likely need to converge and be accessible in a single common domain - this means a fairly intelligent edge device is required with lots of complicated and convoluted routing.  Then the discussion becomes "who manages [that smart CPE]?".

11510 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 669

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 331557 18-May-2010 20:05 Send private message

I would say that the CPE in that case would be managed by the customers smart home integrator, or by themselves.

ISP/IPTV/VOIP providers need to have a designated outlet that their problems end at which IMO would be the one on the side of the box provided by the fiber provider.

Customer managing their alarm should go out on the internet and to a web or whatever interface provided by the security monitoring company. No way that consumers should be directly connecting untrusted PCs to the alarm system.

Watching TV on the PC would be a seperate service I would expect that the IPTV providers would charge more for and there would be no need for it to be tied to the ethernet that they provide to give content to their settop boxes.

If TVs start to have IPTV devices in them I would expect multiple NICs, one to connect to the customers LAN for their own content, and one to connect to the IPTV provider to get the live and ondemand paid content. No reason to have the 2 ever join, and for management I would expect that it would be non desirable to have that happen.




Richard rich.ms

627 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

  Reply # 331581 18-May-2010 20:37 Send private message

richms: I would say that the CPE in that case would be managed by the customers smart home integrator, or by themselves.

OK - so, when it doesn't work, who does the customer call for support?
How do we manage the routing for this? CPEs that can handle multiple WAN interfaces are rare.  CPEs that can handle having multiple DHCP clients for multiple WAN interfaces are even more rare.

(Although this is an interesting area for CPE vendors to fulfil, and quickly).  Of course, if there is managed CPE provided by the first service provider into the home, what happens when you want to add more?  Or what happens if they all require their own CPE to be offered?  Yikes - now I'm integrating multiple CPE that I may not have configuration control over, into my home network.  4 CPEs all offering 192.168.1.0/24 scope DHCP offers - oh dear.

richms: ISP/IPTV/VOIP providers need to have a designated outlet that their problems end at which IMO would be the one on the side of the box provided by the fiber provider.

Sure.  That's one option, but again it means that you are not going to be offering a seamless integrated network.  The digital home is then not happening, and you just have multiple high speed interfaces.  Maybe that's OK, maybe it isn't - and the digital home life is one of the things being used to 'sell' NBN type initiatives to Joe Public.

richms: Customer managing their alarm should go out on the internet and to a web or whatever interface provided by the security monitoring company. No way that consumers should be directly connecting untrusted PCs to the alarm system.

A valid point, but why should I trombone traffic between my home security system and over the Internet for instance?  What if I want to watch my porch camera in PiP on my TV at home?  What if I want it in a side-window on my PC?  Why carry that over the WAN when I should be able to carry that within my home networks - be it through DMZs or not?

richms: Watching TV on the PC would be a seperate service I would expect that the IPTV providers would charge more for and there would be no need for it to be tied to the ethernet that they provide to give content to their settop boxes.

It might given as a value-add for free if you have multiple TV providers competing.  If the IPTV provider is offering, e.g. guaranteed HD quality video then there is plenty of reason for it to be tied to the "subscriber access circuit" they have bought.

richms: If TVs start to have IPTV devices in them I would expect multiple NICs, one to connect to the customers LAN for their own content, and one to connect to the IPTV provider to get the live and ondemand paid content. No reason to have the 2 ever join, and for management I would expect that it would be non desirable to have that happen.

There's no "if" about it, there are TVs today that do have IPTV devices in them.  Multiple NICs is one option, but see my first comment: how do you expect them to handle network routing?  Not to mention I don't necessarily want my IPTV provider to have too much control over my TV...  Or what if I want to use multiple IPTV providers simultaneously?

My original point still stands: the home network domain is one of the least thought about in NBN/FTTH initiatives and it is not an easy one to solve because of things like this.  The issue of managing multiple external L3 interfaces into a single home network (that may or may not be NATed, thus the risk of overlapping or conflicting IP addresses gets even higher) is extremely complicated and not at all well thought through.  Interestingly IPv6 both simplifies and complicates this issue.

20210 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1775

Moderator
Trusted
Biddle Corp
Subscriber

  Reply # 331585 18-May-2010 20:46 Send private message

richms: I would say that the CPE in that case would be managed by the customers smart home integrator, or by themselves.



That's where the whole thing falls apart!

11510 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 669

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 331627 18-May-2010 22:05 Send private message

Dont see how it falls apart, either you pay someone to support integrated complex systems, purchase all from one supplier who will do it for you or have them as seperate systems that are not connected.




Richard rich.ms

627 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

  Reply # 331641 18-May-2010 22:27 Send private message

richms: Dont see how it falls apart, either you pay someone to support integrated complex systems, purchase all from one supplier who will do it for you or have them as seperate systems that are not connected.

I'm not sure that's how it works in the mind's eye of the consumer or the NBN/FTTH dreamers.

11510 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 669

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 331661 18-May-2010 22:56 Send private message

How is it any different then not expecting sky to sort out sending it to more than one TV at the moment? All that needs to happen is definitive boundrys be drawn up on where each service will and will not support to, and then a market of lower tier integrators will spring up to help sort out the lower end houses that have traditionally not had any form of automation or structured cabling in them.

Hell, even the likes of harvey normal would love to get in on that cash cow.




Richard rich.ms

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic




Twitter »
Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





Trending now »

Hot discussions in our forums right now:

Slaughter of Innocents
Created by networkn, last reply by networkn on 19-Dec-2014 17:46 (64 replies)
Pages... 3 4 5


youtube downloader
Created by Ford, last reply by jarledb on 22-Dec-2014 16:57 (18 replies)
Pages... 2


Spray Foam Insulation
Created by AACTech, last reply by timbosan on 19-Dec-2014 16:58 (36 replies)
Pages... 2 3


Crew Drinking on Flights - Why!?
Created by networkn, last reply by Geektastic on 22-Dec-2014 09:35 (34 replies)
Pages... 2 3


Spark, the least secure part of your home network?
Created by NZtechfreak, last reply by NonprayingMantis on 23-Dec-2014 02:02 (31 replies)
Pages... 2 3


Police Camera Van Disguise
Created by Reanalyse, last reply by jackyleunght2002 on 23-Dec-2014 01:10 (76 replies)
Pages... 4 5 6


Some lowlife is using my easy to remember number to commit idiocy
Created by joker97, last reply by joker97 on 22-Dec-2014 15:48 (15 replies)

Couriers starting to charge for redelivery
Created by mattwnz, last reply by rendezvous on 19-Dec-2014 11:45 (78 replies)
Pages... 4 5 6



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.

Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.