Go Large Go small

Forums › New Zealand Broadband › Go Large Go small

1 | 2 | 3

Exited
4929 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#51262 6-Nov-2006 15:57

Feedback from internet newsgroups such as Wellington-based Geekzone suggests many internet users have experienced faster connection speeds at off-peak times, when there is less congestion on the network.

Good to see them bringing up geekzone... perhaps bucking the trend?

webhosting

Loose lips may sink ships - Be smart - Don't post internal/commercially sensitive or confidential information!

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79294 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#51267 6-Nov-2006 16:08

Grant17:
JonC: Question is - who will invest the money to fix the problem?

Telecom won't invest if the wholesale price is too low. ISPs won't see a business case for using Telecom's network if the wholesale price is too high....

All the more reason there should be alternative providers to Telecom's network then, wouldn't you agree?

Roll on unbundling...

I agree. But unbundling is about allowing providers to use space in Telecom's cabinets and exchanges. The infrastructure remains basically the same - or almost.

As stated before, nothing prevented other providers of establishing their own infrastructure. Why didn't they? As far as I am aware there was no state imposed monopoly on last mile. Except city councils approval required. What about wireless last mile? WiMax?

But this is off topic, again.

barf

643 posts

Ultimate Geek

#51270 6-Nov-2006 16:14

stuff.co.nz: Telecom must ogger wholesale connections

who's idea was it to put G so close to F on keyboards eh?

But back on topic, to me, it seems like the layer 7 filtering is the shoe stuck in Xtra's cogs at the moment - not the dodgy copper or unbundling or etc

Sniffing the glue holding the Internet together

grant_k

3539 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#51273 6-Nov-2006 16:21

freitasm: I agree. But unbundling is about allowing providers to use space in Telecom's cabinets and exchanges. The infrastructure remains basically the same - or almost.

As stated before, nothing prevented other providers of establishing their own infrastructure. Why didn't they? As far as I am aware there was no state imposed monopoly on last mile. Except city councils approval required.

Yes, good point Mauricio. What we are dealing with here is a "Natural Monopoly" in that it's uneconomic for more than one competing provider to lay duplicate cables along city streets.

I would be the first to agree that in an ideal world we should have duplicate "Last Mile" infrastructure. But the reality is that our population is too small to justify it, except in fortunate places like Wellington where geography has conspired to squeeze everybody closer together.

I agree with you also that if unbundling is ONLY about putting equipment into Telecom's cabinets or exchanges, then the infrastructure is almost the same. Just doing that part of the equation is a cop-out because the only added capacity is that of a duplicate set of DSLAMs which is not going to accomplish a whole lot.

Where the real benefit would accrue is when alternative providers install their own DSLAMs AND THEIR OWN BACKHAUL EQUIPMENT.

Then we would see some huge improvements. If a competing provider also installs an alternative undersea cable, then we would have reached internet Nirvana...

But it's probably not a good idea to hold your breath waiting for it to happen.

bradstewart

4335 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#51274 6-Nov-2006 16:22

Ah more of the high quality we have come to expect from stuff... Has nobody heard of a spellchecker?

JonC

425 posts

Ultimate Geek

#51276 6-Nov-2006 16:23

Grant17:
JonC: Question is - who will invest the money to fix the problem?

Telecom won't invest if the wholesale price is too low. ISPs won't see a business case for using Telecom's network if the wholesale price is too high....

All the more reason there should be alternative providers to Telecom's network then, wouldn't you agree?

As Colin Jackson of InternetNZ says in that article on Stuff:

New Zealand has a "rundown network that does not appear to be capable of delivering an OECD-class service".

Roll on unbundling...

Yeah, I agree. The current problem of decreased speeds compared to last month is NOT a local loop problem. The local loop (copper wire between houses and Telecom cabinets) hasn't suddenly degraded. It's the single backhaul provider that's causing grief. With LLU, ISPs will have to build their own backhaul, taking the strain off Telecom's and relieving the problem being experienced by many at the moment.

However, when future technologies that require a better quality local loop (like ADSL2+) are introduced, that is when the quality of the local loop will be important and the issue of whether Telecom can afford to upgrade it because of low wholesale prices will become relevant. Here's hoping that when that happens, alternatives to the local loop will be available.

EDIT: ... or Telecom has upgraded it.

exportgoldman

1202 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#51491 7-Nov-2006 18:59

barf:
spazz: I've sent 10 speed test results through to the Xtra Helpdesk, I suggest those affected do the same.

Please don't waste Xtra's time with speed test results. Web-based speed tests are not a reliable-enough benchmark to warrant a complaint to your ISP. A better method is to load up your connection with something like bittorrent (properly configured and downloading something legal of course) and measure your speed.

You do realise Telecom/Xtras method of troubleshooting broadband speed issues is to get the user to use a web based speed test site www.jetstreamgames.co.nz/speed and submit these off to Xtra?

Web based speed tests are fine, if you know the connection to the test web site is not loaded down, and it sits close to the local network.

In Xtra's case, I recall the guy which setup the original speedtest site had it on dual cisco routers, with 100MBits connection to Xtra's core network.

I assume they must have upgraded this since, otherwise a few dozen users testing their broadband connection would swap this.

Tyler - Parnell Geek - iPhone 3G - Lenovo X301 - Kaseya - Great Western Steak House, these are some of my favourite things.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

LennonNZ

2459 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#51492 7-Nov-2006 19:11

Hi

www.nzdsl.co.nz had ~30000 tests done on it (on the 26th) normally around 15000 per day which I presume is a akit more tests than the jetstreamgames server has at the moment, and it (nzdsl.co.nz's server) only has 100M connection to the internet on it (and it is doing nothing like 100M to/from it). I would think 100M is quite enough for the speedtests done on it at the moment.

Remember test times are quite small and not everyone tests at the same time

Thanks
Craig

exportgoldman

1202 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#51496 7-Nov-2006 19:19

freitasm:
Grant17:
JonC: Question is - who will invest the money to fix the problem?

Telecom won't invest if the wholesale price is too low. ISPs won't see a business case for using Telecom's network if the wholesale price is too high....

All the more reason there should be alternative providers to Telecom's network then, wouldn't you agree?

Roll on unbundling...

I agree. But unbundling is about allowing providers to use space in Telecom's cabinets and exchanges. The infrastructure remains basically the same - or almost.

As stated before, nothing prevented other providers of establishing their own infrastructure. Why didn't they?As far as I am aware there was no state imposed monopoly on last mile. Except city councils approval required. What about wireless last mile? WiMax?

But this is off topic, again.

Actually freitasm you must be new around here :-)

TelstraClear, which was called Saturn back in 1998, started to dig up the roads in residential Wellington (quite a investment for them) believing that there would be a level playing field, and no state sanctioned monopoly. They laid their cable, including fibre, directly to citizens homes.

Then they offered some amazing prices, selling Cable TV, super fast (even today’s broadband speeds don't compare) and phone line services.

Telecom brought 5% of Sky TV, got a wholesale agreement with Sky TV, and started to match their pricing on a street by street basis - but only on the streets Saturn had gone to great expensive to lay their cables down.

This is the book definition of predatory pricing, a monopoly using it's profits from another area of it's business to squeeze a competitor out of the market.

Saturn took them to the commerce commission, surely the Commerce Commission would rule against a monopoly killing off at that stage the only competition Telecom have had since they were privatised?

Nope, they ruled that this "Customer Loyalty" rebate was OK. Saturn stopped it's plans to roll out the rest of its network to New Zealand, and has languished ever since, first as Clear Communications, and then as TelstraClear.

Everyone else watched on and realised that yes, we do hae a "state imposed monopoly" on the last mile.

This is the most memorable example, but there have been plenty more over the years, including the National Governments Telecommunications ministers refusal to even look at unbundling the local loop, even though, the very independant report has asked to be commissioned on this very topic said we should, every country that had done it experiences far lower telecommunications costs, and higher broadband penetration

More Information here http://www.converge.org.nz/watchdog/05/03.htm

Tyler - Parnell Geek - iPhone 3G - Lenovo X301 - Kaseya - Great Western Steak House, these are some of my favourite things.

JonC

425 posts

Ultimate Geek

#51515 7-Nov-2006 20:49

Telecom wrote the book on exploiting a monopoly. It's a shame the Commerce Commission didn't see it that way.

However, I thought TCL's expansion into Auckland was blocked by the councils because objections were made to stringing the cables on poles.

tonyhughes

Hawkes Bay
8476 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#51516 7-Nov-2006 20:52

JonC: Telecom wrote the book on exploiting a monopoly.

Perhaps you mean "Telecom wasnt actually the first company in the history of the world to seek to maximise the ROI for the investors that own the company" ?

(tongue in cheek!!!)

exportgoldman

1202 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#51525 7-Nov-2006 22:05

JonC: Telecom wrote the book on exploiting a monopoly. It's a shame the Commerce Commission didn't see it that way.

However, I thought TCL's expansion into Auckland was blocked by the councils because objections were made to stringing the cables on poles.

Yes your right about Auckland - but I would argue, that Saturn were ready to take on Auckland by digging, the same way they had in Wellington and ChristChurch, but could not compete with Telecom's predatory pricing strategy.

So, no one did anything for another 10 years, until TelstraClear had a half hearted effort at it in Auckland, but not wanting to invest the money in digging, because of uncertainty in the market and lack of government support.

There are many things done by the government in the last ten years to do with favouring Telecom which one does wonder if some people got nice cars, or easy jobs with associates of Telecom for their 'hard work' in government.

Tyler - Parnell Geek - iPhone 3G - Lenovo X301 - Kaseya - Great Western Steak House, these are some of my favourite things.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79294 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#51530 7-Nov-2006 22:36

exportgoldman: Actually freitasm you must be new around here :-)

TelstraClear, which was called Saturn back in 1998, started to dig up the roads in residential Wellington (quite a investment for them) believing that there would be a level playing field, and no state sanctioned monopoly. They laid their cable, including fibre, directly to citizens homes.

Not at all. I remember Saturn really well. Actually I am client since the days of Chello. And I am stil a client now.

When I say "nothing prevented other providers of establishing their own infrastructure. Why didn't they? As far as I am aware there was no state imposed monopoly on last mile." I am referring to all other companies that vocally complained about Telecom, such as IHUG, Slingshot and others.

grant_k

3539 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#51538 7-Nov-2006 23:14

freitasm: When I say "nothing prevented other providers of establishing their own infrastructure. Why didn't they?

For the same reason that you didn't see another power company laying alternative power lines down your street...

It's what is known as a "Natural Monopoly" i.e. it's uneconomic to have a duplicate set of infrastructure.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79294 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#51540 7-Nov-2006 23:16

Not the same infrastructure. Fiber for example is new, and any company could lay the cables. It's not reusing the copper structure for sure.

1 | 2 | 3