NZ Plan For Fiber To the Home

Forums › New Zealand Broadband › NZ Plan For Fiber To the Home

1 | 2

vinnieg

2260 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#343673 21-Jun-2010 10:18

raytaylor:

What about hologram conferencing? According to my calculations, a super high def 3d hologram conference would take up to 550mbps.

Ask telstra - they recently did it at a shareholders confrence in Australia. Videos on youtube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjdcIcctr34&feature=related

Yeah that was between Melbourne(Rove) and NZ with Jeremy Corbett and a few other comedians up at Vector Arena

I have moved across the ditch. Now residing in Melbourne as a VOIP/Video Technical Trainer/Engineer.

hairy1

3332 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#343740 21-Jun-2010 12:33

The quote for my monthly quote was from a small ISP and was a "back of the envelope" verbal quote. However, I got the impression that they were happy to do it as it appeared the on-going costs to deliver data were less with fibre than ADSL.

My views (except when I am looking out their windows) are not those of my employer.

raytaylor

4017 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#343771 21-Jun-2010 13:52

need to compare apples with apples.

1mbit flatrate can transfer 324gb a month - much different from 10gb total. To your isp it usually doesnt matter what speed they give you - if you have a cap because they know you will spread it out.
I would much rather have 1mbit unlimited than 100mbit with a 10gb cap anyday but thats not going to happen :-(
Its the isp's upstream bandwidth that you are buying.

Because of this fibre will be a premium product, even though the tail cost would probably be the same or slightly higher than a telecom wholesale dsl connection + wholesale landline voice service.

Ray Taylor

There is no place like localhost

Spreadsheet for Comparing Electricity Plans Here

ChillingSilence

301 posts

Ultimate Geek

#343773 21-Jun-2010 13:55

Apples with apples?

Tell me then, what is "flat-rate DSL" vs "flat-rate fibre" if not comparing apples with apples?

4m/bit down, 900kbps upload, that's what I get for $59 a month and it's easy to reach 300GB. Maxing my connection (With my QoS on) I can do approx 25GB per-day of traffic.

Definitely not with the ~$1K difference.

raytaylor

4017 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#344158 22-Jun-2010 14:13

Sorry i must have misread.

I was thinking 1mbit flatrate fibre compared to 100mbit 10gb capped fibre.

Ray Taylor

There is no place like localhost

Spreadsheet for Comparing Electricity Plans Here

ChillingSilence

301 posts

Ultimate Geek

#344265 22-Jun-2010 19:12

Fair call.

I'd personally prefer the higher bandwidth rather than higher peak speeds. It's easier to manage slower speeds well with QoS than it is to manage overall consumption IMHO ;)

Zeon

3916 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#344272 22-Jun-2010 19:42

The benefit of FTTH in terms of datacaps will come in bypassing Telecom Wholesale's backhaul and handover limits (only 32kbps) which is the biggest constraints to data caps now. If cheap backhaul and easy handover exists between the wholesalers and retailers there may even be free national fingers crossed

Speedtest 2019-10-14

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

ChillingSilence

301 posts

Ultimate Geek

#344274 22-Jun-2010 19:48

FTTH won't do that. National data is not the reason for high costing per-GB rates, but because the SCC is really the only means for getting data in and out of the country.

We could have an alternative, which should theoretically decrease the per-GB cost by providing competition. Has nothing to do with monopoly or bypassing Chorus back-haul.

Data caps with FTTH and just the SCC won't decrease. It'll still cost ISP's the same per-GB to buy data, regardless of if they wanted to provide it to the customer over Fibre or Copper ADSL networks. The medium to your house has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Cheap backhaul and handovers already exists. See the APE and WIX:
http://nzix.net/who.html

kyhwana2

2566 posts

Uber Geek

#344275 22-Jun-2010 19:52

Basically, you'll have the same data caps on FTTH as we have on DSL now, except you'll be able to blow through it faster..

ChillingSilence

301 posts

Ultimate Geek

#344277 22-Jun-2010 19:54

Pretty much!

If you're on 10GB with a 100m/bit download (and 50m/bit upload), lets round it down and say you're doing 10MB/sec, you should be able to hose through your 10GB in about 17 minutes. Imagine you get a virus and it starts uploading and blasting through your connection in about half an hour.

It wasn't too bad back in the day when everybody was on Dial-Up and the worst it'd upload at was like 4KB/sec, but times be changin' ....

cokemaster

Exited
4929 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#344281 22-Jun-2010 20:08

Zeon: The benefit of FTTH in terms of datacaps will come in bypassing Telecom Wholesale's backhaul and handover limits (only 32kbps) which is the biggest constraints to data caps now. If cheap backhaul and easy handover exists between the wholesalers and retailers there may even be free national fingers crossed

Perhaps you should look at the LLU offerings then....

webhosting

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

Zeon

3916 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#344347 22-Jun-2010 22:41

ChillingSilence: FTTH won't do that. National data is not the reason for high costing per-GB rates, but because the SCC is really the only means for getting data in and out of the country.

We could have an alternative, which should theoretically decrease the per-GB cost by providing competition. Has nothing to do with monopoly or bypassing Chorus back-haul.

Data caps with FTTH and just the SCC won't decrease. It'll still cost ISP's the same per-GB to buy data, regardless of if they wanted to provide it to the customer over Fibre or Copper ADSL networks. The medium to your house has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Cheap backhaul and handovers already exists. See the APE and WIX:
http://nzix.net/who.html

Um.... incorrect. First off the Citylink peering exchanges are not handover points and are not backhaul. I'm talking about the cost and limitations of getting a customer's PPP session from the Telecom wholesale port all the way through to the ISP's POP wherever they want that. So for example lets say Orcon has their handovers in Auckland and that is also likely where all their PPP sessions are based from. For a customer in Invercargill they have to pay Telecom Wholesale for the:

a) DSL port
b) backhaul from Invercargill to Auckland
c) handover link

Info on the Telecom Wholesale product is here:
http://www.telecomwholesale.co.nz/handoverlinks

One of the biggest complaints I have heard about the UBA product which virtually all connections (apart from LLUs) use (UBA is Telecom wholesale) is the maximum handover bandwidth committed per port. I hear Telecom Wholesale won't provision more than 32kbps handover per client so ISPs basically have to have a large number of clients with small data caps to cover those with larger datacaps to maintain decent speeds. This is further exacerbated if the ISP has gluts in bandwidth demand (which is why the low cost ISPs like Xnet and Slingshot have off-peak to flatten their demand).

While LLU gets around this, in many instances Telecom still have a monopoly on the backhaul from the exchange to the ISP's POP. I was talking to an ISP the other day about the possibility of free data from my home connection to work (same ISP) and colocated servers but they won't do it even though its LLU as the price of Telecom backhaul is too high.

Seriously, while Chorus are sweet and Telecom retail do their thing - Telecom wholesale is the new bottleneck. To put it in perspective for one connection we have we pay $500 per month for 5mbps and move 3-4TB of national data a month.

Anyway, while international bandwidth is a bottleneck I do agree, prices pegged to those in Aus and their is competition there. Content caching and fast national will be the biggest winner under FTTH.

Speedtest 2019-10-14

Ragnor

8222 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#344372 23-Jun-2010 00:33

Zeon:

Um.... incorrect. First off the Citylink peering exchanges are not handover points and are not backhaul. I'm talking about the cost and limitations of getting a customer's PPP session from the Telecom wholesale port all the way through to the ISP's POP wherever they want that. So for example lets say Orcon has their handovers in Auckland and that is also likely where all their PPP sessions are based from. For a customer in Invercargill they have to pay Telecom Wholesale for the:

a) DSL port
b) backhaul from Invercargill to Auckland
c) handover link

+1 this

Wholesale cost of the dsl port alone is ~$20/month before anything else.

However, while I'm of the opinion the wholesale pricing is high because it supports Telecom's bloated management and overall operational structure FTTH will not magically make the cost super low for the from the home to the ISP part of the service.

insane

3240 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#344380 23-Jun-2010 01:46

Well handovers are not cheap so if ISPs are expected to have capacity for 1000's of users pulling 100mbps then they're in for some pain. It would basically be taking their current connectivity and upgrading it by 10 to 20 times.

I just hope that whoever is given the contract for the build in Auckland (where my interest is) does not under scope the requirements.

webwat

2036 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#344928 24-Jun-2010 15:41

ChillingSilence: FTTH won't do that. National data is not the reason for high costing per-GB rates, but because the SCC is really the only means for getting data in and out of the country.

We could have an alternative, which should theoretically decrease the per-GB cost by providing competition. Has nothing to do with monopoly or bypassing Chorus back-haul.

Data caps with FTTH and just the SCC won't decrease. It'll still cost ISP's the same per-GB to buy data, regardless of if they wanted to provide it to the customer over Fibre or Copper ADSL networks. The medium to your house has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Cheap backhaul and handovers already exists. See the APE and WIX:
http://nzix.net/who.html

Thats not quite accurate. APE and WIX are BGP peering interchanges, not Layer 2 handover points and not ultrafast since we dont use them enough, but thats only relevant for ADSL traffic after its handed over to the ISP from Telecom. Even if Telecom peered freely, they would still need dedicated handovers for Layer 2 broadband traffic. Its limited before it even gets to the ISP.

Once data demand for broadband uses the spare capacity on Southern Cross network (both the San Jose and Sydney links) then costs will actually go up until more international capacity comes online. We probably haven't reached that point yet, but when it happens we will need to start hosting more content and applications locally. I don't think any new trans-oceanic links will be online before we get a reasonable number of FTTH users, so ISPs may hold off buying the last of the spare capacity before it runs out anyway.

Time to find a new industry!

1 | 2