Fibre to the Home under National policies

Forums › ICT Policies and Regulation › Fibre to the Home under National policies

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7

4222 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1322

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#176910 9-Nov-2008 11:46

They will have to think about other applications they can run over fibre, internet wise I'm guessing we could see high speed offered on National traffic but cap International speed fairly low not to choke the current links we have.
An application I can see is Sky TV doing all their channels on it in High Def IPTV for example

Basekid

70 posts

Master Geek

#176917 9-Nov-2008 13:07

Fibre to the home is pretty useless imho. The main problem for NZ is that almost all data comes from overseas. While fibre may increase national speeds, international speeds will not go up that much (as servers limit download speeds) and we will still have a cap.

So in the end people will just go through their cap faster.... yay.

http://spiegelei.myminicity.com/

barf

643 posts

Ultimate Geek

#176918 9-Nov-2008 13:40

I'm sure the schools need "faster porn", to quote John Key...

National HAVN'T actually RELEASED any of their POLICIES yet, just campaigned on 'ISSUES'.
Is that not blantantly dishonest to anyone except me?

goto http://national.org.nz/policies/policies.aspx
all you can see are press releases and synopses, I pity the voter who diddn't research the party they voted for.

Sniffing the glue holding the Internet together

cyril7

9075 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2499

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#176926 9-Nov-2008 15:10

I have to agree with others sentiments, my current 6Mb/s connection (at 3.3km) rarely finds server connections that open it right up, so there is still throughput restrictions where fibre already is part of the network, namely the amount of southercross fibre each ISP is prepared to pay for. Further to that, the performance my connection provides pretty much keeps me happy, but then again I dont use torrents or large downloads or movies over the net.

DJshadow to put the cabnetisation program on hold would be fool hardy, even though I rarely use my 6Mb/s in a couple of years my 10 and 13yr old will be using a bit hunk of bandwidth (already are) so our needs will grow, the cabinet thats 300m from my home is going to do just fine especially if by teh time its upgraded (6/2011) I hope telecom should be offering VDSL2 options, something that is just a card change on an ISAM.

Also as the cabinets are fitted with Alcatels ISAM the option of upgrade to FTTH from the cabinet is pretty straight forward as that option already exists in that family. Telecoms whole NGN upgrade to IP based ISAMs throughout both exchange and cabinet based with fibre GigE feeding between all is the core of what a FTTH network needs anyway.

Cyril

allstarnz

1720 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 24

Trusted

#176970 9-Nov-2008 19:46

the Southern Cross Bottleneck is the problem, not the domestic links. What's the point in having fast internet if you can't get any use for it outside New Zealand

eXDee

4033 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1070

Trusted

#176971 9-Nov-2008 19:49

cyril7: I have to agree with others sentiments, my current 6Mb/s connection (at 3.3km) rarely finds server connections that open it right up

I can max out my 10Mb/s connection with a multi threaded download manager off many servers, isp is telstra. Of course it is multiple connections, but it proves there is a fairly decent throughput there if you try and use it.

Question on cabinets, and i've asked this many times before (probably to you also), but would there be any explaination for only getting 10mbit off a cabinet that i'm syncing 20mbit with? Telstra confirmed that they do not shape to 10, each FS/FS profile is actually profiled to a max of 25 which is obviously impossible on ADSL2+. I have seen speed tests of people getting higher than this on various ISP's, however i can definitely confirm 10 is my absolute max no matter where i download from and no matter what speedtest i do, over several months.
Its not something i can complain about - 10mbit is way above average for NZ, but if the potential is there its always nice to use it.

Lenovo

Shop now for Lenovo laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
80652 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 41034

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#176973 9-Nov-2008 20:00

I've moved this discussion to our ICT Policies and Regulations forum.

Referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies

Support Geekzone by subscribing (browse ads-free), or making a one-off or recurring donation through PressPatron.

TinyTim

1058 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 167

Trusted

#177012 10-Nov-2008 07:35

DjShadow:is there any reason to put the Cabnetisation (fibre to the node) project on hold?

Telecom has to do this cabinetisation has part of the separation agreement with the government - there's no option to put it on hold.

cokemaster:
Aren't the new cabinets already fiber fed, so it would make sense if one was to go fiber to the home to distribute the fiber from the cabinet to the home?

Except that a km or two of fibre per cabinet is a tiny fraction of the total fibre that would be needed to go past every home in the country (or 75% of the country or whatever it is) so the advantage Telecom/Chorus from already having FTTN is tiny. Their real advantage is the existing copper network: VDSL2 is the obvious solution (if interim), but still wouldn't be that cheap because the number of additional cabinets needed to get the length of the copper down to 500m-1km would be an order of magnitude more than Telecom's current cabinetisation plan.

I believe that even Munchkin's estimate of $8 billion for FTTH is probably low - most estimates seem to forget the cost of wiring up the house. Verizon on their website says this takes 4-6 hours for FiOS, plus the cost of the equipment - can't be cheap.

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9996

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#177015 10-Nov-2008 07:53

I just can't reastically see a large scale FTTH ever becoming a reality. All new subdivisions built in NZ are now FTTH since Telecom won't deploy any more copper but the costs to wire up 75% of houses is just out of this world. As mentioned people are also forgetting the costs of wiring up houses. Imagine the work required to retrofit *every* house that has FFTH - does it really stack up?

We're talking fitting an ONT style unit such as those deployed by Telecom/WxC/AlarmNZ to every house and then also rewiring the house so that the residents are able to take advantage of the connection. Just think of the costs involved..

I'm not against fibre - I've just yet to see anybody yet present a business case that gets anywhere close to justifying the investment involved. Maurice Williamson kept talking about a cost per household of $18 per month at the InternetNZ debate and that households wouldn't need a phoneline. People like this are just dreaming..

TinyTim

1058 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 167

Trusted

#177016 10-Nov-2008 08:07

sbiddle:
I'm not against fibre - I've just yet to see anybody yet present a business case that gets anywhere close to justifying the investment involved. Maurice Williamson kept talking about a cost per household of $18 per month at the InternetNZ debate and that households wouldn't need a phoneline. People like this are just dreaming..

I doubt Maurice Williamson's estimate even includes the drop, much less ONT and house wiring. Plus he has assumed micro-trenching throughout, which just aint going to happen in our paper-thin roads.

Even the New Zealand Institute's study - one of the most highly regarded - is unlit fibre only, so ignores the cost of the electronics, as well as using a retail ARPU to pay for a wholesale network.

DonGould

3892 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 164

#177082 10-Nov-2008 12:43

TinyTim: Even the New Zealand Institute's study - one of the most highly regarded.

I'm sorry but that still remains the most moronic report I've read on the subject so far.

I agree it's got some great stuff in it.

However even hinting at a monopoly in the telecommunications sector after 20 years of struggling to get us out of the monopoly we had is just moronic!

I didn't go door to door in the hot Canterbury sun all summer in 1989 trying to promote a small telcommunications company to have our government step in and undo all that work!

There are better solutions that can be found!

Cheers Don

Promote New Zealand - Get yourself a .kiwi.nz domain name!!!

Check out mine - i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz - don@i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz

Lenovo

Shop now for Lenovo laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

TinyTim

1058 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 167

Trusted

#177106 10-Nov-2008 13:31

DonGould:
However even hinting at a monopoly in the telecommunications sector after 20 years of struggling to get us out of the monopoly we had is just moronic!

Not sure I follow. They're pushing for something that no-one else is interested in doing or can afford to do: a large scale FTTH layer 1 network in the near future. I'm not sure monopoly is the right concern here - you or anyone else could build out a competing network if you wanted.

coffeebaron

6304 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3567

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#177110 10-Nov-2008 13:41

It is going to take a long time to roll out FTTH. We are talking about something 10 years away. 10 years ago, dial-up was the norm, and all you'd ever need. 10 years from now a lot will have changed agine, and DSL/VDSL etc will have done their time.
I don't believe anyone will look back in 10 years time and say "this was a dumb idea rolling out FTTH". The backhaul, the international capacity, the local content, it will all come.

Rural IT and Broadband support.

Broadband troubleshooting and master filter installs.
Starlink installer - one month free: https://www.starlink.com/?referral=RC-32845-88860-71
Wi-Fi and networking
Cel-Fi supply and installer - boost your mobile phone coverage legally

Need help in Auckland, Waikato or BoP? Click my email button, or email me direct: [my user name] at geekzonemail dot com

DonGould

3892 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 164

#177165 10-Nov-2008 16:39

TinyTim: Not sure I follow. They're pushing for something that no-one else is interested in doing or can afford to do: a large scale FTTH layer 1 network in the near future. I'm not sure monopoly is the right concern here - you or anyone else could build out a competing network if you wanted.

Not according to that report.

From page 11 of the report: "Create FibreCo, a price regulated monopoly investor in the fibre access network"

That's just simply an insane proposition that gets the report laughed out of the room as far as I'm concerned.

It shows no understanding of Government policy for almost 30 years.

FibreCo should be build on a needs basic with a transparent costing model if it is to follow Government policy for the past 25 years.

I confess that I haven't even finished reading the whole report. To me, it just keeps getting worse and worse as I read it.

The first 11 pages show no respect for the investment that has been put in place by a bunch of hard working groups (and I'm not even counting Telecom as one of those, even though it would be fair to).

No respect, or even understanding, seems to be being given the the public policy frame work that has been put in place for large investment over the past 30 years from the time that Robert Mouldoon was in power to today.

I could go on and on about holes I see in that presentation but I'm not sure it would be helpful to anyone.

Cheers Don

Promote New Zealand - Get yourself a .kiwi.nz domain name!!!

Check out mine - i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz - don@i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz

TinyTim

1058 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 167

Trusted

#177204 10-Nov-2008 20:03

DonGould:
TinyTim: Not sure I follow. They're pushing for something that no-one else is interested in doing or can afford to do: a large scale FTTH layer 1 network in the near future. I'm not sure monopoly is the right concern here - you or anyone else could build out a competing network if you wanted.

Not according to that report.

From page 11 of the report: "Create FibreCo, a price regulated monopoly investor in the fibre access network"

That's just simply an insane proposition that gets the report laughed out of the room as far as I'm concerned.

They mean that only one company gets to operate the fibre access network - they don't mean other operators can't build their own networks. And the price they sell access for is regulated so there are no monopoly rents.

It's not their intention to compete with existing networks that can already provide the desired bandwidth - they talk about it later with regards to Telecom.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think the report is the answer, it has some awful calculations in it as I already said.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7