First to get in the Ultra-Fast Broadband rollout: Hamilton, Tauranga, Whangarei, New Plymouth and Wanganui

Forums › ICT Policies and Regulation › First to get in the Ultra-Fast Broadband rollout: Hamilton, Tauranga, Whangarei, New Plymouth and Wanganui

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

8279 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 585

Trusted

#414577 8-Dec-2010 12:16

Well a lot of people seem to be saying contention from DSLAM to local EAS is not a problem (cabinets have gigabit fibre) but that handover "dimensioning" to the ISP done later at the remote EAS is an purely artificial limitation.

@Talkiet

I'll wager your your home adsl connection is still FIPD. Only new customers since 1st of Jan are using EUBA etc on Telecom right?

wired

191 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 72

#414602 8-Dec-2010 13:13

sbiddle: One thing that's been interesting has been the talk of "free installations".

There seems to be a lot of unanswered questions relating to this, so if people do know the answers I'd love to know.

Where will fibre be terminated? Initially it was going to be to the pole/kerb but there has since been talk in recent months of it being terminated at the demarc on the house. Doing this will require consent of the land owner which has caused big issues in Aussie with around 50% of people not giving permission in Tasmania.

What is considered to be a "free install"? If cable needs to be run to the house, either as an overhead drop or trench, an ONT needs to be installed, house wiring needs to be altered, a new router installed, and possibly a house alarm moved over to an IP adapter to ensure continuity of alarm monitoring. Who is going to pay for all of this?

There are two termination points.
1) Termination at the pole/property boundary is part of the communal build. This is the part that the govt is loaning the money for.
2) When a customer signs up, the LFC installs the additional fibre to the house to the demarc. This is paid for by the LFC and they get the money back from the $40/month rental.

Also when the customer signs up, the taxpayer gets the money back from the LFC as they have to "buy-out" that customer connection from the govt - hence why the 1.5b is only a loan.

Looks like the free install is only as far as the demarc in the house which is probably the copper ethernet port between the ONU and the Residential gateway.

exportgoldman

1202 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3

Trusted

#414619 8-Dec-2010 13:48

ockel:
Richard7666: Do most cities still have overhead power-poles? I know that Invercargill has had all its power and communications cabling underground for a decade now. This could be problematic.

Where undergrounding has occurred then I imagine the winning bidder will use their ducting rather than add new overheads. And where its still overhead they'll use the poles. I would say subject to council approval but chances are they own the lines company and would approve such work. But if it was Telstraclear, say in Auckland, then they'd probably decline the use of overhead cables. /ooops. They already did. 10 years ago.

Quite correct, I believe it was Vector which wanted to roll out fibre in Auckland, but the Auckland City Council refused to allow them to string fibre overhead where there were existing power lines, so it became unfeasable and they gave up.

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

cyril7

9073 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2499

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#414740 8-Dec-2010 19:32

A couple of corrections. The number (32, 45, 48) of kbps isn't strictly speaking a CIR, The number is (I believe, from public knowledge) used to calculate the aggregate capacity of ISP handovers, so the 'CIR' doesn't apply to individual subscribers.

Hi Neil, all well and good, but reality is at peak time throughput's are well below 2.5Mb/s, my guess is by an order (10x) at best, ie struggling 300kb/s. I clearly understand that the exchange/street hardware is capable and configured for around 5Mb/s uncontested (ie GigE feeding a fully populated ISAM of 192ports = 5Mb/s) which I think is a good place to be in this day and age. However only Telecom understand how many ISAM GigEs are aggregated to a GigE further upstream, one assumes the cost to not contend that portion is not the limiting point.

So as such the exchange/street hardware is not the limiting factor to provide 2.5Mb/s uncontended (onshore), simply the dimensioning of the network futher up in its core, again a cost, but not one that requires the high expense of digging streets which is where the real money lays and what the UFB requires.

So hopefully the competition of the UFB rollout will see the current delivery work as it should, rather than be a Ferrari running with a speed limiter.

Cyril

hamish225

1430 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 215

ID Verified

#414743 8-Dec-2010 19:42

ockel:
Richard7666: Do most cities still have overhead power-poles? I know that Invercargill has had all its power and communications cabling underground for a decade now. This could be problematic.

Where undergrounding has occurred then I imagine the winning bidder will use their ducting rather than add new overheads. And where its still overhead they'll use the poles. I would say subject to council approval but chances are they own the lines company and would approve such work. But if it was Telstraclear, say in Auckland, then they'd probably decline the use of overhead cables. /ooops. They already did. 10 years ago.

i dont see why....

we have them in chch and they arnt even that noticeable!

the stupid thing is, they only seem to have cable in areas that have overhead powerlines.

bunch of cheap... PEOPLE.

>.<

*Insert big spe*dtest result here*

ockel

2031 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 545

#414852 9-Dec-2010 07:41

hamish225:
ockel:
Richard7666: Do most cities still have overhead power-poles? I know that Invercargill has had all its power and communications cabling underground for a decade now. This could be problematic.

Where undergrounding has occurred then I imagine the winning bidder will use their ducting rather than add new overheads. And where its still overhead they'll use the poles. I would say subject to council approval but chances are they own the lines company and would approve such work. But if it was Telstraclear, say in Auckland, then they'd probably decline the use of overhead cables. /ooops. They already did. 10 years ago.

i dont see why....

we have them in chch and they arnt even that noticeable!

the stupid thing is, they only seem to have cable in areas that have overhead powerlines.

bunch of cheap... PEOPLE.

>.<

Narrow minded councils in Auckland didnt want the visual pollution. Which is why Christchurch and Wellington do have cable networks and competition (in theory).
Personally I think that fat overhead cables are ugly and very noticeable - especially where there are multiple providers however the economics to build despite shorter asset life is hugely in favour of overhead cables.

You're unlikely to get cable where there are no overhead lines as Telstraclear wouldnt have found digging and laying worthwhile in those areas.

Sixth Labour Government - "Vision without Execution is just Hallucination"

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

DonGould

3892 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 164

#414903 9-Dec-2010 10:18

cyril7:So as such the exchange/street hardware is not the limiting factor to provide 2.5Mb/s uncontended (onshore), simply the dimensioning of the network futher up in its core, again a cost, but not one that requires the high expense of digging streets which is where the real money lays and what the UFB requires.

So hopefully the competition of the UFB rollout will see the current delivery work as it should, rather than be a Ferrari running with a speed limiter.

Cyril

I'm with you on this one Cyril, 45kbits just isn't playing the game in my view. T told .govt that it was going to deliver 10mbit to 80% of homes, and I took it that they were going to play nice with competitors. 45kbits isn't what I call 'playing nice' it's being obstructionist and holding data out of the network for any number of reasons that I can only speculate about.

It's also holding the market closed to anyone small to enter the market. If you want to enter the market with a trail of 50 customers you get a hand over of what? See my point?

It's holding out content such as iSky and Apple TV. Who want's to pay $200 for a STB when your average data plan will be chewed up after 10 movies?

.au has 1tb data plans now, why don't our providers? Because they couldn't stuff that much data into the network for more than 1% of users?

Half a decade ago ceo.t.nz talked about using 'confusion', is this just a new face on the old monkey?

D

Talkiet

4819 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3934

Trusted

#414909 9-Dec-2010 10:45

DonGould: [snip] 45kbits isn't what I call 'playing nice' it's being obstructionist and holding data out of the network for any number of reasons that I can only speculate about.
[snip]
D

Ask your ISP if there are any other products they can purchase that give them the ability to dimension at higher than 45kbit/sec aggregate.

Bear in mind that Telecom Retail has the same requirements for all new connections and is actively migrating all existing customers to the same products consumed by other ISPs as well.

Cheers - N

Please note all comments are from my own brain and don't necessarily represent the position or opinions of my employer, previous employers, colleagues, friends or pets.

DonGould

3892 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 164

#414917 9-Dec-2010 10:56

Talkiet: Ask your ISP if there are any other products they can purchase that give them the ability to dimension at higher than 45kbit/sec aggregate.

Bear in mind that Telecom Retail has the same requirements for all new connections and is actively migrating all existing customers to the same products consumed by other ISPs as well.

See: Telecom Wholesale Products

N if TW have products to sell then how about publishing it in the public space just like anyone else. Can you imagine the response from an ISP if I called up and asked what hand over product they were purchasing from TW? Come on, let's get real.

Step1 - tw publish product offerings in public space.
Step2 - consumers simply ask which product offering ips is using before signing up.

Once consumers become aware which isps do that then they'll just vote with feet, but really... TW need to drive this from their end. They need to push isps, such as Xtra, Orcon, etc to present products with appropriate hand overs.

Do we need to just set up a project like this one: BB Monitoring

...and get consumers to just name and shame those that are not delivering?

This isn't what I call 'playing the game'. All you're doing is suggesting we push the blame around the industry.

D

webwat

2036 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 145

Trusted

#415116 9-Dec-2010 16:01

wired:
sbiddle: One thing that's been interesting has been the talk of "free installations".

There seems to be a lot of unanswered questions relating to this, so if people do know the answers I'd love to know.

Where will fibre be terminated? Initially it was going to be to the pole/kerb but there has since been talk in recent months of it being terminated at the demarc on the house. Doing this will require consent of the land owner which has caused big issues in Aussie with around 50% of people not giving permission in Tasmania.

What is considered to be a "free install"? If cable needs to be run to the house, either as an overhead drop or trench, an ONT needs to be installed, house wiring needs to be altered, a new router installed, and possibly a house alarm moved over to an IP adapter to ensure continuity of alarm monitoring. Who is going to pay for all of this?

There are two termination points.
1) Termination at the pole/property boundary is part of the communal build. This is the part that the govt is loaning the money for.
2) When a customer signs up, the LFC installs the additional fibre to the house to the demarc. This is paid for by the LFC and they get the money back from the $40/month rental.

Also when the customer signs up, the taxpayer gets the money back from the LFC as they have to "buy-out" that customer connection from the govt - hence why the 1.5b is only a loan.

Looks like the free install is only as far as the demarc in the house which is probably the copper ethernet port between the ONU and the Residential gateway.

So many questions from all of us and just the occasional answer! Its a shame TV1 is giving everyone the wrong idea. Editor must have been on holiday...

Demarc for the fibreco is the Ethernet port on the ONT, and presumably any other copper ports on the particular ONU such as POTS or coax. For ONUs in an MTB, I think its also the Ethernet port but what happens when the building wiring isn't up to Ethernet spec (and how to prove it)? Sounds like inviting blame games for apartment dwellers since most such wiring works perfectly ok for ADSL.

ONT issues: looks like fibreco's will be expected to own the ONT for most users. Will they be required to provide ITU-T standard ONTs that support management/testing/reporting by the retail ISP? The RFP was ammended to require outdoor ONT enclosures where practical, but do the backup batteries also need to be outdoor, and is backup optional? What is involved in meeting the fibreco's emergency service requirements, will ISPs need contracts guaranteeing VoIP uptime? Or will the fibrecos provide POTS from the ONT equivalent to a landline. I'm sure at least some of the options and lead-in works will be negotiable, but there needs to be a system to require landlords to help their tenants get the service as well. Alarms could be tested on an equivalent ATA, but most other changeover costs will be harder to justify for end users.

Presumably mid-span splitters (eg passive outdoor cabinets) are allowed, and the 2.5M CIR will work fine with 64-way split ratios to keep costs down, but will topologies be allowed that lock neighbourhoods onto the same hardware — reducing choice of providers and service levels, or PON vs point-to-point? The original idea was to encourage competition at Layer 2. I presume the $60 quoted for 100Mbps is actually for Ethernet, because there's no point offering a different grade of GPON unless the CIR is better too.

Wondering how long it will take for a wholesale carrier to start reselling UFB service to ISPs as an aggregated nationwide service, especially for smaller ISPs that only have capacity to connect a few handover points. They might also be able to stimulate the market with a G.hn or HomePNA home-LAN product that eliminates the rewiring of older homes.

Will be interesting to see whether Southern Cross drop prices, but as international demand increases I can't see them being interested in stimulating demand further. The last 10 years of the cable's life has to be profitable, and probably not economic to maintain after 2025.

I'm thinking the fibreco's best chance of stimulating demand would be to build their COs as part of data centres designed to encourage local content, and generally bring NZ hosting costs down through fast peering services to every data centre and content provider possible. Maybe a marketing programme that discounts connection prices in return for advertising that content is on local fibre.

Time to find a new industry!

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
80646 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 41029

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#415126 9-Dec-2010 16:24

DonGould: Do we need to just set up a project like this one: BB Monitoring

There is Epitiro and TrueNet. I have a TrueNet device here and it works well.

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.

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

PenultimateHop

637 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 2

Trusted

#415150 9-Dec-2010 17:10

Ragnor: Well a lot of people seem to be saying contention from DSLAM to local EAS is not a problem (cabinets have gigabit fibre) but that handover "dimensioning" to the ISP done later at the remote EAS is an purely artificial limitation.

There is still contention between the DSLAM and FDS - this is known as the Local Aggregation Path (LAP). The 45kbit/s (or 32Kbit/s or whatever) dimensioning figure applies here as well as at the handover.

DonGould

3892 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 164

#415154 9-Dec-2010 17:14

PenultimateHop:
Ragnor: Well a lot of people seem to be saying contention from DSLAM to local EAS is not a problem (cabinets have gigabit fibre) but that handover "dimensioning" to the ISP done later at the remote EAS is an purely artificial limitation.

There is still contention between the DSLAM and FDS - this is known as the Local Aggregation Path (LAP). The 45kbit/s (or 32Kbit/s or whatever) dimensioning figure applies here as well as at the handover.

sorry, can someone scratch a little diagram on a bit of paper and post an image?

I'm not following all these points - FDS? LAP? EAS? ISP (ok, kidding on that last one :) )

D

PenultimateHop

637 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 2

Trusted

#415202 9-Dec-2010 18:43

DonGould: sorry, can someone scratch a little diagram on a bit of paper and post an image?

I'm not following all these points - FDS? LAP? EAS? ISP (ok, kidding on that last one :) )

D

http://comcom.govt.nz/assets/Telecommunications/STD/UBA/UBA-STD-as-at-8-July-2010/UBA-STD-Schedule-1-Service-Description-8-July-2010.pdf - item 2.4.
http://comcom.govt.nz/assets/Telecommunications/STD/UBA-Backhaul/UBA-Backhaul/Final-UBA-STD-for-Telecoms-UBA-Backhaul-Service-Schedule-1-UBA-Backhaul-Service-Description-27-June-2008.pdf - Appendix A.

webwat

2036 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 145

Trusted

#415221 9-Dec-2010 19:44

Well telecoms netowrk is pretty tree-like, most of the points aggregate traffic more than the level below as you get closer to the backbone. Handovers come off at various points but traffic gets aggregated there too.

Imagine you had 100 bedrooms at your house, several small switches, and 4 or 5 modems so you would need to connect them all together into a single network something like that.

Anyone know if CFH has a greenfields strategy? Would be a shame if lots of new developments were difficult to install the fibre drops into.

BTW I guess some of the proposals would be planning to use pre-terminated cables, so the distribution cable would have a MTP termination that connects a short run to a hand-hole, where individual drops connect as required.

Time to find a new industry!

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6