Whose NBN is it, anyway?

Is this a joke? What is underlaying here are excuses. The problem is... How long would it last for the future, what is the new scientific international program, and why do we have to just match the rest of the Developing World? What is the Demand? What For! You can't Receive a Lamb through the Internet?- Can't anyone tell me that this new government is DEMOCRATIC? HOW!? The future is WIRELESS?!

The problem with all previous comments that no one appreciates that all current proposals for building the fiber optics NBN demand the monopoly of the new infrastructure. Terrier's proposal is conditional on the Government to regulation to force Telstra to use the new network and to ban it for building a competitive network for the next 20 years. That is not competition and thus will not change the current situation. You simply advocate to replace Telstra's monopoly with Teria's monopoly. Frankly I would rather have the Australian owned monopoly than the one controlled from Singapore.

There's only so many times you can read the same complaint about a single point, not being able to get DSL based broadband in metropolitan areas. There is absolutely nothing that competitive carriers such as Optus, AAPT or iiNet can do about this as there is no process with Telstra to place DSL equipment into RIMs, or order the copper to terminate to that point.

Also, the argument that Paul is raising that is questioning how much residential subscribers, and small businesses, are willing to pay for is exactly the right question, not the amount of data (to upload/download) your ISP provides you before throttling you to dial-up speeds.

In reality, FTTN is not going to have a substantial impact on the speed that most residential (the same ADSL2 technology that%u2019s available today is still going to be used in the majority of connections), and is not going to change the amount of data your ISP allows you to download before throttling to back to a rate where they can control their costs.

If the FTTN is the vehicle for solving the issue of providing fixed wire broadband to residential customers in DSL blackspots (e.g. connected to RIMs), give Telstra the money to subsidise the investment to install the broadband equipment in their cabinets. Better yet, force Telstra to provide open access to the RIMs and subsidise the competitive carrier%u2019s rollout to the cabinet.

Regarding data download restrictions, the reality is that Australia is a remote location from the source of the IP content, and the issue that needs to be solved here is to build competition in international IP transit market, not lump the IP data cost issue with the FTTN debate. Having said that, Telstra charges exorbitant rates for interconnecting ISP%u2019s networks with their own broadband network, which is another reason why ISPs limit the amount of data they are willing to let their customers download.

One thing this debate is missing is the bandwidth requirements that business customers have. Very few business sites are located in buildings with competitive fibre installations, how are business users who require high speed symmetric services (10Mbps and above) going to have their needs fulfilled? How are the retail carriers of the FTTN going to provide businesses with the SLAs (99.95% availability) and fault restoration times (2 hours) they require to run a successful business?

I aggree with and am in the same situation as "Behind a RIM of Oakden SA". I too am behind a RIM in Evanston Park. The ONLY way for me to get ADSL2 is to go through telstra as they enable it on the ports on the RIM but I cant get ADSL2 through any other ISP due to this RIM blocking access.

Quote: "HOW much broadband speed do Australians really want and at what price? Two big questions which seem to have unwittingly slipped off the NBN agenda. Demand and willingness to pay for it."

Is this a joke or serious statement?

We just want a fair market; market forces would already have answered this given such conditions!

Do not put the cart before the horse!

Advice to Mr. Rudd, get rid of the set minded old school Government office officials and prune the dead wood out, not sure you actually do run the country yet?

Gary Looney

Menindee NSW 2879

I'd like to point out that there are people like me, 6km from the exchange of a small (10K) town, who on a good day, get 0.8Mbps. ADSL works, just. ADSL2 and VDSL will make no improvement. This is why I was so excited about even a FTTN DSL2 solution.

The technology to provide fibre to the home over cheap (polymer) fibre now exists and has an upgrade path well beyond 1Gbps. To those who think ADSL speeds is all we'll ever need, consider this, I just had to send 1G of data to a customer (engineering files). Do you think my customer appreciated the delay?

To those who just want Telstra to go ahead and do it. Do you remember how they used to charge hundreds of dollars per month for an ISDN line? Do you remember every single time there was new technology they dragged their heels and insisted on milking fat profits out of paid for infrastructure? Do you really think Telstra will go ahead and build fibre to the home, given a monopoly? No. They will milk DSL2 for all its worth. And then in 2020 when the rest of the world is used to Gbps speeds, we'll be scratching our heads wishing the government built a new network back in 2010.

And for all the people who go on about 3G. Sorry to burst your bubble, but its only suitable for occasional and remote use. If you tried to replace even existing internet traffic over fixed lines with 3G, the system would die. There simply isn't enough spectrum to physically handle it. You could get close by closing down UHF TV and having micro cells, but the latter isn't going to happen unless it happens like I suggest below.

If you want my idea about how the NBN should be done then its this. If Terria doesn't come up with a plan that has fibre to the home upgradeability, the government should step in and build the network itself. The price is comparable to an extra 100km of freeway. Each Node should include a micro cell so that you have ubiquitous internet. And then you should be able to buy your own fibre connection and pay it off - exactly as you would pay for a mobile phone handset. That way the cost to the government stops at 10B. You have a decent 20Mbps everywhere and those of us who need it faster, can have it.

We are currently in a 'world financial crises', largely brought about by no or very little regulation. Seems like we are about to repeat it all over again. Simple facts are that industry is there for a profit. Now that's not a bad idea but when it comes to infrastructure services, leaving it to industry is only courting disaster. We have seen this time and time again with electricity, gas etc etc.

As to ADSL2 services, well I'm lucky (I think ???) because mine max's out at a whopping 6Mbps and that's just 1.5km from the exchange. So with 4 pc's at home (for me, the missus and two uni students - the dog can't operate the mouse yet !) I'm really flying.

Paul is obviously a bit out of touch in saying we have ADSL2 in metro areas, it just isnt true, and most of the exchanges that support ADSL2 are already full, there isnt any more ports. A point that he does rasie which needs to be further discussed is an Ethernet connection, why are we talking about only FTTN when an ethernet connection is viable. Any other thoughts?

I'm reading all coment,but forgett ADSL, 2 or 3 , etc. The NBN, face massive change in the new technology, and because all the cables optical, equipment,etc., are now more less of cost, all serviced are low cost, specialy Internet, don't forgett the telephone call and video conference, are all free cost, because all are transparent in the data transmission systems. Sorry but many people, don't not the new technology.

With luck Labor will do what Labor does with difficult election promises... forget them because its to hard. Typical Socialist always trying to tell everyone what they must & must not too, but fail to fund it properly.

The arogance of Mr Broad.

"We're weeks away from the government commencing its selection process to award Terria or Telstra"

Sorry mate, but there are several other bidders in this game, not just Telstra and TERRiA. There is one I can think of with a much stronger proposal than TERRiA and Telstra.

"Today we have ADSL2 in all metro areas across the country. Plenty of it."

As many have said on this blog, Mr Broad must be living in a different Australia. There are many locations throughout Australia cities which dont have access to any wireline broadband, and many more who ONLY have access to ADSL1 because of Telstra's existing FTTN strategy with CMUX/RIMs. And there are many more again who are on ADSL2 but getting less than 10Mbps.

For the past 5 years Telstra have been deploying FTTN with limited backhaul (<16Mbps) and only ADSL1 capability into new estates. Because of FTTN, the CLECs have no ability to deliver their ADSL2 services and must resort to wholesaling ADSL1 from Telstra.

Your comments are typical of most Australia Telco CEOs - both past and present - you lack vision, a key ingredient of being a CEO.

Both Telstra and Optus will have 3G networks covering 98% of Australians by the end of next year%u2026 wireless speeds are increasing relatively fast... the carriers continue to add capacity and depth to the existing networks... does that suggest something? It won%u2019t cost taxpayers $4.7 billion, which could be diverted to improve ICT training and research projects in Australia? On the issue of Telstra exchanges being %u2018full' - note that the actual space required by telephone equipment is dropping dramatically and Telstra plans to close many exchanges over the next few years, forcing them and their ISP tenants to find other locations for transmission equipment, most likely roadside cabinets. The issue is the ISPs are reluctant to install a new ADSL DSLAM until they know they will have enough subscribers using it to make the equipment purchase worthwhile.

It's not about how many people want it or will pay for it now. Its about building the infrastructure for the future. A high speed network will be essential for next-generation services such as internet tv, cloud computing and networked city services.

AAPT CEO, how did you get that job? Do you know anything at all? First: why should we the taxpayers give money to these monkeys and they pay for a service that doesn't work or exist? Second: ALL INFRASTRUCTURE to the last mile is COPPER WIRED of the PSTN going from central offices to homes. IT IS ALL OWNED BY TELSTRA !!!!!!! WAKE UP AAPT. Who did you pay to say your words??????????? THIRD: TPG right now for the past 3 days has got ADSL2 download speeds of 30Kb since something went wrong and they still cannot sort it out. Reasons, some at least, why we do not have something that works is IBI=Inefficiency by INCAPACITY. And we have to put up with a knowledgeable CEO from AAPT that should know better before he opens his mouth? How did he get that job?

Quote "Today we have ADSL2 in all metro areas across the country." - So Paul, does this mean "metro areas" means suburbs without RIMS?

If people want to live in whoop whoop dont expect city technology no company will provide a bushy with expensive conections for free otherwise they will make a large loss so stop complaining or move back to the metro and you can have your fast cheap connection.

The issue isn't whether we need a NBN but rather who will own it when built. It would be just repeating the same mistakes we have now to allow a single telecommunications company to own the network. Also an issue is how fast should the network be? I heard 12Mbps minimum but I'm comfortably above that now. Still there are plenty of people who struggle with 1990's grade internet so I don't complain there.

As for wireless, yes while it it useful for people who need internet on the move, compared to a quality wired connection it is not in the same league.

"Today we have ADSL2 in all metro areas across the country." WRONG

"HOW much broadband speed do Australians really want and at what price?" ... For me, the answer is that I want unlimited broadband usage, or if they have to shape it, they could at least shape it to basic broadband, 256Kb/sec instead of shaping it to dial-up speeds.

I dont think the guys here are saying the new network will fix the lack of ports for adsl2 and so on, they are stating that the comment of everyone can get ADSL2 is vey very wrong, and i agree :)

Nice generalisation about having plenty of ADSL2 in metro areas, Mr Broad.

Plenty of ADSL2 eh? Is that from the perspective of consumers or from ISPs like AAPT who have now cherry-picked all the worthwhile exchanges where there's a buck to be made? My suburb is 13kms from Melbourne city centre and the only provider of ADSL2 is Telstra.

If they had of let Optus do there thing, they could have spent the other 3.7 billion rolling out FTTH in all the capital cities. Optus would have had alterative backhaul right across the country, so it would have allowed other isps to install DSLAMs into regional exchanges because Telstra would have had competition. Im in a regional area on adsl2 through optus, im already getting 12mb. I dont want to pay more for somthing I can already get.

Why do we keep hearing about the availability of ADSL 2 being so great in the metro areas when if you are 9 km from the CBD in a new suburb and on an exchange with numerous companies offering ADSL 2 but you happen to be on a RIM, thanks to Telstra, it`s not available? It would be interesting to know how many homes across the nation in suburban areas are restricted to dial up or ADSL due to RIM technology. Remember if you do not have copper from home to the exchange you cannot get ADSL 2. I`m assuming fibre to the node overcomes this problem.

To all of who are wining about lack of ADSL ports in the exchanges - the new network will NOT add them. It is all about network between exchanges. Cancelling $1B grant to Optus just cut you from the affordable internet connection.

"Today we have ADSL2 in all metro areas across the country. Plenty of it. No indication that we're going to be stretched to meet demand any time soon." Really? seems your talking about some other Australia there mate, i can only get dial up and im less then 15km from the CBD. Unless im willing to sell a kidney to pay for wireless access to 3G Have a read up on RIMM exchanges and see why Australia%u2019s infrastructure is a joke

ADSL2 in metro? I live in melbourne CBD and cannot get it at all! And the exchange is so full that there can be no more connections added. So while the cost is high, it keeps a lid on it, if there was very low or free connections, then the infrastructure won't cope! We are kidding ourselves that we live in a first world country.

Very interesting how Paul says we already have ADSL 2 and plenty of it it whilst trying to put doubt in everyones mind about the actuall need for a NBN. Smells like someone is trying to protect their parasitic business model to me.

This may seem like a silly question but do we have any idea how much it would cost for the end user? ie compared to a 10 gig ADSL 2 plan. IF like me ADSL2 is fast enough and the fibre pricing is super expensive why would I switch? Will I be forced too switch? What happens if say 50 percent aren't interested in switching? Seems Like an Analog to Digital tv switchover senario.

I tend to agree with Paul Broad. For those sighting specific locations in Perth and Sydney I think you have misunderstood him. While it is true that there are some areas within larger geographic areas that do not have access, by far the majority does.

For those that only believe Telstra can build the network then ask yourself why haven't they done so in the pockets in Perth and Sydney. Ans they don't think they can get a return on their investment and yet it is simple process for them.

If NBN goes ahead every internet user will have to pay more so that a few can have higher speeds. Paul is correct in asking how many want higher speeds. It is not a majority by any means.

ADSL 2 in all metro areas? This from the CEO of the company that took 2 months to hook up my neighbour (inner city Canberra). No wonder.

Whilst we have old people telling us about technology we will always have a problem. What is fast today will be slow tommorrow. It's a pity that our Governments only listen to bureaucrats and bean counters instead of looking to the nerds for help.

"Today we have ADSL2 in all metro areas across the country. Plenty of it."

No wonder our broadband network is an international joke when the CEO of AAPT is so obviously wrong.

There are people <20km from the centre of Sydney who can't get ADSL2 because their sub exchange isn't appropriately configured.

Surprise surprise, industry wants the government to step away from regulation. Paul says 'There's willingness from all industry participants in this debate to pull a chair up to the table and ensure the access rules we play by prevent any one player obtaining an advantage'.

I think we've heard claims like this before. Industry based regulation serves industry, end of story. We only have to think about the way we were all shafted by Visy and Amcor to know that we can't trust big business to just do the right thing. If government has no place protecting the interests of consumers who does?

This is a comment from:- Paul Broad, AAPT CEO, Nov 14 2008.

"Today we have ADSL2 in all metro areas across the country. Plenty of it. No indication that we're going to be stretched to meet demand any time soon."

This is blatantly incorrect! There are many inner city suburbs of Perth that cannot get, nor will ever get ADSL 2, ADSL or any other copper connection other than dial up.

We are on the Riverton exchange in Perth and the only broadband connection we can get that works is Bigpond Wireless which is way too expensive and is barely broadband and 3's Mobile broadband which is very good and cheap and it works.

Vodaphone, Optus and Virgin wireless won't work and AAPT certainly won't! So where is this CEO getting off with his statement of universal ADSL 2? Obviously very misimformed.

There are large businesses still running on 256kbs over here because that's all they can get. Yes we need the NBN badly and quick and can CEO's in the industry aquaint themselves with the true facts and not just those that apply to Sydney and Melbourne.

Don't kid yourself on high speed network availability in metro areas. Telstra may provide it on all their exchanges but there are a vast number of metro areas and pretty much every regional area where there is no high speed option and if there is, Telstra is the only option. Where is the competition? When you talk about high speed aviability you're basically talking about Telstra's existing monopoly network for many (most?) australians.

OK, so if / when the NBN is complete, how much will it cost the average Joe? $4.7B (or more) will be spent, but I bet we all have to pay through the nose to access it. Current broadband costs are quite unreasonable, in my opinion. Should accee be inexpensive or free for members of the public, i.e. Australian taxpayers? You betcha.

Paul you ask how we should spend this $4.7billion? I do not agree with the underlying premise. There is simply no need to spend this vast amount of public money with a high opportunity cost when we have a player willing and able to roll out a broadband system immediately and the governemnt has the ability and Constitutional power to ensure that that there is no exploitation while giving an adequate return on capital. Oh and it's good to know that you think Telstra should be a part of the discussions - I can understand Telstra's frustrations.