Newsletter:

Skip Navigation LinksHome > Features > Opinion > What now for the National Broadband Network?

What now for the National Broadband Network?

By Nathan Taylor
2 June 2008 03:42PM
Tags: nbn | conroy | broadband | internet | telstra

So the national broadband network tender has been delayed. Still, Nathan Taylor says peer-to-peer users should be excited about the prospect of VDSL2.

Thanks to Telstra’s reluctance or inability to reveal too many details about its existing network, the other bidders for the $4.7 billion NBN network (most notably the Optus-led Terria Group and more recently Macquarie and TransACT) have asked for and received an another extension on the tender.

Instead of the July 25 tender deadline, the bidders will be given 12 weeks from the date that Telstra actually supplies them with the required information. Whenever that may be.

It would certainly seem that Broadband Minister Stephen Conroy’s goal of seeing the network begin to be rolled out this year is devolving into pure fantasy. Of course, we don’t really know much of what Conroy is thinking, given he has effectively closed up shop when it comes to talking about the NBN, refusing to answer questions during Senate Estimates hearings.

That said, I sincerely hope he gives the non-Telstra bidders every opportunity to put in a competitive bid. There is no doubt in my mind that any bid from Optus and it cohorts (or anybody else really) is going to be more ambitious, less compromising and better generally for the public at large than if Telstra gets the contract. And I certainly don’t think Telstra should be rewarded for its reluctance to improve broadband in Australia in the first place.

If Telstra does win the contract, it must at least agree to a separation of the NBN business from its main business – as others have said, the only way the NBN can really work is if it is run as an independent wholesaler.

As for what we’ll be getting when the broadband network is built, that’s still an open question. The government has specified relatively modest speed and coverage criteria, but is not prescribing the means to achieve those criteria.

The most commonly touted scenario for the NBN is a fibre to the node (FTTN) network using VDSL2 technology to cover the last mile (or few hundred metres, as the case may be). With FTTN, instead of linking all the way back to an exchange, our home connection only extends to the nearest node – no more than a few hundred metres for most of us. This reduces the range that the copper has to travel before hitting fibre, and anybody who has taken a lesson in ADSL Basics knows that the shorter the copper loop, the faster the connection.

Even if the telcos continue to use ADSL (which is still a possibility), FTTN means that a lot more of us will approach the mythical 24mbps that ADSL 2+ is theoretically capable of.

While that would be nice, VDSL2 (very high speed digital subscriber line) can be a source of real excitement. For a start, it can theoretically deliver 100mbps to homes with 300m of the node. Just as importantly, it can do that at a symmetrical rate, so your uploads will be as fast as downloads.

This, of course, corrects one of the mistaken assumptions made when telcos in the US and worldwide chose ADSL as the primary access mechanism – that people would mostly want to download stuff and that uploads were irrelevant. The fact that peer-to-peer traffic comprises roughly 74% of all Internet traffic (according to the lastest iPoque figures) pretty much puts paid to that notion.

Of course, neither FTTN nor VDSL are confirmed. I’d put pretty healthy odds, however, that FTTN will start rolling out some time next year, but the implementation of VDSL may well depend on who gets the contract.

   


Ads by Google


Thoughts on this article? Add a comment below.
Comments: 9
Mate are yoy a fully paid up DROPTUS stooge or what or a member of whingepool where all the other Telstra Bashers come from?? I have never read such an unbalanced (and Anti-Telstra) reporting before!!!

with stuff like "And I certainly don’t think Telstra should be rewarded for its reluctance to improve broadband in Australia in the first place" shows you are nieve or plain ignorant!!

iTnews - comments icon Posted by JONJun 2, 2008 4:48 PM
The extension is 12 weeks from when all partied deliver the required information. This includes Optus and others. Please do not try and pretend this attack on Telstra is a news story, if was a true news story all the facts would be here.

Go and work for Today Tonight, you would be better suited there.

iTnews - comments icon Posted by CKJun 2, 2008 5:32 PM
Jon, then you must work for Tel$tra.

Telstra have proven over the years time and time again that they can not and should not be trusted to offer anything that even REMOTELY resembles value for money. They have proven time and time again their desire to rape and pillage the Australian hard-earned at the expense of all else. Innovation, customer service and value for money be damned.

$29.95 for 200MB with $150/GB exess? What a disgrace. What an embarassment to this country. They should be ashamed at this blatant outright gouging of average Australians.

Telstra make me sick (and yes, i am a Shareholder but i'm also a human being).

iTnews - comments icon Posted by EdJun 3, 2008 12:29 AM
JON & CK: it's an opinion piece. The fact that the opinion expressed differs from yours is no call to throw a tantrum.

For mine, I reckon any entity that sets out to build a single national network will get it substantially wrong. Nothing's perfect, but a network planned and built at a local or regional level will likely have fewer shortcomings. For that reason Telstra - and any other entity that tenders for the whole NBN - is the wrong one for the job. There is, of course, a need for national coordination to ensure that all the regional bits work together. Whether the coordinator should be commercial or public is a matter of belief, but public oversight is imperative.

Both the network(s) and the coordinator are natural monopolies. As has been observed ad nauseum, the infrastructure owner must be structurally separate from the retailer. I reckon there should be a structurally separate wholesale tier as well That adds complexity, but facilitates flexibility at the local/regional level.

For the good of the nation, Telstra must be broken up. The cheapest way to manage that is to treat it like a demerger. That way, Telstra's shareholders end up with equivalent holdings in the child entities. Those entities could then go their separate ways. There would probably be a need for monitoring, to ensure that their historical relationship doesn't lead to collusion between the child entities.

For the record: I'm a Telstra shareholder.

iTnews - comments icon Posted by DavidBJun 3, 2008 8:37 AM
Demerger my $%&*%$!!!! Give the shareholders what they deserve...a truckload of cash for the network they own (or more!!!!!!!).

Telstra is the only vertically intergrated Telco in the land. Why should Telsra be "whittled" down to accomodate OPTUS??

Kate McKenzie has returned from Europe where they are doing the exact opposite to what YOU suggest.

The Separation of Telstra is being "pushed" by OPTUS who stand to gain the most & once again at the expense of the Taxpayer (remember the OPEL saga!!!)

Why should DROPTUS get a gravy train ride at their expense of Telstra shareholders (& the Taxpayers)who have paid "in full" & own their network.

A demerger will ony screw the shareholders over& public!!!


Do your homework first buddy!!!

iTnews - comments icon Posted by JONJun 3, 2008 3:43 PM
Demerger my $%&*%$!!!! Give the shareholders what they deserve...a truckload of cash for the network they own (or more!!!!!!!).

Telstra is the only vertically intergrated Telco in the land. Why should Telsra be "whittled" down to accomodate OPTUS??

Kate McKenzie has returned from Europe where they are doing the exact opposite to what YOU suggest.

The Separation of Telstra is being "pushed" by OPTUS who stand to gain the most & once again at the expense of the Taxpayer (remember the OPEL saga!!!)

Why should DROPTUS get a gravy train ride at their expense of Telstra shareholders (& the Taxpayers)who have paid "in full" & own their network.

A demerger will ony screw the shareholders over& public!!!


Do your homework first buddy!!!

iTnews - comments icon Posted by JONJun 3, 2008 3:43 PM
Poor JON, there's no need to panic - nor to repeat yourself. The network is privatised and I don't propose changing that. There's no unscrambling that egg.

The telecommunications environment in Australia differs substantially from that in Europe. For our environment, the vast majority of credible experts support structural separation. I'll take their advice above your intemperate outburst.

As you point out, the network was built and paid for by the people of Australia. From that investment, we're entitled to the best that free market competition can deliver. As things are, we're not getting it.

I'm a shareholder and I'm quite content to see my investment in the network remain where it is. A demerger-style separation will not decrease the value of that investment and, according to some analyses, may substantially increase it. The expensive buyback you advocate would not be in my interests as a shareholder, nor would it be the best allocation of national resources. Much as some might like to correct past mistakes, the benefit doesn't justify the expense.

iTnews - comments icon Posted by DavidBJun 4, 2008 11:26 AM
Thanks DB for the reply.

Howver IF you are a shareholder you should know better. YOU have bought and paid in FULL the network.

Comments like "As you point out, the network was built and paid for by the people of Australia" neglect to mention this!!

iTnews - comments icon Posted by JONJun 5, 2008 9:05 AM
Seem like pretty resonable comments to me. It's interesting to note the Telstra militia are getting a bit more frantic these days.... looks like Optus is beginning to bite.

We all know that for Telstra the only way is down and they need to protect their turf in anyway possible.... including it seems slow development of network for political point scoring. Telstra should have been building the network years ago, rather than delaying and use it against the opposition. Their actions show that the only fair way NBN will be run, managed and charged is if it's a separate wholesale company.... not Telstra, Optus or any other with a retail operation.

Whilst the Government is at it, it should force a split of Telstra into retail and wholesale... as a Telstra shareholder I would be happy to get shares in any new company.... it may be the only way I see a capital return.... as well improve the telecomms landscape for all Australians.

iTnews - comments icon Posted by AdrianJun 11, 2008 9:45 AM
Report this comment as offensive:

   * Indicates information we require to process your submission.

Name: *
Email: *
Reason for offense: *
Your report will not be displayed.  
Name:
*
 
Email:
(will not be displayed)
*
 
Comment:
(HTML not permitted)
*
 
Validation
*

Enter the code you see below:

 

 
 
 
 
 


Poll

Who do you think is most likely to supply national broadband?





Product Reviews now available on iTnews.com.au

TopTopics
(3455) -  microsoft
(3443) -  telstra
(2425) -  network
(2335) -  broadband
(1816) -  security
(1793) -  apple
(1478) -  mobile
(1270) -  data
(1214) -  vmware
(1178) -  intel
(1097) -  internet
(1084) -  researchers
(1060) -  windows
(1043) -  iphone
(985) -  ibm