What is your internet speed?

[The_bluester (Paul)]

TL;DR for the above, currently the biggest performance issues seem to be variable performance of FTTN (Where they in fact can now blame end user equipment and wiring as well as the inherently variable nature of FTTN) and RSP's cheaping out on backhaul or CVC.

[Camelopardalis (Dunk)]

I think it's all too easy to blame the politicians. Hey, why not?

As an outsider, it's maybe easier to see the challenges to any broadband roll-out in Australia. Geography and population distribution being the main clincher. That in turn makes it costly, and subject to inconsistent performance.

I lived in the UK when they were doing a similar thing and it cost an absolute fortune to roll it out, took more years than it should, and end users still bleated about the performance. 10 years later, you still get people dissatisfied with their 8Mb or less if they're not covered by 21CN. Over there, FTTN is usually pretty good (40+Mb), but considering the population density you're usually no more than about 50 yards from the node box.

[LewisM]

I would have rather seen our tax dollars going into the environment, education, sciences, medicine...you know, important things.

Nope, we need to spend billions so Joe Blogs can watch the footy live in HD or download a bootleg Game of Thrones. Honestly, who gives a sheet???!!!

[dbowie (Brenton)]

NBN Fixed Wireless installed this morn $60 mth unlimited Optus 12Mbps tier. I have paid a fortune in past 6 yrs on internet/phone, watching crap commercial TV only dreamed of streaming for my entertainment and business . Wireless router connection with MacBook right next to router averaged out at 5-6Mbps, wireless disabled and Ethernet connected 11.5 constant, good argument for home network connection as opposed to relying on WiFi in house. Netflix Iview SBS OnDemand Youtube streaming no probs even with WiFi all 4 devices on update download, Im pretty happy...

[AndrewJ]

I would have rather seen our tax dollars going into the environment,

Just like the Murray basin plan????
No matter where you put big money, someone somewhere is going to be making a killing from milking it.
Wonder what pollies/public servants/businessmen are getting the biggest spinoffs???

Andrew

[The_bluester (Paul)]

Originally Posted by Camelopardalis

I think it's all too easy to blame the politicians. Hey, why not?

As an outsider, it's maybe easier to see the challenges to any broadband roll-out in Australia. Geography and population distribution being the main clincher. That in turn makes it costly, and subject to inconsistent performance.

I lived in the UK when they were doing a similar thing and it cost an absolute fortune to roll it out, took more years than it should, and end users still bleated about the performance. 10 years later, you still get people dissatisfied with their 8Mb or less if they're not covered by 21CN. Over there, FTTN is usually pretty good (40+Mb), but considering the population density you're usually no more than about 50 yards from the node box.

One of the primary differences between the UK FTTN rollout that was carefully ignored when the NBN was forcibly changed to it was that density difference that means the average distance to node in Aus would be in the hundreds of meters, not tens.

However, everyone does ignore when pushing for FTTN that while our population density is far lower then Europe (For instance) taking the population density of the country as a whole is very misleading. The vast bulk of the population which were originally to be covered by FTTP (93% originally) are almost exclusively clustered in the highest population density areas in the country, which are close enough to radically change from the "Super duper low density" picture that is used to say it is all too hard, but not close enough to make FTTN more than a "Good enough for 2010" stopgap. Comparing apples with apples we are a lot like NZ density wise and after being used as another poster child for FTTN construction, they changed over to FTTP instead, exactly the opposite of what we have done.


To those who say "So you want to be able to watch Netflix" I say you are seriously missing the bigger picture, and that is exactly how the LNP like it. Early on in the piece I was able to work comfortably from home at least one day a week, with the tower congestion where I am I can't rely on doing that now. Telecommuting should have been a reality under the NBN but it is staying a pipe dream, you want more money poured into environmental stuff, just imagine how many thousands of car trips per week still being made that should not need to be.

"So you want to watch Netflix" also does not cover the likes of the work my mother does, she does a lot of typesetting and ad setup for a number of print publications, she used to have to drive into Melbourne to deliver a DVD with the magazine file on it (An hour each way, and still nearly faster than uploading it to the print houses FTP server) It is borderline but the fixed wireless makes it possible to do it online, AND everyone else in the house can still use the connection at the same time, with slightly degraded performance.

Those who just look at Netflix and content piracy are not doing a lot better than one of the sources of our problem, the then communications minister (Who I am not going to name) who at the start of the ADSL era when people started clamoring for it stated that people only wanted broadband for faster access to pornography. Video streaming and downloads, legal or otherwise are a very small part of the picture and while debate fixates on that, we sit back and watch while we drop down the rankings for connectivity.

[julianh72 (Julian)]

Originally Posted by LewisM

I would have rather seen our tax dollars going into the environment, education, sciences, medicine...you know, important things.

All of which would have been helped immensely by a proper FTTP high-speed National Broadband Network.

On FTTN? Not so much ...

[Camelopardalis (Dunk)]

Originally Posted by The_bluester

One of the primary differences between the UK FTTN rollout that was carefully ignored when the NBN was forcibly changed to it was that density difference that means the average distance to node in Aus would be in the hundreds of meters, not tens.

However, everyone does ignore when pushing for FTTN that while our population density is far lower then Europe (For instance) taking the population density of the country as a whole is very misleading. The vast bulk of the population which were originally to be covered by FTTP (93% originally) are almost exclusively clustered in the highest population density areas in the country, which are close enough to radically change from the "Super duper low density" picture that is used to say it is all too hard, but not close enough to make FTTN more than a "Good enough for 2010" stopgap. Comparing apples with apples we are a lot like NZ density wise and after being used as another poster child for FTTN construction, they changed over to FTTP instead, exactly the opposite of what we have done.


To those who say "So you want to be able to watch Netflix" I say you are seriously missing the bigger picture, and that is exactly how the LNP like it. Early on in the piece I was able to work comfortably from home at least one day a week, with the tower congestion where I am I can't rely on doing that now. Telecommuting should have been a reality under the NBN but it is staying a pipe dream, you want more money poured into environmental stuff, just imagine how many thousands of car trips per week still being made that should not need to be.

"So you want to watch Netflix" also does not cover the likes of the work my mother does, she does a lot of typesetting and ad setup for a number of print publications, she used to have to drive into Melbourne to deliver a DVD with the magazine file on it (An hour each way, and still nearly faster than uploading it to the print houses FTP server) It is borderline but the fixed wireless makes it possible to do it online, AND everyone else in the house can still use the connection at the same time, with slightly degraded performance.

Those who just look at Netflix and content piracy are not doing a lot better than one of the sources of our problem, the then communications minister (Who I am not going to name) who at the start of the ADSL era when people started clamoring for it stated that people only wanted broadband for faster access to pornography. Video streaming and downloads, legal or otherwise are a very small part of the picture and while debate fixates on that, we sit back and watch while we drop down the rankings for connectivity.

It's politically sensitive...do you provide a service to all those who live in the dense population centres, neglecting the rural areas, just to keep costs down? Or do you plan to serve everyone, within reasonable bounds?

The difference in country towns and villages in the UK are that the residences are often clustered closely together. From what I've seen, that isn't always true here. With current technologies, it's still possible to get good speed several hundred metres away from node.

[RAJAH235]

I'm on the 25/5 Unlimited FTTN plan with OPTUS.

My avg. speeds are...

Last Result: Sydney.
Download Speed: 22259 kbps (2782.4 KB/sec transfer rate)
Upload Speed: 4731 kbps (591.4 KB/sec transfer rate)
Latency: 12 ms
Jitter: 2 ms
Friday, 28 July 2017 11:27:57 PM

The uploads in Feb/March/April/May were considerably higher at around
780 KBps to 870 KBps.

I've asked them why did they drop so much?
Apparently, they checked & reset the modem? in June, hence the slower uploads.

D/L are still in the 22000 to 24000 range, so all is good.

Just curious as to why they changed/capped my upload speed.

[toc (Tim)]

Constant 100/40 speed here. On FTTP here, and it is amazing.

[Renato1 (Renato)]

I have a 100m long straight driveway, and due to issues, it took the workers about two and a half to three working days over a week long period to get the fibre-optic cable connected to the house.

Then a guy from the NBN came out and took pictures. Then a guy from Telstra connected us up.Then several months later, another guy came out and said he was there to install the fibre-optic cable ("Too late - it's already done").

Meanwhile, my neighbour has a 200m driveway, which parallels mine for a 100m, then does a 90 degree turn, then another 90 degree turn, then into a curve. It took the contractors nearly three weeks to finally get the fibre optic cable to his house, including cutting through concrete in his drive way, and repairing it.

It must have cost a fortune installing the fibre-optic cable in our area, assuming my and my neighbour's experience were fairly typical.
Glad it was free.
Regards,
Renato

[PCH (Paul)]

Originally Posted by toc

Constant 100/40 speed here. On FTTP here, and it is amazing.

So what decides who gets FTTP and who gets FTTN?

[PCH (Paul)]

Originally Posted by Renato1

I have a 100m long straight driveway, and due to issues, it took the workers about two and a half to three working days over a week long period to get the fibre-optic cable connected to the house.

Then a guy from the NBN came out and took pictures. Then a guy from Telstra connected us up.Then several months later, another guy came out and said he was there to install the fibre-optic cable ("Too late - it's already done").

Meanwhile, my neighbour has a 200m driveway, which parallels mine for a 100m, then does a 90 degree turn, then another 90 degree turn, then into a curve. It took the contractors nearly three weeks to finally get the fibre optic cable to his house, including cutting through concrete in his drive way, and repairing it.

It must have cost a fortune installing the fibre-optic cable in our area, assuming my and my neighbour's experience were fairly typical.
Glad it was free.
Regards,
Renato

So how come you got all that expenditure for free, when other places - like mine - only get FTTN which is crapola at best?

[LewisM]

Originally Posted by Renato1

Glad it was free.
Regards,
Renato

I take it that was tongue in cheek.

All those tax dollars sunk into it that could have gone elsewhere. We all pay for it, as will our children.

Bluestar, if you think that at least 80% of Internet use is not purely recreational, then I think you need to reassess the Australian demographic. I seriously doubt even 20% is business or government sector use for that matter. I understand business wanting faster Internet, but consumers literally do want it for their downloads, Skyping, Faceblurb, Netflix...

In the end, the NBN is a vote getter. Labor will sell Australia's soul to win seats (history repeats ad nauseum), and the LNP strips it to bare bones to at least only sell the rotting flesh.

Well, our Internet got even slower so complained to The Philippine Government...oops, I mean Telstra. They claim Line maintenance from July 20 to August 2. I claimed I need a partial refund for the month. We'll see.

[The_bluester (Paul)]

Originally Posted by Renato1

I have a 100m long straight driveway, and due to issues, it took the workers about two and a half to three working days over a week long period to get the fibre-optic cable connected to the house.

Then a guy from the NBN came out and took pictures. Then a guy from Telstra connected us up.Then several months later, another guy came out and said he was there to install the fibre-optic cable ("Too late - it's already done").

Meanwhile, my neighbour has a 200m driveway, which parallels mine for a 100m, then does a 90 degree turn, then another 90 degree turn, then into a curve. It took the contractors nearly three weeks to finally get the fibre optic cable to his house, including cutting through concrete in his drive way, and repairing it.

It must have cost a fortune installing the fibre-optic cable in our area, assuming my and my neighbour's experience were fairly typical.
Glad it was free.
Regards,
Renato

That is why a very large portion of the originally planned FTTP build cost was coming from the access to houses from the street. IMO the currently evolving FTTC setup is likely to be the sweet spot (It did not really exist at the time the original architecture was conceived) so that 90+% of the population could get speeds which would be at least adequate to immediately foreseeable needs on completion and if you want more you can pay to have a fibre laid to your door.

Originally Posted by PCH

So what decides who gets FTTP and who gets FTTN?

It is pretty simple, the Australian electorate decided by electing the coalition in 2013. You can draw a straight line between cause (Election) and effect (FTTN) My employer was doing some design work for FTTP construction and more or less as soon as the election result came in, all new jobs stopped coming on the FTTP design work we were doing.

Originally Posted by LewisM

Bluestar, if you think that at least 80% of Internet use is not purely recreational, then I think you need to reassess the Australian demographic. I seriously doubt even 20% is business or government sector use for that matter. I understand business wanting faster Internet, but consumers literally do want it for their downloads, Skyping, Faceblurb, Netflix...

This is an infrastructure build which should be looked at in the light of a 50 to 100 year plan, it may well be 80% "Entertainment" use right now (I never said it was not, just that it need not be, but emasculating it with the FTTN build does help to make sure it will not be useful for better/other purposes)

If we take that attitude back to when the POTS (Plain Old Telephone System) was being constructed, who in the public needed a telephone? Telegrams worked perfectly fine for the 90% of households who did not have a phone. Why spend all that public money?

Roll on into the mid 90's. Why should the PSTN be co opted for internet services? 90% of households only use their phone line for calls.

Same again ten years or so later, who needs broadband, 28.8K to 56K dial up is all 90% of Australian households who are connected to the internet are using. To quote him properly this time, our comms minister of the day (Richard Alston) said of broadband “Well for example, people will tell you that pornography is one of the major reasons why there’s been a high take-up rate in South Korea. I haven’t confirmed that at first instance but I’ve been there, I’ve looked at what’s happening.”

At what point should we look forward in an infrastructure build to what is foreseeably needed within the operation life of the resulting asset rather than build Melbourne's Western Ring Road over and over again? That has been "Completed" for around 20 years and under major upgrade for at least ten of those when the studies of the time identified that foreseeable traffic volumes would max it out by about five years after it was completed (They did) and that building it properly the first time would be orders of magnitude cheaper than upgrading it over and over again. I travel it daily and have done for nine years, all bar about one of which have been through constant major roadworks. We are watching them widen a bridge that is not as long but is at least half the height of the West Gate Bridge at the moment. They left that bit out of the last "upgrade"

[Renato1 (Renato)]

Originally Posted by PCH

So how come you got all that expenditure for free, when other places - like mine - only get FTTN which is crapola at best?

I don't know. It just happened like that.
Regards,
Renato

[julianh72 (Julian)]

Originally Posted by PCH

So how come you got all that expenditure for free, when other places - like mine - only get FTTN which is crapola at best?

Tony Abbott and Malcolm Turnbull's MTM - delivered "sooner, cheaper and more affordably".

[raymo]

My downloads anywhere near peak times are generally between
3 and 6Mbps, other times around 20-23Mbps. I must get around to
contacting iinet.
raymo

[Tandum (Robin)]

I got a letter from NBN co this week saying they will be changing the telstra pillar over the back fence to an NBN pillar.

We're 14K from the Brisbane CBD and everyone here is speed limited to 4MBs on both ADSL1 and ADSL2. I can't get a reliable remote desktop to any of my clients.

I'm keen to see remote robotic surgery happening though the NBN. Hope they at least get a fibre link. We-re getting FTTN here.

[gary]

Originally Posted by LewisM

All those tax dollars sunk into it that could have gone elsewhere. We all pay for it, as will our children.

Hi Lewis.

That is not correct.

The NBN funding model is not paid for by tax.

Government's that have good credit ratings have a trick up their sleeve
which enables them to fund infrastructure without having to dip into the
tax pool.

They offer AAA-rated bonds to investors at some low interest rate,
such as 4%.

Then when the NBN, or rail network, airport or tollway or whatever
they are investing in starts to make a return - say they plan for 7% return
a decade or two down the track - then they buy back the bonds plus pay the
interest they promised.

You've forked out nothing except "IOU's" in the form of bonds, bought them
back plus paid interest from the profits you made plus you now own
that airport or tollway or broadband network plus it is making a profit
from then on.

Later, if you so choose, you can sell the entire piece of infrastructure
to private investors and put all that profit into consolidated revenue
to build schools or hospitals or pay social welfare.

And where this trick makes the most sense to perform is when interest
rates are very low. They've been at historic lows for quite a while.

So there is a counter economic and business argument that says it is
prudent to invest heavily in profit-making infrastructure at times such
as these.

Businesses do the same during these periods, that is take advantage
of very low interest rates to purchase plant and machinery to further
grow the business.

But Governments are lucky that they can write their own IOU's in the
form of bonds. I wish I could do it.

Best Regards

Gary