Future Direction of ioffl and wireless stuff

Moriarty

Originally posted by unkel
Surely you cannot compare this to more typical broadband services on the continent where you get a lot more for a lot less. Nowadays I would classify broadband as something in the range of 5000 to 100000 kbps as real broadband for a fee of less than my NTL subscription.

Broadband connections for home users in europe generally range from 512kbit to 10mbit, with the majority between 512kbit and 2mbit. You would be hard pressed to find 100,000kbps (~=100mbit) home connections around europe for the next while.

Originally posted by unkel
How about wireless:

http://www.iswitch.nl/index.php

Mind this is European. In the far east they do understand progress and most connections are now 100000 kbps delivered as standard to new apartment blocks (Japan and South Korea)

Ireland was, is, and will remain to be the retard of Europe :mad:

Wireless is only an interim solution. A good physical network will always outperform it in terms of reliability, performance and scalability. The problem is, a good physical network requires a lot of captial investment, which isnt exactly forthcoming these days.

Xian

Originally posted by Moriarty
Wireless is only an interim solution. A good physical network will always outperform it in terms of reliability, performance and scalability.

In theory, yes. In practice, the only two potential physical networks just aren't going to happen.

Copper, because the recent failure of the USO is the death knell for the phone network being a viable national broadband network. That the owner of the network is investing at less than the rate of depreciation of the network is compounded by the fact that the new USO puts them under no obligation to remedy current deficiencies (Carrier Systems, lead, verdigris et al.).

And anyway, at what throughput does copper max out at anyway? Not much I imagine. Even less if you take into account the disincentive of rolling out a higher-spec service that would cannibalize existing revenue streams.

Fibre, well...

The problem is, a good physical network requires a lot of captial investment, which isnt exactly forthcoming these days.

It was Ovum who estimated that it would cost €4.1bn for 85% of the population to be connected by fibre to connect at 5Mb/s.

Me, I don't think that kind of money is needed when, for instance, unlicenced 5.8 Ghz can stretch 8km with 14Mb/s throughput, taking into consideration the fact that only about 5% of users live more than 7km of their nearest phone exchange. There may be practical difficutlies inherent in this particular band but none insurmountable by others (the recent 3.5 Ghz licences having a range of 15 km, for instance).

In short, there's nothing interim with wireless, in the short or medium term, let alone future developments like UWB.

Moriarty

Originally posted by Xian
In theory, yes. In practice, the only two potential physical networks just aren't going to happen.

Copper, because the recent failure of the USO is the death knell for the phone network being a viable national broadband network. That the owner of the network is investing at less than the rate of depreciation of the network is compounded by the fact that the new USO puts them under no obligation to remedy current deficiencies (Carrier Systems, lead, verdigris et al.).

Indeed. All the same, we cannot simply dismiss the phone network. Its already in the ground, its a proven technology that delivers great internet connections and its fairly cheap to upgrade systems to dsl. Whats holding us up is nothing technical, its political; mainly with eircom, comreg and the government. That means things can be changed. Giving up on the phone network to deliver broadband internet would be a blunder of colossal proportions for ireland offline.

Originally posted by Xian
And anyway, at what throughput does copper max out at anyway? Not much I imagine. Even less if you take into account the disincentive of rolling out a higher-spec service that would cannibalize existing revenue streams.

xDSL can deliver more than enough for home users and many businesses. There are dsl packages available in the UK for 4mbit downstream at a reasonable price.

Originally posted by Xian
Fibre, well...

Fibre is the future, its not a matter of if but when. Saying that, its certainly not a short-medium term possibility here.

Originally posted by Xian
It was Ovum who estimated that it would cost €4.1bn for 85% of the population to be connected by fibre to connect at 5Mb/s.

The beauty about fibre is that the physical network wont be obsolete any time soon. Im simplifying slightly but to upgrade from a 5mbit connection over fibre to a 150mbit connection would cost very little, relativly. The technology is constantly improving with bandwidth size over fibre increasing drasticly every year. The same cant be said of other mediums. A fibre network is a long term investment that will reap you long term functionality.

Originally posted by Xian
Me, I don't think that kind of money is needed when, for instance, unlicenced 5.8 Ghz can stretch 8km with 14Mb/s throughput, taking into consideration the fact that only about 5% of users live more than 7km of their nearest phone exchange. There may be practical difficutlies inherent in this particular band but none insurmountable by others (the recent 3.5 Ghz licences having a range of 15 km, for instance).

Yup, and for the moment thats great. Remember though that bandwidth over wireless is shared between all users. Your connection will be contended from the moment it leaves your antenna with everyone else in the area, you will all be sharing a part of that 14MB/s. As such, i have serious concerns about the proper scalability of wireless networks to take over from xDSL as the accepted medium for internet access, as you seem to be suggesting.

There is only one real way to increase the bandwidth for a wireless technology and thats to increase the spectrum that its allowed use, which is very problematic when you consider how squashed the current spectrum is at the moment.

Originally posted by Xian
In short, there's nothing interim with wireless, in the short or medium term, let alone future developments like UWB.

Interim was perhaps the wrong word to have used. Niche would have been more appropriate. Wireless will have a use for the forseable future to provide connections to isolated people. From my point of view and experiences though, i would have to say that it would be the solution to fall back on only when forced to. There are better options and we should be aiming to use those.

Xian

Originally posted by Moriarty
Giving up on the phone network to deliver broadband internet would be a blunder of colossal proportions for ireland offline.

That is exactly what I plan to do.

...we cannot simply dismiss the phone network. Its already in the ground, its a proven technology that delivers great internet connections and its fairly cheap to upgrade systems to dsl. Whats holding us up is nothing technical, its political; mainly with eircom, comreg and the government. That means things can be changed.

Yes, things can be changed, and we have a yardstick to measure the rate of that change: FRIACO took two years. Let's say another two years to enable the remaining 900 odd exchanges so those living next door to the exchanges and without line degradation have access to the bailer-twine-and-sticky-tape excuse for broadband that is currently offered on this network. Another two, say, to bring the quality up to that now available in other countries and two for every generation of DSL already developed to be deployed.

No, there's a more efficient and effective means to make that change happen and that is by committing the "collossal blunder" of giving up on the phone network, by driving the rollout of commercial and community wireless networks.

The link you posted about BT offering a 1Mb wholesale service, for instance, is a transparent response to competition from the cable operators. Here we do not have such a competing last mile network, and until we do we should expect the current stagnation in services to continue, with developments arriving on schedule every two years. The only viable competing last mile is wireless, hence the path we are taking.

---

Originally posted by Xian
And anyway, at what throughput does copper max out at anyway?

---

xDSL can deliver more than enough for home users and many businesses. There are dsl packages available in the UK for 4mbit downstream at a reasonable price.

The correct answer is, of course, 1.5 to 2 Mb/s at 5.5 km and 6.1 Mb/s at 3.7 km from the exchange for ADSL, SHDSL is 2Mb/s at less than 2 km from the exchange down to less than 500kbps at 5km and VDSL providing "tens of megabits per second" as long as you're within a kilometer of the exchange. Oh, and that's a spotless line too (bearing in mind that the UK now have a progressive USO whereas we have none). And of course you need a network operator to provide the service. Also (and not to play the statistics game but) 50% of the population live in non-urban areas. Should they be content with what they've got and hold tight for...

Fibre is the future, its not a matter of if but when.
...
A fibre network is a long term investment that will reap you long term functionality.

And what part of €4.1 billion don't you understand? I'm sure a bout with a kanga hammer on Galway granite will probably change your mind about a nationwide fibre-to-the-home network, that it's money better spent on health and education for instance.

Remember though that bandwidth over wireless is shared between all users. Your connection will be contended from the moment it leaves your antenna with everyone else in the area, you will all be sharing a part of that 14MB/s.

Ah, contention. Contention is a Fact of Life (TM). I reckon I could drive from Dublin to Cork (observing all speed limits etc.) in 2 hours. Last week it took 5. Why? Because the road network is contended (and also, for reasons beyond my control, I set out at the time of mass exodus: Friday afternoon). DSL too is contended (albeit artificially, but that's to stop real contention).

The solution? Redundancy: more than one way to get from a to b. To extend the analogy, I could take the train, fly or, if I had loadsa wonga, get a helicopter.

The same applies to Internet access: If you're not getting the service you require from one provider, or are getting tired of microwave ovens, baby alarms, DECT phones etc. you should have the option of moving to another...

There is only one real way to increase the bandwidth for a wireless technology and thats to increase the spectrum that its allowed use, which is very problematic when you consider how squashed the current spectrum is at the moment.

Well if you're serious about sorting out Internet access in your area you should consider getting one of the 3.5 Ghz licences up for grabs recently. If someone else has got it, fine: you've somewhere to go. If not, then you should think of getting a group together and applying. It's nice and quiet there: no transvestite with a phone to interfere with you.

If it's more spectrum you want, there should be an additional 500 Mhz tranche in the 5 Ghz band to be made available next year. In addition, plans seem to be afoot for use of the MMDS and GSM 1800 bands for broadband provision. Is that enough for the moment (considering the inevitable agreement at European level to follow suit with the US to allow the 4 to 8 Ghz bands to be used for UWB)?

Moriarty

Originally posted by Xian
That is exactly what I plan to do.

Thats artifically and unnecessarly limiting the possible options futher.

Originally posted by Xian
Yes, things can be changed, and we have a yardstick to measure the rate of that change: FRIACO took two years. Let's say another two years to enable the remaining 900 odd exchanges so those living next door to the exchanges and without line degradation have access to the bailer-twine-and-sticky-tape excuse for broadband that is currently offered on this network. Another two, say, to bring the quality up to that now available in other countries and two for every generation of DSL already developed to be deployed.

Come now. Developments do not happen in a vacuum. It would be progress to have all exchanges dsl enabled in 2 years time. Just because theyre upgrading exchanges doesnt mean they wont have the time to change the product they offer over the dsl network at the same time. After all, once the equipment is installed its mainly a matter of policy and not technical limitation on what eircom offer. If wireless companys take off like you seem to think they will, eircom will have to compete for business and create attractive offerings.

Originally posted by Xian
No, there's a more efficient and effective means to make that change happen and that is by committing the "collossal blunder" of giving up on the phone network, by driving the rollout of commercial and community wireless networks.

What makes you think that wireless companys will be any more intrested in rural areas than eircom are at the moment? With the granting of 3.5ghz licenses local monopolys instead of national ones are now being introduced. What makes you think they will offer good quality service at a competitive price? Where is your proof that large scale deployment and take up of wireless technology as a substitute for both cable and xdsl broadband in both urban and rural environments works? Do you think people would be more willing to stick an antenna on their roof (along with the pricey install that necessarly entails) or phone up eircom and plug a microfilter and adsl modem onto the existing phone line?

Originally posted by Xian
The link you posted about BT offering a 1Mb wholesale service, for instance, is a transparent response to competition from the cable operators. Here we do not have such a competing last mile network, and until we do we should expect the current stagnation in services to continue, with developments arriving on schedule every two years. The only viable competing last mile is wireless, hence the path we are taking.

Great, and how does getting eircom to further deploy and develop dsl stifle competition? Surely if the wireless companys are chomping at the bit like you think, they will enter the market place no matter what? Surely your not suggesting that they will need a monopoly on the last mile for them to even think about it? Why arent we seeing widespread deployment of wireless companys at the moment?

Originally posted by Xian
The correct answer is, of course, 1.5 to 2 Mb/s at 5.5 km and 6.1 Mb/s at 3.7 km from the exchange for ADSL, SHDSL is 2Mb/s at less than 2 km from the exchange down to less than 500kbps at 5km and VDSL providing "tens of megabits per second" as long as you're within a kilometer of the exchange. Oh, and that's a spotless line too (bearing in mind that the UK now have a progressive USO whereas we have none). And of course you need a network operator to provide the service. Also (and not to play the statistics game but) 50% of the population live in non-urban areas. Should they be content with what they've got and hold tight for...

What throughput does wireless max out at per customer? How many customers with that throughput can you put on each transmitter (eg: how many before you have to refuse new connections on the basis that the spectrum is used to capacity)? What are you going to suggest for the people that cant get onto the service, because the transmitter is in full use?

Originally posted by Xian
Ah, contention. Contention is a Fact of Life (TM). <snip>. DSL too is contended (albeit artificially, but that's to stop real contention).

Not all contention is the same, which is the point you seem to have missed. Contention over xDSL is fully artifical and controllable, so the provider can offer whatever quality of service it decides to. Contention over wireless, on the other hand, is a set physical limit that cant be changed. Add one too many people to the same transmitter and everyones connection suffers, unaviodably. But hey, we can just tell the people that ask for a connection but are refused that the spectrum is full so they can go jump. Im sure theyll understand that its for the greater good that they cant get it.

Originally posted by Xian
The solution? Redundancy: more than one way to get from a to b. To extend the analogy, I could take the train, fly or, if I had loadsa wonga, get a helicopter.

Thats great, but how do you intend to provide redundancy over the first wireless hop? Install a few antennas on each customers chimney, so you can use a few seperate frequencys? Install a few of the same antennas, but point them at seperate transmitters (presuming that two are in range)? How, prey tell, would you do it?

Originally posted by Xian
The same applies to Internet access: If you're not getting the service you require from one provider, or are getting tired of microwave ovens, baby alarms, DECT phones etc. you should have the option of moving to another...

Correctomundo. Except, er, thats far easier to do over a dsl network than a wireless one. Oops.

Originally posted by Xian
Well if you're serious about sorting out Internet access in your area you should consider getting one of the 3.5 Ghz licences up for grabs recently. If someone else has got it, fine: you've somewhere to go. If not, then you should think of getting a group together and applying. It's nice and quiet there: no transvestite with a phone to interfere with you.

Sure, ill be waiting for the €30,000(?) to apply for the licence and the few hundred thousand at the very minimum that will be required to create a decent infrastructure from you by cheque, ok? Thats awfully nice of you.

Hang on a moment, somebody else already has the 3.5ghz licence down here in limerick: chorus, who are selling their powernet 512k connections for €100/month. Hrmm. Well thats that out the window.

Originally posted by Xian
If it's more spectrum you want, there should be an additional 500 Mhz tranche in the 5 Ghz band to be made available next year. In addition, plans seem to be afoot for use of the MMDS and GSM 1800 bands for broadband provision. Is that enough for the moment (considering the inevitable agreement at European level to follow suit with the US to allow the 4 to 8 Ghz bands to be used for UWB)?

Great, an extra 500mhz in the 5ghz band that is more or less useless for long range links. Thats going to go down a treat, thanks.

Would the 1800mhz scheme be the scheme proposed by comreg a few weeks ago? The one where its only offered in the back of beyonds? If its ever offered at all, of course. Not that itll be offered in the next year or so anyway. Which still doesnt help anyone in or around a town or city, which is most of the population. Oh, and we have zilch on any proposed pricing, while i think of it. I wont hold my breath, if its ok with you.

Ooo. UWB. Yeah, thats going to be licenced 'real soon now' . And you were complaining about dsl rollout being too slow for you? Heh.

Moriarty

Thread split from here as this has become very OT.

Dawg

Originally posted by Moriarty
If wireless companys take off like you seem to think they will, eircom will have to compete for business and create attractive offerings

Thats exactly the point. Eircom have dragged their heels on pretty much everything to date, and no doubt will continue to do so. Complaining to them is a waste of time, energy and resources that can be better spent elsewhere. I don't think anyone is saying wireless should be the only last mile technology used, but by using it as a strong alternative it injects some much needed competition meaning better services across the board and CHOICE of technologies for the punter.

Originally posted by Moriarty
What makes you think...<SNIP> take up of wireless technology as a substitute for both cable and xdsl broadband in both urban and rural environments works?<SNIP>...

Not substitute, provide an alternative. DSL, wireless and cable can all compete in the same area's. Providing one does not mean ditching all others.

Originally posted by Moriarty
Great, and how does getting eircom to further deploy and develop dsl stifle competition?

Eh? Let's turn that around - Let's try promoting a viable alternative (improving competition) in order to get Eircom to further deploy and develop DSL. I hear wireless is pretty good...

Originally posted by Moriarty
What are you going to suggest for the people that cant get onto the service, because the transmitter is in full use?

I'd hope that they would have an alternative option, like DSL or cable.

Originally posted by Moriarty
But hey, we can just tell the people that ask for a connection but are refused that the spectrum is full so they can go jump. Im sure theyll understand that its for the greater good that they cant get it.

See above.

Originally posted by Moriarty
Thats great, but how do you intend to provide redundancy over the first wireless hop? Install a few antennas on each customers chimney, so you can use a few seperate frequencys?

Again, I don't think anyone is saying to rip all the cables out and expect everyone in the country to jump onto wireless connections.

Originally posted by Moriarty
Hang on a moment, somebody else already has the 3.5ghz licence down here in limerick: chorus, who are selling their powernet 512k connections for €100/month. Hrmm. Well thats that out the window.

I was under the impression Chorus had their licence revoked for sitting on it too long.


I don't mean to step on ayones toes but it just seemed there was some big misinterpretations flying around..

SkepticOne

Agree with Dawg. The problem has always been the monopoly. It is true you can make some progress through the regulator but that is slow an inefficient. Ultimately the monopoly must be eliminated. Wireless is the only realistic alternative, particularly in rural areas.

yellum

Originally posted by Xian
Originally posted by Moriarty
Giving up on the phone network to deliver broadband internet would be a blunder of colossal proportions for ireland offline.

That is exactly what I plan to do.

Uhm, did I just read that right ? Is Ireland Offline stating they've given up the fight to have the phone network utilised for broadband ?

spongebob

Once Comreg publshed the USO in July they effectively signed the execution order for the Wired network in Ireland.

In dropping the minimum data requirement from 2.4k to 0k, they clearly indicated to Eircom that Eircom do not have to provide exclusive high quality copper pairs to everybody , or anybody as is the case. Comreg did not require Eircom to use Wireless alternatives either. In the UK 28.8k is now the minimum acceptable standard.

As Eircom have now been given carte blanche to pairgain lines as they see fit, and have a licence to do so until the end of 2007 with no interference from Comreg (bar having to write occasional reports to Comreg on the mater) it follows that Universal Broadband availibility over copper is now impossible.

Wireless technology is the only way to achieve that aim. VSAT is not good enough in practise and is too expensive.

M

yellum

Originally posted by Xian
Is that enough for the moment (considering the inevitable agreement at European level to follow suit with the US to allow the 4 to 8 Ghz bands to be used for UWB)?

UWB hs a theoretical distance of 100m. Not really uselful. Its meant to be just a juiced up Bluetooth and to be used for Personal Area Networks not Local or Wide Area Networks.

yellum

Originally posted by Muck
Once Comreg publshed the USO in July they effectively signed the execution order for the Wired network in Ireland.

In dropping the minimum data requirement from 2.4k to 0k, they clearly indicated to Eircom that Eircom do not have to provide exclusive high quality copper pairs to everybody , or anybody as is the case. Comreg did not require Eircom to use Wireless alternatives either. In the UK 28.8k is now the minimum acceptable standard.

As Eircom have now been given carte blanche to pairgain lines as they see fit, and have a licence to do so until the end of 2007 with no interference from Comreg (bar having to write occasional reports to Comreg on the mater) it follows that Universal Broadband availibility over copper is now impossible.

Jesus Christ. This is the first time I heard about this.

What motivated Comreg to fuck the Irish people over so much and side with big business ?

dahamsta

Muck, shouldn't this make it all the more important that IrelandOffline tackle the matter head-on, rather than sidelining it and concentrating a large majority of resources on wireless? IrelandOffline's argument is that we shouldn't be feeding Eircom via xDSL installations, but that's a very weak argument in my view. If the bitstream and unbundling prices were forced down by ComReg (and the USO issue tackled heavily), Eircom would be forced to compete at retail level properly.

Wireless is excellent and I think IrelandOffline should a large proportion of resources to lobbying the government for grant schemes and licencing relaxations, but a large proportion is not the majority that's been outlined by the group in recent months. Wireless is not the be-all and end-all, particularly in the unlicenced spectrum. The Wild West was cool, but it was quite easy to get shot...

adam

yellum

Was there any hullabaloo created about Comregs new Eircom friendlier USO ?

Did IrelandOffline have a press release on it ?

(not being a smartass, I've just not been reading the IOFFL forums of late )

This was a horrific decision and its impact should have been let known to all the media outlets and all IOFFL members.

spongebob

Adam

May I dissect this a bit.

Originally posted by dahamsta
Muck, shouldn't this make it all the more important that IrelandOffline tackle the matter head-on, rather than sidelining it and concentrating a large majority of resources on wireless?

Yes, IMO there is a small window of opportunity in October when Eircom delivers a report on the number of pairgains as required in the USO. After that we can all chill till 2007.

IrelandOffline's argument is that we shouldn't be feeding Eircom via xDSL installations, but that's a very weak argument in my view.

First I heard of that Adam TBH. Can you point me to an official source of some sort?

If the bitstream and unbundling prices were forced down by ComReg (and the USO issue tackled heavily), Eircom would be forced to compete at retail level properly.

Absolutely Right. This is in the High Court till next year as you know well. Then there is the Supreme Court (yawwwwn) . THere may be some movement on this by 2005.

Wireless is excellent and I think IrelandOffline should a large proportion of resources to lobbying the government for grant schemes and licencing relaxations, but a large proportion is not the majority that's been outlined by the group in recent months. Wireless is not the be-all and end-all, particularly in the unlicenced spectrum. The Wild West was cool, but it was quite easy to get shot...

Half the population will have access to a cheap(ish) wired solution by next year. The majority of the rest will have no wired solution so they will need wireless. Licenced wireless comes with quality of service GUARANTEES while unlicenced is a shot in the dark where you will probably be fine in a rural area which is where Wireless is desperately needed.

I had a long discussion in the Broadband To Clár thread Here about the MOST rural areas where EVEN Wireless is probably uneconomical.

My gut instinct is that the country divvies into 3 areas.

1. Licenced Wireless in Large Towns. Very Competitive because Eircom have left some fat margin to play with. Watch the ding-dong for 3.5Ghz spectrum in Dublin over the next fortnight. Loads of backhaul possibilities too.

2. Licenced Wireless in Populated Rural areas. These tend to be around the Big towns, in rural areas such as Meath/Kildare. ONLY Wireless will work excecpt close to Dunshaughl;in and Ashbourne and Newbridge. These guys can charge what they WANT. Also close to backhaul supplies.

3. Licenced Wireless in Un-Populated Rural areas. Not enough demand and far from decent backhaul at decent prices.

Unlicenced will ALWAYS be required for ad-hoc solutions from house to house as necessary.

M

vinnyfitz

If I recall correctly there was quite a lot of discussion at the AGM on this topic and Xian's plan to prioritise campaigning on Wireless was strongly endorsed.

Moriarty

Originally posted by vinnyfitz
If I recall correctly there was quite a lot of discussion at the AGM on this topic and Xian's plan to prioritise campaigning on Wireless was strongly endorsed.

If thats the case, its rather unfortunate that the membership at large werent consulted about this first.

dahamsta

Yes, IMO there is a small window of opportunity in October when Eircom delivers a report on the number of pairgains as required in the USO. After that we can all chill till 2007.

You think we should just sit back and have a cup of coffee if we don't agree with something?

First I heard of that Adam TBH. Can you point me to an official source of some sort?

I could be wrong, it could have been SkepticOne that said [something along those lines]. I'll have a look around. The underlying premise is the important thing though: IrelandOffline committee members have stated several times on the forums that wireless is [the] major priority. I believe it was in their state of the union type thing too.

Absolutely Right. This is in the High Court till next year as you know well. Then there is the Supreme Court (yawwwwn) . THere may be some movement on this by 2005.

Again, we should sit on our laurels?

Half the population will have access to a cheap(ish) wired solution by next year. The majority of the rest will have no wired solution so they will need wireless.

Obviously I'm not against wireless. I use a wireless connection!

Licenced wireless comes with quality of service GUARANTEES while unlicenced is a shot in the dark where you will probably be fine in a rural area which is where Wireless is desperately needed.

Hence my allusion to the Wild West. Are you agreeing with me or arguing with me? You wouldn't troll little innocent old me would you... well, innocent old... well, old...

Unlicenced will ALWAYS be required for ad-hoc solutions from house to house as necessary.

Absolutely. I'd go even further than that actually, I'd say it's perfectly valid for large-scale bottom-of-the-line budget broadband. We don't need to tame the Wild West, we just need to make sure there's a civilised alternative.

adam

spongebob

Prioritising the ADVOCACY of Wireless Last Mile, over Wired Last Mile , until the next AGM , is OK with me. That is because the USO is a Rust in Peace document which entitles Irish Consumer to nothing. The Irish Consumer is entitled to 0k of data over their phone line. Comreg does not want to get involved in anything higher than that.

Shall we call it the Comreg Verdigris Directive in future?

This is what Adam said a while back!

"IrelandOffline's argument is that we shouldn't be feeding Eircom via xDSL installations"

The ADVOCACY of Wireless solutions and of an overall National Policy environment that makes such an alternative last mile feasible is not the same thing as a DISINCENTIVE to install Eircom RADSL.

It may result in market conditions amounting to that (in time) but NOT before the next AGM I suspect . In the meantime it is a worthwhile objective .

M

vinnyfitz

Well.. Moriarty
That is what AGMs are for - getting the membership to come along and participate in consultation. The agenda which was circulated to all members did have a heading called "future direction of IOFFL" or similar.

Anyway the consultation continues here and I'm sure the strong committee elected a few weeks ago will ensure that all the points being made in this thread refine and sharpen the campaign. I'm just pointing out that Xian's strategy is not coming out of the blue.

Moriarty

Originally posted by Muck
The ADVOCACY of Wireless solutions and of an overall National Policy environment that makes such an alternative last mile feasible is not the same thing as a DISINCENTIVE to install Eircom RADSL.

Thats fine, i think most (all?) would agree with advocacy of wireless.. but it should not be to the detriment of further work wrt dsl imo.

yellum

Why can't the USO be changed before 2007 ?

Whats stopping this from being done ?

Is it actually a contract with Eircom where the Comreg signed away all our rights until 2007 or is this something that can be fought and campaigned for.

spongebob

Originally posted by yellum
Is it actually a contract with Eircom where the Comreg signed away all our rights until 2007 or is this something that can be fought and campaigned for.

There have been 2 USO documents.

April 1999
July 2003

It is a long term policy, most of it agreed by Eircom rather than imposed by Comreg, on what is Universally Available to All Eircom consumers at a standard price nationally. It is a bill of rights for an analogue line if you like. ISDN lines are specifically excluded.

The last one lasted over 4 years and the curent one will last 4 years too.

The current one is based on a 2002 EU directive which told the Comreg's of the EU that ALL consumers were entitled to Functional Internet Access . Comreg promptly dropped the minimum guaranteed speed from the (1999 level) of 2,400 Full Duplex to a new (2003) level of 0k.

They ALSO dropped the Full Duplex requirement which is necessary to get any Internet Access over CTS/RTS handshaking. Therefore we are entitled to 0K HALF DUPLEX to be precise...until 2007.

It will not be changed during that time unless the data from Eircom, mainly due October 24th, is 'deficient' . Comreg will probably take our concerns on board and change the USO from 0K HALF DUPLEX to a more equitable 0K FULL DUPLEX instead. They do listen to us you know.


M

oscarBravo

Um.

Isn't this a Market/Policy discussion?

dahamsta

Yeah, but who goes in there?

heh

oscarBravo

Me.

And I get lonely.

bk

Originally posted by Moriarty
If thats the case, its rather unfortunate that the membership at large werent consulted about this first.

Hi Moriarty,

The idea of focusing on wireless had been floated on the boards by Xian about 4 months before the AGM, nobody should be surprised.

During the AGM a lot of discussion was put into this move and everyone present voted unanimously to back this new focus on wireless.

Personally I agree 100% with the focus on wireless and this is why:

The Eircom management have NO interest in developing xDSL in Ireland.

The goals of the Eircom management are very simple, to make as much money as possible as quickly as possible, without losing too many customers and then in a few years time sell it for a bundle of cash.

This is clear to see in recent articles in the newspapers stating the vast reduction in spending by Eircom on the network, etc.

While the full rollout of cheap xDSL by Eircom would be very good for Eircom in the long term IMO, in the short term it costs a lot of money and it would cannibalise many of their existing cash cows such as per second dialup, ISDN, leased line. This obviuosly goes against the Eircom managements primary goal that I mentioned above, so obviously they are going to roll out xDSL as slowly as possible.

The only reason Eircom would improve its rollout of xDSL are:

1) Legal requirements from ComReg such as the USO.

Well unfortunately the boat has already sailed on this one and any other legal obligations ComReg or anyone else puts on Eircom are likely to be fought for years by Eircom in the courts. Therefore their is little or no point in lobbying ComReg to put pressure on Eircom.

2) Competition.

Now this is the one that Eircom responds to very quickly. The only reason Eircom released the cheaper RADSL products is because the introduction of FRIACO which cuts into their per minute dial up model. Trust me if we didn't have FRIACO, we wouldn't have RADSL.

It is quiet clear to me that if we are going to get any more developments out of Eircom, it won't come from lobbying, it will only come when some competition arrives to challenge xDSL. And the only feasible alternative to Eircom in Ireland is wireless.

Therefore I believe that he IOFLL committee will be focusing on developing the environment for a strong, innovative and well developed wireless networks here in Ireland.

When we have done that, Eircom can decide to either compete or die.

Urban Weigl

Originally posted by Muck
2. Licenced Wireless in Populated Rural areas. These tend to be around the Big towns, in rural areas such as Meath/Kildare. ONLY Wireless will work excecpt close to Dunshaughl;in and Ashbourne and Newbridge. These guys can charge what they WANT. Also close to backhaul supplies.

This does not always hold true. In most cases, the moment you step away from Dublin, the cost of backhaul doubles (if you are lucky).

bk

While just reading my last post it might seem like the only reason why I'm pushing wireless is to get Eircom to compete.

While that might be a nice side effect, my reasons are actually far more complicated then that.

I trully believe that wireless is the future of high speed broadband for the following reasons:

1) Scales to much higher speeds.
2) Relatively cheap and easy to rollout.
3) Typically covers much wider areas.
4) Doesn't have the problems of trying to run on a decrepit, collapsing, pair gain filled wired network.

While wireless may not be perfect yet, mainly due to the use of unlicensed spectrum, when interference free licensed spectrum (see 3.5Ghz) and new equipment become available, it will become as rock solid as xDSL and an excellent alternative to xDSL.

In fact their are new exciting developments in wireless everyday. For instance somebody mentioned that UWB has a distance of only 100m. Now I don't know if this is true or not, but lets just say it is. Here is an exciting possibility for you, each person gets a NLOS UWB wireless modem, but this modem also acts as a transmitter, forming a P2P (peer to peer) wireless network with its neighbours. Could you imagine a 100mb (potentially uncontented, at least with other people on the same network) wireless P2P network covering the whole of Dublin, with 3.5GHz/5GHz point to point links to cover the gaps in the network.

I'm not saying that this is going to happen, but it is just one of the exciting possiblities of wireless. With wireless we may not only be able to catch up with our neighbours in Europe, we may even be able to surpass them. Wouldn't it be good to be in the lead for a change.

bk

Originally posted by Urban Weigl
This does not always hold true. In most cases, the moment you step away from Dublin, the cost of backhaul doubles (if you are lucky).

I'd say Muck is thinking about the possibilities with the fiber rings projects.