The "National Broadband Plan"

bealtine

http://www.siliconrepublic.com/comms/item/28968-ireland-will-learn-its/

NGN report to finally be published 30/8/2012

watty

I predict that it will be full of platitudes, no commitment to reform the Useless Comreg, no commitment to proper spectrum management, no genuine blueprint for a National fibre Infrastructure and no commitment to universal Broadband.

It will be up to the market.

There will be much (totally misplaced) faith in LTE and Digital Dividend (neither of which as planned gives a significant improvement on 3G/HSPA "midband") for the Rural user.

Oh I'd so love to be proved wrong.

bealtine

watty wrote: »

I predict that it will be full of platitudes, no commitment to reform the Useless Comreg, no commitment to proper spectrum management, no genuine blueprint for a National fibre Infrastructure and no commitment to universal Broadband.

It will be up to the market.

There will be much (totally misplaced) faith in LTE and Digital Dividend (neither of which as planned gives a significant improvement on 3G/HSPA "midband") for the Rural user.

Oh I'd so love to be proved wrong.

I predict you are right...ALL politicians believe "LTE will save us"

clohamon

Yes, there's no engineering function left in the department and they haven't hired any consultants.

Anyone for BS bingo?

Here's a few starters.
connected society, digital world, digital economy, big data, cloud computing, social media, virtual world, online, Web 2.0, e + (medicine, health, commerce, education, government, commerce again)

SeaSide

e-hub of europe - love that one

there is no demand - remember that one

clohamon

...smart metering, distance learning....

funnyname

http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/Press+Releases/2012/Minister+Rabbitte+Delivering+a+Connected+Society+%E2%80%93+A+National+Broadband+Plan.htm

National Broadband Plan Targets:

70Mbps - 100Mbps to more than half of the population by 2015;
At least 40Mbps, and in many cases much faster speeds, to at least a further 20% of the population and potentially as much as 35% around smaller towns and villages; and
A minimum of 30Mbps for every remaining home and business in the country – no matter how rural or remote.

Galen

The last mile is the kicker. What chance is there of Eircom or gov replacing my copper? - next to none as far as I can see.

Where's the money for this pipe dream?

croo

The use of the word "Plan" seems a little deceptive.

This Plan is a milestone

Says it all to me.

Liamario

"National Broadband Plan Targets"

My heart has sunk for those in rural areas.

ToadVine

funnyname wrote: »

http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/Press+Releases/2012/Minister+Rabbitte+Delivering+a+Connected+Society+%E2%80%93+A+National+Broadband+Plan.htm

National Broadband Plan Targets:

70Mbps - 100Mbps to more than half of the population by 2015;
At least 40Mbps, and in many cases much faster speeds, to at least a further 20% of the population and potentially as much as 35% around smaller towns and villages; and
A minimum of 30Mbps for every remaining home and business in the country – no matter how rural or remote.

How realistic is this? How will it be achieved? Could this be achieved by wireless 4G?

I'd love to hear Watty and bealtine opinions on this.

oscarBravo

ToadVine wrote: »

Could this be achieved by wireless 4G?

Nope.

ToadVine

oscarBravo wrote: »

Nope.

Just like the NBS delvers "broadband" by 3G, right?

watty

Wireless 101 All figures are approximate.

By 1949 we knew the limits. The Shannon - Nyquist Communication Information theory, which is really a law. It's derived from Laws of Thermodynamics.

We have ALWAYS known that fixed wireless links are "better" than Mobile. Actually because fixed wireless doesn't have the same limits on power and uses roof top aerials, Fixed Wireless is ALWAYS AT LEAST x8 to x16 better than Mobile.

Wireless has been close to the physical limits of speed for power and distance for over 10 years. So why the "excitement" about LTE/4G over 3G?

2G was GSM. It uses a 0.2KHz channel. The most advanced form of it gives about 1Mbps. The most basic version is 0.014Mbps and intermediate (ordinary EDGE) is 0.245Mbps. The USA used an inferior 2G system called CDMA-1

3G is er, 3G. It uses a 5MHz channel, though other versions exist. For "sharing" the cell it uses the inferior CDMA approach to share the cell sector, so capacity is lost as more users connect. The basic speed is 0.240Mbps The HSPA, HSPA+ and later enhancements simply trade "robustness" for speed, this means the higher speeds (up to 21Mbps) only work as the signal is better. It's shared. So 10 people simultaneously connecting can't get much more than about 1Mbps. If it used a different system to CDMA then 10 simultaneous perfect connections would be nearly 2Mbps. But if only a few people connect the access method (CDMA or other) isn't important. On average for a cell only 2% to 5% of locations can get the peak speed. 50% of locations have to share more like 4Mbps, so if 20 people connect the speed is worse than 2G / GSM.

4G/Mobile Wimax/LTE. The LTE can use 20MHz channels. So this means in 5MHz channel it's the same as 3G, the 100Mbps "headline" is if there is 20MHz channels. Comreg is auctioning 5Mhz channels. Also to build an efficient network with good capacity you need absolute minimum of 3 channels and ideally 6 or more to have capacity and have masts not interfere with each other. The main advantages of LTE are not speed. Neither Mobile WiMax nor LTE are "really" 4G in one sense. In another they are.

LTE advantages:
:: Unlike GSM & 3G there is no voice mode or SMS or X25. Only native IP data. This makes management, backhaul and central servers all simpler. It makes texting and Voice more expensive!
:: It doesn't use CDMA for downlink. Instead of a single carrier it uses OFDM. This is pointless for fixed installs with a roof aerial, but makes moving reception better, especially with a small internal aerial on 700MHz to 1800MHz bands. The speed only degrades linearly as more users added.
:: It can get more speed by having bigger channels or even linking (bonding) channels.

So the advantages of LTE are more reliable link, better mobility, IP/Data only, ability to use different sizes and larger channels and less wastage when heavily loaded. It is not just about speed.

For more speed you need more power or spectrum or both. Mobile devices can't be using more transmitter power! LTE can only deliver "broadband" speeds if it has massive spectrum and very few people use each mast. You would need x20 the amount of spectrum that Comreg will allocate any one user AND TEN TIMES the mast density to equal UPCs or FTTC entry level speed/performance. Even then you are never assured a connection.

It is NOT broadband. It's just a better midband. As Comreg envisage it, it will only be better than 3G when heavily loaded (0.5Mbps rather than 0.25Mbps). It's designed to COMPLEMENT real broadband when on the go mobility is needed.

To get the best value out of ANY wireless system you need to maximise the spectrum as the capacity on average nearly doubled compared to chopped up spectrum to different operators (some mast channels over subscribed while others are idle).

The ONLY sensible way to deploy LTE is a single Wholesale operator and as large an amount of spectrum as possible to have 6 off 20MHz channels instead of the 2 or 3 off by 5MHz channels Comreg wants.

It's a criminal waste of a National resource.

But EVEN if you do LTE properly it's never ever going to be an economic or workable rural broadband solution. Fixed Wireless will deliver x8 capacity for half the infrastructure cost. But anywhere that can get ESB can get fibre cheaply, or Fibre and then VDSL, Coax or a 1:1 wireless link. That will give as a MINIMUM x5 times what fixed Wireless can do, 100Mbps minimum. Fixed wireless can deliver minimum 20Mbps with reasonable contention.

With LTE even if you have 6 channels of 20MBps nationally, you can't even guarantee that people will always connect (no contention control because it's Mobile), or won't disconnect or even get an assured 2Mbps from a mast with 100Mbps +

This is physics and mathematics. Our politicians need to stop listening to fairy stories from Operators.

The NBS should be torn up today. It's a lie. It has not and can't deliver a single broadband connection. Yet the people in these areas are "forbidden" Government investment.

The NBS simply allowed Three to meet their VOICE 3G licence obligations that they had been in breach of.

Our secretive Government and Comreg will not tell us what are penalties for non-compliance and rarely revoke licences or fine for non-compliance.

Useless Comreg will not even protect the spectrum for primary users of it!

bealtine

ToadVine wrote: »

How realistic is this? How will it be achieved? Could this be achieved by wireless 4G?

I'd love to hear Watty and bealtine opinions on this.

As the others have said 4G cannot deliver for a number of technical reasons. These reasons must be hard to understand as the DECNR seem to utterly ignore the physics and pretend 3G/4G can somehow mystically break these laws of physics and somehow magically give a guaranteed service.

I do like the targets in the plan, they are very laudable targets and Ireland Inc should have decent broadband whether you are in Ballydehob or D4.

The only actual commitment in the plan is to hire some mapping guy all the rest is just wishful thinking with minimal commitment to do anything.

Yes I think the DECNR have stolen the IoffL phrase that broadband is the rural electrification of the 21st century so obviously they read these fora and the IoffL website regularly.

Now let's see something concrete on the delivery front...not a gaggle of platitudes

watty

There are two types of WiFi Hotspot:
1) Commercial pay as you go
2) Freely provided (Some College, Library, cafe, Hotel lobby etc)

This is from 2002 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/2175804.stm

The growth of Free WiFi Hotspots and 3G/HSPA+ in cities is killing the profitability of Commercial WiFi Hotspots. Ironically Operators WANT people to have good real broadband so they can host 3G/HSPA+ and LTE Femto cells. There is FAR more money for operators in that than in WiFi Hotspots. Vodafone in particular has been promoting 3G Hotspots to plug into your real broadband.

LTE can't replace 3G in the short term. All the existing 3G and even much GSM/EDGE needs to run in parallel. If there are as many LTE bases as 3G deployed then the amount of Fibre and Microwave link backhaul in use needs to be tripled! If an attempt was really made to make 4G/LTE be a real alternative (rather than a Mobile Complement) to Broadband, then you would need x10 as many bases and x6 the spectrum. That would need about 50x the present fibre capacity used by operators. A high percentage of such cells would be micro or pico fed by local fixed broadband.

So ironically to deploy even a basic LTE rollout you need a decent national fibre plan and 3x the current backhaul capacity used by Operators. Not only that, a national LTE network only equal in coverage to present 3G by one operator would cost about €1.5 Billion (Ericsson & Vodafone estimate!).

You can do a real 100Mbps minimum to every premises in Ireland for that, with over 50% getting 1Gbps. But the MARKET will never deliver that. Because the amount of data carried would be up to 100x to 1000x more than a Mobile operator would need to carry and the profits are lower. Germany shows you can charge far more for LTE than fibre broadband. The LTE in Germany is priced not for fixed home use but for the "Road Warrior" / Businessman on the go.

LTE is purely designed as a Native IP MOBILE solution. The main development focus has actually been on Urban deployment (hence smaller 2600MHz cells and MIMO to have more capacity via "virtual" sectors).

I'd not invest in rolling out commercial PAYG WiFi hotspots. But for successful deployment LTE needs a massive increase in Fibre assets and real FAST Broadband (100Mbps or more) for many Femto cells.

clohamon

adrianweckler: Asked Min Rabbitte if delivering 30Mbs to *everyone* in country in next 2.4 years was basically just a mobile 4G solution. Not sure, he said

Original Tweet: http://twitter.com/adrianweckler/statuses/241118441015218176

And this for those with usable broadband
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3ncAuwi-DE

Consultants have been advising - apparently.
Mapping starts after spectrum auction.
Auction will enhance mobile quality in 'several' parts of the country.

Headshot

Id love to know how the hell will rural areas get those speeds? I just cant see it happening what so ever

Will it be wireless, 4G or what the hell will it be?

bealtine

Headshot wrote: »

Will it be wireless, 4G or what the hell will it be?

Well based on the nonsense that the DECNR come out with regularly it would seem they are angling for an LTE roll out. Take the lazy way out would be my guess, as a plan there is not one real concrete commitment to actually do anything except hire a mapping guy...

watty

Unless there is a real plan which is actually implemented the Rural areas will not get those speeds. If left "to the market" and Mobile Operators at best you'll see 0.2Mbps to 2Mbps Rural Mobile speeds (typical) with no assurance of a connection. Of course with Mobile about 2% to 5% of people will see Broadband performance. Demos for Journalists will be carefully organised. Only a large controlled measurement of 1000+ people gives the true picture of Mobile. Anything else is anecdotal.

Headshot

Sorry for the bump but iv heard today that my area will be getting done, supposed to get speeds up to 30 mbps. I heard that Prisa Technologies are supposed to be assisting in the design, planning and procurement of this initiative. Never heard of them.

Id love to know what technology will be used

bealtine

Headshot wrote: »

Sorry for the bump but iv heard today that my area will be getting done, supposed to get speeds up to 30 mbps. I heard that Prisa Technologies are supposed to be assisting in the design, planning and procurement of this initiative. Never heard of them.

Id love to know what technology will be used

Well it's not even at the planning phase or mapping stage yet...but based on the play book the Dept uses it will be mobile...because that's "technology neutral"

Headshot

bealtine wrote: »

Well it's not even at the planning phase or mapping stage yet...but based on the play book the Dept uses it will be mobile...because that's "technology neutral"

"The procurement process will be finalised next year" is what im told. Ya im thinking it will be mobile broadband crap, will they ever learn? The funny thing is all they have to do in my area is get eircom to upgrade the backhaul in the exchange and alot of the trouble will go away. No that would be to easy

bealtine

Headshot wrote: »

"The procurement process will be finalised next year" is what im told. Ya im thinking it will be mobile broadband crap, will they ever learn? The funny thing is all they have to do in my area is get eircom to upgrade the backhaul in the exchange and alot of the trouble will go away. No that would be to easy

procurement stage next year sounds rather unlikely...

http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/Press+Releases/2013/Experts+appointed+to+design+state+led+broadband+investment.htm

and these are the consultants:
http://www.prisaconsulting.com/

Headshot

Governemnt offical told me today is will start next year but you could say what they are usually like

bealtine

Headshot wrote: »

Governemnt offical told me today is will start next year but you could say what they are usually like

if some random official told you the moon was made of cheese would you believe that too<g>?

Headshot

Hence why I said you know what they are like. But he's not a random official btw.

clohamon

bealtine wrote: »

procurement stage next year sounds rather unlikely...

clohamon

Headshot wrote: »

iv heard today that my area will be getting done

How does your non-random official know if they haven't done the mapping yet?

Headshot wrote: »

supposed to get speeds up to 30 mbps

That's a change from the original promise of 30Mb/s minimum to the most remote residences and businesses.

Headshot wrote: »

Id love to know what technology will be used

If your non-random official knows the "up to" speed and the areas to be covered it's unlikely that he doesn't also know the technology. Why not ask him?

bealtine

clohamon wrote: »

If your non-random official knows the "up to" speed and the areas to be covered it's unlikely that he doesn't also know the technology. Why not ask him?

If the "non-random" official already knows the outcome (areas and speeds) what's the point in these exercises?

Sounds like they want the consultants to arrive at a specific set of pre-determined "conclusions".

clohamon

bealtine wrote: »

If the "non-random" official already knows the outcome (areas and speeds) what's the point in these exercises?

Sounds like they want the consultants to arrive at a specific set of pre-determined "conclusions".

The first job of the department is to appoint a scapegoat.
The first rule of consultancy is to give the customer what they want.