NBP: National Broadband Plan Announced

Orebro

digiman wrote: »

The key point is that the latency is greater in fibre.

Fibre had a refractive index of about 0.66 which means that it reflects internally in the fibre and thus travels a further distance than the length of the cable.

Wireless doesn't have that problem which means that the latency using for example a microwave radio is less than using fibre between the same 2 physically places.

And this is relevant to the NBP how?

Tigerandahalf

The high horse brigade wrote: »

That horse bolted long ago, get over it!

We are left with the NBP as it stands. We either go with it or start again costing us another 8 years

Well that is the bigger question, not the talk about the 3 billion cost.
Plenty of rural voters want their fibre broadband now irrespective of the cost/problems down the line.

You only have to look at the local elections in the uk where the Tories and Labour have been hammered due to their fiddling with brexit.

Orebro

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

Plenty of rural voters want their fibre broadband now irrespective of the cost/problems down the line.

No, they want their fibre, and at €3Bn over 25 years it is a good deal and an excellent investment. Stop making rural dwellers out to be some sort of greedy spongers looking for an unreasonable service.

digiman

Orebro wrote: »

And this is relevant to the NBP how?

You clearly don't understand what you are talking about. Basically it's you that needs to go back to physics class and not Jakey.

Orebro

digiman wrote: »

You clearly don't understand what you are talking about. Basically it's you that needs to go back to physics class and not Jakey.

And this is relevant to the NBP how exactly?

What I do understand is that people are constantly trying to muddy the waters with talk of 5G and now someone is on about copper & microwaves and getting pedantic about technical details that have absolutely no relevance to the subject of this thread.

digiman

Orebro wrote: »

And this is relevant to the NBP how exactly?

I've no interest in wasting my time arguing with you.

Just admit that your post in response to what Jakey said was incorrect and move on. He came on and just pointed out what someone else said wasn't fully correct and you bash him for saying so even though its yourself that's actually wrong.

Of course it's relevant to NBP, the majority of the technical solution is based on fibre and this forum talks about the advantages and disadvantages of all the different technical solutions.

Go on with yourself now please

ednwireland

Wanderer78 wrote: »

user1842 wrote:

FTTH (fibre to the home) is the only future proofed solution, period. There is no other solution, not 5G, not 6G not 7G and so on.

Its hard to justify dragging fibre up boreens for single homes, or even a couple of houses, its not viable at the moment, future proof, yup, but viable, no

there's probably 50 houses within 2km of where the fibre ends 500 yds from my house why eir stopped there who knows all know is there are several agricultural based businesses that could use fibre and a lot of houses

Orebro

digiman wrote: »

I've no interest in wasting my time arguing with you.

Just admit that your post in response to what Jakey said was incorrect and move on. He came on and just pointed out what someone else said wasn't fully correct and you bash him for saying so even though its yourself that's actually wrong.

Of course it's relevant to NBP, the majority of the technical solution is based on fibre and this forum talks about the advantages and disadvantages of all the different technical solutions.

Go on with yourself now please

How about you explain how, and I quote "Copper and wireless signals both travel faster." in the context of the scale of the NBP rollout? Absolute nonsense, as we're not talking about a few metres run of cable here. Are you really saying that copper is a viable alternative to a FTTH rollout? Jesus.

turbbo

digiman wrote: »

I've no interest in wasting my time arguing with you.

Just admit that your post in response to what Jakey said was incorrect and move on. He came on and just pointed out what someone else said wasn't fully correct and you bash him for saying so even though its yourself that's actually wrong.

Of course it's relevant to NBP, the majority of the technical solution is based on fibre and this forum talks about the advantages and disadvantages of all the different technical solutions.

Go on with yourself now please

Anybody that would argue that wireless is gonna solve the Broadband deficit in Ireland should re-read all the technical posts made here over the years.
As they clearly don't have the full picture. Basically you need fibre to have wireless. I don't even think the NBP @ 3 Billion is going to provide everybody with fibre - that is NOT what is going to happen. This NBP overall is the best solution - it might not be the best value for money - but is anything in this country??? May as well get some infrastructure - the roads that were built in the last 2 decades cost billions - don't hear too many people complaining about them now - in fact people want more of them.

digiman

turbbo wrote: »

Anybody that would argue that wireless is gonna solve the Broadband deficit in Ireland should re-read all the technical posts made here over the years.
As they clearly don't have the full picture. Basically you need fibre to have wireless. I don't even think the NBP @ 3 Billion is going to provide everybody with fibre - that is NOT what is going to happen. This NBP overall is the best solution - it might not be the best value for money - but is anything in this country??? May as well get some infrastructure - the roads that were built in the last 2 decades cost billions - don't hear too many people complaining about them now - in fact people want more of them.

Neither Jakey or myself are arguing this point. We are only both confirming that a signal propagates quicker over copper and wireless compared to fibre due to the refractive index of glass. Another poster mentioned that the Internet travels at the speed of light over fibre but it actually only travels at about 2/3 the speed of light. That is all either of us are saying. I'm certainly not trying to promote wireless over fibre and I don't believe Jakey was either he was simply just correcting another poster.

What annoyed me is that Orebo said he should go back to physics when it's him/herself that is in correct and should acknowledge that rather than be a smartass. We need educated/experienced people to post on these threads otherwise it will become a case of people coming to the conclusion that the best solution is something other than fibre.


I've stated for many years that fibre is the best technical solution and is far more future proofed than wireless. I work on fibre systems that are delivering 25Tb/s so I've a good idea on the long term future of fibre. It should also be noted that over a single strand of fibre it is actually starting to get close to its limits especially in long distance submarine type applications but there are R&D people working on improving this all the time. But this is not something we need to worry about, let's get the fibre in the ground and on the poles and upgrade the optics at each end of the fibre over time.

turbbo

digiman wrote: »

Neither Jakey or myself are arguing this point. We are only both confirming that a signal propagates quicker over copper and wireless compared to fibre due to the refractive index of glass. Another poster mentioned that the Internet travels at the speed of light over fibre but it actually only travels at about 2/3 the speed of light. That is all either of us are saying. I'm certainly not trying to promote wireless over fibre and I don't believe Jakey was either he was simply just correcting another poster.

What annoyed me is that Orebo said he should go back to physics when it's him/herself that is in correct and should acknowledge that rather than be a smartass. We need educated/experienced people to post on these threads otherwise it will become a case of people coming to the conclusion that the best solution is something other than fibre.


I've stated for many years that fibre is the best technical solution and is far more future proofed than wireless. I work on fibre systems that are delivering 25Tb/s so I've a good idea on the long term future of fibre. It should also be noted that over a single strand of fibre it is actually starting to get close to its limits especially in long distance submarine type applications but there are R&D people working on improving this all the time. But this is not something we need to worry about, let's get the fibre in the ground and on the poles and upgrade the optics at each end of the fibre over time.

Sounds like we're in agreement then!

Orebro

digiman wrote: »

What annoyed me is that Orebo said he should go back to physics when it's him/herself that is in correct and should acknowledge that rather than be a smartass. We need educated/experienced people to post on these threads otherwise it will become a case of people coming to the conclusion that the best solution is something other than fibre.

What we don't need on here are people muddying the waters, which is what you are doing. I won't even get into your disgraceful education comments, you sound like a real classy person.

digiman

Orebro wrote: »

What we don't need on here are people muddying the waters, which is what you are doing. I won't even get into your disgraceful education comments, you sound like a real classy person.

I'm obviously talking about the need for people who are educated and experienced in the Telecoms sector who can educate the people who are not as familiar with the industry. These people should be encouraged to post rather than less informed people slagging them off and taking their posts out of context.

Part of the problem with the whole thing is that there is not enough of these experienced leaders speaking out for whatever reasons and you then give more airtime to the likes of Sean Bolger and Peter Casey who are spinning their own agenda on 5G. These people are unfortunately getting too loud of a voice and you have hardcore Peter Casey supporters repeating what he says like he is some sort of Messiah.

turbbo

digiman wrote: »

I'm obviously talking about the need for people who are educated and experienced in the Telecoms sector who can educate the people who are not as familiar with the industry. These people should be encouraged to post rather than less informed people slagging them off and taking their posts out of context.

Part of the problem with the whole thing is that there is not enough of these experienced leaders speaking out for whatever reasons and you then give more airtime to the likes of Sean Bolger and Peter Casey who are spinning their own agenda on 5G. These people are unfortunately getting too loud of a voice and you have hardcore Peter Casey supporters repeating what he says like he is some sort of Messiah.

Are you happy that he NBP is going ahead (albeit not perfect)?

ED E

Want to bump this. For those new to the thread its worth listening.

The Cush wrote: »

Adrian Weckler's "Big Tech Show" podcast, discussion on the NBP from a few days ago, a good listen

https://soundcloud.com/user-401325083/the-truth-about-rural-broadband?in=user-401325083/sets/the-big-tech-show

digiman

turbbo wrote: »

Are you happy that he NBP is going ahead (albeit not perfect)?

I really hope it goes ahead and posted here a few days ago why I think so.

Nothing will ever be perfect and not everybody will get the solution that they want but from what I can see this is the best option that we currently have to take so let's go with it.

I love getting value for money as much as anyone and will often chase down a bargain but sometimes you just have to spend that bit extra to get what you want and also pay for the convenience of it.

theguzman

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Its hard to justify dragging fibre up boreens for single homes, or even a couple of houses, its not viable at the moment, future proof, yup, but viable, no

Wanderer78 wrote: »

its not viable to drag fibre up 'small roads', unless theres a considerable increase in public funding to do so, private operators cannot absorb these costs, these are the current facts on the matter. by all means lobby for these increase public funds, but be prepared for disappointment. since i dont truly understand the tech, i do not have a viable alternative. of course it would be great to have fibre all over the country, but...

Viability does not come into this, it is for to build a network where private enterprise have failed and refuse and/or unable to invest, The National part of NBP is exactly that, this is for rural country dwellers, those of us who cannot get Broadband. I own one particularly rural house an older 100+ year old farmhouse which is 8.4kms from the local Exchange, it would barely get 1mb on ADSL if it would even work. When my late grandmother was alive she had to rely on an old Routel Radio Phone which kept breaking down and eventually Telecom Eireann stood telephone poles extending the copper line for the final 2.5kms to her house, this is how long ago it was.

There was no mobile signal at this house until last November when Eir did something to the masts and you can now get 3G with one bar, sufficient for voice calls but a waste of time for Data. As part of the National Broadband Plan I will look to try get fibre installed to there and as there is occupied houses even further out at 10kms from the Exchange so the fibre will hopefully be passing us by anyway. I am currently renovating this house and it has so much huge potential in a nice mountainous location, having Gigabit FTTH would add enormously to its attraction and value.

I personally am happier for it to be left in Private hands, the Govt can run nothing properly look at the HSE etc. a dumping ground for failed careers and a a money pit. Then imagine every gobdaw parish pump politician having an input, it would be like letting the lunatics in charge of the Asylum.

The mistake that was made was Privatising Telecom Eireann by Fianna Fail, roasting the public in over-priced shares and it is something that should not be forgotten. If OpenEIR today was state owned it would have been much easier to implement this as the network should have been kept in state ownership and privatise and outsource the rest. With Bord Gais they privatised the sales etc but kept the Network.

The most important thing is that this gets build and roll-out the service to rural Ireland. It will not be a Private Monopoly in the captive sense, Eir has a Private Monopoly but they are obliged to allow other operators to sell their product over the network also, the same as the ESB Networks and Eirgrid control the electric infrastructure but you have the option to buy power from Airtricity instead. With the NBP FTTH you could choose EIR, Vodafone, Digiweb whoever as your provider as it is open access, there is nothing to stop the plethora of Wireless ISP's offering service via the NBP FTTH network also and I am sure some of the more progressive ones plan to do it as Wireless is a stop-gap measure.

Wireless, 4G/LTE and 5G are something that filled the Vacuum but are not a proper solution, especially as today's bandwidth demands increase exponentially, a WISP was a much better service back in 2008 as the data demands were a fraction of today, you have 4K streaming today and 8K soon, monstrous file sizes and huge demand for upload capacity for streaming and High-Def Video calls, these sort of things were not popular when the plethora of Wireless Companies started filling the vacuum of Broadband years ago in areas where Eir had not rolled out ADSL, the ADSL was too slow (e.g. Sneem Village 3mb on EIR to this day) and also due to the price at €50/month for ADSL was also too expensive and you had the situation where the WISP's were faster and cheaper than EIR ADSL as EIR's Copper ADSL and Copper vDSL (Marketed as eFibre) is now totally obsolete.

The WISP lobby are trying to market 5G as an alternative to fibre, but it is not, it will always be the poor second cousin to Fibre, take a look at any WISP, 5G or LTE customer forum either here on boards or other sites and you will see it littered with complains of latency, congestion, evening slow downs etc. It does not have the capacity simply to provide the ever increasing demands of data consumption, only fibre to the home can provide this, one house with kids and iPads and a Netflix 4K account would easily burn through over one 1TB of Data monthly, back in 2006 I had a one-way satellite down and Dialup uplink connection and I had 1GB per month allowance costing me around €80/month combined landline and sat costs, the 1GB was barely sufficient and I had roughly 33MB allowance per day until they increased it to 2GB. The internet has come along way since and in 10 years time it will be even much heavier in terms of data consumption.

However looking at it now in hindsight we seem hopefully but be headed for Fibre as a fresh start, similar to Eastern Europe, after the collapse of communism countries like Lithuania went from having practically nothing straight to Fibre, wheras in the 1980's Ireland had the most advanced Telecom's network with the latest technology available at the time as all local exchanges went automatic, a few upgrades of DLSAM's and Fibre trunk backhaul and the urban vDSL cabinets are all we have seen up until EIR started rolling out their own fibre, and this was under competitive pressure from SIRO and UPC/Virgin in urban centres.

Copper Landlines are now almost totally obsolete except in situations like my own where I pay EIR €50 a month for 12mb ADSL2+ in my house 2kms from the Exchange as I need the internet, my upload is 0.6mb which is brutal. If I had a Fibre or Cable alternative I'd have dumped EIR long ago, there is a Wireless provider here locally, however their service is brutal wheras my ADSL2+ is rock solid, it is what it is, it was cutting edge 10 years ago but now it barely cuts butter but is still far superior to the local WISP. I barely even use the landline phone despite paying for it.

gnf_ireland

theguzman wrote: »

Viability does not come into this, it is for to build a network where private enterprise have failed and refuse and/or unable to invest, The National part of NBP is exactly that, this is for rural country dwellers, those of us who cannot get Broadband. I own one particularly rural house an older 100+ year old farmhouse which is 8.4kms from the local Exchange, it would barely get 1mb on ADSL if it would even work. When my late grandmother was alive she had to rely on an old Routel Radio Phone which kept breaking down and eventually Telecom Eireann stood telephone poles extending the copper line for the final 2.5kms to her house, this is how long ago it was.

There was no mobile signal at this house until last November when Eir did something to the masts and you can now get 3G with one bar, sufficient for voice calls but a waste of time for Data. As part of the National Broadband Plan I will look to try get fibre installed to there and as there is occupied houses even further out at 10kms from the Exchange so the fibre will hopefully be passing us by anyway.

My parents house are even worse off. There is no ADSL connectivity at all as the local exchange is not enabled. The mobile signal is so poor that no reception exists indoors (maybe 1 bar on a good day), and outside you might get 2 bars if you are lucky. That includes vodafone, three and eir networks. They are still very reliant on their fixed line phone.
My mother installed QSAT a number of years ago to get some level of broadband coverage, as the only other option to her was dial-up.

theguzman wrote: »

I am currently renovating this house and it has so much huge potential in a nice mountainous location, having Gigabit FTTH would add enormously to its attraction and value.

Perfect, the increase in property valuations in rural Ireland will result in increased Local Property Tax intake which will help cover the cost of the project !

turbbo

digiman wrote: »

I really hope it goes ahead and posted here a few days ago why I think so.

Nothing will ever be perfect and not everybody will get the solution that they want but from what I can see this is the best option that we currently have to take so let's go with it.

I love getting value for money as much as anyone and will often chase down a bargain but sometimes you just have to spend that bit extra to get what you want and also pay for the convenience of it.

100% agree.

theguzman

gnf_ireland wrote: »

My parents house are even worse off. There is no ADSL connectivity at all as the local exchange is not enabled. The mobile signal is so poor that no reception exists indoors (maybe 1 bar on a good day), and outside you might get 2 bars if you are lucky. That includes vodafone, three and eir networks. They are still very reliant on their fixed line phone.
My mother installed QSAT a number of years ago to get some level of broadband coverage, as the only other option to her was dial-up.




Perfect, the increase in property valuations in rural Ireland will result in increased Local Property Tax intake which will help cover the cost of the project !

I have been paying €90 a year the minimum LPT but after the renovation and added value and works I'd say this will increase to €495 with the house worth between €250k to €300k but if FTTH was there it might add another 10% so FTTH will definitely cause an uptick in Property tax, like Luas bounce effect in Dublin.

The house is remote and rural, idyllic and peaceful, the sort of place a highly skilled IT guru might like to rent and live with a partner and few dogs etc. and work from home with Fibre in the countryside for a fraction of the living cost in the big cities. This 4 bedroom old style house of mine will eventually come to market at €150 - €200 per week, if you were an IT person in places like London or Dublin and you already owned your own property there you could let it out and live in the country with maybe €1k profit per month. The NBP will give a badly needed financial boost to rural Ireland, we should revise down the real cost of its build when you take into account what it will generate to help pay for itself.

By comparison look at the Children's Hospital for example that has huge capital cost but also continuous ongoing costs, not taking away from a badly needed Project or to have debate on it's pros or cons but there is a huge amount of ignorance about the NBP and much of it is fuelled by the WISP and LTE/5G lobby who know the days of their cottage industry and inferior service will be numbered once homes around rural Ireland get in Fibre. The more progressive WISP's embrace the NBP and plan to resell, then there are others who have tried everything in their power to stop or block it including spreading false propaganda Fake News and lies about it and try to ensure Fibre is not used.

cregmon

theguzman wrote: »

Wireless, 4G/LTE and 5G are something that filled the Vacuum but are not a proper solution

They have their place but are not a like-for-like replacement; important to also remind everyone that true 5G network deployments are few and far between. Not sure if Imagine are using NR yet, but even so they have have the smallest 3.6GHz FWA frequency block of any nationwide operator. I can't take them as a serious contender if they're not willing to make a proper investment in the most basic of requirements, i.e. spectrum.

Also important to remind all is that GPON technology hasn't stood still either. 10G PON and beyond are being trialed. It uses the same single-mode fiber that's being laid for the current GPON FTTH rollouts - obviously the ONT/ONU boxes have to be swapped out but that's been the case with the copper local loops for the last eighty or more years.

The real hard case premises (one single house at the end of a 2-4km line) are always going to be a headache for operators, but again it was the same issue regardless of the medium (Cu, fibre, wireless, semaphore...). I'd hazard that a big category of premises are the 5-10 single dwellings within a 1.5km circle. In theory they could be reached by a dedicated FWA mast but that still needs fibre backhaul, power, road access, 100-200sq.m land, etc. Whether that's more cost effective than pulling fibre to homes is possibly debatable - I'd like to hear experienced opinion on that. I reckon they constitute a big slice of the NBP catchment and also represent the majority of areas avoided by openeir in their rural program. I know from stats that the biggest single cost of a FWA mast is the site itself - not the equipment or spectrum licenses. For mobile, the costs can be shared with multiple operators; I don't know if its the same for FWA providers? But for this NBP tender I guess site & equipment sharing was ruled out.

Its been interesting to watch developments as I'm in one of those still-waiting neighbourhoods. The most galling thing is being asked to pay €50-70 per month for a slow vdsl link when something 25-200 times faster is around the same price - good old Irish begrudgery!

turbbo

cregmon wrote: »

The most galling thing is being asked to pay €50-70 per month for a slow vdsl link when something 25-200 times faster is around the same price - good old Irish begrudgery!

Fingers crossed I get a 150mb connection for €50 a month next week. I haven't had vsdl at any stage as it wasn't available - 2.5mb tops with dsl until 4g and lte came along about 3 years ago. Loads of people worse off wireless black spots etc.
The country isn't as well connected as people like to think it is. Even in suburban areas it can be quite dismal. This NBP should already be started long ago - we've had enough dithering.

cregmon

turbbo wrote: »

Fingers crossed I get a 150mb connection for €50 a month next week. I haven't had vsdl at any stage as it wasn't available - 2.5mb tops with dsl until 4g and lte came along about 3 years ago. Loads of people worse off wireless black spots etc.
The country isn't as well connected as people like to think it is. Even in suburban areas it can be quite dismal. This NBP should already be started long ago - we've had enough dithering.

We were on a decent (for the time) adsl link of 12Mbps down, ~768kbps up, but it was contended (48:1 I think) and the DSLAM backhaul was limited to 15Mbps for some reason. When VDSL was added I asked to be swapped over - even though the line speed was slower (dropped from 12 to 7) it was uncontended so it was usable all day.

Before ADSL we used an WCDMA based O2 dongle on a windowsill upstairs to get some basic connectivity. I kept it as a backup for a while but then gave it someone more needy.

Good luck with new connection - I'm still holding out for openeir to realise that we're on the only road left connected to their local outhouse that doesn't have FTTH. I drive past everyone elses pole mounted black boxes every day and wonder what it must be like for them ;-)

gnf_ireland

theguzman wrote: »

I have been paying €90 a year the minimum LPT but after the renovation and added value and works I'd say this will increase to €495 with the house worth between €250k to €300k but if FTTH was there it might add another 10% so FTTH will definitely cause an uptick in Property tax, like Luas bounce effect in Dublin.

The house is remote and rural, idyllic and peaceful, the sort of place a highly skilled IT guru might like to rent and live with a partner and few dogs etc. and work from home with Fibre in the countryside for a fraction of the living cost in the big cities. This 4 bedroom old style house of mine will eventually come to market at €150 - €200 per week, if you were an IT person in places like London or Dublin and you already owned your own property there you could let it out and live in the country with maybe €1k profit per month. The NBP will give a badly needed financial boost to rural Ireland, we should revise down the real cost of its build when you take into account what it will generate to help pay for itself.

By comparison look at the Children's Hospital for example that has huge capital cost but also continuous ongoing costs, not taking away from a badly needed Project or to have debate on it's pros or cons but there is a huge amount of ignorance about the NBP and much of it is fuelled by the WISP and LTE/5G lobby who know the days of their cottage industry and inferior service will be numbered once homes around rural Ireland get in Fibre. The more progressive WISP's embrace the NBP and plan to resell, then there are others who have tried everything in their power to stop or block it including spreading false propaganda Fake News and lies about it and try to ensure Fibre is not used.

Just to clarify I am pro-NBP, even though I am urban living and not directly impacted by it. I believe we need it for a number of reasons, most of which are forward thinking around smart healthcare, smart agriculture and of course keeping rural Ireland alive. Without it, urban areas are going to get more densely populated, house prices will go through the roof and carbon emissions joining them as we are all stuck in traffic for hours.

Regarding fibre v wireless discussions - sadly this has been fueled by vested interests and there has not been a facility to properly discuss that there is no other technology that can travel at the speed of light like fibre can. But I think the government are clear on this one - its fibre all the way !

Regarding getting IT people to move - sadly this will be a while away in a lot of cases. Not because of technology but because of company cultures in a lot of places. Its fine working 1/2 days a week from home but permanently remote is a different story. Much better for non-IT roles like surveyors, architects etc in the short term. That said some companies are different, and remember being offered a role a while back which was 100% remote when not directly on customer site. But I do understand the sentiment !

But does the 'broadband bounce' mean the value of rural properties increase or urban ones reduce

turbbo

cregmon wrote: »

We were on a decent (for the time) adsl link of 12Mbps down, ~768kbps up, but it was contended (48:1 I think) and the DSLAM backhaul was limited to 15Mbps for some reason. When VDSL was added I asked to be swapped over - even though the line speed was slower (dropped from 12 to 7) it was uncontended so it was usable all day.

Before ADSL we used an WCDMA based O2 dongle on a windowsill upstairs to get some basic connectivity. I kept it as a backup for a while but then gave it someone more needy.

Good luck with new connection - I'm still holding out for openeir to realise that we're on the only road left connected to their local outhouse that doesn't have FTTH. I drive past everyone elses pole mounted black boxes every day and wonder what it must be like for them ;-)

Yeah I was doing that a while back too when I could only get 2.5mbs. But tbh once I got on 4g and average about 12mb on most evenings it has been very bearable won't know what to do with 150 mbs.

cregmon

gnf_ireland wrote: »

But does the 'broadband bounce' mean the value of rural properties increase or urban ones reduce

Will we see broadband & mobile coverage info as standard in Daft or Myhome adverts like BER ratings? I know when a friend sent me a link to a house they we're interested in. The first thing I did was lookup the connectivity info from its eircode. It had no FTTH, wasn't on eir's rollout plan and was about 5km from the nearest town.

They didn't go for it in the end.

theguzman

gnf_ireland wrote: »

Just to clarify I am pro-NBP, even though I am urban living and not directly impacted by it. I believe we need it for a number of reasons, most of which are forward thinking around smart healthcare, smart agriculture and of course keeping rural Ireland alive. Without it, urban areas are going to get more densely populated, house prices will go through the roof and carbon emissions joining them as we are all stuck in traffic for hours.

Regarding fibre v wireless discussions - sadly this has been fueled by vested interests and there has not been a facility to properly discuss that there is no other technology that can travel at the speed of light like fibre can. But I think the government are clear on this one - its fibre all the way !

Regarding getting IT people to move - sadly this will be a while away in a lot of cases. Not because of technology but because of company cultures in a lot of places. Its fine working 1/2 days a week from home but permanently remote is a different story. Much better for non-IT roles like surveyors, architects etc in the short term. That said some companies are different, and remember being offered a role a while back which was 100% remote when not directly on customer site. But I do understand the sentiment !

But does the 'broadband bounce' mean the value of rural properties increase or urban ones reduce

Urban prices will continue to increase due to the liberal immigration policy, diversified multi-national workforce and highest birth-rates in the EU and the best performing economy in the EU. Rural prices will continue to increase due to the above and feedback from the Dublin centric economy. Basically houses particularly in Leinster will increase alot and further fund regions further out will benefit from the Dublin boom also. With the signing of the M20 Motorway this week and hopefully the NBP next week it will prove to be a historical week of investment for the non-Dublin economy.

Johnboy1951

Thinking about the cost of the NBP and the value for money aspect, I am of the opinion that the value for money concerns would not be as prevalent had the gov initially made more of a noise about what they were speaking about when throwing about the €500 m figure for cost.
Had they made a big deal about the difference in the tender requirements and what was previously imagined, regarding to where the fibre was to be taken, and the expected increase in cost that this would necessarily entail, then I feel the present concerns about the value for money aspect would have been reduced a lot.

That change, essentially from bringing fibre to each village to a scheme where the fibre is brought to each home/premises, was huge, and did not, IMO, receive the highlighting and discussion such a large change should have received.

So now we have niggling concerns about value for money, because of not being properly informed or maybe not informed sufficiently well.

Much as I dislike the single remaining option to do the NBP, it is long past the time for it to begin. People, and indeed the prosperity of the whole country, are suffering because of all the delays.

Of course I still do not trust the politicians, and would not be surprised in the least if we find out something in the future that we should have been informed about.

gnf_ireland

cregmon wrote: »

Will we see broadband & mobile coverage info as standard in Daft or Myhome adverts like BER ratings? I know when a friend sent me a link to a house they we're interested in. The first thing I did was lookup the connectivity info from its eircode. It had no FTTH, wasn't on eir's rollout plan and was about 5km from the nearest town.

They didn't go for it in the end.

Agree with you on that. It will be the same as all other utilities. But on the assumption NBP goes ahead, everyone will be entitled to fibre connectivity - its only in the interim it will make a difference.

ED E

gnf_ireland wrote: »

Agree with you on that. It will be the same as all other utilities. But on the assumption NBP goes ahead, everyone will be entitled to fibre connectivity - its only in the interim it will make a difference.

Not true. Urbanites won't.

marno21

ED E wrote: »

Not true. Urbanites won't.

Indeed. Here in Killarney for well over a year there were farmhouses on hills a few km away that had Eir FTTH and I had 24Mbit VDSL. This has changed since with SIRO rolling out on my road

(For reference - I'm not complaining, although no doubt there were people along the road with genuine need for faster down and especially up speeds that couldn't get it)

turbbo

marno21 wrote: »

Indeed. Here in Killarney for well over a year there were farmhouses on hills a few km away that had Eir FTTH and I had 24Mbit VDSL. This has changed since with SIRO rolling out on my road

(For reference - I'm not complaining, although no doubt there were people along the road with genuine need for faster down and especially up speeds that couldn't get it)

Was down there last week and couldn't believe the amount of DPs on the poles in very rural places too!!
I'm just outside Limerick City and only getting what can be considered faster than 12mb BB this month.
I guess we have Openeir working on this for nearly 3 years now. And it has been strange what areas started first etc.

gnf_ireland

ED E wrote: »

Not true. Urbanites won't.

As the European rules around minimum broadband speed increases, its very likely NBP will get the job of rolling out any areas not covered by commercial operators - whether urban or rural !

But yes, in the short term you are correct that urbanites have less guarantee of broadband speeds than our rural counterparts

cregmon

gnf_ireland wrote: »

As the European rules around minimum broadband speed increases, its very likely NBP will get the job of rolling out any areas not covered by commercial operators - whether urban or rural !

But yes, in the short term you are correct that urbanites have less guarantee of broadband speeds than our rural counterparts

Be interested to read what those rules (guidelines, maybe?) are today. Would be surprised if operators are in compliance to today's regs, nevermind what the Commisioners might be dreaming of for the 2020's!

turbbo

gnf_ireland wrote: »

As the European rules around minimum broadband speed increases, its very likely NBP will get the job of rolling out any areas not covered by commercial operators - whether urban or rural !

But yes, in the short term you are correct that urbanites have less guarantee of broadband speeds than our rural counterparts

Yes short term only - Openeir are already on about starting a 10gb fibre rollout to urban areas once they have finished their rural rollout to what is only 300k premises and supposed to be finished this June.
Also NBP remains to be seen how and who they connect - I can see plenty of rural premises being abandoned.

Marlow

cregmon wrote: »

Be interested to read what those rules (guidelines, maybe?) are today. Would be surprised if operators are in compliance to today's regs, nevermind what the Commisioners might be dreaming of for the 2020's!

There are no regulations for minimum speeds. Zero. Zilch.

The European guidelines are for broadband connections, that have been build using funding from Europe and the Government.

They are a recommendation for everyone else.

It does not prevent an internet provider from offering slower packages for lets say less money.

There is no way, that Europe or the Government can force private operators to have to adhere to those guidelines, when no public funding has been added. The market, the consumer and the backbone pricing is what regulates, what private entities charge and provide. Competition.

/M

Johnboy1951

What is really needed is that providers be forced to guarantee a minimum speed per contract.
That would stop most of the complaints short ..... and force this 'up to' selling out altogether.

OK, if I only want 3Mb/s guaranteed then let someone sell me that if they wish ..... but not 'up to' 7 Mb/s which drops to 1Mb/s at times.

Marlow

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

What is really needed is that providers be forced to guarantee a minimum speed per contract.
That would stop most of the complaints short ..... and force this 'up to' selling out altogether.

OK, if I only want 3Mb/s guaranteed then let someone sell me that if they wish ..... but not 'up to' 7 Mb/s which drops to 1Mb/s at times.

For that to happen, the backbone pricing in Ireland has to come down first. It's at 10+ times the level of anywhere else in Europe and even Dublin. Once you leave Dublin, you get fleeced by the backbone carriers.

Next, the ASAI and Comreg would need to actually enforce that what is advertised is delivered. We used to have contention specified for each connection in the advertising. Very few providers still do that. Now Eir for example won't even tell you what the upload speed is. Nevermind that Eir and Imagine are calling copper and fixed wireless "fibre".

Then you need to get the government to actually sort out the places, that lack fibre coming to masts and areas, that have been underserved, so that the providers don't have to haul the bandwidth in 50-100km on licensed links over radio.

Next, you would need to educate the consumer to test correctly. 9 out of 10 don't even know how to do a proper speedtest.

After all that is sorted, you will automatically see, that was is advertised is what you get consistently.

/M

cregmon

Marlow wrote: »

There are no regulations for minimum speeds. Zero. Zilch.

The European guidelines are for broadband connections, that have been build using funding from Europe and the Government.

They are a recommendation for everyone else.

It does not prevent an internet provider from offering slower packages for lets say less money.

There is no way, that Europe or the Government can force private operators to have to adhere to those guidelines, when no public funding has been added. The market, the consumer and the backbone pricing is what regulates, what private entities charge and provide. Competition.

/M

Wonder how far anyone has tried to contest the accepted position? How does a data connectivity service stand up against other publicly marketed services. What would happen if an airline or a bus company said you could get upto 100% travel from A to B but if we only get you 10% of the way there's no comeback!
I think the single market could push for better equivalence for EU consumers across many sectors.

Marlow

cregmon wrote: »

Wonder how far anyone has tried to contest the accepted position? How does a data connectivity service stand up against other publicly marketed services. What would happen if an airline or a bus company said you could get upto 100% travel from A to B but if we only get you 10% of the way there's no comeback!
I think the single market could push for better equivalence for EU consumers across many sectors.

You can get uncontended service, no problem. You just have to pay full price then.

1 Gbit/s uncontended service from Cogent in Dublin costs you about 800-1000 EUR/month + VAT. If you buy more, each 1 Mbit/s gets cheaper.

Now you add the cost of bringing it from Dublin to wherever you want it.

That's the cost for uncontended service.

And that Cogent pricing is the same pretty much anywhere worldwide. It's the stretch from there and on and what pricing the market can bear, that dictates how contented your service is. Fact.

You will not find a provider, that will operate at a loss for very long. SIRO is operating at a loss currently, but that's a long term investment.

/M

oscarBravo

On the confusion that tends to surround the speed of light and how it impacts on broadband performance: the problems arise from the conflation of a couple of different things. Bear with me while I go off on a few tangents.

Speed is a measure of distance per unit time: metres per second, kilometres per hour, furlongs per fortnight, whatever.

Broadband "speed" is measured as quantity of data per unit time: fundamentally, bits per second. It would be more accurate to describe it as "throughput", but we're sorta stuck with "speed", because that's how people have trained themselves to think about it.

Is throughput a factor of speed? Not really, frankly. If I drive across town with a 1TB hard drive and it takes me ten minutes to get there, I've achieved more than 13Gb/s throughput, despite averaging less than 50km/h.

Or, for a different analogy: a four-lane road with a 120km/h speed limit has six times the throughput (or, more accurately, capacity) than a single-lane road with an 80km/h limit. 50% more speed, but 500% more capacity.

It's also fair to point out that latency is a factor, because round-trip times can have a significant impact on throughput. That said, the actual propagation speed (in m/s) of a signal is very far from being the only, or even the most important, factor in determining latency.

It's true that the speed of light in fibre cable is about two-thirds of that of radio waves in air, but it's usually the case that only the last couple of kilometres at most of a wireless connection are actually carried by radio signals through the air. The vast majority of any digital communication's journey is going to be spent in glass, no matter what the last mile looks like. It's also useful to note that the propagation speed of an electrical signal through copper wires is pretty much the same as that of light through fibre.

Latency is more likely to be influenced by switching delays through multiple network hops, but most of all by congestion. Nothing impacts both throughput and latency as much as queuing.

The short version: the discussion about the speed of transmission through various media is interesting from a technical/nerdy point of view, but by far the more important metric is throughput, which - at the end of the day - is a function of capacity.

At which point it becomes worth reiterating a point that's often forgotten when some people - who, with the best will in the world, don't know what they're talking about - witter on about fibre becoming obsolete: a single strand of fibre has more theoretical capacity than the entire usable radio spectrum.

Bringing it all back to the NBP: either we're going to build future-proof infrastructure, or we're not. Future-proof infrastructure means fibre - no ifs, buts or maybes.

_Puma_

I thought we were through the looking glass with the last few pages of posts on this thread. Thanking you oscarBravo for drawing a line under the nonsense!

I've recently been in contact with my local government TD about the NBP. All signs so far is a substantial announcement by the minister next week. The TD I was speaking to certainly understands the importance, both politically and in terms of crucial capital infrastructure, of getting this version of the NBP through now.

turbbo

oscarBravo wrote: »

On the confusion that tends to surround the speed of light and how it impacts on broadband performance: the problems arise from the conflation of a couple of different things. Bear with me while I go off on a few tangents.

Speed is a measure of distance per unit time: metres per second, kilometres per hour, furlongs per fortnight, whatever.

Broadband "speed" is measured as quantity of data per unit time: fundamentally, bits per second. It would be more accurate to describe it as "throughput", but we're sorta stuck with "speed", because that's how people have trained themselves to think about it.

Is throughput a factor of speed? Not really, frankly. If I drive across town with a 1TB hard drive and it takes me ten minutes to get there, I've achieved more than 13Gb/s throughput, despite averaging less than 50km/h.

Or, for a different analogy: a four-lane road with a 120km/h speed limit has six times the throughput (or, more accurately, capacity) than a single-lane road with an 80km/h limit. 50% more speed, but 500% more capacity.

It's also fair to point out that latency is a factor, because round-trip times can have a significant impact on throughput. That said, the actual propagation speed (in m/s) of a signal is very far from being the only, or even the most important, factor in determining latency.

It's true that the speed of light in fibre cable is about two-thirds of that of radio waves in air, but it's usually the case that only the last couple of kilometres at most of a wireless connection are actually carried by radio signals through the air. The vast majority of any digital communication's journey is going to be spent in glass, no matter what the last mile looks like. It's also useful to note that the propagation speed of an electrical signal through copper wires is pretty much the same as that of light through fibre.

Latency is more likely to be influenced by switching delays through multiple network hops, but most of all by congestion. Nothing impacts both throughput and latency as much as queuing.

The short version: the discussion about the speed of transmission through various media is interesting from a technical/nerdy point of view, but by far the more important metric is throughput, which - at the end of the day - is a function of capacity.

At which point it becomes worth reiterating a point that's often forgotten when some people - who, with the best will in the world, don't know what they're talking about - witter on about fibre becoming obsolete: a single strand of fibre has more theoretical capacity than the entire usable radio spectrum.

Bringing it all back to the NBP: either we're going to build future-proof infrastructure, or we're not. Future-proof infrastructure means fibre - no ifs, buts or maybes.

user1842

_Puma_ wrote: »

I thought we were through the looking glass with the last few pages of posts on this thread. Thanking you oscarBravo for drawing a line under the nonsense!

I've recently been in contact with my local government TD about the NBP. All signs so far is a substantial announcement by the minister next week. The TD I was speaking to certainly understands the importance, both politically and in terms of crucial capital infrastructure, of getting this version of the NBP through now.

I really hope in the very near future this thread will close and a new one opened, titled:

National Broadband Plan Implementation

cregmon

user1842 wrote: »

I really hope in the very near future this thread will close and a new one opened, titled:

National Broadband Plan Implementation

With queries like "Anyone still remember when you had to wait more than 15 minutes to download FIFA 22?"

cregmon

cregmon wrote: »

With queries like "Anyone still remember when you had to wait more than 15 minutes to download FIFA 22?"

More like remember when you couldn't work from home and had to spend X hours and X on fuel traveling to the office.

Yes there will still be organisations that won't allow their staff to work from home but most who want to retain their top staff do and will with proper broadband.

Johnboy1951

Marlow wrote: »

For that to happen, the backbone pricing in Ireland has to come down first. It's at 10+ times the level of anywhere else in Europe and even Dublin. Once you leave Dublin, you get fleeced by the backbone carriers.

Next, the ASAI and Comreg would need to actually enforce that what is advertised is delivered. We used to have contention specified for each connection in the advertising. Very few providers still do that. Now Eir for example won't even tell you what the upload speed is. Nevermind that Eir and Imagine are calling copper and fixed wireless "fibre".

Then you need to get the government to actually sort out the places, that lack fibre coming to masts and areas, that have been underserved, so that the providers don't have to haul the bandwidth in 50-100km on licensed links over radio.

Next, you would need to educate the consumer to test correctly. 9 out of 10 don't even know how to do a proper speedtest.

After all that is sorted, you will automatically see, that was is advertised is what you get consistently.

/M

On the other hand if the rule is made than all those things would happen as a result ...... so much the easier way to do it.

The Cush

National Broadband Plan discussion on Today with Sean O'Rourke earlier today, Brendan Howlin, Labour leader, said we need to look at the NBP again. Labour candidates won't be getting a vote from me this time around.

Patrick O'Donovan, Minister of State at the Department of Finance and Public Expenditure and Reform was also part of the discussion, his contribution starts at 16:30mins

https://www.rte.ie/radio/radioplayer/html5/#/radio1/21549690

Someone mentioned this recently, this is a National project covering approx. 540,000 premises, over 1.2 million people at a speculated cost of €3bn spread over 25 years. In comparison the Dublin metro will cost up to €5bn over a shorter period of time. NBP will be fixed price according to the Dept. over the period of the contract, can the same be said of the Dublin Metro project? I haven't heard the same criticism of costs for the Metro project.

digiman

The Cush wrote: »

National Broadband Plan discussion on Today with Sean O'Rourke earlier today, Brendan Howlin, Labour leader, said we need to look at the NBP again. Labour candidates won't be getting a vote from me this time around.

Patrick O'Donovan, Minister of State at the Department of Finance and Public Expenditure and Reform was also part of the discussion, his contribution starts at 16:30mins

https://www.rte.ie/radio/radioplayer/html5/#/radio1/21549690

Someone mentioned this recently, this is a National project covering approx. 540,000 premises, over 1.2 million people at a speculated cost of €3bn spread over 25 years. In comparison the Dublin metro will cost up to €5bn over a shorter period of time. NBP will be fixed price according to the Dept. over the period of the contract, can the same be said of the Dublin Metro project? I haven't heard the same criticism of costs for the Metro project.

In fairness it's in Dublin and its badly needed.

Has there ever been a public project where the people thought they were getting value for money and there isn't some part of the country who would rather money spent elsewhere!

You will never please all the people all of the time!

Sam Russell

With a projected cost of €3 billion for 500,000 locations, which is an average of €6,000 each.

How many of these locations will actually sign up and pay the monthly charge?

If the take up is about 20% then that will be €30k each, and the state will own nothing, and the operator will own a valuable bit of national infrastructure that is a monopoly.

Has any research been done on the likely take up?