NBP: National Broadband Plan Announced

NewClareman

The high horse brigade wrote: »

What other technologies?
You are making the mistake of listening to what those with vested interests are spouting about wireless technologies. Those myths have all been debunked in this thread already.
Fibre is the only game in town

Yes, some statements are misguided, but by no means all. It depends on the use cases - i.e. what services must be supported. For example, terrestrial radio based solutions do not have the capacity to accommodate many simultaneous high definition streams. They also have high latency, when compared to fibre. Therefore, if giving every home access to Netflix and online gaming services is the objective, then they're not suitable. However, they can support hd video calls, digital commerce and telemedicine. They also support an entire universe of "Internet of Things".

fergus1001

Deleted User wrote:

By the time this is up and running, it’ll be outdated if not obsolete.

go and read some of the thread before throwing out a statement

fergus1001

fergus1001 wrote: »

go and read some of the thread before throwing out a statement

I have done. I’m basing my point on the fact that no contract has yet been signed. Yes, I may be exaggerating slightly, but this is Ireland! A lot of talking to be done before any work gets started.
I hope I’m wrong, but time will tell.

NewClareman

Siena Gigantic Backyard wrote: »

It's highly unlikely that a system capable of 10Gb/s up and down will be obsolete anytime soon. There may be economic and political criticisms of the project that are justified but technically it should be world class.

I agree, and even if 10Gbit/s is too low, the speed can be increased by upgrading the ONT's etc. However, that's not the substantive issue. SpaceX is only one consortium that is working on low cost solutions for rural communities. Once their footprint covers Ireland they would provide a much lower cost option for rural broadband. At the very least we should be considering the viability of these options, before we sign a contract.

"SpaceX plans to launch a total of nearly 12,000 satellites to provide internet coverage to every part of the globe. The company isn’t the only one interested in such a scheme right now. OneWeb already launched six satellites in February, the first batch of a planned 650 satellites to provide global internet coverage from low orbits. And recently Amazon announced an ambitious plan to create 3,236 satellites for the same purpose, under a new initiative called Project Kuiper."

I know that the consultants looked at all the options. I also know that any good consultant tries to find the preferred answer, before they start work.

westyIrl

NewClareman wrote: »

I know that the consultants looked at all the options. I also know that any good consultant tries to find the preferred answer, before they start work.

They did and it's called Fibre.

Jim

Gary kk

NewClareman wrote: »

I agree, and even if 10Gbit/s is too low, the speed can be increased by upgrading the ONT's etc. However, that's not the substantive issue. SpaceX is only one consortium that is working on low cost solutions for rural communities. Once their footprint covers Ireland they would provide a much lower cost option for rural broadband. At the very least we should be considering the viability of these options, before we sign a contract.

"SpaceX plans to launch a total of nearly 12,000 satellites to provide internet coverage to every part of the globe. The company isn’t the only one interested in such a scheme right now. OneWeb already launched six satellites in February, the first batch of a planned 650 satellites to provide global internet coverage from low orbits. And recently Amazon announced an ambitious plan to create 3,236 satellites for the same purpose, under a new initiative called Project Kuiper."

I know that the consultants looked at all the options. I also know that any good consultant tries to find the preferred answer, before they start work.

So how does that work is it to the government to lease a certain amount of them or is direct to the customer. I think low earth orbit means they can't stay above the same place on the planet will there be high lag while swapping between satellites.How much capacity will each have. What will the true affect of weather have on the signal.

NewClareman

DubInMeath wrote: »

[HTML][/HTML]

L 2.5 a layer between L2 and L3 for on prem and cloud.
Daily working on remote systems downloading entire server images to our lab, video based remote sessions while also connected to those images, with other apps such mail and IM running.

Getting away with 4 down and 1 up, but speed equirements only increasing. Anytime like last week when their was a fault on the line that halved the speed between 8 am and 4 pm forget about it 200 km round trip to the office needed.

It must be very frustrating working with such a low speed link. I also agree that the bandwidth demands will continue to increase. I would argue that there is a halfway house between the 200km round trip and fibre to the home. If there was office space available locally, with high speed broadband, it would work fine. That was the original plan, and in line with the spatial strategy. It would make sense to make it available to you at a nominal cost, based on agreed criteria.

Anyway, I drove Limerick Dublin twice weekly for years, so I hope you get an acceptable solution that meets your needs.

glucifer

NewClareman wrote: »

I agree, and even if 10Gbit/s is too low, the speed can be increased by upgrading the ONT's etc. However, that's not the substantive issue. SpaceX is only one consortium that is working on low cost solutions for rural communities. Once their footprint covers Ireland they would provide a much lower cost option for rural broadband. At the very least we should be considering the viability of these options, before we sign a contract.

"SpaceX plans to launch a total of nearly 12,000 satellites to provide internet coverage to every part of the globe. The company isn’t the only one interested in such a scheme right now. OneWeb already launched six satellites in February, the first batch of a planned 650 satellites to provide global internet coverage from low orbits. And recently Amazon announced an ambitious plan to create 3,236 satellites for the same purpose, under a new initiative called Project Kuiper."

I know that the consultants looked at all the options. I also know that any good consultant tries to find the preferred answer, before they start work.

Was LEO looked at in this form?
I'm sure they looked at the existing satellite "broadband" available, Is the Space X version available commercially?
Is it a case of bad timing for LEO or can the plan be adapted to include it for the hardest to connect places in the 2%?

oscarBravo

NewClareman wrote: »

SpaceX is only one consortium that is working on low cost solutions for rural communities. Once their footprint covers Ireland they would provide a much lower cost option for rural broadband.

Really? How much will Starlink cost, and can you provide the relevant technical specs to make an informed decision about it as an NBP platform?

Orebro

Anyone spouting SpaceX or other “solutions” to broadband for Ireland - the Star Trek forum is that way ->

Leave it to the grown ups on here.

Orebro

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I don’t recall saying it’d be obsolete soon. I said that by the time all the talking is done, it will be, especially with the rate technology is progressing.
After all, the contract hasn’t been signed yet. We’re years away from nationwide high speed broadband.

So you’re basically talking nonsense as you can not elaborate on any of your points. Hurling on the ditch as they say. Enjoy your fibre broadband Jack!

The high horse brigade

NewClareman wrote: »

I agree, and even if 10Gbit/s is too low, the speed can be increased by upgrading the ONT's etc. However, that's not the substantive issue. SpaceX is only one consortium that is working on low cost solutions for rural communities. Once their footprint covers Ireland they would provide a much lower cost option for rural broadband. At the very least we should be considering the viability of these options, before we sign a contract.

"SpaceX plans to launch a total of nearly 12,000 satellites to provide internet coverage to every part of the globe. The company isn’t the only one interested in such a scheme right now. OneWeb already launched six satellites in February, the first batch of a planned 650 satellites to provide global internet coverage from low orbits. And recently Amazon announced an ambitious plan to create 3,236 satellites for the same purpose, under a new initiative called Project Kuiper."

I know that the consultants looked at all the options. I also know that any good consultant tries to find the preferred answer, before they start work.

FFS, stop! Stop believing into the hype or we'll be back here again in a few years, just like we are after the last plan (National Broadband Scheme)

You do realise a satellite has the same backhaul as a small rural exchange

Orebro

Seriously, the utter nonsense being bandied about by some on here is unbelievable. Do you go onto other forums talking like this and giving advice about things you know nothing about? Low orbit satellites, fibre being obsolete any day now - Jesus wept!

The high horse brigade

The high horse brigade wrote: »

FFS, stop! Stop believing into the hyperinflation or we'll be back here again in a few years, just like we are after the last plan (National Broadband Scheme)

You do realise a satellite has the same backhaul as a small rural exchange

It's worse than a small rural exchange, I'm on a small rural exchange and apart from rare line issues there is no comparison with the hell that is tooways product.

westyIrl

This thread really requires a sticky/post modded by informed contributors like OscarBravo, ED E, The Cush, Navi, Marlow and a few others so newcomers can be quickly pointed to it so as reams of posts aren't taken up explaining the same old thing in a slightly different way Ad nauseum. It really is getting to that point.

Jim

NewClareman

NewClareman wrote: »

It must be very frustrating working with such a low speed link. I also agree that the bandwidth demands will continue to increase. I would argue that there is a halfway house between the 200km round trip and fibre to the home. If there was office space available locally, with high speed broadband, it would work fine. That was the original plan, and in line with the spatial strategy. It would make sense to make it available to you at a nominal cost, based on agreed criteria.

Anyway, I drove Limerick Dublin twice weekly for years, so I hope you get an acceptable solution that meets your needs.

That's the thing, everyone's taxes go to providing those roads and motorways. I was previously in another job a field service engineer. The need to travel to urban customers including Limerick, Cork etc reduced once they got broadband as we and if needed the manufacturers engineers could log onto the robotic systems we supported to recalibrate them.
Talking to a friend still working for the same company, only those customers still in areas without broadband still require regular visits. He personally lives in Tallaght and has fibre and can't wait for the rest of the country to have it as it means no more travelling for half a day without pay to visit customers for issues that could be resolved from the office.

Marlow

Orebro wrote: »

Anyone on a WISP shouldn’t be considered to have broadband. Unless they only use it between 7am and 4pm. I would be horrified if my WISP provider was consulted and they say I have 30Mbps. They can bloody well consult me and the other users of it for the reality of the situation.

Sorry .. but you can not cut all regional providers over with one comb. There's plenty of them, that provide, what it says on the tin can. Even after 4pm.

So you suggest, that it is ok to give a private company tax money to create competition to local irish businesses ? To the point where they can not compete ?

/M

NewClareman

oscarBravo wrote: »

Really? How much will Starlink cost, and can you provide the relevant technical specs to make an informed decision about it as an NBP platform?

Their filing to the fcc shows quite a bit of technical detail. They are targeting “residential, commercial, institutional, governmental and professional users worldwide”. SpaceX has said that Starlink could provide gigabit speeds with latency as low as 25ms, putting it on par with terrestrial broadband.

It is early days, with only 60 of the satellites ready for launch. Then again, the NBP has a lifespan of 25 years, so a small wait should be acceptable. (To save 3 billion, or even 1, it bloody well should be.) It is one of a number of companies, including Amazon, with similar plans. These are big guns, with deep brockets, building disruptive technologies. Given the money at stake, I would expect the consultants to justify why we are not waiting to see how these technologies pan out.

Marlow

Starlink is more geared for connections across countriy borders than inside a country. It is also yet unknown if it actually will work out that way.

From what i have seen everything has been based on models.

/M

clohamon

oscarBravo wrote: »

Really? How much will Starlink cost, and can you provide the relevant technical specs to make an informed decision about it as an NBP platform?

This is the doc that some of the promoters are working off.
http://www.mit.edu/~portillo/files/Comparison-LEO-IAC-2018-slides.pdf

These people are hoping to be a ground station with INEX in Cork.
https://www.cloudcix.com/#/

roast

NewClareman wrote: »

SpaceX has said that Starlink could provide gigabit speeds with latency as low as 25ms, putting it on par with terrestrial broadband.

I'm assuming that's just earth-to-satellite latency. There's still consumer->base and sat->base->destination to account for. The round trip time is going to be a lot longer than 25ms, I imagine?
And then you have to consider bandwidth throughput, which some redditors have spoken about here. It's worth a read, even for the (admittedly speculative) cost breakdown.

NewClareman wrote: »

Given the money at stake, I would expect the consultants to justify why we are not waiting to see how these technologies pan out.

Fibre is already a proven medium and has been for decades. So is FWA. The time it would take for LEO to "prove" itself is a lot longer than Ireland should wait.


On another note - I can't believe we've forgotten about the NBS so soon. Three had to service some customers with Tooway connections who they couldn't reach with 3G. Neither 3G or Sat were viable long-term solutions back then, nor is 5G/LEO now, even if Starlink gets off the ground (pun intended) as a commercial product.

No more stopgaps.

NewClareman

The high horse brigade wrote: »

FFS, stop! Stop believing into the hype or we'll be back here again in a few years, just like we are after the last plan (National Broadband Scheme)

You do realise a satellite has the same backhaul as a small rural exchange

OMG you really need to start doing your homework. :eek:
Space X are talking about a throughput of 23.7 Tbps. Not many small rural exchanges with that capacity.

Marlow

roast wrote: »

I'm assuming that's just earth-to-satellite latency. There's still consumer->base and sat->base->destination to account for. The round trip time is going to be a lot longer than 25ms, I imagine?

I've seen figures of 40-50ms round trip in the models, but nothing lower. And that is across continents. Which is seriously good. But you won't see the sub 10ms figures you for example see on FTTH.

/M

Orebro

NewClareman wrote: »

OMG you really need to start doing your homework. :eek:
Space X are talking about a throughput of 23.7 Tbps. Not many small rural exchanges with that capacity.

Can’t tell if you’re trolling or just reading too much of Elon Musks twitter feed.

NewClareman

roast wrote: »

I'm assuming that's just earth-to-satellite latency. There's still consumer->base and sat->base->destination to account for. The round trip time is going to be a lot longer than 25ms, I imagine?
And then you have to consider bandwidth throughput, which some redditors have spoken about here. It's worth a read, even for the (admittedly speculative) cost breakdown.


Fibre is already a proven medium and has been for decades. So is FWA. The time it would take for LEO to "prove" itself is a lot longer than Ireland should wait.

Yes, I too suspect the overall latency will be multiples of 25ms. (So, no real time gaming. That’s why I keep asking what services we want to support.)

The bandwidth figures look good, see the link that clohamon posted. However, once again UHD Netflix could be a problem.

Yes fibre and FWA are proven technologies. The issue is the cost.

Orebro

Marlow wrote: »

Sorry .. but you can not cut all regional providers over with one comb. There's plenty of them, that provide, what it says on the tin can. Even after 4pm.

So you suggest, that it is ok to give a private company tax money to create competition to local irish businesses ? To the point where they can not compete ?

/M

I know the WISPs would just love to maintain the status quo and keep on creaming it on their desperate subscribers. Nothing stopping these companies from applying to become suppliers on the NBP infrastructure.

It will be a happy day when I get to phone my WISP and cancel my connection.

tsue921i8wljb3

NewClareman wrote: »

OMG you really need to start doing your homework. :eek:
Space X are talking about a throughput of 23.7 Tbps. Not many small rural exchanges with that capacity.

Musk has a long history of over promising and under delivering on projects. You say the Government should have waited. This thread was started in 2014 and this is just the latest iteration of the project. Everything can be pushed back interminably but there comes a point where if you want something done a decision has to be made. Rightly or wrongly that day has come and we are where we are.

I think NBI are the worst option of the three bidders and the Government have been somewhat backed into a corner in deciding to go with them but I'd rather restart the whole procurement process with the FTTH providers involved than gamble on an unproven satellite option.

NewClareman

Orebro wrote: »

Can’t tell if you’re trolling or just reading too much of Elon Musks twitter feed.

I can assure you that I am in deadly earnest - I suggest you read the material posted to see just how advanced this technology is. These companies are big beasts with the money and clout to make disruptive changes, quickly.

By the way, I would prefer not to be accused of trolling. If you have a problem with my posting then report it.

Marlow

Orebro wrote: »

I know the WISPs would just love to maintain the status quo and keep on creaming it on their desperate subscribers. Nothing stopping these companies from applying to become suppliers on the NBP infrastructure.

So ... what you are saying is, that you are ok with the Government paying for land and building a store from tax money, driving the local grocery shops out of business and also not letting them object, because you don't like what they sell or how they conduct their business. At the same time killing of jobs locally.

That is basically what you are saying.

If they are creaming it, why don't drive the installers all Ferraris? I find these are often hard working people, that have brought broadband into areas, where there was none and made a difference. Yes, they have not all scaled as well with the market. But not giving them a word in their future is taking the piss.

/M

Gary kk

Marlow wrote: »

So ... what you are saying is, that you are ok with the Government paying for land and building a store from tax money, driving the local grocery shops out of business and also not letting them object, because you don't like what they sell or how they conduct their business. At the same time killing of jobs locally.

That is basically what you are saying.

If they are creaming it, why don't drive the installers all Ferraris? I find these are often hard working people, that have brought broadband into areas, where there was none and made a difference. Yes, they have not all scaled as well with the market. But not giving them a word in their future is taking the piss.

/M

I think his saying his provider is crap and he doesn't trust the rest now which could be a fair point of view

Gary kk

NewClareman wrote: »

I can assure you that I am in deadly earnest - I suggest you read the material posted to see just how advanced this technology is. These companies are big beasts with the money and clout to make disruptive changes, quickly.

By the wash, I would prefer not to be accused of trolling. If you have a problem with my posting then report it.

And Mr New Clareman I think you have decided no way should the government spend 3 billion on rural Ireland

Marlow

Gary kk wrote: »

I think his saying his provider is crap and he doesn't trust the rest now which could be a fair point of view

No. How can that be fair ? So because you bought a bad apple innone store, you stop buying apples full stop?

Biggest nonsense, I have heard in a while.

How has any one regional provider anything to do with a completely unrelated company on the other side of the country, just because they sell a similar service ?

/M

NewClareman

Siena Gigantic Backyard wrote: »

Musk has a long history of over promising and under delivering on projects. You say the Government should have waited. This thread was started in 2014 and this is just the latest iteration of the project. Everything can be pushed back interminably but there comes a point where if you want something done a decision has to be made. Rightly or wrongly that day has come and we are where we are.

I think NBI are the worst option of the three bidders and the Government have been somewhat backed into a corner in deciding to go with them but I'd rather restart the whole procurement process with the FTTH providers involved than gamble on an unproven satellite option.

The original plan was published in 2012, I remember a lot of the detail. I agree that the government have been backed into a corner, not least by not moving quickly enough.

My view is that fibre should be brought no further than villages, in line with the spatial strategy. Radio and copper technologies should be used for the tails, to provide a quick, low cost, solution. It’s not so long ago that we were serving mobile base stations using dsl repeaters. I had a quick google and pole mounted multi ADSL units are still available. This would give a basic broadband service to everyone, at much lower cost.

In the meantime big bucks are going in to satellite solutions for rural broadband. Given the players involved, and the size of the business opportunity, I have no doubt that these will work out. I would expect that these will be sufficiently competitive that a minimal state subsidy, if any, will be required. (I have had first hand experience of new technologies coming from left field and wiping out traditional approaches. It wasn’t pretty.)

Gary kk

Marlow wrote: »

No. How can that be fair ? So because you bought a bad apple innone store, you stop buying apples full stop?

Biggest nonsense, I have heard in a while.

How has any one regional provider anything to do with a completely unrelated company on the other side of the country, just because they sell a similar service ?

/M

Yes but if that was the first apple you ever had and it was bitter as f would you be racing off to buy another

Marlow

The entire plan should have been aimed at fixing the actual issue in Ireland: backbone network to villages and masts and regulated pricing aligning with the european market.

If that had been done, everything would have sorted itself out in no time.

But that is not sexy, nor interesting enough to win elections, so it's not the way it went.

The NBP follows a strategy in line with the fixing of pot holes. Especially when you see articles like the row between Spending and Comms pushed by a brother of one of the parties.

/M

NewClareman

Gary kk wrote: »

And Mr New Clareman I think you have decided no way should the government spend 3 billion on rural Ireland

Absolutely not, I believe that we need lots of initiatives to decentralize, from Dublin. I just believe in prioritization and value for money. I am very close to relocating permanently to a rural area with no broadband. So, I do have skin in the game. No Netflix, IPTV, cloud access, all things I use daily.

However, there are greater issues for rural Ireland. Greater Gardaí cover, ambulance provision (or an air ambulance), local post office, etc.
I have spent many hours with relatives in hospital, over the past two years. Many were on trollies for days, one of whom was over 90. Need I go on?

It seems that we have become immune to realizing just how big a sum €3,000,000,000 really is. That money has to be repaid, out of our taxes.

The high horse brigade

NewClareman wrote: »

OMG you really need to start doing your homework. :eek:
Space X are talking about a throughput of 23.7 Tbps. Not many small rural exchanges with that capacity.

Yes, maximum throughput.... which requires 4,425 satellites and 123 ground stations. And these are theoretical figures, take them with a pinch of salt

Marlow

The high horse brigade wrote: »

Yes, maximum throughput.... which requires 4,425 satellites and 123 ground stations. And these are theoretical figures, take them with a pinch of salt

5.5 Gbit/s per satellite with over 4500 satellites is pretty good though. And while that is over 6 times more satellites than any of the other low earth orbit projects, it is worldwide.

How many exchanges do we have in Ireland ? Over 170 NGA enabled exchanges feeding over 1000 sub-exchanges. And that does not include the exchanges that are not broadband launched or provide older DSL type broadband and covers OpenEIR only. Nevermind what other operators have in place.

That 4500 satellites is worldwide. Not just in a little place like Ireland.

/M

NewClareman

The high horse brigade wrote: »

Yes, maximum throughput.... which requires 4,425 satellites and 123 ground stations. And these are theoretical figures, take them with a pinch of salt

Good, you’ve read the slide. Now, what is the typical backhaul capacity to a small rural exchange, and how does it compare?

Marlow

NewClareman wrote: »

Good, you’ve read the slide. Now, what is the typical backhaul capacity to a small rural exchange, and how does it compare?

All NGA enabled sub-exchanges would have got at least 10 Gbit/s uplink to begin with. That's over 1000 of them. Because otherwise you can't service the 2.5 Gbit/s / 1.25 Gbit/s FTTH clusters.

Only 2 of the Dublin exchanges have capacity for 100 Gbit/s circuits, but a lot of larger NGA exchanges would have multiples of 10 Gbit/s. Over 170 of them.

Even with SIRO ... it starts at 10 Gbit/s for every interconnect. Minimum. To every connected provider.

/M

oscarBravo

NewClareman wrote: »

Their filing to the fcc shows quite a bit of technical detail. They are targeting “residential, commercial, institutional, governmental and professional users worldwide”. SpaceX has said that Starlink could provide gigabit speeds with latency as low as 25ms, putting it on par with terrestrial broadband.

It is early days, with only 60 of the satellites ready for launch. Then again, the NBP has a lifespan of 25 years, so a small wait should be acceptable. (To save 3 billion, or even 1, it bloody well should be.) It is one of a number of companies, including Amazon, with similar plans. These are big guns, with deep brockets, building disruptive technologies. Given the money at stake, I would expect the consultants to justify why we are not waiting to see how these technologies pan out.

That's fascinating and all, but you confidently stated "low cost", and "lower cost".

So: how much will it cost?

The high horse brigade

NewClareman wrote: »

Good, you’ve read the slide. Now, what is the typical backhaul capacity to a small rural exchange, and how does it compare?

Theroetically they each have at least one fibre that can do 10gbit

NewClareman

Marlow wrote: »

5.5 Gbit/s per satellite with over 4500 satellites is pretty good though. And while that is over 6 times more satellites than any of the other sub orbit projects, it is worldwide.

How many exchanges do we have in Ireland ? Over 170 NGA enabled exchanges feeding over 1000 sub-exchanges. And that does not include the exchange that are not broadband launched or provide older DSL type broadband and covers OpenEIR only. Nevermind what other operators have in place.

That 4500 satellites is worldwide. Not just in a little place like Ireland.

/M

Yeah, pretty good for satellite, I was amazed tbh.

As you said earlier, extending the backbone is the real issue - the actual number of exchanges is almost irrelevant. We really only need two, a main and a backup.

With a suitable backbone in place, I suspect that, as you say, everything else would work itself out. Maybe splitting Eir Wholesale (or Open Eir, or whatever) from the retail side would encourage them to be more active in this area.

NewClareman

The high horse brigade wrote: »

Theroetically they each have at least one fibre that can do 10gbit

Agreed.

Tbh, the status of the exchange is irrelevant - once it’s got fibre connectivity is not a big issue.

Marlow

NewClareman wrote: »

With a suitable backbone in place, I suspect that, as you say, everything else would work itself out. Maybe splitting Eir Wholesale (or Open Eir, or whatever) from the retail side would encourage them to be more active in this area.

That's what they have done. That's why it is called "Eir" and "OpenEIR". They're not supposed to talk to each other. Even placed on different floors.

It hasn't worked. It would only work, if they were completely independant, like SIRO is from any of the providers. While Vodafone is an investor, they have no say in SIROs day to day operations. Every partner on SIRO is sort of equal ... I say sort of, because there are Tier 1 (national) and Tier 2 (regional) providers. But all with the same level of access.

/M

Marlow

NewClareman wrote: »

Really, must have been a recent upgrade.

You can't run FTTH out to rural Ireland and sell 1000 Mbit/s FTTH connections, if you don't at least have 10 Gbit/s to the sub-exchange that it's hanging off.

/M

NewClareman

Marlow wrote: »

That's what they have done. That's why it is called "Eir" and "OpenEIR". They're not supposed to talk to each other. Even placed on different floors.

It hasn't worked. It would only work, if they were completely independant, like SIRO is from any of the providers. While Vodafone is an investor, they have no say in SIROs day to day operations. Every partner on SIRO is sort of equal ... I say sort of, because there are Tier 1 (national) and Tier 2 (regional) providers. But all with the same level of access.

/M

Complete independence is what I’m talking about - forget the imaginary Chinese walls.

Orebro

Marlow wrote: »

So ... what you are saying is, that you are ok with the Government paying for land and building a store from tax money, driving the local grocery shops out of business and also not letting them object, because you don't like what they sell or how they conduct their business. At the same time killing of jobs locally.

That is basically what you are saying.

If they are creaming it, why don't drive the installers all Ferraris? I find these are often hard working people, that have brought broadband into areas, where there was none and made a difference. Yes, they have not all scaled as well with the market. But not giving them a word in their future is taking the piss.

/M

If the local shops were providing a suitable service then this wouldn't have to happen. But if all they're selling is stale bread and water then maybe Gov intervention is required.

Marlow

Orebro wrote: »

If the local shops were providing a suitable service then this wouldn't have to happen. But if all they're selling is stale bread and water then maybe Gov intervention is required.

But that's again, what I'm pointing out. They aren't all doing that. They weren't even consulted. You don't even know, if they are selling stale bread at this point, because you haven't even checked. Just because you checked a shop in Cork, doesn't mean, that it's the same in Galway or Mayo.

/M

NewClareman

Marlow wrote: »

You can't run FTTH out to rural Ireland and sell 1000 Mbit/s FTTH connections, if you don't at least have 10 Gbit/s to the sub-exchange that it's hanging off.

/M

I know.