NBP: National Broadband Plan Announced

Gonzo

galljga1 wrote: »

Cheers lads, I could be joining the 21st century very soon. Are the blue lines the 100,000 or the 300,000?
I don't suppose there is anyway of ascertaining when the individual areas are being upgraded.

The blue lines include all 300,000 homes. Right now there is no way to guess other than look at an exchange with blue lines and the number of homes that Eir have said they will cover in that exchange.

Eir have yet to provide more detailed information about the choosen exchanges other than a vague Autumn/Winter 2016 start date for first live FTTH services.

rob808

Gonzo wrote: »

They seem fairly serious about getting these houses done. They have obviously worked out that these areas will eventually turn a profit over time and they don't want to lose these areas to another provider since they lost much of Dublin already to upc/virgin media.

2 weeks ago they announced a list of exchanges covering 100,000 homes to be completed by this time next year. Work has already started in these areas with the trimming of hedges and some new poles installed. On my road Eir replaced 6 poles over the past 2 months.

I reckon Eir will not start on the NBP (If awarded) for along time to come because:

1. They have 300,000 homes/premises to provide FTTH for which is commercially viable for Eir to complete.

2. They still have FTTC to finish and new cabinets to add in finished exchanges.

3. I am guessing they will probably announce another major project within the next 12-18 months to upgrade urban areas to FTTH to compliment the rollout with the 300,000 rural homes and replacing FTTC. They probably want to complete the 300,000 rural homes in the 3 year timescale so that they can get active again in the urban areas upgrading everyone to FTTH. Such a plan may take well past 2020.

and then once all the commercially viable areas are complete then they can turn attention to the NBP.

If Eir won part of the NBP or all of it they would have to start NBP in 2017 they couldn't delay it to 2020.

ED E

guil wrote: »

I'm pretty sure there was article posted here where eir explicitly said they won't give any guarantee to have the work done.

IIRC eir have stated they won't agree to financial penalties for not servicing any part of that cohort. What they will do though is grab as many as possible as every house they pass by is instantly commercially viable and removed from the NBP without them having to bind themselves into anything.

This race effect will probably benefit a significant group of people but IMO hurt the NBP over all.

Johnboy1951

ED E wrote: »

IIRC eir have stated they won't agree to financial penalties for not servicing any part of that cohort. What they will do though is grab as many as possible as every house they pass by is instantly commercially viable and removed from the NBP without them having to bind themselves into anything.

This race effect will probably benefit a significant group of people but IMO hurt the NBP over all.

I wonder about that 'hurting' part.

If a certain amount of money is reckoned for the NBP -- and apparently some bidders reckon it is not sufficient -- and if that amount is NOT reduced, then there would be more money per remaining household available for those who win the NBP.

In addition the winning party could also compete for the 'close-by' eir blue line houses, as they would essentially be passing a lot of them.

Of course a reduction in the finance available, which might be tied to the number of buildings to be serviced and not the area, could really screw things up.

ED E

The "hurt" comes from the fact that not all customers are created equal.

Say you have a village that has no internet at all. FTTH is the only tech allowed.

You have:

• 50 homes within 500m of the center
• 50 homes within 1000m of the center
• 50 homes within 2000m of the center
• 50 homes within 6000m of the center

A. NBP takes the lot, great, job done.

B. Eir take the first three groups, leave the last 50 homes. Those last 50 homes do not pay for themselves, so even with NBP intervention they are a really terrible customer for an NBP operator. This sours the overall pot.

Johnboy1951

FTTH is the only tech allowed.

But that is not the case ..... FTTH seems to be the preferred option, but nothing is settled, so a FW scheme could be an option ..... or existing copper for those last 50.

ED E

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

But that is not the case ..... FTTH seems to be the preferred option, but nothing is settled, so a FW scheme could be an option ..... or existing copper for those last 50.

It was a simplified scenario, the same goes for most techs except FWA which will cover that entire village in one go.

plodder

ED E wrote: »

The "hurt" comes from the fact that not all customers are created equal.

Say you have a village that has no internet at all. FTTH is the only tech allowed.

You have:

• 50 homes within 500m of the center
• 50 homes within 1000m of the center
• 50 homes within 2000m of the center
• 50 homes within 6000m of the center

A. NBP takes the lot, great, job done.

B. Eir take the first three groups, leave the last 50 homes. Those last 50 homes do not pay for themselves, so even with NBP intervention they are a really terrible customer for an NBP operator. This sours the overall pot.

What's stopping Siro from competing for the first three groups on the same basis as Eir? I thought the NBP was always supposed to be dealing with the customers that are hard to reach and "non commercial".

rob808

plodder wrote: »

What's stopping Siro from competing for the first three groups on the same basis as Eir? I thought the NBP was always supposed to be dealing with the customers that are hard to reach and "non commercial".

well Siro could if they won 1 of the lots since Eir never sign any commitment fourm they are still part of the NBP.

ED E

plodder wrote: »

What's stopping Siro from competing for the first three groups on the same basis as Eir? I thought the NBP was always supposed to be dealing with the customers that are hard to reach and "non commercial".

SIRO arent ready to ramp up to that yet, eir have the staffing and equipment that the ESB just doesn't as they're new to the space.

plodder

rob808 wrote: »

well Siro could if they won 1 of the lots since Eir never sign any commitment fourm they are still part of the NBP.

Maybe I misunderstood the scenario, but I understood it to mean that Eir might take the first three groups outside of the NBP.

If that is the case, there doesn't seem to be anything stopping Siro from doing it too, except that they have chosen not to.

ED E wrote:

SIRO arent ready to ramp up to that yet, eir have the staffing and equipment that the ESB just doesn't as they're new to the space.

which is reasonable enough, but it wouldn;t stop them coming in at any time in the future.

rob808

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/eir-receives-ratings-boost-from-moody-s-ahead-of-fund-raising-1.2583586

Cuddlesworth

plodder wrote: »

Maybe I misunderstood the scenario, but I understood it to mean that Eir might take the first three groups outside of the NBP.

And the cost per install and yearly maintenance cost per user looks worse and worse on the books. And while Siro can compete in the same space(they won't), they can't compete using government subsidization.

Eir's aggressive expansion is either doing a good job of killing the NBP or making sure that the remaining houses are guaranteed to be under their control for a lower costs base.

rob808

The maintenance of fibre quite cheap compared to copper,it the install and rollout with labour the main cost of FTTH.It hard to say how badly Eir FTTH rollout will hurt NBP.

ED E

rob808 wrote: »

The maintenance of fibre quite cheap compared to copper,it the install and rollout with labour the main cost of FTTH.It hard to say how badly Eir FTTH rollout will hurt NBP.

In urban settings its way better, in rural areas it will still be aerial and be battered every Dec-Feb and involve major fault works to a very similar extent to copper.

plodder

ED E wrote: »

In urban settings its way better, in rural areas it will still be aerial and be battered every Dec-Feb and involve major fault works to a very similar extent to copper.

I've never fully understood the reason for it, but the rural phone network always seems more resilient to bad weather than the electricity network. I don't recall ever losing our phone, but power cuts are common enough. Maybe the ESB cables are bigger and more vulnerable.

garroff

Most damage to ESB overhead networks is caused by falling timber and lines clashing in high winds. If networks are patrolled annually and clearances maintained then there are very few outages.
ESB outage hours per customer per year is small and falling.

garroff

Also repairs to OH networks can be done much quicker than to UG networks. I would rather be looking for an OH fault than a UG fault.

ED E

plodder wrote: »

I've never fully understood the reason for it, but the rural phone network always seems more resilient to bad weather than the electricity network. I don't recall ever losing our phone, but power cuts are common enough. Maybe the ESB cables are bigger and more vulnerable.

You've just been lucky, the POTS network gets battered, especially in the west. As above its mostly trees and debris pulling them down.

murphaph

garroff wrote: »

Also repairs to OH networks can be done much quicker than to UG networks. I would rather be looking for an OH fault than a UG fault.

OH is cheap and cheerful. It is never a better choice when it comes to reliability except in earthquake zones, where UG networks are simply not an option, hence the widespread use of OH in Japan, even in cities.

UG services are far less likely to fail. Tree surgery and so on all cost big money, none of which is required with UG ducting of services.

With fibre UG profits much more from the technology than OH, because the one weak spot of the UG network is that is is more prone to flooding than the OH network, but fibre is largely immune to water ingress.

As ED E correctly points out, fibre on the OH network will be just as much affected by storms as the copper network is today.

Cuddlesworth

rob808 wrote: »

The maintenance of fibre quite cheap compared to copper,it the install and rollout with labour the main cost of FTTH.It hard to say how badly Eir FTTH rollout will hurt NBP.

Its not the maintenance of the cables. You need backhaul, switching equipment, a place to put said equipment, maintenance contracts for the equipment, people to support and monitor the equipment. And when the number of users per exchange is low, the cost per user will be significantly higher.

MBSnr

ED E wrote: »

You've just been lucky, the POTS network gets battered, especially in the west. As above its mostly trees and debris pulling them down.

Maybe but I'd have to agree with plodder.

In the last ten years we have lost power multiple times. Only lost the phone by lightening, water ingress into the box on the pole and a digger ironically breaking the only bit where the cable goes under ground!

tsue921i8wljb3

The DCENR have released a statement in response to eir's efforts to reduce the intervention area. They are basically saying that the proposed intervention area stays at over 750000 premises as eir would not sign a Commitment Agreement in respect of any proposed commercial plans.

However there is scope to reduce the intervention area if eir or other operators follow up on their proposed plans. It will be interesting to see if Imagine's new wireless product will be accepted by the department as meeting the required standards.

Also interesting to note that there were five responses to this phase of the tendering process. My guesses are:

• eir
• Siro
• Gigabit Fibre
• Enet
• Axionne (?)

eir's response to the department is reported here:

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/eir-responds-to-government-concerns-over-rural-broadband-1.2594249

rob808

Siena Gigantic Backyard wrote: »

The DCENR have released a statement in response to eir's efforts to reduce the intervention area. They are basically saying that the proposed intervention area stays at over 750000 premises as eir would not sign a Commitment Agreement in respect of any proposed commercial plans.

However there is scope to reduce the intervention area if eir or other operators follow up on their proposed plans. It will be interesting to see if Imagine's new wireless product will be accepted by the department as meeting the required standards.

Also interesting to note that there were five responses to this phase of the tendering process. My guesses are:

• eir
• Siro
• Gigabit Fibre
• Enet
• Axionne (?)

eir's response to the department is reported here:

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/eir-responds-to-government-concerns-over-rural-broadband-1.2594249

The problem with imagine (magnet) New LTE product is that 20GB day cap and then it €1 for every 1GB when you go over it.It expensive as it is €60 I hope they don't except it I rather a open network than a monopoly one.

MajesticDonkey

rob808 wrote: »

The problem with imagine (magnet) New LTE product is that 20GB day cap and then it €1 for every 1GB when you go over it.It expensive as it is €60 I hope they don't except it I rather a open network than a monopoly one.

There wouldn't be a 20GB cap on an NBP product as I'm fairly sure there's a clause about monthly limits. Even with the Three NBP there was no monthly limit, but the overall service was a load of balls.

BandMember

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

There wouldn't be a 20GB cap on an NBP product as I'm fairly sure there's a clause about monthly limits. Even with the Three NBP there was no monthly limit, but the overall service was a load of balls.

Eh, oh yes there bloody well was limits with Three!! There was a 40GB monthly limit (it started off originally at 15GB!! http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/communications/en-ie/Broadband/Pages/NBS-Frequently-Asked-Questions.aspx) and boy did they know how to charge if you went over it.... :mad:

ED E

BandMember wrote: »

Eh, oh yes there bloody well was limits with Three!! There was a 40GB monthly limit (it started off originally at 15GB!! http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/communications/en-ie/Broadband/Pages/NBS-Frequently-Asked-Questions.aspx) and boy did they know how to charge if you went over it.... :mad:

That was the NBS, this is the NBP. New project, new rules, no cellular crap.

BandMember

ED E wrote: »

That was the NBS, this is the NBP. New project, new rules, no cellular crap.

Yes, and let's be very thankful for that! However, if you read back, I was specifically addressing a claim that there was no limits with the last plan, for which Three won the contract.

Actually, speaking of that shower of chancers, would anyone be surprised if they had stuck in a bid for the new NBP with promises galore? I know I wouldn't.... Thankfully though, the State seems to have learned from their very costly mistake last time around and is finally going to lay the foundations for a proper 21st Century broadband service in the country. Well, we hope anyway!!

MajesticDonkey

BandMember wrote: »

Eh, oh yes there bloody well was limits with Three!! There was a 40GB monthly limit (it started off originally at 15GB!! http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/communications/en-ie/Broadband/Pages/NBS-Frequently-Asked-Questions.aspx) and boy did they know how to charge if you went over it.... :mad:

Ohhh, my bad!

KOR101

.....

http://www.independent.ie/business/technology/exeircom-boss-phil-nolan-backing-new-bid-for-rollout-of-national-broadband-plan-34612950.html

tsue921i8wljb3

Openeir have set up a dedicated team, separate from the main organisation, to deal with other wholesale operators who wish to gain access to openeir's infrastructure for the NBP. I wonder was this a condition stipulated by the DCENR as part of the bidding process? Will the ESB have to do likewise?

http://www.openeir.ie/news/NBP_Access_Requests/

ED E

Thats very positive if they actually do segment them off from HSQ.

Currently OpenEir have a presence in most towns already, SIRO do too via the HV lines and ENET has some limited access. But if a provider could use eirs exchanges for co-lo and their plant network to reach outwards from towns it significantly reduces the "buy in" cost in joining the market.

While its not the solution we want, think how quick a rollout could be if Imagine placed FiberConnect LTE towers on top of each OpenEir exchange.

oscarBravo

ED E wrote: »

While its not the solution we want, think how quick a rollout could be if Imagine placed FiberConnect LTE towers on top of each OpenEir exchange.

Jesus. Enough with the LTE already. We're talking about scalable next-generation broadband here, not wireless snakeoil.

ED E

oscarBravo wrote: »

Jesus. Enough with the LTE already. We're talking about scalable next-generation broadband here, not wireless snakeoil.

In a perfect world but this is the overseers of the NB.S. we're talking about here....

The Ritz

ED E wrote: »

In a perfect world but this is the overseers of the NB.S. we're talking about here....

I don't believe that this is the case - anyone who has had contact with the people working on the NBS will tell you that they are totally committed to a permanent solution to broadband access right across the country, this is clearly evidenced in the mapping exercise where a very strict line has been taken by DCENR with operators' claims and in the very detailed documents published about the project.

There is no credibility in claims by wireless operators that they can deliver scalable future-proof mass broadband access. They are trying frantically to preserve their businesses, understandably, but the clock is running inexorably down for them.

BandMember

ED E wrote: »

In a perfect world but this is the overseers of the NB.S. we're talking about here....

You're not losing the faith are you? You are the last person I would have thought that I'd see here going on about wireless as the future of NBP!! :eek:

flutered

BandMember wrote: »

You're not losing the faith are you? You are the last person I would have thought that I'd see here going on about wireless as the future of NBP!! :eek:

i had the damm thing, it was a scam, i was paying for 3.5meg down, it would hit the 3.5 ok, but then sink to zero fast, how bad was it, i could not get a connection to two different servers in the uk to run a c or mcam line, i was blaming everyone bar the supplier, until the people on the other side explained that the signal was spending too long at zero to ping across, oh i got reassurances, i got promises, i was told that there was a tail on my reciever, eventualli i toke them take it out, i returned to the land line with a little under 1meg down, then hey presto i can my lines up and running, b.t.w. i never told the crowd on the other side that i had changed peoviders, one of which i had been with from 2009, with rarely a drop in signal, wireless has left a deep distrust and a bitter tase in my mouth

ED E

BandMember wrote: »

You're not losing the faith are you? You are the last person I would have thought that I'd see here going on about wireless as the future of NBP!! :eek:

IMO it should be P2P fiber, GPON just leaves work to be done later on when we max out the glass but I've a cynical head on me somewhat.

The state as a whole does an ok job with infrastructure projects but our only real success with big tech projects has been ROS. If the beancounters get a word in I can see FWA being touted as a viable option (not that it is).

pegasus1

ED E wrote: »

IMO it should be P2P fiber, GPON just leaves work to be done later on when we max out the glass but I've a cynical head on me somewhat.

Am I right in thinking, that with the way GPON is being laid out with splitters being here, there and everywhere, It would be impossible without major expense to covert to P2P.

bk

pegasus1 wrote: »

Am I right in thinking, that with the way GPON is being laid out with splitters being here, there and everywhere, It would be impossible without major expense to covert to P2P.

It would be costly, but MUCH cheaper then the current GPON rollout.

You would basically just have to push more fiber through the existing distribution ducts. There should be sufficient space in the distribution ducts for extra fiber once the copper is removed.

The most expensive element of FTTH is the drop to the persons home, but this wouldn't need to change if you were to change to P2P.

Having said that, I think it will be largely unnecessary for the next 50 years or so. The upcoming upgrades to GPON, 10G-PON, WDM-PON, etc. can be made at a fraction of the cost and give massive speed boosts without the need of P2P.

Eventually switching to P2P will become necessary, but not for many years if not decades and even when it is necessary, it can be done on a phased basis on a as needed basis.

digiman

Jesus lads yous will be looking for a fully meshed fibre network to every possible premises in the world next Crazy talk!!

It would take some amount of convincing for me why you would require P2P fibre from the exchange to the home. GPON technology will just keep moving along that can increase the split ratio rather than decrease it.

The main disadvantage of GPON would be the added latency versus a dedicated P2P link, but you are still looking at only a couple of ms in worst case. And with the laws of physics it will be negligible when looking at the delay going to far away locations.

ED E

It was tongue in cheek ladies. It'll be 2040 onwards before 10GPON is insufficient at an 8 or 16 way split.

KOR101

....

http://talkofthetown.ie/2016/04/18/more-than-11000-new-homes-and-businesses-in-louth-to-benefit-from-high-speed-broadband-this-year/

Gonzo

http://talkofthetown.ie/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Screen-Shot-2016-04-18-at-15.39.17.png

a possible screenshot of a section of an updated openeir website yet to go live in the whereandwhen section perhaps?

KOR101

ED E

So they want to mandate KNN* to hire every bricklayer in the country to start doing telecoms? Magic-ing up build teams will just lead to quality issues.

2022 is a very reasonable timeframe for the size of the undertaking. If they want to speed it up provide the contract winner with a planing fastpath to override local CoCos and NIMBYism.

*KNN work for Siro and OpenEir so are the most likely candidate to do the civils/installs.

KOR101

But doesn't it come down to cost to a great extent. Can't it be done faster at the same quality, but just at a greater cost.

ED E

KOR101 wrote: »

But doesn't it come down to cost to a great extent. Can't it be done faster at the same quality, but just at a greater cost.

Yes and no. If you ask the HSE to build a new hospital in 15 years they'll say €2B for example. How about 8 years? €3B. 4 years? Not possible.

If this is going to be a network for a generation lets do it right.

mobil 222

ED E wrote: »

So they want to mandate KNN* to hire every bricklayer in the country to start doing telecoms? Magic-ing up build teams will just lead to quality issues.

2022 is a very reasonable timeframe for the size of the undertaking. If they want to speed it up provide the contract winner with a planing fastpath to override local CoCos and NIMBYism.

*KNN work for Siro and OpenEir so are the most likely candidate to do the civils/installs.

Add your reply here. kNN have been involved in OpenEir Fibre Rollout and I know for a fact that quality is a big issue
with them. In the past few years the workmanship has improved 100% and standards are very high.
Ok there have been cowboys around but these are far and few between.

pegasus1

It's not a thing to be rushed by having bringing in untrained workers...corners are cut in most construction...do the same to fibre will mean when testing cable that has been pulled into postition, will lead to failures of a lot more cable..pull/run a fibre wrong and you either break the fibre completely or drop the speed that it can carry..its not copper, its glass...having it done right the one time, will lead to less delays...