NBP: National Broadband Plan Announced

dbit

Will ESB voda make they're backhaul available to projects like B4rn do you think? Hell even if it didn't improve my connection directly, I would still be interested in the project from start to finish purely from an interest and learning point of view .

DBIT is available to travel to any part of Ireland to get involved with this type of stuff . I may experience callouses as my hands have been on keyboards my entire working life .

frozenfrozen

There should just be a 0% tax for 10 years to whatever company covers the whole country in fibre first, and we could see how fast 'not economically viable' goes out the window

dbit

Cheers Ed im faping away to these right now :-https://www.flickr.com/search/?q=b4rn
locals doing the splices with splice kits this is bloody unreal. ducts junction boxes the lot , why are we so bloody passive !

frozenfrozen

b4rn looks ****ing great. can we do this please?

dbit

frozenfrozen wrote: »

b4rn looks ****ing great. can we do this please?

Rally all your farmers get an OS map of your area look at the who when and where. If you do get it off the ground gimme a shout and ill shovel like a mad whore.

KOR101

If less than FTTH, how about an argument that the NBP may well slow down fibre rollout because the subsidies slow down the FTTH land grab that looks like it's just started.

ItHurtsWhenIP

frozenfrozen wrote: »

b4rn looks ****ing great. can we do this please?

dbit wrote: »

Rally all your farmers get an OS map of your area look at the who when and where. If you do get it off the ground gimme a shout and ill shovel like a mad whore.

I met Barry Forde of B4RN at a conference yesterday. They're set-up is incredible and it's not costing them the earth at all. When they had 350 subscribers they were meeting their expenses (break even). When they had 500 (I think) they were paying back the principle on their loans. When they got 1200 they were able to pay a staff of up to 7.

They now have 1500 customers!!! :eek: It only costs them £6.86 to roll out a meter of fibre. :eek::eek: They only provide Gigabit connectivity ... because it would cost them more to have to throttle a customers connection. :eek::eek::eek:

They have dual diversely routed trunks running into an IX in Manchester. They're looking at running some north to Scotland in case ISIS nukes the Mancunians!

I could go on, but I don't want the mods to beat me up for being so far OT it hurts.

dbit

LIKE LIKE LIKE LIKE LIKE LIKE LIKE LIKE LIKE LIKE LIKE LIKE LIKE LIKE ! yes mods will go nuts as this is veering offroad very quickly. IT is all very relative in terms of seeing the ordinary man terminate the fiber somehow i dont think ESB would let us loose on the backhauls.

MBSnr

MBSnr wrote: »

OK so it's not like for like and perhaps they are all unpaid volunteers (I don't know) but funny how we are told it'll cost multiple thousands to lay fibre to one rural home here...

Surely someone's maths doesn't add up here.

This is the sort of constructive project benefitting the local community that a body such as Macra na Feirme could get its members involved in....

tsue921i8wljb3

MBSnr wrote: »

OK so it's not like for like and perhaps they are all unpaid volunteers (I don't know) but funny how we are told it'll cost x multiple thousands to lay fibre to one rural home here...

Surely someone's maths doesn't add up here.

It's in no way comparable to a commercial rollout. They are indeed using some volunteer labour. It is also predicated on the goodwill of landowners who allow access to their property. However it is a remarkable project and deserves massive praise.

MBSnr

Siena Gigantic Backyard wrote: »

It's in no way comparable to a commercial rollout. They are indeed using some volunteer labour. It is also predicated on the goodwill of landowners who allow access to their property. However it is a remarkable project and deserves massive praise.

I deleted my post as it was badly worded.. but I wasn't quick enough! Anyhow if these guys can do it at this price per metre that's very impressive. I'd love to think it could be the same here but I doubt it. Lots of small landholders to negotiate with to start....

MajesticDonkey

Villain wrote: »

A lot of the rural wireless setups are in place, e.g. there are 5 in my area outside Carlow

But are subscribers gettting 30 Mbps+?

Villain

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

But are subscribers gettting 30 Mbps+?

They can if they are willing to pay for it.

MajesticDonkey

Villain wrote: »

They can if they are willing to pay for it.

Surprising, to be honest. First I've heard of WISPs offering that kind of speed. Chances are it's not consistent though, as in at peak times?

tsue921i8wljb3

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

Surprising, to be honest. First I've heard of WISPs offering that kind of speed. Chances are it's not consistent though, as in at peak times?

Digiweb's Metro product has been offering 30/1 for several years. I agree with you though on the peak time speed. My own 3Mb Imagine wireless connection slows down markedly at peak times. I have a Sam Knows box and over the past year the average peak time speed has never been above 2Mb.

Villain

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

Surprising, to be honest. First I've heard of WISPs offering that kind of speed. Chances are it's not consistent though, as in at peak times?

As I say if you are willing to pay for it, contention ranges from 20 to 1 and 4 to 1

murphaph

Gonzo wrote: »

I have to agree as much as I want a decent fibre network in place throughout rural Ireland, even if it's gonna take the next 10 years, I'd rather wait 10 years for it then have a wireless service which would be nowhere nearly as good.

Yeah but you have a 10Mbps ADSL connection right now. If you had 3G or no broadband whatsoever you might feel differently about the role fixed wireless can play as an interim solution.

KOR101

Villain wrote: »

They can if they are willing to pay for it.

Not where I am.

http://www.sccbroadband.ie/business-broadband/

And. those are the business packages.

mass_debater

What's holding WISPs back is having to link for miles and miles to get access to fibre backhaul, then you have Comreg treating them as a cash cow. The annual fee for a licensed link should be about 50 quid like it is in the UK, instead Comreg are milking them dry demanding over a grand each so WISPs end up using unlicensed frequencies.

bk

Here is the problem if WISPs are allowed get subsidy movie from the NBP.

Ok so your town manages to get just about 30Mb/s and you are very happy.

But will you be happy when the guys in the next town over get 1Gb/s FTTH?

What about 10 years from now when you are still stuck on the same 30Mb/s WISP as they used up all the subsidy money to bring service to your town, leaving non available for the FTTH providers now making it uneconomic to service your area.

Trust me this is exactly what will happen if you leave WISPs on the NBP scheme.

KOR101

bk wrote: »

Here is the problem if WISPs are allowed get subsidy movie from the NBP.

Ok so your town manages to get just about 30Mb/s and you are very happy.

But will you be happy when the guys in the next town over get 1Gb/s FTTH?

What about 10 years from now when you are still stuck on the same 30Mb/s WISP as they used up all the subsidy money to bring service to your town, leaving non available for the FTTH providers now making it uneconomic to service your area.

Trust me this is exactly what will happen if you leave WISPs on the NBP scheme.

That was my earlier point. But, you're painting it in too black and white terms. An earlier poster said that bidders are being required to spell out their long term plans as it is recognised that 30/(10 or 6) won't be good enough in 3 to 5 years time.

MMFITWGDV wrote: »

I had a chat with a DCENR representative today at a conference. While the stated goal of the NBP is for 30Mbps downstream, they have reduced the upstream requirement from 10Mbps to 6Mbps in order to give the WISPs a "fair chance" of making a competitive submission for the NBP. Imagine are the only WISP that has engaged with them so far.

However the companies tendering for the NBP also have to show what they plan to deliver over the 15-20 years of the NBP contract, as 30/6Mbps now will not be sufficient in 3-5 years (IMO).

I'd love to see what snake oil the WISPs try to show that they could, for example, deliver 250Mbps by 2030!

The ESB plan, where they talk about villages of 100, also rightly throws a cat among the pigeons, because it makes a nonsense of the earlier mapping exercise. An overlap between the NDP and commercial plans is highly probable, reducing the commercial case.

There were so many inconsistencies between the IT and Independent articles that it's clear there is no firm ESB plan yet. They are making it up as they go along. As is the govt with the NBP.

SpaceTime

They need to make it easy for rural wISPs to become FTTH resellers.

I think it's a bit unrealistic to expect investment in a system that's going to be phased out (at least in higher density profitable areas).

They need to ensure that these, mostly very small, companies have an ability to project a long term business plan.

Otherwise why would anyone invest in them or lend to them for build out?!

A special rural hybrid licence that recognised this situation needs to be designed. Something that incentivises investment in fibre backhauled wisps as an intermediate step towards widespread FTTH.

Johnboy1951

Downgrading the requirements for NBP is not going to help anyone in the medium or long term.

I would have no objection to a NBP specification of immediate 30/10 with a guaranteed 100 synchronous within 3 years and a 1000 synchronous within 5 years.

If the WISPS can show they can do that then by all means get them involved.
If not then reject them outright, and get the same guarantees from any other provider who wants to get involved.

Build in some 'insurance' from those who sign up, so that if they fail, the tax payer is not out of pocket.

... I love to dream ....

KOR101

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Downgrading the requirements for NBP is not going to help anyone in the medium or long term.

Giving the WISPs a 'fair chance' may be legally important.

Villain

People are living in a dream world, FTTH outside of towns and villages is a pipe dream for the next 10 years, that doesn't mean people shouldn't work towards it but excluding WISPS that can deliver a usable connection at say even 30Mbps for the next 3 to 5 years is just plain stupid.

Pat Rabbite promised the sun moon and stars then realized the cost and issues involved. It's great to dream but you have to accept the reality too.

frozenfrozen

Every house they run fibre to is going to be paying at least 50 euro a month for eternity, if that can't be profitable even with government subsidy then it will never get done

If b4rn are able to lay fibre at 9 euro per metre I can't see why ftth outside towns here isn't possible short term
Electricity to every house was done at great cost and they can do it again with fibre, and if they want to think outside the box for even one second why don't they ask land owners can they run cable through their land rather than digging up roads, in exchange for free fibre for X amount of time or a free install.

And if no company is willing to do ftth rurally then maybe the state could sponsor community broadband projects and give equal access to the nearest fibre backbone at a reduced rate seeing as it's so cost prohibitive to run fibre to these locations.

ItHurtsWhenIP

KOR101 wrote: »

Giving the WISPs a 'fair chance' may be legally important.

That was exactly the point the DCENR guy made. They can't be seen to actively discriminate against a solution (crap as it may be) at this tendering phase. Otherwise the WISPs will go crying to the EU and then we remain in the dark-fibre ages :P for another 5 years.

Villain wrote: »

People are living in a dream world, FTTH outside of towns and villages is a pipe dream for the next 10 years, that doesn't mean people shouldn't work towards it but excluding WISPS that can deliver a usable connection at say even 30Mbps for the next 3 to 5 years is just plain stupid.

Pat Rabbite promised the sun moon and stars then realized the cost and issues involved. It's great to dream but you have to accept the reality too.

The B4RN project proves that FTTH rurally is not "dream world". They've done this in their area in only a few years and they are connecting up so many new people each week, it's depressing.

frozenfrozen wrote: »

Every house they run fibre to is going to be paying at least 50 euro a month for eternity, if that can't be profitable even with government subsidy then it will never get done

If b4rn are able to lay fibre at 9 euro per metre I can't see why ftth outside towns here isn't possible short term
Electricity to every house was done at great cost and they can do it again with fibre, and if they want to think outside the box for even one second why don't they ask land owners can they run cable through their land rather than digging up roads, in exchange for free fibre for X amount of time or a free install.

And if no company is willing to do ftth rurally then maybe the state could sponsor community broadband projects and give equal access to the nearest fibre backbone at a reduced rate seeing as it's so cost prohibitive to run fibre to these locations.

A commercial company will never get agreement from every farmer to cross their land with Fibre unless there was a fat brown envelope for them, so this would never fly. Using the farmers land would only work in a community endeavour.

However, both Eircom and ESB/VF have the infrastructure to deliver this on their poles and stringing fibre along those is a damn sight faster than putting in ducting along the roadway.

Obviously my preference would be for them to string it along the nice new ESB poles and not the ivy covered Eircom things.

Villain

MMFITWGDV wrote: »

That was exactly the point the DCENR guy made. They can't be seen to actively discriminate against a solution (crap as it may be) at this tendering phase. Otherwise the WISPs will go crying to the EU and then we remain in the dark-fibre ages :P for another 5 years.



The B4RN project proves that FTTH rurally is not "dream world". They've done this in their area in only a few years and they are connecting up so many new people each week, it's depressing.



A commercial company will never get agreement from every farmer to cross their land with Fibre unless there was a fat brown envelope for them, so this would never fly. Using the farmers land would only work in a community endeavour.

However, both Eircom and ESB/VF have the infrastructure to deliver this on their poles and stringing fibre along those is a damn sight faster than putting in ducting along the roadway.

Obviously my preference would be for them to string it along the nice new ESB poles and not the ivy covered Eircom things.

B4RN shows what a community project can do in one area with support buy in from everyones that is very different from a mass rollout to everyone.

My comment on a dream world was people thinking that every home in Ireland that wanted FTTH would get it within a few years, that is not going to happen and WISPS can provide a service in the meantime.

Johnboy1951

KOR101 wrote: »

Giving the WISPs a 'fair chance' may be legally important.

I would really like to know how that should even be considered when creating the specifications of requirements to go out to tender.

Either commercial companies can provide the service required or they cannot.

What reason is there to reduce the specifications of requirements?

As I also posted ..... they can include upgradability for all connections in the specification for tender and also specify the time period within which this must be accomplished.

If the WISPS can do this, then welcome aboard.
Else don't bother tendering.

jca

God this thread is becoming boring..... Time to hit the unfollow button.

lucernarian

jca wrote: »

God this thread is becoming boring..... Time to hit the unfollow button.

I'll stick my neck out here and say that no one really wants to know if you find it boring or cares if you unfollow it. Maybe you could contribute something more positive?

KOR101 wrote:

Giving the WISPs a 'fair chance' may be legally important.

Why would that be? Does the Govt. need to justify why it wants 10 Mbps upload speeds? What are EU targets for next generation broadband specs and availability?

I find that line of logic by the DCENR official to be questionable. I'd sooner think by reducing some of the requirements, they would certainly achieve cost savings from there being more eligible bidders or else simply using cheaper tech.

KOR101

lucernarian wrote: »

Why would that be? Does the Govt. need to justify why it wants 10 Mbps upload speeds? What are EU targets for next generation broadband specs and availability?

I find that line of logic by the DCENR official to be questionable. I'd sooner think by reducing some of the requirements, they would certainly achieve cost savings from there being more eligible bidders or else simply using cheaper tech.

Okay, points taken. Perhaps they just want to go into the election with a bright shiny new plan, instead of being bogged down in a judicial review.

jca

lucernarian wrote: »

I'll stick my neck out here and say that no one really wants to know if you find it boring or cares if you unfollow it. Maybe you could contribute something more positive?


Why would that be? Does the Govt. need to justify why it wants 10 Mbps upload speeds? What are EU targets for next generation broadband specs and availability?

I find that line of logic by the DCENR official to be questionable. I'd sooner think by reducing some of the requirements, they would certainly achieve cost savings from there being more eligible bidders or else simply using cheaper tech.

Stick your neck out all you like but none of this drivel has anything to with the Vodafone/ ESB ftth joint venture. Its all completely off topic but when a moderator is joining in the drivel it seems to be ok.

lucernarian

lucernarian wrote: »

Why would that be? Does the Govt. need to justify why it wants 10 Mbps upload speeds?

Its a reflection of the current state of public administration in Ireland and the EU.
Yes, the government wants the highest speeds possible, but if they specifically say this in the tender they get accused of ruling out these people by an administrative stroke of the pen.
So they set the standards low, allow them to enter, and hopefully the guy with the better/faster service wins.
However, this is fraught with danger if the slow speed guy is much cheaper than the fast guy as he can claim that he fulfills the minimum criteria and gives much better value... and we end up, in that case, with a crap service.
All the correct auditable procedures would have been followed except that no common sense would have been used....

lucernarian

Deleted User wrote: »

Its a reflection of the current state of public administration in Ireland and the EU.
Yes, the government wants the highest speeds possible, but if they specifically say this in the tender they get accused of ruling out these people by an administrative stroke of the pen.
So they set the standards low, allow them to enter, and hopefully the guy with the better/faster service wins.
However, this is fraught with danger if the slow speed guy is much cheaper than the fast guy as he can claim that he fulfills the minimum criteria and gives much better value... and we end up, in that case, with a crap service.
All the correct auditable procedures would have been followed except that no common sense would have been used....

That doesn't really make sense. (EDIT: the part about being accused of ruling out any specific group, i.e. discriminating against a particular technology which would be against EU law I believe). They're just stating the minimum accepted upload speed will be for any tendering or what will count as commercial NGB coverage on the DCENR map. Where in EU law does it say that government agencies have to reduce specs for state-aid tenders, to allow for more bidders?

I don't see what proceedure is being followed, except by a DCENR civil servant being lazy or disingenuous in his response to an informal question.

bk

MOD: Moved lots of posts about the NBP to the correct thread.

jca, please no back seat modding, if you are unhappy with OT posts, please report them and leave it to the mods to handle.

rob808

I Think EIrcom be better to win the tender than ESB and Vodafone since there building out there FTTH to 300 towns and village and since it take them 2020 you see why I wouldnt like them to use NBP money to do them towns not saying they are but they could if they won it leaving the rest of us on vodafone wireless broadband.

They migth not be able do it but since this is Ireland it won't surprise me and I couldn't see them completing the NBP if there doing them towns and rural Ireland completely impossible.

bk

rob808 wrote: »

I Think EIrcom be better to win the tender than ESB and Vodafone since there building out there FTTH to 300 towns and village and since it take them 2020 you see why I wouldnt like them to use NBP money to do them towns not saying they are but they could if they won it leaving the rest of us on vodafone wireless broadband.

They migth not be able do it but since this is Ireland it won't surprise me and I couldn't see them completing the NBP if there doing them towns and rural Ireland completely impossible.

It would likely take Eircom just as long to rollout FTTH as ESB.

Both would likely use KN Networks and other subcontractors, so there would be little difference in time scales. While Eircom has improved massively over the last 3 years, I still remain wary of them.

Eircom have an advantage in having a more widespread fiber backhaul network and future proofing via FTTC cabs.

ESB have an advantage in having a much better pole network in rural Ireland and also are almost completely debt free, unlike Eircom with it's massive debts. Finally the ESB don't have the large added cost of maintaining an operating two parallel networks.

For the above reasons I would expect it to be cheaper for ESB to rollout FTTH then Eircom.

Also ESB just has a far better record of building, maintaining, operating and investing in crucial national infrastructure.

dbit

bk wrote: »

It would likely take Eircom just as long to rollout FTTH as ESB.

Both would likely use KN Networks and other subcontractors, so there would be little difference in time scales. While Eircom has improved massively over the last 3 years, I still remain wary of them.

Eircom have an advantage in having a more widespread fiber backhaul network and future proofing via FTTC cabs.

ESB have an advantage in having a much better pole network in rural Ireland and also are almost completely debt free, unlike Eircom with it's massive debts. Finally the ESB don't have the large added cost of maintaining an operating two parallel networks.

For the above reasons I would expect it to be cheaper for ESB to rollout FTTH then Eircom.

Also ESB just has a far better record of building, maintaining, operating and investing in crucial national infrastructure.

Here Here !

lucernarian

bk wrote: »

Also ESB just has a far better record of building, maintaining, operating and investing in crucial national infrastructure.

I think that record is overblown in my limited experience in Louth, whether it's the very unfortunate cat that walked amongst a 110 kV trafo and wiped out power within 20km of Drogheda for a number of hours, or the years and years of telling the ESB that not only were lots of branches and trees knocking off the aluminium wires serving my folks' house, the pole was leaning somewhat and causing the span of wires to droop dangerously close to two 30-pair eircom cables. They did eventually fix that, and replace the wooden beam supporting the insulatiors from initial electrification in the area with a galvanised one, a few years ago.

And we have higher-than-average electricity costs which our exceptionally well-paid networks staff benefit greatly from. And how we only have supplies rated up to 63A unless you pay over a grand to have it bumped up to 80A and even then the lights will still dim if even a kettle or vacuum cleaner is switched on. UK customers enjoy 100A-fused connections to the mains and having two electric showers on isn't an issue.


Apart from those very specific examples, I do concede that the ESB operate far more effectively than e.g. Irish Rail in particular. But looking at this project, a press release last year mentioned offering services from Q1 2015 onwards and now in Q2, they're announcing they will start selling it commercially in a single town in Q3, and another 5 by the end of the year.

One last point, I have a feeling Mayo may have 3 towns selected for Phase 1 to allow a demonstration to Enda and his 3 FG colleagues on why the NBP should be adequately funded, and how beneficial the (ESB/Voda) infrastructure is. Probably as well as there being a wink and and an elbow between FG politicians and some ESB board member or other.

xxyyzz

I did my work experience in the ESB head office years ago. One senior colleague was running a stained glass business from his desk. He took orders and did designs during the week and built it at the weekends.

SpaceTime

The main concern with eircom is their credit rating and ability to raise funds on the market.

I would rather see the state owning this infrastructure and tendering for someone to operate it and build it on a franchisee basis. A new purpose built company could own it and raise capital for investment.

We've had enough delays caused by eircom due to the state of its finances in the recent past and it still has a very significant debt load.

You could also have multiple operators involved with something like this.

I'm not keen on the idea of handing rural broadband over to a commercial monopoly situation.

KOR101

The more we get of this, the harder it is for govt. to disappoint.

http://www.independent.ie/business/technology/news/eircom-promises-new-rural-fibre-broadband-will-overtake-city-speeds-31158182.html

dbit

KOR101 wrote: »

The more we get of this, the harder it is for govt. to disappoint.

http://www.independent.ie/business/technology/news/eircom-promises-new-rural-fibre-broadband-will-overtake-city-speeds-31158182.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrZRrzfMF3o

rob808

KOR101 wrote: »

The more we get of this, the harder it is for govt. to disappoint.

http://www.independent.ie/business/technology/news/eircom-promises-new-rural-fibre-broadband-will-overtake-city-speeds-31158182.html

Im really am hoping we get FTTH because that be brilliant

rob808

dbit wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrZRrzfMF3o

Haha I hope not.

KOR101

Eircom is seeking permission from its lenders to be able to spend up to €500 million on acquisitions and potentially sell its valuable telephone exchange site on Crown Alley in Temple Bar. The telecoms group also wants the covenants limiting its overall indebtedness and related interest payments significantly relaxed.
“The proposed covenant amendments reflect the current success eircom is enjoying with new products/ services as well as the accelerated rollout of the network and benefit anticipated from certain significant investment opportunities currently present across Ireland, ” according to documentation prepared for the company’s lenders.

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/eircom-seeks-go-ahead-to-spend-500m-and-to-sell-temple-bar-site-1.2197579

Just shows the financial difficulties Eircom faces. No doubt they will get agreement, because otherwise they're strategically screwed. Although you might wonder whether 'Performance Risk', as it's called, will be part of the decision making process for the NBP.

SpaceTime

Crown Alley better be worth more than the cost of moving it.

It's serving a huge chunk of central Dublin, mostly north of the river.

Oddly Crown Alley actually has the worst FTTC coverage imaginable! I know people who can barely get 3Mbit/s DSL from it.

For some historical reason most of D7 - Stoneybatter is on Crown Alley! The lines are over 3km long!

ED E

In its turn the Telephone Company of Ireland gave way to the
National Telephone Company in 1893, at which time the service
was available only in Dublin, Belfast, Cork, Limerick, Dundalk,
Drogheda and Derry. In the seven years that followed develop-
ment was more or less rapid, and in 1900 there were 56 exchanges
working in Ireland. In that year the Dublin exchange was trans-
ferred from Commercial Buildings to a new building in Crown
Alley, where an exchange with capacity for 1,600 lines had been
installed, this exchange was extended from time to time to meet
growth and was not finally taken out of service until 1930 when
conversion of the central Dublin area to automatic working was
completed. The same building now houses an automatic exchange.

Its ooooold. Back in the day cetralization made sense, the terminology for an exchange is still CO or Central Office. But now its a datacentre, so I'm really surprised they wanna move it.

The lack of VDSL is the problem of no cabs. And anyone with money in the area just gets a fibre circuit from there or north main.

jd

ED E wrote: »

Its ooooold. Back in the day cetralization made sense, the terminology for an exchange is still CO or Central Office. But now its a datacentre, so I'm really surprised they wanna move it.

The lack of VDSL is the problem of no cabs. And anyone with money in the area just gets a fibre circuit from there or north main.

There are two parts to the the CRA facility - the datacentre opposite the Elephant and Castle, and the telephone exchange in the redbrick Victorian building on the corner of Temple Bar and Crown Alley