4 ms·

Anyone know if this would be feasible in Australia? Our National Broadband Network was originally planned to be fiber-to-the-home, but changed to a fiber-to-the

by barbs 12y ago

Anyone know if this would be feasible in Australia? Our National Broadband Network was originally planned to be fiber-to-the-home, but changed to a fiber-to-the-node system with the change of government. Not sure how close the average home is to its nearest node, so I don't know if it'd be less than 30 metres in most cases...

quink 12y ago
It would be. This wouldn't however involve the nodes as built at the moment. The problem is one of distance, not of the protocol that you're using. Adopting this instead of VDSL2 and keeping the architecture and topology the same won't make any difference worth speaking of to most premises. Instead the premises will have in the pits (or on one of the electricity poles) just outside them a tiny box - powered from the household itself through the existing copper - that connects to the fibre, which runs past the household. This contrasts with the average distance to the nodes of about three, four hundred metres likely under what the coalition is doing. It gets rid of the most expensive part of a FTTH install, which is the actual connection to the customer. So, yes, it's viable. It's also, however, substantially more like Labor's plan than the coalition's. So even if it were to make a buttload of sense and be insanely more cost effective it still wouldn't be done because Labor is evil. Or something. And Telstra and Murdoch wouldn't approve of something like this.
monochr 12y ago
No. This is for fiber to the premise, not fiber to the node. It would have solved some of the problems with the old NBN model, especially in highrise buildings in the city. I'm simply for this by the fact the government has been progressively removing all technical references about the NBN from every government website. During their election they promised a climate controlled box every 500 meters or so. This was ridiculed as completely out of the question due to cost and maintenance and has been quietly dropped since then. So even at the best case scenario the distance will be x20 as long as in these trials. And as the researchers noted: "giving broadband speeds up to 500 Mbps over a distance of 100 meters. In contrast, XG-FAST uses an increased frequency range up to 500 MHz to achieve higher speeds but over shorter distances."
- robotresearcher 12y ago
  > No. This is for fiber to the premise, ... It's about squeezing more out of the existing copper to the premise, while we wait for fibre to arrive.
  - monochr 12y ago
    No. It's about nit needing to rip out whole buildings to put in fiber to the plug. They say it in the article.
    - robotresearcher 12y ago
      You don't rip out the building because you're using the existing copper that runs inside the building. Maybe you'd run fibre from the junction box to the building then, or maybe you'd just use the existing copper on that route too.
      - monochr 12y ago
        Please read the article. This technology is only viable for copper wires shorter than 30m. The previous spec at 1/10 speed was for wire shorter than 100m.
        robotresearcher 12y ago
        Quoth the article: "a major business benefit in locations where it is not physically, economically or aesthetically viable to lay new fiber cables all the way into residences. Instead, fiber can be brought to the curbside, wall or basement of a building and the existing copper network used for the final few meters." I interpreted "the premise" as the building, but perhaps the conventional interpretation is the entire grounds. Either way, this is certainly about squeezing more out of the existing copper.
        monochr 12y ago
        Existing copper inside the building. It is absolutely useless for the 1km+ distance to exchanges common in cities and 10km+ common in rural settings.
nwh 12y ago
Have you seen the state of Telstra copper? No way, I can't even break 0.8MB/s with ADSL2. The pit outside my house is filled to the brim with water when it rains, which drops the sync speed even further. The MDF of my building was hanging from the wall by the copper lines, which Telstra has deemed to not be an issue. Heck, the lines are just twisted pair buried straight in the ground with no protection at all.
- superbird 12y ago
  Copper can take quite a bit of abuse, the real issue you will find on your line will either be in the pit (Telstra trialled a program with a anti-water gel which had a reverse effect and corroded the copper connections). Or you have the issue of wiring within your house, even though household wiring is typically straightforward most houses in certain areas will have Optus and Telstra copper running into the house, how those are wired into the actual wall socket is another story as Telstra are only required to supply a working phone line if you sign up for TPG/Dodo or any other ISP that isn't Telstra. Sign up for Telstra and they ensure all wiring is nice and only distance/exchange conditions are a factor.
  - nwh 12y ago
    I redid the wiring in the house as far as I could and cleaned up the MDF myself (screwing it back on the wall was a nice start). Problem is probably in the pit, but as you said it's not their interest to fix it as I don't have a Telstra service at all.
    - superbird 12y ago
      What type of wire did you replace it with?
      - nwh 12y ago
        Replaced the end points, not the wiring itself. The wiring is 2000s vintage and not anywhere near as terrible as the huge old Australian baseboard plugs it was fastened in to. Replacing the wiring in the walls was a bit too much given that I expected to be ditching it for fibre soon.
mcbridematt 12y ago
It would make the installation process easier, in that there would be no need to pull fibre through existing lead in conduits (which is a major issue) This could be called 'Fibre-To-The-Fence' basically. I bet this isn't that much cheaper than a full FTTH - the cost advantage of DSL is eroded as the port density goes down.

by barbs 12y ago

quink 12y ago

It would be. This wouldn't however involve the nodes as built at the moment. The problem is one of distance, not of the protocol that you're using. Adopting this instead of VDSL2 and keeping the architecture and topology the same won't make any difference worth speaking of to most premises. Instead the premises will have in the pits (or on one of the electricity poles) just outside them a tiny box - powered from the household itself through the existing copper - that connects to the fibre, which runs past the household. This contrasts with the average distance to the nodes of about three, four hundred metres likely under what the coalition is doing. It gets rid of the most expensive part of a FTTH install, which is the actual connection to the customer. So, yes, it's viable. It's also, however, substantially more like Labor's plan than the coalition's. So even if it were to make a buttload of sense and be insanely more cost effective it still wouldn't be done because Labor is evil. Or something. And Telstra and Murdoch wouldn't approve of something like this.

monochr 12y ago

No. This is for fiber to the premise, not fiber to the node. It would have solved some of the problems with the old NBN model, especially in highrise buildings in the city. I'm simply for this by the fact the government has been progressively removing all technical references about the NBN from every government website. During their election they promised a climate controlled box every 500 meters or so. This was ridiculed as completely out of the question due to cost and maintenance and has been quietly dropped since then. So even at the best case scenario the distance will be x20 as long as in these trials. And as the researchers noted: "giving broadband speeds up to 500 Mbps over a distance of 100 meters. In contrast, XG-FAST uses an increased frequency range up to 500 MHz to achieve higher speeds but over shorter distances."

robotresearcher 12y ago
> No. This is for fiber to the premise, ... It's about squeezing more out of the existing copper to the premise, while we wait for fibre to arrive.
- monochr 12y ago
  No. It's about nit needing to rip out whole buildings to put in fiber to the plug. They say it in the article.
  - robotresearcher 12y ago
    You don't rip out the building because you're using the existing copper that runs inside the building. Maybe you'd run fibre from the junction box to the building then, or maybe you'd just use the existing copper on that route too.
    - monochr 12y ago
      Please read the article. This technology is only viable for copper wires shorter than 30m. The previous spec at 1/10 speed was for wire shorter than 100m.
      - robotresearcher 12y ago
        Quoth the article: "a major business benefit in locations where it is not physically, economically or aesthetically viable to lay new fiber cables all the way into residences. Instead, fiber can be brought to the curbside, wall or basement of a building and the existing copper network used for the final few meters." I interpreted "the premise" as the building, but perhaps the conventional interpretation is the entire grounds. Either way, this is certainly about squeezing more out of the existing copper.
        monochr 12y ago
        Existing copper inside the building. It is absolutely useless for the 1km+ distance to exchanges common in cities and 10km+ common in rural settings.

nwh 12y ago

Have you seen the state of Telstra copper? No way, I can't even break 0.8MB/s with ADSL2. The pit outside my house is filled to the brim with water when it rains, which drops the sync speed even further. The MDF of my building was hanging from the wall by the copper lines, which Telstra has deemed to not be an issue. Heck, the lines are just twisted pair buried straight in the ground with no protection at all.

superbird 12y ago
Copper can take quite a bit of abuse, the real issue you will find on your line will either be in the pit (Telstra trialled a program with a anti-water gel which had a reverse effect and corroded the copper connections). Or you have the issue of wiring within your house, even though household wiring is typically straightforward most houses in certain areas will have Optus and Telstra copper running into the house, how those are wired into the actual wall socket is another story as Telstra are only required to supply a working phone line if you sign up for TPG/Dodo or any other ISP that isn't Telstra. Sign up for Telstra and they ensure all wiring is nice and only distance/exchange conditions are a factor.
- nwh 12y ago
  I redid the wiring in the house as far as I could and cleaned up the MDF myself (screwing it back on the wall was a nice start). Problem is probably in the pit, but as you said it's not their interest to fix it as I don't have a Telstra service at all.
  - superbird 12y ago
    What type of wire did you replace it with?
    - nwh 12y ago
      Replaced the end points, not the wiring itself. The wiring is 2000s vintage and not anywhere near as terrible as the huge old Australian baseboard plugs it was fastened in to. Replacing the wiring in the walls was a bit too much given that I expected to be ditching it for fibre soon.

mcbridematt 12y ago

It would make the installation process easier, in that there would be no need to pull fibre through existing lead in conduits (which is a major issue) This could be called 'Fibre-To-The-Fence' basically. I bet this isn't that much cheaper than a full FTTH - the cost advantage of DSL is eroded as the port density goes down.