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 thi

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.