On 6 May 2010 the Australian Government released the National Broadband Network Implementation Study. The Implementation Study examines the Government’s coverage, commerciality and competition objectives as well as the detailed operating arrangements of NBN Co Limited, its ownership and structure, ways to attract private sector investment and longer term privatisation.

Totalfair has reviewed the NBN-Implementation-Study-complete-report and added comments to the wiki where appropriate, comments added are as follows:

Chapter 02:Establishing a Mandate for NBN CO

Recommendation 01

That NBN Co only enter markets where there is insufficient infrastructure to support superfast broadband or where retail service providers are unable to access bottleneck assets on reasonable terms.

Freedom of Communication disagrees:

The NBN should not just be built because of a lack of fast broadband in some areas. It is generally recognised that The NBN is being built because of a failure of the free market to provide:
a) A fair competitive environment on (due to incumbent monopoly) factors NOT just limited to providing access eg: length of contract, price, etc
b) Ability for ISP’s to work together for the greater good on core issues, standards, technologies, thereby causing massive overheads and disparities due to lack of unanimity.
c) Long sighted vision and investing which equates to an ability to build it right the first time.
So it is all of the above, and not just geographical access to broadband that the free market has failed to provide Australia. Despite being of a commercial nature, a large part of the appeal of NBN Co is its benignity, and purpose built design which by nature should both provide, and provoke the above mentioned qualities from its competitors.

Reccomendation 02

That Government’s objective of providing superfast broadband to premises be measured in terms of coverage, with premises considered covered by the NBN where:

1. NBN Co is able to provide a wholesale service to those premises at the request of a retail service provider within a maximum number of days, specified by Government. For premises to be defined as ‘covered’, NBN Co should not be required to install CPE, or for fibre to perform the ‘drop’ and install the ONT. NBN Co should not perform the ‘drop’ and install the ONT until services are ordered via a retail service provider;

2. The ACCC or appropriate agency has declared the premises to be ‘adequately served’ by other providers where premises already have access to last-mile services of the required speed, with infrastructure-based competition and/or open-access wholesale arrangements in place, and with pricing comparable with NBN services; that to the extent that premises are deemed to be ‘adequately served’ by FTTP infrastructure, these should be counted towards the FTTP coverage objective.

Freedom of Communication disagrees:

The recommendation is flawed and dangerous in the suggestion in point 2 that “connectivity” with technologies other than fiber should be “counted towards the FTTP coverage objective”. It can not be understated how important the coverage is fiber and not some other technology eg copper for the following reasons:
a) The speed requirement of what is considered super fast broadband will most certainly outgrow any speed requirement set in the current time, it will grow to such a point that fiber is the only technology which can provide these speeds, therefore fiber is future-proof, copper is not, and premises served by other technologies will need to be declassified as covered when these requirements change. Counting inferior technology such as copper under the title “Fiber to the home” gives a false impression of the value of the network, and the classification of “covered” will needlessly degrade over time whereas strictly classifying fiber premises as covered will never degrade.
b) Ubiquity using a single technology in a networked system makes it far easier to conceptualise, administer, and upgrade, the overhead costs involved working with fragmented technologies will be cumbersome and unending.

Recommendation 03

For the purposes of NBN Co’s coverage requirement, that premises be defined, to mean any building (or part of a building) that meets one of the following criteria:

1. Currently has a standard telephone service activated as defined under the USO;
2. Currently has a fixed-line residential or business broadband product activated;
3. Is used on an ongoing basis for residential, business, health or educational purposes; or,
4. Is defined as a school by the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.

Freedom of Communication disagrees:

This excludes permanently inhabited dwellings which aren’t “buildings” per se, it is recommended that the definition include “permanently inhabited dwellings”.

Recommendation 08

That until the FTTP roll-out is complete in a given area, only premises that cannot access a metro-equivalent service as defined under the Australian Broadband Guarantee program be eligible for an NBN satellite service.

Freedom of Communication disagrees:

Access to the broadband guarantee is rightfully limited because costs are borne by the government in providing access, however it is completely different if a consumer wishes to pay for 12Mbps satellite available through the NBN – if so it would indicate that the customer was not being served properly by their current ISP’s who are under no obligation to actually provide the speeds of 512k/128k (which are already far below the 12Mbps minimum the NBN would provide). Limiting access of customers willing to pay would is pointless especially when servicing these customers would provide instant income with out the burden of extra infrastructure, which is unique to satellite technology.

Recommendation 16

That NBN Co overbuild third party FTTP networks that do not comply with the FTTP design standards; that, where a deployment does comply with the FTTP design standards established by Government, NBN Co may:

1. Apply to ACMA to have the premises declared ‘adequately served’;

2. Attempt to secure access from the network owner that would allow NBN Co to offer wholesale services over the network;

3. Overbuild the network where NBN Co is unable to secure necessary access and the premises are not declared ‘adequately served’.

Freedom of Communication disagrees:

Declaring a premises ‘adequately served’ based on “design standards” is missing the point of the NBN.
The NBN is important for service levels and competitiveness, which is completely different to design standards.
If 3rd party FTTP providers know this, they could preemptively roll out FTTP that conforms to “design standards”  thereby relieving NBN Co of its duty but with no intention of providing a level of service or competitiveness that NBN Co would otherwise be obliged to offer.

Recommendation 17

That all new developments where fixed telecommunications infrastructure is deployed be required to provide a duct, pit and pipe network with sufficient additional capacity to allow for an FTTP deployment by NBN Co; that this infrastructure be provided at the developer’s expense—an exemption being made for new premises where no fixed-line telecommunications infrastructure is installed.

Freedom of Communication disagrees:

With the increasing trend of IP enabled devices increasingly becoming integrated into every day electronics  it would be tragically short sighted to negate a requirement to only ‘fixed line telecommunication infrastructure”. This should be re-written to: “fixed line telecommunication or electricity distribution infrastructure”. It is extremely important to grasp that in the not too distant there will be IP enabled devices wherever there is electricity being used, and even more fundamentally there will be IP enabled devices monitoring and controlling the flow of the actual electricity.

Recommendation 43

That NBN Co be required to provide a next-generation satellite service ensuring access to at least 12 Mbps peak data rates to all premises beyond the fibre footprint. Satellite system capacity should be dimensioned to offer an average data rate per premises that reflects potential growth in usage patterns over the lifetime of the satellite system.

Freedom of Communication disagrees:

The NBN Co should be required to provide satellite service ensuring access across all of Australia, not just outside the fiber footprint, this is most likely possible technically but needs to be available officially as consumers within the footprint of the fiber network should not be excluded from access if they happen to be one of the many whom fall through the cracks and find themselves officially “serviceable”, but otherwise technically unserviceable. There is also a lack of support generally in the NBN for people who live or work transiently who can’t access the internet from a fixed location and require satellite services despite being inside the ‘coverage zone.

A video highlighting the benefits of the NBN that even sheep can understand.

The Australian Department of Broadband, Communications, and the Digital Economy is holding a forum called Realising Our Broadband Future; We congratulate the government on taking a proactive democratic approach to the issue and involving many thinkers and doers in the process.

Everyone in Australia and many oversees will be affected by the NBN rollout and consequential policy and ideas, this is an event not to be missed if you have anything to add.

Multiple locations

The conference will be held in Sydney, with video streaming to multiple locations around the nation; discussion will be held in remote groups and contributions will be made to a wiki.

Speakers

Senator, the Hon. Stephen Conroy

Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy

Senator Kate Lundy

Vinton G. Cerf

Vice President and Chief Internet Evangelist Google

Jeffrey Cole

Director USC Annenberg School

Five streams of discussion

After various keynotes and discussions, from people from organisations such as Google, and ICANN the will divide into five groups

Smart infrastructure

Digital Education

e-Community

e-Health

e-Business

Once again the website is http://broadbandfuture.gov.au, if you can’t make it to Sydney, sign up to one near you.

Why does Australia need a Fiber to the Home National Broadband Network now?

The importance of vision

There are three types of people in this debate, 1.) Those with vision for the nation of Australia, 2.) those who simply have no vision, and 3.) those who have a short-term, self-serving vision.

Vision for the future is more important than the facts of the present in directing ones course; why? Because vision is not just about seeing facts, but about an intimate knowledge in which way these facts are moving and an understanding of where they will end up.

It is small minded to live without vision, but it becomes a tragedy when one participates in deciding the future of the nation with a self-serving vision.

It’s unfortunate in politics that we frequently have to contend with others who lack of vision oppose anything new or costly, or contend with those who negate concern for the nation with self serving vision through their ties to old orders, companies, or monopolies caught out of line to the path for the greater good, we shouldn’t accept them, or their arguments.

We do need vision, but it’s necessary that the vision of the great is underpinned by united, conscientious action, or our vision will become dwarfed by the formidable forces of apathy, and self servitude.

Technology will make or break us, we need to embrace it at any cost; it’s a no-brainer.

When planning technology the overbearing need for vision rather than just facts can’t be underestimated – and none more importantly than planning the backbone of technology: broadband. It’s obvious that technology is constantly changing and expanding with snowballing velocity, however that’s not all that technology is:

Technology is not only driving, not only supplying or assisting our existence, it is increasingly becoming our existence, how can we deny it?

There is no denying it; there is nothing that technology hasn’t embraced, not only, touched, not only effected but embraced, and this trend will not stop until the next age, which eludes us indefinitely. For this reason, technology is our unavoidable future, the faster and deeper we can become technologically minded, the sooner we will have our future.

It’s a great race, we have to be in it to win it.

As a nation, we are in a great race, a race where nations compete for each others trade and in turn build their empires, not necessarily of geographical prominence, but of quality of life and of ideals, these ideals of freedom, and liberty that are the heart of us; ideals our forebears have fought and died to protect from other forces which have sought to enslave us, forces which still exist. As the lessons of history repeatedly confirm, a nation’s ability to grok technology can send it to the forefront of the nations, or it can make its status a third world country, or else delegate it completely to history as an annexed nation.

Technological aptitude is priceless in terms of a nation, we need to embrace technology at any cost.

yes, even at quality for life in the short term, even at the cost of other infrastructure in the short term, because because if we don’t embrace it, none of it will be around for us to enjoy – however any advancement in technologising life will surely pay us back in terms of quality of life, and ease of building our other infrastructure. Any advancement in technology therefore is an investment, and should be seen as such.

Broadband’s role in advancing technology.

How technology relies on communication:

Now that we fully understand the need for technology, let’s understand why technology relies on broadband, the word broadband has many uses, originally it implied that a signal being sent over a medium used the full capacity of the said medium; however we will assume its larger use in which it means “high speed internet”. To understand broadband’s relationship with technology, we must understand broadband’s relationship with the fundamental use and reason for technology: communication. Communication pretty much IS technology because without communication, technology would not spread, would not be understood, could not interact, or could not be built in partnership, therefore we would be left in the dark ages each time someone with an idea passed on.

The internet – the ultimate in communication:

We have many forms of communication; communication comes in many shapes and forms with increasing complexity, from speech, to smoke signals, to letters -  however there is nothing that comes even close to the effectiveness of digital communication, speech is fine, but you can’t hear someone across the ocean, the telephone is fine, but you can’t see the person speaking,  letters are fine but they take days to arrive – we have, through a process of advancement found our final idea of the ultimate communication: the internet.

The internet is a paradigm shift from normal communication because instead of just trying to amplify communication or modulate it, the internet allows communication to be assembled or stored within electronic media, and be ported anywhere and disassembled in anyway a receiver wishes to, and the sender allows. Also the internet has no preferred format – the internet – can carry any other type of communication eg. video, telephone calls, facsimile, virtual reality, and much more, it is also not inherently limited by distance, volume, number of channels, or number parties communicating at any given time.

The above is why the internet is the unchallenged leading method of communication across the globe with an increasing margin.

Technology <=> Communication <=> Internet <=> Broadband

Just as no one could argue for national prominence while ignoring technology, or argue for technology and neglect the internet, no-one could argue for the internet and neglect broadband, no-one – broadband is the de-facto medium that carries the internet, there is no other competitive choice, through these logical steps it becomes obvious that broadband is unanimous with technology.

The need for a public High Speed National Broadband Network

Why the free market hasn’t worked for public infrastructure,  why it never will

Some detractors from a national Broadband network say that the free market (ie. supply and demand) could work for Australia’s broadband needs, but has it so far?

Telstra’s Monopoly

The free market has done little to build the broadband network in Austrlia, even Telstra was not created by the free market, Telstra was a government entity sold to its shareholders as a combined wholesale and retailer of the fixed line telephone network to share holders from 1997. Since the sale Telstra has “grown fat sucking the teat of the copper wire that was provided to them”, they have upgraded some exchanges for ADSL and ISDN internet connections but due to its monopoly in the market has done little to increase the speed to anything close to an acceptable standard, and this speed is anything but accessible across the board. Official Govt. Source on Telstra sale. The Telstra monopoly ensures that telstra remains both a wholesaler and retailer of broadband, and is largely unregulated in the price it sets, as well as the fact that Telstra routinely blocks access to infrastructure from competing networks who either have to duplicate the technology, or can not move into an area.

Because of not only the free market, but free market monopoly of Telstra, which has dragged its heels in the upgrading or opening of its networks, Australia has one of the lowest rates of broadband connections, with the lowest speeds and highest costs in the western hemisphere.

More on Telstra’s Practices

Many Australians choose not to take high speed internet, does that mean they don’t want or need it?

It has been said that of the areas that high speed internet is available in Australia, there are relatively few people that take up high speed broadband, however, any allusions to this must be tempered with the realisation of the prohibitively high costs high speed broadband subscribers pay compared to other nations, and also the ridiculous conditions attached, which are not heard of in other nations – conditions including download limits, peak and off-peak times, and gross asymmetry which leaves the higher speed broadband out of reach to average Australian’s, and detrimentally affects commerce, education, science and medicin. It is said that the low takeup of high speed services indicate that Australians don’t want or need it, but perhaps a better measure  is looking at what some Australian’s including small business actually pay for high speed internet despite the high cost involved.

Private sectors priority is its executives and its shareholders.

The private sector will always look after executives, and its share holders, the greater public is a very distant third. Free market purists only have to look at the state of the market now, after bank-headed-bubble which collapsed recently in the US, and still affects the rest of the world.

Public Infrastructure should be in public hands!

While free market capitalism can help open up some areas, there are some universal necessities that should be provided by a democratic government,  public infra-structure being one of them. Long term planning of infrastructure can not be handled by short term needs, or the shaky vendors who supply them – this is the reason why we have town planning, we have a national highway system, reminiscent of way back when the Roman Empire grew the way it did because of roads that connected the world’s traders. Imagine if the government decided to let free market rule and instead let a bunch of farmers build connecting toll roads however they felt they wanted to, in different directions, around their prize crops and their houses, and could charge whatever they wanted. This is analogous to national broadband infrastructure too.

The Private sector can not handle something of the magnitude of what Australia needs; there will be too many squabbles, too many cut corners, too many bottlenecks, too many incompatibilities, asynchronicity and pricing schemes,  and too many people who simple can’t connect because no company sees it as profitable to supply them.

Which company is benevolent enough to be fair,  which company is large enough, which has the staying power? There fact is that the private sector can not provide a national broadband network for the real reasons that we need it, and certainly not any time soon.

What benefits will a public high speed National Broadband network provide?

Because of broadband high speed National Broadband Network will provide countless benefits to every aspect of society,

NBN will fuel our home grown content industry

For a nation of innovators who have made world changing discoveries, inventions, and designs in every field we have little to show for ourselves as far as innovation goes on the world wide web – and it’s no surprise that this is a direct result of  the unavailability and price of high speed internet, this has severely stunted the usually innovative enterprise of Australian developers, which have to watch as the world zooms past them, a world with ubiquitous networking, connected communities and large and able base of connected consumers.

Australia has missed the boat as far as web applications go, there is a growing consensus that all the big ideas out there are taken and that opportunities for new and innovative web applications are dwarfed by predatory companies who snap up any seminal idea before it gets off the ground.

Despite this, we can never concede defeat, we must not be left behind, and given the opportunity, Australian’s have been known to defy the odds and become very successful.

NBN will fuel home grown hosting infrastructure

Australia already has world-class data-centers (the powerhouses of the internet), but with faster broadband around Australia, and fatter pipes to our front door, other nations will start to host web servers on our own soil, and fuel much needed economic growth and jobs.

NBN will enable “Thin Client architecture”

If Australia had a high speed national broadband network, it could revolutionise computing in the country by allowing “thin client architecture” to relocate most of our computing resources local centralised data-houses, this would have untold benefits:

A thin client is a bare bones PC where less is more, the bulk of the software, hardware and processing power is contained or happens on a choice of more reliable, higher specification servers elsewhere on a connected network (eg. the internet). It can be a very small, low-powered device giving lower costs to purchase and to operate per seat. By keeping a few servers busy and many thin clients lightly loaded, users can expect easier system management and lower costs, as well as all the advantages of networked computing: central storage/backup and easier security. Because the thin client is relatively passive and low-maintenance, but numerous, the entire system is simpler and easier to install and to operate. As the cost of hardware plunges and the cost of employing a technician, buying energy, and disposing of waste rises, the advantages of thin clients grow. From the user’s perspective, the interaction with monitor, keyboard, and cursor changes little from using a thick client.  A high-end server can power over 700 clients, and a few data-centers full of many servers could serve the entire nations computer needs should this be a chosen plan. Thin clients are a great investment for schools and businesses who want to maximize the number of workstations they can purchase on a budget. A simple $100 unit could replace a computer in a school or business. It would also save a lot of power in the long run, due to low power consumption. The main advantages of thin clients are: Easier mass deployment of networks, easier to secure, data is kept safer from corruption, lower Hardware costs, they save electricity and produce less heat and wastes, less noise, easier replacement, portability of user location, less likely to be stolen (worth less), operable in extreme and hostile environments, more efficient use of computer resources, simple to upgrad, and less wasted hardware

NBN will take Australia’s world class education facilities truly online.

Online education is known to be of great value in the United States:

First it makes readings, original sources, or specialised materials more easily accessible to students. Second, it encourages more out-of-class student reflection and interaction among students or with the instructor. And, third, it helps to meet the expectations of students who increasingly anticipate that courses will be supplemented with online materials or discussions.

Online education also provides flexibility in ways traditional education can’t in terms of points of entry and exit, program components, modes of delivery, greater learner control and choice regarding the content, appropriate learner support systems such as better access to information on courses and services, and appropriate learning resources.

Australia’s education facilities are world class; there are about there are about 400,000 international students in the country this year (2009) and this number is growing every year, from about 200,000 in 2002. With high speed internet accessible to most of Australia this will not only drastically change the way Australians learn by enabling richer immersion in course-ware with greater learning outcomes, it will also enable world class Australian facilities to find a world audience, but most importantly, a high speed national broadband network will allow more young Australian’s to forgo traveling stay in their home, and home town to undertake a university degree.

NBN will enable unimaginable advancement through providing a platform for unleashed creativity

The human mind is the most creative thing on the planet, so when endowed and liberated with a new tool, unimaginable things happen in terms of the creations that turn out: you just never know how technology will be used and built upon, and the thought of combining the power of high speed internet with the ingenuity in the nation of Australia is amazing.

An example of new technology liberating others to create is the ways people have found to use the humble iPod.

NBN Will allow a plethora of bundled Services

There are some concerns being publicised about the cost to the user of the planned NBN, which in the unlikely event they are above $100 per month, will make the price less burdensome due to these value added services:

Digital Television services

The current free-to air and pay TV services  could be offered online as part of the packaged deal.

Voip telephone services

This is the big one, and perhaps Telstra’s real reason to keep its monopoly on the Australian broadband network: There is no reason, with the planned infra-structure that the Australian government could not institute a free national VOIP service, this service would require no extra architecture and could be run of the National Broadband Network, hence allowing free calling on a national scale, the only thing the Government would have to introduce is a directory per-se and allow customers to supply their own equipment. Of course if the government does not do it, it is simple enough for the free market to do, but with the free market there will be a loss of ubiquity, transparency, and interoperability.

NBN will bring untold benefit to the environment

There are great benefits to the environment in store if we migrate to a high speed National Broadband system

In 2007, before the Fiber to the Home (FTTH) plan was unveiled, Climate Risk, an environmental analysis expert identified some ways we can achieve a 5% reduction in Australia’s national emissions while also saving $6.6 billion a year for homes and business.

• High-definition videoconferencing.
• Remote management of household appliances which are not being used.
• Better logistics systems which do not allow vehicles to move around without loads.
• Teleworking, which people to work in a virtual office without ever leaving their home.
• Increasing renewable energy use with networked demand-side management. By 2015, they could reduce Australia’s greenhouse emissions by about 27 million carbon tonnes a year

And this study was just focused on the short term, before the current Fiber to the Home plans were announced.

Fiber Optics are the ultimate in networking technology, choosing fiber: another no brainer

Fiber Optics is the fastest, cheapest, purest, un-improvable digital communications medium, and arguably: technology on the planet. Against its only competitors: copper or wireless, fiber optics trumps them both. The only thing that will come ahead of fiber optics as a communications medium will be teleportation, telekenisis, or just… understanding.

There is no question that we need a National Broadband Network, and there should be no question that this network should run on fiber.