NBN reveals new FTTdp trials, but says FTTN not ‘dead’

97

news The NBN company today revealed it would undertake a new set of trials in Sydney and Melbourne of the Fibre to the Distribution Point technology which some believe represents a viable path forward for ditching the company’s Fibre to the Node rollout style once and for all.

The NBN company has been trialling FTTdp for some time internally. It has previously gone to market to purchase FTTdp hardware for the trials, and already came close to hitting the 1Gbps speed tier in trials of the technology in an apartment block in Carlton in Melbourne.

However, this afternoon the company revealed it would conduct a new set of trials in Sydney, Melbourne and other capital cities. The news appears to have been broken by ZDNet first this afternoon.

The NBN company subsequently issued a statement noting that both the FTTdp model and the associated ‘skinny fibre’ approach to cutting costs in its backhaul Local Fibre Network were “new” technologies that both needed further testing.

“FTTdp is an exciting prospect for the company but it is a very new technology,” the company said. “FTTdP is not currently being deployed anywhere in the world at scale. A lot more work needs to be done in terms of field testing of the equipment for Australian conditions. We also need to know more about the financials and the rollout logistics.

The company said that FTTdp could use either the VDSL or G.Fast standards to connect customers. “There are potential savings for both Skinny Fibre and FTTdp – but more work is needed,” it said. It is believed the FTTdp trials will only involve small numbers of premises.

The news comes as this week a series of revelations have rocked the NBN issue, especially associated with events in Parliament House in Canberra.

Earlier this week NBN chief executive Bill Morrow revealed that the NBN company had put a proposal to its board for a wide-scale deployment of FTTdp. A number of commentators — including members of the Opposition — believe the combination of FTTdp and the ‘skinny fibre’ option for the NBN company’s Local Fibre Network has the potential to make the company’s Fibre to the Node rollout obsolete.

The key factor is cost and speed of rollout. The use of the two technologies brings the cost of this so-called ‘Fibre to the Gate’ model close to the Fibre to the Node rollout model for the NBN, which is being used to connect about a third of Australian premises.

However, it also brings much better technical functionality, allowing broadband speeds similar to a Fibre to the Premises rollout.

FTTN not dead
In its statement, the NBN company also issued a pointed rebuttal to those who believe Fibre to the Node is on the way out.

“At present FTTN remains the fastest and most cost effective end-user way for nbn to connect end-users,” the company said. FTTN cost per premises is $2,300 as stated in our corporate plan and financial results.”

“We are looking to make fast broadband available to 2 million more homes in the next Financial Year alone with FTTN. By June 2017 we will have more FTTN premises Ready for Service than FTTP.”

The company stipulated that it had the flexibility to use whatever technology it chose to.

“We are of course continuing to test new ways to bring ours costs down,” it said. “We will aim to use the right technology in the right place. This helps us meet our goal of providing very fast broadband to all Australians as quickly and cost-effectively as possible.”

“FTTN is still faster and cheaper to deploy than any other technology.”

Image credit: NBN company

97 COMMENTS

  1. Fttn is also crap.. So if they can choose the technology they like, then why go for FTTN. ? At least Fttdp is upgradeable and easier to order FOD.. Not to mention superior to FTTN in every way except for FTTP>
    Mind boggles why they are insisting of FTTN.. Cheaper to install, maybe? But its performance and reliability is poor, and costs bucket to run and maintain. I think if you add the maintenance and running costs to FTTN, you will find its actually far more expensive than they make out.

  2. Clue-by-four needed for nbn™:
    Cheapest upfront cost =/= ” most cost effective”

    And of course FttN isn’t dead. They’ve got to keep it alive until at least after the federal election, otherwise Labor could run a massive advertising campaign about how Malcolm Turnbull’s Muddle delayed the fibre rollout for years and added $billions to the price, just for them to go back to the Labor fibre plan after a couple of years. (Which they’re doing anyway, but trying to achieve by stealth).

  3. “At present FTTN remains the fastest and most cost effective end-user way for nbn to connect end-users,” the company said.

    This is the contentious bit of this for me. Its not the most cost effective, its the cheapest. FTTdp is the most cost effective and for now delivers the most bang for the buck.

    In the long term, getting to a full FttP build, then neither are because both need additional costs to become FttP, something the Liberals continuously ignore.

    But of the two options here, FttN is the cheaper, which doesnt mean its the most cost effective.

      • I would think FttDP would be fairly easy to upgrade the last section. Apparently easier than the node to the home, at the very least.

        • Definitely, my point was more that FTTN was chosen on cost alone, and the benefits for FTTP were largely ignored.

          • The benefits were not largely ignored, FTTP is ideal for areas that require new infrastructure, FTTP is therefore ideal for greenfields areas, I expect the Coalition and Labor to continue with that model.

          • Telstra is not the NBN Co.

            +1 to yourself, what a sock puppet act eh? bit low though what’s wrong with a +100 – lol

          • @ alain

            “Telstra is not NBNCo”

            No but they will be NBN™ if your heroes have their way…

            Regardless, ROFL…

            I see you are becoming a bit snooty and making up more fantasies to cover for your subservient stupidity…

            Oh of course, business as usual, please continue, we are all “most amused” possibly more than normal…

            You’re welcome.

          • Definitely, my point was more that FTTN was chosen on cost alone, and the benefits for FTTP were largely ignored.

            100% agree, the only “B” with FttN is cost, any other benefit is totally ignored.

          • “Telstra is not the NBN Co.”
            May as well be, given that laying copper leads directly to triple dipping into nbns coffers at this point.

            Let’s conveniently ignore that Labors mandate was for FTTP to greenfields and that appears to have gone wayside. Which was the entire point of your throw away comment. Oops.

    • Exactly. When the government is spending $50 billion + ongoings, the only sane approach is one that gives lasting value. Right now it’s all short-term thinking for political gain and then sell it off no matter what.

    • GongGav,

      But of the two options here, FttN is the cheaper, which doesnt mean its the most cost effective.

      How does the cheapest fixed line infrastructure rollout and the fastest to deploy rollout and therefore the quickest option to the get customer revenue rolling in (ROI) not cost effective?

      • Fastest by a small margin.

        Cheaper on an initial deployment, more expensive over longer period.

        1 – It will need to be upgraded sooner, at a substantial (replace the copper) cost.
        2 – Operating expenditure is greater.

        Only short term idiocy puts it as “Cheaper” anyone thinking more than an election period or 2 understands that it is in fact more expensive.

        • 1 – It will need to be upgraded sooner, at a substantial (replace the copper) cost.

          Nailed it.

      • @ alain

        FRAUDBAND /FTTN was NOT faster for me or many like me… as promised pre- Sept 2013?

        So WRONG about faster to deploy.

      • Woolfe,

        Fastest by a small margin.

        What margin is that?

        Cheaper on an initial deployment, more expensive over longer period.

        So when will FTTN need to be upgraded and at what cost?

        1 – It will need to be upgraded sooner, at a substantial (replace the copper) cost.

        Define ‘sooner’ and the cost.

        2 – Operating expenditure is greater.

        The OPEX of FTTN is what that makes it a deal breaker?

        • @ alain

          Can’t disprove, can’t excuse, can’t even (typically) lie and contradict to attempt to address my concern so… just ignore…

          Q. Will you ever grow some?

          A. No

          You’re welcome.

          • @rizz – if you see this, what I like is the irony that last week he was whinging that peoples ‘argument’ had reduced to personal attack, only for him to be doing the same here.

            Like when he reduces his debate to calling you a sockpuppet…

          • Indeed GG,

            Over the years we have all become accustomed to alain’s little games, contradictions, complete ill-logic/irrationality, lies, exaggerations, his one rule for him another for us and of course his go to ploy… the childish route and do so, 0-100 quicker than an R35.

            Which is why we love him so, he’s so much fun to fuck with, due to complete inconsistency and bullshit…

        • Woolfe gone MIA, in steps the 24/7 tagger with yet more repetitive off topic stocking filler crap.

          Need to respond, even for others, anything will do.

          • 24/7 since when?

            Would that be a personal attack Reality? OMG are you resorting to the tactics you so love to accuse others of…

            Off topic? Exactly how? I was merely responding that it is not that much quicker, and when you take into account the long term cost, it is not cheaper either. Others have suggested that it won’t be cheaper in the short term either. I kind of agree, but am not certain of that yet.

        • This is what happens when you stop caring about the debate, to the point of not watching responses.

          @alain – how are YOU defining cost effectiveness? I’m defining it by the cost to get to a full fibre build.

          But FttDP builds as far as is needed at a wholesale level. The fibre from there to the property is specific to the individuals needs, and I can live with that.

          What does it cost to get from FttN to FttP versus what it costs to get from FttDP to FttP. One is in the thousands for the consumer, one is in the hundreds.

        • 1 year

          “Sooner” than the other technological choices available at the moment

          OPEX of FTTN is one of many deal breakers.

      • How does the cheapest fixed line infrastructure rollout and the fastest to deploy rollout and therefore the quickest option to the get customer revenue rolling in (ROI) not cost effective?

        It’s like you come here and don’t see/read anything except for posts to attack if they don’t back your beloved FttN :o(

  4. I’d like them to include Zillmere in the FTTdp trials, namely the section between Zillmere Rd, Church Rd, Muller Rd and the FTTP zone above it.

    I might be living in that zone, but that’s beside the point…

  5. Given it seems they are hellbent on offloading the NBN to Telstra asap, it makes sense that lowest cost comes before everything else.

  6. So at the end of the day what do these FttDp trials actually mean if GimpCo has no intention of replacing FttN with it. I’m sure they are happy to piss away yet more time & money exploring solutions in the name of being “technology agnostic” anything to give the appearance their patchwork mess is not politically motivated. Remember according to coalition clowns nobody needs more than 25mbps, assuming GimpCo do switch to FttDp this would be an admission FttN is not sufficient (just as we predicted) yet they still cant admit FttP was the correct solution all along. They’ll only consider future speed requirements when it’s the present.

    • Back before GimpCo became “technology agnostic” I seem to recall that they ran a small trial for FTTN that went to 200,000 or so premises. They must really have had some heavily agnostic faith in that technology.

      I wonder if they will be running FTTdp to 200,000 premises just to make sure it works?

    • So at the end of the day what do these FttDp trials actually mean if GimpCo has no intention of replacing FttN with it.

      I may be totally wrong Hubert, but I get the vibe that Morrow wants to try scaling Fttdo up a bit, and possibly using newer techniques (the previous trial were over a year ago), to see if it is a viable alternative to FttN (viable as per the SoE that the board needs to decide things on).

      Otherwise….yeah, why would they bother?

      • I may be totally wrong Hubert, but I get the vibe that Morrow wants to try scaling Fttdo up a bit

        I guess we’ll see what happens but either way it’s not a good look for GimpCo. One of their twatter shill feeds was asking yesterday if it (FttDp) could save GimpCo implying that it needs saving. lol.

        • Yes indeed HC.

          It like another shill (if not the same one here) keeps asking when Labor will have a solution…

          Why would anyone need a solution, if there isn’t a fucking problem.

          Seems even the shills know how fucked MTM is (except the one who could have written it… lol) but of course, they aren’t allowed to say.

        • One of their twatter shill feeds was asking yesterday if it (FttDp) could save GimpCo implying that it needs saving. lol.

          Indeed it does, nice to see even they agree :o)

  7. This is imo not really anything new, NBN have been using SEM’s (larger 48 port or less micro nodes basically or Sealed Expansion Module in AL speak) already for sections that are too small for a 192 port cabinet to be worthwhile.

  8. i’d be happy to go FTTdP , its the best of both worlds and give businesses (home and corporate) the option to take fiber all the way to the building if it’s needed.

    i’d like ftth as it removes a return path as far as lightning strikes go, I’ve lost 6 modems in one month a summer ago, 2 cable modems a few years earlier, all of which caused damage to either the modem, router or computers.

    having rapid upload bandwidth also give rise to cloud based storage, near lan like VPN access to work servers etc. So many reasons to fiber.

    • bob 17/03/2016 at 6:59 pm

      i’d be happy to go FTTdP , its the best of both worlds and give businesses (home and corporate) the option to take fiber all the way to the building if it’s needed.
      It may be the best of both worlds,but why should you have to settle for second best?.
      if this mob had not stuffed around and thrown away billions on rubbish you could of had the best bar none.

  9. The NBN company today revealed it would undertake a new set of trials in Sydney and Melbourne of the Fibre to the Distribution Point technology.
    How many trials do you need ? by this time, if you haven,t worked out what is required you are either pretty stupid,retarded, or you are planning a big coverup ,you first trot out the big technical words and then give it a good layer of BS switch all the plans around and around till every body gets dizzy,then tell every body ye this is the best plan it,s called fttp it,s super super super fast and super cheap and every body claps and says gee this mob are just wonderful,we will have to vote them in again.
    For me the turds should go to jail.

    • Hughie, the dirt is harder in other cities…….. cough……

      The majority of costs in this model is skilled labour, I can only guess that is the part they are testing.

  10. “FTTN cost per premises is $2,300 as stated in our corporate plan and financial results”

    And strangely, the cost for FTTP in New Zealand is $NZ2,134…

      • And strangely, the cost for FTTP in New Zealand is $NZ2,134…

        … and strangely the Chorus rollout in NZ which is a private/public partnership where Chorus is rolling out to duct infrastructure it already owns and also a major portion of aerial FTTP to a population size about 75% of Melbourne is just like here, so yeah there is no reason why the FTTP CPP should not be the same.

        • Your statement would be relevant, if we were rolling out FTTP to the whole continent, which we weren’t.

          Australian cities are quite urbanised, and our larger population means economies of scale would kick in MORE than in NZ. Thus, yes, the prices seen in NZ are actually quite indicative of what Australia could have expected.

          But, ignoring all that, you claim we can’t look at the FTTP CPP of NZ because its so different, yet point to BT and their FTTN rollout as somehow indicative of FTTN in Australia?

          Blatant hypocrisy. If NZ is nothing like Australia, how the hell is Britain anything at all like Australia?

          A population almost 3 times more than Australia in an area close to 36 times smaller than Australia, but apparently the UK FTTN rollout is perfect to point at to prove that FTTN is perfect for Australia, but our closest neighbour rolling out FTTP is somehow nothing at all like Australia.

          But I look forward to your non-sensical reply justifying your hypocrisy.

          • R0ninX3ph,

            You left out the bit where Chorus had to utilise a hefty portion of the much cheaper FTTP aerial deployment (they even designed their own aerial cable) to get their FTTP cost down.

          • ……So? Is there something inherently evil about aerial fibre that I am missing?

            But of course you ignore the point of my post, which was pointing out your hypocrisy.

            If you’re allowed to point and scream about BT FTTN in Britain, Britain which is not in anyway similar to Australia, then we’re allowed to point to NZ and Chorus’ rollout.

          • @ alain…

            Oh, like the “FAILED” HFC you told us previously you had “hanging across the road form your place”, which is only good for the pigeons to perch upon”

            Is that what you mean?

            You’re welcome.

          • R0ninX3ph,

            ……So? Is there something inherently evil about aerial fibre that I am missing?

            No other than longevity and it’s much cheaper to roll out than in ground FTTP that’s why Chorus use it, so to say NBN Co FTTP CPP should be at least at Chorus NZ level we need to ask the NBN Co to recalculate their FTTP CPP using the same proportion of aerial that Chorus NZ are using – sound fair?

            It does but pro FTTP fans are not interested in fair.

            If you’re allowed to point and scream about BT FTTN in Britain, Britain which is not in anyway similar to Australia,

            The point of comparison is BT is rolling out both FTTN and FTTP and state that FTTN is cheaper and faster to deploy than FTTP, it is a technical infrastructure rollout comparison.

            then we’re allowed to point to NZ and Chorus’ rollout.

            You can point out Chorus & NZ all you like, I don’t care, I will still point out the differences to Australia including the structure and funding of the controlling company, the differences in the FTTP deployment model and the vast differences in residences and area covered.

          • “The point of comparison is BT is rolling out both FTTN and FTTP and state that FTTN is cheaper and faster to deploy than FTTP, it is a technical infrastructure rollout comparison.”

            So, population density doesn’t come in at all regarding the speed/cost of rolling out FTTN? Kay.

          • @R0ninX3ph

            Didn’t he say that’s the critical difference comparing us to NZ and why you can’t compare them?

        • Nope.

          Costs for duct usage had already been covered, and has the same effect on Copper as it does on the fibre.

          Population size is irrelevant. In fact NZ will likely be more expensive due to Economies of scale.

          • Costs for duct usage had already been covered,

            ‘Covered’ meaning what exactly?, we are comparing the equivalent of the incumbent in NZ (a Telstra) rolling out FTTP with government funding assistance to the 100% Government owned and funded NBN Co here.

            You left out the Chorus aerial FTTP deployment, well you would because that’s different to here, so you have to leave it out.

          • “‘Covered’ meaning what exactly?, we are comparing the equivalent of the incumbent in NZ (a Telstra) rolling out FTTP with government funding assistance to the 100% Government owned and funded NBN Co here.”

            Covered by the Telstra deal giving NBN access to Telstra pits and pipes.

          • Accuse people of sock puppetry all you want Reality, but when other people understand what someone means and they can explain it, why shouldn’t they?

            He clearly meant that NBN Co have access to the Telstra pits and pipes like Chorus does in NZ, so, it doesn’t matter?

          • Oh he ‘clearly meant’ did he, love the MtM bashers band of brothers helping each other out when it all gets a bit awkward, which is quite often.

            lol

          • “Clearly meant”

            Yep it is exactly what I meant.

            Costs for duct usage in the Australian example had been covered.

            Getting a bit desperate aren’t you Reality

          • Alain wouldn’t understand, because he has no friends here…

            Even the other faithful crusaders aren’t interested in supporting him and his style of arguing via contradictions, lies, BS and stupidity.

          • Not wrong Woolfe, he even tried claiming FttN doesn’t have maintenance, power or even any actual cost for the new copper wires in another post!!

  11. Can someone in the know take a punt at what technology would they possibly run in my case.
    There is a Telstra pit across the road (narrow 2 way suburban street), with a power pole next to it. My telephone cable comes overhead from the power pole to my facia on the house.
    Could I be blessed with Fttp or FttDp if it’s in by then. Is there a policy they run for overhead connections?

  12. I suspect that they’re stalling on instruction from the Government. The fact that this trial is happening is just further confirmation they want to go ahead with it, just not yet politically. It’s an election year – things must be done right. Malcolm needs a boost in the polls, so I suspect that he’s looking at the financial practicalities of FTTdp behind the scenes as we speak. The only other stumbling block now is the Statement of Expectations, which needs amending.

  13. What? More trials just to cement further inequity in the network? I’m sure home owners who live just outside of these trial areas are going to love their property values.

  14. So explain something to me… you’ll deploy FTTN.

    Then people will have to upgrade to FTTdp / FTTP anyway and because the Nodes are actively switched (vs GPON) you’ll either have to expend more money in the long term keeping it operational or more money in the short term replacing the active components with passive ones?…

    How is that more cost effective as an upgrade path…

    • I just feel sorry for the people on FTTN if they do make the switch to FTTdp for the non-HFC and non-FTTP build areas. My parents area is going RFS in August this year, but that means they’ll be stuck on FTTN for years to come.

      • crossing fingers over here! became disabled (gradual onset) and got to point of not able to work come dec 2012. was so chuffed about FTTP set for early 2014 install, allows me to do volunteer work from home in my field (special education) and lets me see my specialists in HD from home instead of being unable to walk or do much else for the week after I’m tranported to each appointment. shoddy copper here, scheduled now for FTTN in last half of 2017 -reaaaaally hoping it is delayed further or FTTdp is easily to sub in quickly after the election cause more than anything else I need an impressive upload channel

      • That would be me. I am lined up to get FTTN sometime this year. Since the copper in my area is so degraded its unlikely I will get more than 12mbit.

  15. This is another political ploy to confuse, mislead and misinform the general public with bogus technical jargon.

    The truth is FTTdp (Fibre To The Distribution Point) is very similar to FTTC / FTTN

    • This is another political ploy to confuse, mislead and misinform the general public with bogus technical jargon.

      Not sure where you are going with this, the NBN Co didn’t choose the technical term FTTdp, nor FTTN or FTTC for that matter.

      • Put simply,it takes a long time for the public awareness of something as dry as technology and cost difference between FTTN/FTTP to build at all. Arguably the media are starting to report quite negatively on the prospects of FTTN now, easy fix for Malcolm, new buzzword , Fibre to the Curb or whatever simplification he uses (one will be necessary) for FTTdp and then the media loses ability to contrast Labor and Coalition plans because the mix just got so much more chaotic and the amount of FTTN going forward will be unknown not to mention it’s likely success speed and reliability wise on average across the nation.master stroke from Malcolm to remove most baggage from FTTN being apparently his baby.

      • Not sure where you are going with this, the NBN Co didn’t choose the technical term FTTdp, nor FTTN or FTTC for that matter.

        Who?? Oh, you mean nbn™…get with the times Reality ;o)

    • Oh absolutely! All the coalition need do is talk up FTTdp and the building general public awareness of FTTN inadequacy and lack of cost efficiency is gone in a millisecond via utter confusion. In lieu of understanding people default to who seems to the most compelling and seemingly honest salesperson, that would be Malcolm (SEEMINGLY)

      • All the information and trials about FTTdp so far has come from the NBN Co itself, nothing to do with Turnbull.

        Enhancements to FTTN is a dynamic as trials of FTTdp, VDSL and G.fast overseas results are published.
        FTTdp and enhancements will have minimal effect on the FTTN rollout targets and construction model in 2016, post election it may influence the FTTN model in the 2017 onwards time frame.

        • Oh yep cheers , I get that already, I’m talking about what Malcolm does with this information, that’s what my informed speculation was about :)
          That being said , Mal.has been on about G.Fast and higher speed VDSL since the 2013 policy announcement.

          Also RE FTTN,FTTP,FTTC,FTTdp all adding up to confusion you are correct these terms existed already and are technically correct but the public was lost once FTTN was added not to mention HFC. FTTdp for this reason has power to completely derail any media critique of FTTN rollout and trials despite merit or lack of. It would be a political masterstroke to push it hard as token policy – they can say it’s a logical step forward in their technical agnosticism, a symbol of their nimbke pragmatism and an easy upgrade for FTTN when and if that’s needed – even if this claim is total garbage, remember Turnbull saying Rudd and co were conducting a despicable scare campaign for ballparking fibre on demand at 3 to 5 thousand dollars ? That hasn’t negatively impacted Turnbull yet and won’t if FTTdp is pushed.

      • Oh absolutely! All the coalition need do is talk up FTTdp and the building general public awareness of FTTN inadequacy and lack of cost efficiency is gone in a millisecond via utter confusion.

        Actually, all they need to do is say it has many of the advantages of fibre (including speed) and the benefit of reusing the copper to make the roll out faster and they have both a political and actual winner. They don’t need to even mention the issues with FttN.

        It really is a no-brainer…they’d better hope the ALP or Greens don’t take it as policy before them…

        • Agreed.

          FTTdp is not as good as FTTP, but it is a better stepping solution than FTTN, which requires a lot of NEW Copper to be laid *facepalm*

          ALP and Greens should throw down and say that the end goal is FTTP, but due to the mess that MTM has created we will be staging some of the areas with FTTdp first.

          • Yep, the only way they can avoid the NBN becoming an even bigger cluster fuck is if they start getting bipartisan on it…FttN is too much of a waste of money for what it does for the ALP, and FttP is too expensive for who it gives it too for the LPA, hopefully they can both see Fttdp as a middle ground.

          • Yes but then what would all the usual suspects MTM illogical ideologues here do, without having the others to blame for everything…

            They’d be shattered :)

  16. Is it just me or do the continued leaks and news of trials of skinny fibre and FTTDP just scream of a company which actually might be doing their job (representing Australia’s best interests in creating our new network) but whose hands are so tied politically they’re unable to do so.

    I mean since the current government took power I’ve been under the impression that NBNCo, with the turn over in management, had become their puppet, a tool to do their whims. It’s feeling more and more like NBNCo has been kicking and screaming this whole time trying to get out from under their thumb only to have their opinions silenced by propaganda.

    • It’s a romantic idea, but I don’t think it’s true.

      nbn’s mandate is (basically) to provide 25Mbit to everyone as quick as possible for the least cost. FTTN is nasty, but it’s technology they can buy off the shelf today and it’s cheap to deploy. Future speed requirements, copper maintenance and upgradability are problems they’re leaving for the new private owners post 2020 to deal with.

Comments are closed.