Dear NBNco

Bring it on? Cut it out.

This article – much like the NBN roll out – is long overdue, and it’s time that those of us in the technology sector spoke out. Since the Abbott–Turnbull government first imposed its NBN policy directives, the voices of experts in our industry have been ignored. They continue to be ignored.

Our concerns are wide ranging. But what bothers us most is that NBNco – the company tasked with rolling out Australia’s largest infrastructure project – is failing to do so. Luckily, it’s not over yet, and we still believe that it’s possible to fix what’s broken and we can stop swerving towards the embarrassing road we’re barreling down, and change direction for the kind of NBN Australia deserves.

I also must raise, the fibre isn't the important part of my complaint. While the multi-technology was an absolutely wrong choice, the real root cause was the policy and business decisions, related to the purchase and ongoing contractual obligations of existing infrastructure from incumbent telecommunication monopolies which have driven up costs while holding us back.

Quick history of the NBN

The NBN was born of the failure of the many political and private endeavours before it. Telstra was chiefly privatised to capture investment capital from the business community with the intent purpose of replacing the ageing copper network. This never came to pass. And now the NBN is in danger of repeating the failures from which it sprang. History is repeating itself.

While the original model (Fibre to the Premises, FTTP) offered a high-performance connection, the model we have settled for (FTTN, Fibre to the Node) relies on decades old copper infrastructure. It can be as unreliable as the infrastructure it purports to upgrade.

NBNco is continuing this trend, racing to the bottom with the Multi Technology Mix. As they deploy these different kinds of technologies we will end up with an NBN that is neither suitable nor cost effective. All while actively working to remove incentives for future upgrades to the network to keep up with demands of the citizens.

The Liberal NBN is broken, and the resulting network will be equal or worse than what it replaced. How can we be an innovation nation when we rank 60th in global Internet speeds?

Purpose-built…for 1872

Most of the technologies available to the NBNco Multi Technology Mix were not originally designed for the internet. Copper networks were built for telegraphs and phone calls. Today, that technology is held together with plastic bags and Band-Aids, while the fibre-optic network’s core design has a single purpose: transmitting internet data as fast as possible.

Fibre may be initially more expensive because it’s a newer technology, but keeping the copper network on life support is plain irresponsible. The Coalition and Bill Morrow repeat cheaper and faster, but they ignore economies of scale. Slightly more expensive results in exceptionally better return on your investment. "Faster, but worse" doesn't have the same ring as "Faster and cheaper".

and I'm going to ignore the behind-the-scenes ISP/RSP/CVC Costing/Congestion issues because that's an entirely other nightmare.

Why Focus on Fibre?

In 2017, broadband internet access shouldn’t be a luxurious toy, but a privilege all Australians enjoy. As more and more of our institutions come to rely on the NBN, the lack of equitable access will mean that those without will be severely disadvantaged. Education, entertainment and future career prospects all depend on reliable internet access.

Using FTTNode, the best of the speeds available are only maintained for the first kilometre. Considering that speed continues to drop with every additional metre, every home on the street is likely to be connected at a different speed. FTTN requires nodes to be located at a visible distance from the property for a chance of higher-than-average speeds.

Fibre maintains its maximum speed for the length of the entire run, which means that node placement is much more flexible. For example, if NBNco decided to limit fibre runs to five kilometres, this would require massively fewer nodes. In turn, that would mean a lower cost for installation, power and ongoing maintenance.

The original FTTP ideal is non-discriminatory. It creates a society where an NBN-enabled home is the gold standard for speed and equality, with most homes being equal – hopefully including those in rural areas. In that sense, the NBN is more than a piece of infrastructure, it's an economic enterprise – and should leveraged as an instrument for social and economic good. With a little more foresight, it should be both.

Where we have headed with the FTTN looks very different…

CEO of NBN walks into a bar
"What'll be?"
"A pint"
"$10"
CEO pays
Bartender pours ¼ a pint
"I paid for a pint?"
"You paid for up to a pint"

— DaKangaroo (@DaKangaroo) October 13, 2017

Speeds: FTTP vs FTTN

FTTP guarantees the best available speeds to all Australians, everywhere (at the time of writing, that would be up to 1000 Mbps). Not just the lucky ones. Whereas copper-based FTTN can be a roll of the dice. Unguaranteed speeds range from a ‘best case scenario’ of 65 Mbps to as low as 10 Mbps, depending on a number of factors (such as rain), with no ability to improve. Why do we accept an infrastructure project with such clear winners and losers? And a low benchmark for even the best connections.

You just have to look to the real-estate market to see how this is playing out. Increasingly, homes are advertised as “NBN FTTP enabled” to showcase the fact that they have ‘Fibre to the Premises’ (FTTP). The technology once promised to all is fast becoming a luxury item and commanding a premium, available (for a price) to the lucky few.

Complications

Every piece of technology has primary hardware, supporting hardware and operating software, as well as support contracts and training. Hardware quickly goes out of warranty or is discontinued; multiplying those hardware issues by using a mix of technology just makes no sense. Different brands and technologies are commonly unable to directly speak to each other, requiring system administrators to glue the disparate pieces together – at considerable cost.

In short, NBNco’s model of adapting and maintaining Frankenstein networks is incredibly expensive and complex. Choosing a single technology would reduce upfront and ongoing maintenance costs.

Meanwhile, Turnbull continues to raise concerns that “people don’t use higher speeds” while failing to mention this is because consumers are unable to experience mind changing online experiences until they have the ability to use them on a daily basis. This is a chicken and egg issue – build it and they will use it. The business community will feast on this increased bandwidth especially during the #ideasboom with entrepreneurs brimming with possibilities for this untapped bandwidth. (Streaming services like Netflix, for example, are a prime example of the kind of opportunistic entrepreneurialism Australia could see with increasing bandwidths.)

And – perhaps, as someone has suggested, if you don’t have the kind of connectivity you think you should, maybe you should ask if it’s your own fault. After all, that’s what Malcolm Turnbull thinks.

@SaysJuliaKeady just curious:- if connectivity was so vital to you why did you buy a house where there was no broadband available?

— Malcolm Turnbull (@TurnbullMalcolm) March 20, 2014

After billions of dollars and years of time invested, The NBN is just game of dice, getting a decent service is random chance.

Extra Reading: Technical Issues

Weather

Copper-based broadband networks are affected by the weather. Rain causes connection problems, thanks to insufficient protection and non-waterproofed access panels. TV and radio broadcast towers also degrade copper cable. To fix this you need additional hardware, such as RF filters (another extra cost).

Wireless broadband

While offering homes internet access without digging up the streets, wireless also suffers from congestion issues. The more people connecting to each tower, the smaller the share of bandwidth each person gets. Even in the best conditions, wirelessly connected homes will never reach acceptable levels for video conferencing, online gaming or similar real-time services.

Latency

It’s an issue often raised by network engineers, but latency is often lost in the wider political discussion. Internet connections are primarily advertised by connection speed (25Mbps). Latency (put simply, the speed at which messages are sent) is not advertised. But the lower the latency, the more real-time and complex services become possible.

Online gaming, teleconferencing, and forex/share trading depends on the signal being sent, received and responded to as fast as possible. Fibre’s latency is unbeatable thanks to the speed of light, offering 1–20ms connections to local servers compared to 20–150ms connections with FTTN, and 200–1000ms over wireless.

Online Commerce
Over the last few years, Amazon and Google have both published some remarkable statistics on latency. Both found that every 100ms of latency cost them 1% in sales or conversions. They produced examples showing that one second (1000ms) of extra delay resulted in around 9% reduction in sales and conversions. As we transition to an e-commerce focused digital economy and online always-on retail and services, speed is king – but latency is queen.

Fibre-only models resolve many issues telecommunication engineers face on a daily basis, yet the Turnbull government continues.
The points raised above are all well known, widely understood, and should come as no surprise to anybody inside the NBNco.