ADSL2+ is not the answer: why we still desperately need FttN

Send to a friend Print

Help more people find out about this story

Del.icio.us
StumbleUpon

David Braue07 February 2008, 4:35 AM

It's well and good that Telstra has switched on ADSL2+ for 2.5 million homes, but thousands of people will discover they are still getting slow speeds despite paying premium rates for the new service. Here's why fibre is the only solution.


Telstra may finally be switching on its ADSL2+ services in over 900 exchanges around the country, but it had better be ready to handle the legions of disappointed customers who will find out that just because they’re paying for ADSL2+, doesn’t mean they’re getting it.

The surprise announcement, which ended more than a year in which Telstra had flat-out refused to turn on the ADSL2+ equipment it had installed, was hailed by responsible minister Stephen Conroy as a step forward for Australian broadband – and it is, as long as there’s less than about a kilometre of wire between you and your local Telstra exchange.

Note that I’m talking about wire, not distance; telecommunications cabling snakes its way under the streets and the actual length of the wire to your house can be nearly twice the physical distance.

This translates into ADSL2+ signal attenuation that means just one thing you need to care about: while Telstra will potentially be providing (and charging) more than 2 million homes for 20Mbps services, many of those will be limping along at a tenth of the speed.

My house, in a densely populated area 13km outside of Melbourne, is around 3km from the exchange but apparently has more than 4km of wiring (you can check your own situation, along with an estimate of the ADSL2+ speeds you can expect, at www.adsl2exchanges.com.au .

Throw in the usual spaghetti of in-house phone wiring, and I was welcomed to the world of ADSL2+ with speeds of just 1.5Mbps; moving to another phone outlet in the house, I was cruising along at a blistering 800Kbps – that’s 0.8Mbps.

After much swearing, reconfiguration, technical support calling, and dusty crawling around the roof, I found and disconnected an errant phone line that, it seems, was introducing interference into the connection.

I know this because speeds jumped – all the way to 2.9Mbps. If that doesn’t sound like ADSL2+ to you, well, you’re thinking like I am. And I’m thinking that while Telstra has done something good by turning on these DSLAMs, it’s only the beginning – and not the end, as was suggested by Internode head Simon Hackett in response to the announcement.

Widespread ADSL2+, Hackett reasoned, would obviate the need for a fibre-to-the-node network as it becomes more widespread. But given my own experiences, I think ADSL2+ is just going to be a toe in the water; my own service would become far faster if there were a fibre-equipped node on a nearby street corner – which would mean my signal wouldn’t have time to attenuate over a few hundred metres to the local node.

In the meantime, new ADSL2+ customers expecting an instant speed boost need to temper their expectations; there are still so many variables affecting performance that it’s just not a guarantee of anything. Until the FttN rollout gets underway, millions of customers, me included, just won’t be getting what they paid for.

 


Post your comment



Comments

RSS feed Email alert

tin:

ADSL2+ is barely worth it for our house.
Looking at the Internode graphs, we'd see a speed increase of between 400kbps and 700kbps (currently getting around 4.5 to 5mbps).

The only reason for us to go ADSL2 would be lower costs, but that only happens with 3rd party DSLAMs... And I doubt that will happen here soon (if ever).

29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Paul:

ADSL2+ is useless if you are on Pair Gain and no copper line to your house. May as well be ADSL1.

There are 20 000 homes on the NSW Central Coast that can not get ADSL due to distance from exchange or pair gain line, what is Telstra doing to help these residents, not much, chech out NextG they say, yeah right. Lets hope wimax is the answer.

29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Chuck:

I am guessing you like everyone else gets 90% of their internet content from the US.

So what happens when you get your FTTN network, everyone on 20 Meg+ and the international links saturated. Sure you can download ubuntu from the internode file mirror in 30 secs. Not much else.

What this country needs is 3 or 4 more of the PIPE network international links, this is the bottle neck, this is where bandwidth increases and cost savings need to occur and with better contention rates, the old 400:1 was before people started uploading on their torrents etc, ISPs need to start accounting for a rise in upload traffic.

29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

TonyZ:

Yes and no. A lot of people work from home and need fast connections to/from their office servers. Businesses also need fast connections. This is where fast "local" connections are important. Increasing bandwidth on the international pipe side of things is important too, but don't underestimate the importance of fast national broadband, both downstream and upstream.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Wal:

Which is why a certain conglomerate is laying another fibre connection between Aus and the US off memory, they are plannign the course as we speak, so in theory this would help eleviate the congestion you mention above.
Also the 'of speeds up to 20 MBps' is just clever marketing nothing else an extra few words to cover telstras arse cause they know they have a network that cant deliver what is expected of it. I really hope the Opel group can sort something decent out and fast!

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Jason Torrento:

You did get what you paid for.

An ADSL2+ port.

You didn't buy 20Mbps of bandwidth, you bought a monthly ADSL2+ service with speeds of up to, 20Mbps.

I agree with you that FTTN might still be needed, but, I completely disagree with the point you put about not getting what you paid for. You got exactly what you ordered.

29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Dan Warne:

That's technically correct, but when you're paying the extortionate premium Telstra puts on ADSL2+, it seems a bit rich when you're getting ADSL1 speeds. I think that was the point he was making -- that a lot of people will sign up to ADSL2+ thinking that the money they'll be paying will buy >ADSL1 speeds, only discover it doesn't. Hence why David suggested that the true solution is FttN, which will actually deliver good link speeds to everyone.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Daniel Crowe:

I agree with Jason Torrento, all the ADSL2+ offerings I've seen (and I'll admit I'm a nerd so I read the caveats) specify that the service degrades the further you are from the exchange, and there's no guarantee of any speed above 1.5Mbps. These caveats aren't generally hidden in the fine print either, I'd say it's in the semi-fine-print.

"I think that was the point he was making -- that a lot of people will sign up to ADSL2+ thinking that the money they'll be paying will buy >ADSL1 speeds, only discover it doesn't"

We haven't seen Telstra's advertising of these plans yet, so while history may tell us that Telstra won't explain any of the downsides, I don't like the fact you've mentioned this as fact when it's not (yet). Let's stick to bagging Telstra for their current bad practices, not what we think their future bad practices may be.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Craig@BigPond:

Re: We haven't seen Telstra's advertising of these plans yet"

Actually we've been advertising ADSL2+ plans since November 06 and endeavour to make this as clear as possible. ere';s the text"

Not available to all customers. Speeds based on Telstra tests. Actual speeds may be less due to a number of factors including network configuration, line quality & length, exchange type, customer premises interference, traffic and equipment. About 50% of customers on this plan can access speeds around 10Mbps or more.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Daz:

Agreed, and he's actually not even getting ADSL1 speeds. I was hopeful of some decent speeds with an <8mbit ADSL1 plan, but my actual speed was roughly 1.5mbit, so I had to change back. Lots of people will get better than 1.5 but way worse than 8 and think they are getting great ADSL2+ speeds. I know, I've talked to them for ages now - they get a Telstra plan that says "up to 20Mbit" and think they've got the fastest connection going - then you show them they aren't even getting 8mbit... not popular!

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Jinzo.pk3:

Anyone here ever heard of 28.8kb Dial-up? . . . There is a fibre cable running RIGHT OUT IN FRONT OF MY PLACE AND I CAN'T HAVE ACCESS TO IT. DAMN YOU TESTRA ! ! ! >=S

29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Asurin:

You poor bastard. Until November last year I was in the same situation that you are in with no less than 6 different Fiber lines running within 100 meters of my house.

I got lucky and Telstra finally upgraded the rim. Of course I'm stuck at 1.5 Mb speeds as it's a Telstra ADSL2 port but I'm with Node.

I'd recommend checking again in case you've been upgraded. My estate is real small so you might get lucky.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Craig@BigPond:

What's your location? What sort of fibre are you referring to?

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Andrew:

David,

Interesting take.

Let's break down the FttN plan:

*Current speed possible for 60 - 70 per cent of homes (i.e. they're within 1.8km) is around 7 to 16Mbps. Chatting to ISPs.

*A billion is already being spent on WiMAX to filling in remote areas to achieve speeds around 12Mbps (okay, god knows what that will be in practice).

*Cost of FttN plan $4.7bn straight from the public purse

*It delivers "a min speed of 12Mbps" to 98 per cent of population.

*Currently less than 50 per cent of net users are prepared to pay more than 40 to 50 a month for a service priced more than 512Kbps.

*FttN enhanced network service will cost around $50 to $80 for basic service. i.e. No-one will buy it.

*IPTV is getting nowhere.

*Experts recommend we have something like FttH up and running by 2012

Thanks ,but I'd prefer to see the money go to Hospitals or *insert worthwhile spending project* unless someone seriously re-jigs and future-proofs the current Fttx plan.

Concerned observer



29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

McBanjo:

Hey punk!

A $4.7 billion asset is nothing to the Australian Govt! IMO it should be as much as is necessary to reap the best benefits of FttN. It looks like that's what they've done. Remember when GST was introduced? Did you notice an increase in govt spending enough to accommodate close to 10% of total Australian Sales. That's a lot of money sitting in a slush fund somewhere.

Plus, we don't want some half-done job that ends up costing more in the future anyway. As is (mostly) always true in the Tech Industry, you get what you pay for and we should build the best now to reap the best benefits for the future.

And where did you get this data from? It seems a bit out of touch anyway. We're not looking at rising Telstra share prices anymore.

If you actually read APC you would know that there is ALWAYS going to be something better and it's usually unstable and unreliable when first released. The best strategy is always to spend as much money as you can afford now.

And how many times do we have to say it? Hospitals don't need money!!!! They need qualified nurses and doctors!!!!!


29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Andrew:

"Plus, we don't want some half-done job that ends up costing more in the future anyway. As is (mostly) always true in the Tech Industry, you get what you pay for and we should build the best now to reap the best benefits for the future."

So building the fibre half-way to the home and entrenching a monopoly is the best way to achieve this huh?

You're missing the point.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

McBanjo:

Also, for these massive Fttn speeds to make any impact, companies like the T4 team need to build new, fast lines to the US and Asia. Part of the reason you pay so much for internet and get so little bandwidth is because of the monopoly of these existing cables owned by Telstra and Optus ultimately.

I have about 19Mbps and it's potential is barely tapped when surfing on outside sites. I only really get my full speeds when surfing from my ISP's servers.


29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Open your mind:

The Bigger Picture..... Forget about ADSL & ADSL2+. If you can't relate to the 'Bigger Picture' and the crucial need for a FTTN, then you have no vision!

A properous future for Australian requires a very fast Broadband Network which current ADSL2+ technology will not provide. So don't be fooled.

Sure ADSL2+ is a quick fix where many new subscribers will benefit in the short term, but the future needs faster broadband to sustain emerging new services such as streaming TV, video conferencing for patients, appointments & business. Remote surgery, home & other automated services. Further emphisis on working from home & freeing up city congestion. Moving new business to country areas, etc... the list goes on.

These are just some forseeable benefits, let alone what we haven't imagined of yet. Evolution will not stop on ADSL2+ technology, it's a far cry from a long term solution for viable & effective Broadband service.

Let's just say that opening up ADSL2+ exchanges is a start, a good sign that things are progressing again, but far from the resolution our country needs for the coming important years ahead.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

McBanjo:

Don't get me wrong. But I think that FttN is more of a 'small' step in the right direction as opposed to what a new PIPE line to the US would be. You mentioned streaming TV, that includes a sh-load of US TV series' and movies. I think the difference is in what speeds we both have. You don't have the creme-de-la-creme of internet speed, so you probably don't understand that it's not all it's worked up to be without the international speeds.

I still agree with a passion that we should spend as much money as is necessary to get this network built and sustained properly. It'd be good to see my tax dollars going into something that's going to save me money from my bills rather than hospitals I've NEVER used.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anony Mouse:

FYI. FTTN won't change how your house is connected to the network either.

Remember that the "node" is not your house, but somewhere on the street corner. The same copper is then used to connect the street corner to your house.

Yes, in many cases this may be shorter than before, but it won't be newer (remember Telstra complaining about how the G9's FTTN would be cutting off their copper and connecting its own network? They're talking about the copper already connected to your house, which isn't being replaced!).

That means noisy phone lines connected to your house will still be noisy phone lines and interfering phone lines inside your house will still be interfering phone lines.

And it won't replace RIMs or pair gain (which can already be removed without spending $billions in moving to FTTN!).

The real key is to get a newer and cleaner connection to your house, the so-called "last mile" problem, than to get better connections to the "node" on your street corner.



29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

swordfishBob:

If Anony Mouse's analysis is correct, we don't need FTT-anything. Just replace the noisey cables everyone has from their house to the nearest corner, and knock down the RIMs. Everything will be instantly better.
Seriously.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

vlaero (New user):

I think it's a little disingenuous to report one person's experience and then pass judgment on broadband plans for the entire Country. You should realise that when Iinet and Internode made their announcement of ADSL2+ being able to provide adequate service here and now they provided the speeds at which peoples modems connected at and then gave averages. This is a factual approach as opposed to this poor excuse for journalism along the lines of 'I can't get a good connection so everyone elses must be bad too. Let drop several billion and fix this issue'. A skeptic would suggest that with the money you're getting from Telstra to write this story you could surely arrange a better connection. If you did a bit of fact checking beforehand and it reflected in the article then people wouldn't have grounds to take this approach.

15 April 2008, 10:07 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Rod Rye (New user):

My speed experience with ADSL2+ is similar, only it drops out when it rains which is alot of fun. Previously I was getting almost comparable speeds on ADSL1, but it dropped out less and my usage was 'unlimited', now on ADSL2+ the ISP has switched me to an option that's cheaper for them, no cheaper for me, with limited usage, and drops out.

Bring on Fiber to the node, obviously retail pricing is something that needs looking at too, there's 0 point in giving everyone 12mbit connections if they use their limit in an hour. I was happier with a slower RELIABLE connection that had no download limits.

The reality is any serious FttN network in order to be competitive would have to be run at a loss for many years, with the investment only paying back over 20+ years. No company in their right mind would construct such a system, so it pretty much has to be government owned and heavily subsidised.

22 April 2008, 12:59 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

anonymous user Anonymous user


Tags