NBP part II

tsue921i8wljb3

clohamon wrote: »

...and a few more issues besides

• contention
• backhaul
• unlicensed spectrum
• informal site agreements
• failure to provide requested information
• 4½ year delay in submission
• inability to meet EU common objectives.

Very true. Like the alternative NBP proposal they submitted, this does not seem at all credible. Last sting of a dying wasp.

Gary kk

Wait this stuff was meant to be 4 years ago

Marlow

Gary kk wrote: »

Wait this stuff was meant to be 4 years ago

No .. the call for data from the department was recently. Data submitted is for said call from the department.

/M

clohamon

Marlow wrote: »

No .. the call for data from the department was recently. Data submitted is for said call from the department.

/M

Yes, there was a call in May but there was also the original call in 2013 and another one in 2015. And the map has been open to amendment at any time since 2013.

Marlow

clohamon wrote: »

Yes, there was a call in May but there was also the original call in 2013 and another one in 2015. And the map has been open to amendment at any time since 2013.

And your point is ?

The wireless technologies that are NGA compliant, speed wise, were not available in 2013 .. 2015 maybe, but unlikely. Or at least not commonly available or prohibitive cost wise.

Hell, VDSL was barely rolled out in 2013. That was announced 2012 and the rollout started end 2012/start 2013, but it wasn't commonly available until 2014.

Technology changes all the time. Data gets submitted, when their status changes.

/M

clohamon

Marlow wrote: »

And your point is ?


/M

It's not a good look.

Marlow

Oh .. and OpenEIRs (then Eircoms) Urban FTTH program was announced on Oct 2014.

That was their first FTTH program.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057315844

That would also not have been included in the call for data 2013.

/M

Marlow

clohamon wrote: »

It's not a good look.

No .. it's you not looking at the historical reasons, why that data may have not been submitted in 2013 and 2015, but would have been submitted this year.

A bit common sense and research goes a long way.

/M

clohamon

Marlow wrote: »

No .. it's you not looking at the historical reasons, why that data may have not been submitted in 2013 and 2015, but would have been submitted this year.

A bit common sense and research goes a long way.

/M

The urban fixed line roll-outs were already within the blue areas.
The map was open to amendment at any time.

Marlow

clohamon wrote: »

The urban fixed line roll-outs were already within the blue areas.

The trials were.

The entire program was far more extensive than that. 66 urban communities.

I was looking for the map presentation, but can't find it right now. But there would have been a lot there, that wasn't in the blue.

Fact is, that the department left it 4 years with call for data, so they're bound to get a lot more data after ignoring for such a long period, because the broadband landscape has changed.

Not the fault of those who submit. More the fault of the department for not being on the ball nor communicating with the industry.

/M

KOR101

Marlow wrote: »

Not the fault of those who submit. More the fault of the department for not being on the ball nor communicating with the industry.

/M

That remains to be seen. They wrote off WISPs a long time ago, and most on here think correctly, so only time will tell whether that was a correct judgement.

SkepticQuark

I'd love to see them try and demonstrate that data actually holds up in a real test of speed and consistency. My guess is it won't.

Orebro

Emmanuel Lemon Louse wrote: »

Very true. Like the alternative NBP proposal they submitted, this does not seem at all credible. Last sting of a dying wisp.

Fixed that for you.

tsue921i8wljb3

Orebro wrote: »

Fixed that for you.

Very good!

clohamon

Emmanuel Lemon Louse wrote: »

Someone is feeding him information. He's a mouthpiece for Imagine as well.

Yes, I think he's pursuing a campaign against Granahan McCourt over the enet contracts/concessions/pricing/general shenanigans.

Unfortunately he seems prepared to undermine the NBP in order to do damage to GMcC. The only ones that are going to suffer are his neighbours in Wicklow and the rest of rural Ireland.

And sad to see IrelandOffline regularly getting mentioned in his tweets. I'm not sure if they support his activities.

gearoidol

Somebody more knowledgeable might help fill me in on the wisp approach.Im based about 8 miles from the nearest town who have efibre,a village 3 miles away has ftth which finishes 200m away from me. I work from home and am very grateful to be covered by a wisp who give me a fairly solid 70mb connection with the last 10 years (originally 4mb,then 8mb,then 20 now 70). The wisp in question are pushing wireless as a viable solution to the nbp.
The question I have is taking my road as an example I can see the wireless base antenna as can my next door neighbours then 3 houses cannot ,then the next 2 can etc ,how is the wireless provider ever going to cover all the houses even in a few mile stretch of my road when the topology means multiple masts will be needs to give line of site and then extrapolate that problem out nationwide ,when often permission for these base stations are on a goodwill basis with farmers etc very reluctant to putting anything in writing ?

Johnboy1951

gearoidol wrote: »

Somebody more knowledgeable might help fill me in on the wisp approach.Im based about 8 miles from the nearest town who have efibre,a village 3 miles away has ftth which finishes 200m away from me. I work from home and am very grateful to be covered by a wisp who give me a fairly solid 70mb connection with the last 10 years (originally 4mb,then 8mb,then 20 now 70). The wisp in question are pushing wireless as a viable solution to the nbp.
The question I have is taking my road as an example I can see the wireless base antenna as can my next door neighbours then 3 houses cannot ,then the next 2 can etc ,how is the wireless provider ever going to cover all the houses even in a few mile stretch of my road when the topology means multiple masts will be needs to give line of site and then extrapolate that problem out nationwide ,when often permission for these base stations are on a goodwill basis with farmers etc very reluctant to putting anything in writing ?

Simple answer is they won't.

Gary kk

There was a call for data on the mapping side in January and February of 2018 for all providers but only 16 gave data.

BarryM

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Simple answer is they won't.

Is that not why 'fibre to the home' is being funded?

My (maybe naive) understanding of the NBP is that it was/is conceived to provide a fibre connection (30Mb?) to everybody.

The poster says he gets 70Mb by wifi, so, presumably the actual NBP, if ever delivered, will match that

I get 30Mb over a wifi connection from a mast ~ 5Km away, over the sea, I suppose I could get more, if I asked. A (subsidised) delivery of 30 via fibre by NBP is not a big improvement in 202?

Gary kk

BarryM wrote: »

Is that not why 'fibre to the home' is being funded?

My (maybe naive) understanding of the NBP is that it was/is conceived to provide a fibre connection (30Mb?) to everybody.

The poster says he gets 70Mb by wifi, so, presumably the actual NBP, if ever delivered, will match that

I get 30Mb over a wifi connection from a mast ~ 5Km away, over the sea, I suppose I could get more, if I asked. A (subsidised) delivery of 30 via fibre by NBP is not a big improvement in 202?

The current plan is provide 150mb not 30 mb

Orebro

gearoidol wrote: »

Somebody more knowledgeable might help fill me in on the wisp approach.Im based about 8 miles from the nearest town who have efibre,a village 3 miles away has ftth which finishes 200m away from me. I work from home and am very grateful to be covered by a wisp who give me a fairly solid 70mb connection with the last 10 years (originally 4mb,then 8mb,then 20 now 70). The wisp in question are pushing wireless as a viable solution to the nbp.
The question I have is taking my road as an example I can see the wireless base antenna as can my next door neighbours then 3 houses cannot ,then the next 2 can etc ,how is the wireless provider ever going to cover all the houses even in a few mile stretch of my road when the topology means multiple masts will be needs to give line of site and then extrapolate that problem out nationwide ,when often permission for these base stations are on a goodwill basis with farmers etc very reluctant to putting anything in writing ?

Unfortunately it's not during the day that most people use the internet at home, hence you are seeing good speeds because there are very few others in contention with you for bandwidth. The big issue with WISPs arises in the evenings when the majority of people need connectivity.

The WISPs will say technically they can supply the same speed in the evenings to many people, but in reality it is very different. In fairness the Gov do understand this so they are pushing ahead with the NBP. There is a special corner in hell for the WISPs and others that are trying to derail it.

clohamon

State Aid approval.
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_19_6291

The European Commission has approved, under EU State aid rules, €2.6 billion of public support for the Irish National Broadband Plan. The scheme will bring high-speed broadband services to consumers and businesses in areas with insufficient connectivity in Ireland.

Commissioner Margrethe Vestager, in charge of competition policy said: “The National Broadband Plan in Ireland is expected to address the significant digital divide between urban and rural areas in Ireland, enabling Irish consumers and businesses to benefit from the full potential of digital growth. This will help households and businesses in areas of Ireland where private investment is insufficient.”

The National Broadband Plan has an indicative budget of €2.6 billion. The scheme aims to address connectivity deficits across Ireland and to achieve 100% high-speed coverage.

The new network will be capable of supporting download speeds of at least 150 Megabits per second (Mbps) and upload speeds of at least 30 Megabits per second (Mbps). It will also provide access to improved broadband services, which will stimulate the development of a modern digital economy.

The scheme targets areas where no broadband infrastructure offering download speeds of at least 30 Mbps is currently in place, and where no private investor has demonstrated a concrete plan to invest commercially in the near future.The Irish authorities have developed a comprehensive mapping of available infrastructure and carried out numerous public consultations in order to determine the target areas.

The subsidised network will offer wholesale access to all operators on an open, transparent and non-discriminatory basis, and will therefore incentivise private investments in the provision of high-speed internet services to households and businesses in the target areas.

The Commission assessed the measure under EU State aid rules, in particular its 2013 Broadband Guidelines. The Commission concluded that the scheme's positive effects on competition in the Irish broadband market outweigh potential negative effects brought about by the public intervention. On this basis, the Commission approved the measure under EU State aid rules.

The scheme will contribute to the EU strategic objectives set out in the Digital Agenda for Europe and in the Communication "Towards a European Gigabit Society".

Background

Broadband connectivity is of strategic importance for European growth and innovation in all sectors of the economy, as well as for social and territorial cohesion. The Digital Agenda for Europeacknowledges the socio-economic benefits of broadband and sets targets for broadband development in Europe, including that 50% or more of European households should subscribe to internet connections above 100 Mbps.

The Digital Agenda for Europe was complemented in 2016 by the Gigabit Communication, which defines connectivity objectives to be achieved by 2025, where the development of very high capacity networks able to provide download speeds of at least 100 Mbps, upgradeable to 1 Gbps, should enable the widespread use of products, services and applications in the Digital Single Market.

The 2013 Broadband Guidelines allow for public interventions where private initiatives are not sufficient, while protecting private investment and competition as a key driver for investment, better prices and quality of services for consumers and businesses.

The non-confidential version of the current decision will be made available under the case number SA.54472 in the State Aid Register on the DG Competition website once any confidentiality issues have been resolved. New publications of state aid decisions on the internet and in the Official Journal are listed in the State Aid Weekly e-News

celticbhoy27

clohamon wrote: »

State Aid approval.
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_19_6291

Beautiful

ussjtrunks

So How long now till we get started? Should the EU approval allow them to sign the contract?

celticbhoy27

ussjtrunks wrote: »

So How long now till we get started? Should the EU approval allow them to sign the contract?

They said they were waiting on eu approval to sign it so you'd be hoping itl be signed next week

celticbhoy27

https://twitter.com/adrianweckler/status/1195294860422647808?s=09

Positive news all around

tsue921i8wljb3

Interested to see the final intervention map now. I wonder have any premises been removed?

celticbhoy27

Emmanuel Lemon Louse wrote: »

Interested to see the final intervention map now. I wonder have any premises been removed?[/QUOTm
Map will stay the same. Speeds of at least 150 and upload of 30 bye bye imagine
https://twitter.com/adrianweckler/status/1195296075059539969?s=09

tsue921i8wljb3

celticbhoy27 wrote: »

Emmanuel Lemon Louse wrote: »

Interested to see the final intervention map now. I wonder have any premises been removed?

m
Map will stay the same. Speeds of at least 150 and upload of 30 bye bye imagine
https://twitter.com/adrianweckler/status/1195296075059539969?s=09

What about this bit?

The scheme targets areas where no broadband infrastructure offering download speeds of at least 30 Mbps is currently in place

user1842

Excellent news, it should be signed ASAP then.

The thread can finally be closed