Messer1 wrote: » What will a home need a Gbps for given that the FCC for example guides 25 Mbps for an intensive user home?
ArrBee wrote: » Ahhh here. First you pretend that the issue is ownership. The state should own the infrastructure. Now you're saying that the state should pay for a supply contact for capacity on satellites. Latency will be an issue for any satellite solution. Throughput is not the only KPI. I don't see any wireless solution being more than a way to plug the holes left by lack of physical infrastructure. Ie in the middle of nowhere. Question is. Do you consider rural Ireland the middle of nowhere? And. Do you think Irish internet availability should be equal or divided by location?
theguzman wrote: » 8k streaming, the internet of things, data demands are going to grow infinitely going forward, the only solution is Fibre to the Home, the starlink array of low earth satellite might be handy for that remote outback cattle station bang in the middle of the red waste in the Northern Territory in Australia. 25Mbps is too low by todays standards never mind by the time such satellites are projected to be launched. I think you'd be better of preaching their efficacy to places like Nigeria, Tristan da Cunha etc. than suggesting it is a solution for Ireland's modern broadband requirements.
ussjtrunks wrote: » If we can't even get decent speeds at peak time on fixed wireless, Satellite would be very bad, Latency aswell becomes and issue even at that altitude
Messer1 wrote: » - sat seems to be faster than fibre beyond about 2k kms.
The Cush wrote: » I think you're mixing up FTTH fibre (20kms) with copper based e-fibre aka VDSL/FTTC with a max distance of 2000m
Messer1 wrote: » Sorry, I was unclear. I'm talking about round tripping over 2,000 kms. Sat is faster as signal travels much faster in space than thro fibre and fewe repeaters needed.
Messer1 wrote: » 8k streaming seems a luxury to me unless you are conducting several major medical ops simultaneously. Still don't know what an extra 975 mbps would be needed for in a home. From what I see the biggest demand worldwide will be in semi-rural & semi-urban areas where users have only one lousy supplier to such an extend that SpaceX has had to dampen expectations.
theguzman wrote: » You are clueless and just telling absolute lies, Fibre optic is the speed of light, radio waves bounced even from a low earth orbit are neither as fast nor have they the same capacity of data throughput. Fibre optics do not use repeaters at all.
Messer1 wrote: » Yes, the State should own the fibre to the proposed 1500 key locations and any extensions from those which are nor covered by FWA, 5G or sat. BTW the State would not contract satellite space, end users would purchase services either directly from sat op or through sales outlets. I suspect the former. I think that everyone should have a minimum level of access (say 100 mbps). After that it is up to economics and logistics as in the case of roads.
oscarBravo wrote: » Messer1 isn't entirely wrong in every aspect: some of the technical arguments have vague merit. It's true that light travels more slowly in glass than radio waves in air or vacuum; as such it's true that LEO satellites may offer marginal advantages in latency over very long distances compared to (say) ocean-spanning fibre.
ArrBee wrote: » This indicates to me that essentially you are against the aims of the NPB and what it is attempting to do (to not leave 25% of the country behind as we move toward the future). I say this because no response from you yet has made a suggestion that meets the objective of the NBP. It is no wonder submissions were ignored.
Messer1 wrote: » . My belated response … The underlying objective of the NBP is to deliver H-S BB to rural users, not specifically to run fibre everywhere. I was concerned about the total cost of the NBP (€5 bn including taxpayers net €2.5 bn). If, say, 100k users (20% of current IA which may shrink much further) take up fibre, the total cost works out at €50k/user with €25k/user coming for taxpayers. These are huge sums by any measure. My submission only sought to make the case that next-gen sats could be a PART of the NBP and help achieve the its objective at much lower cost. The prime recommendation was that an independent, expert study be undertaken by space technologists/economists to establish what roles LEO sats etc. could play (go, no-go or maybe). At worst, this might delay the NBP by a few months and cost a tiny fraction of the €25 mln already spent on consultants. I also urged that fibre be rolled out as quickly as possible to 1000+ BB connection points using a State-funded SPV (this wouldn't break EU rules if/when the IA has been defined). As this is happening, the actual potential/role of sats etc. would become much clearer (performances, charges, time-lines etc.) and the NBP could be rejigged.
Pique wrote: » https://www.independent.ie/business/irish/magnet-networks-open-to-possible-merger-interest-38490049.html Is this in any way connected to NBP suppliers/contractors perchance?
By providing very high speed broadband coverage in areas of the country where private operators have no commercial interest to invest in the near future, the Greek authorities pursue genuine cohesion and economic development objectives, in line with the broadband support policy of the EU, as reflected in the EU2020, DAE and the Gigabit Communication. Therefore, the present aid measure will contribute to the achievement of the objectives of the EU2020/DAE and of the Gigabit Communication and is therefore in line with the common interest.
...the Gigabit Communication sets out further targets in order to respond to technological developments and future needs: by 2025 all European households, rural or urban,should have access to broadband networks offering a download speed of at least 100 Mbps, which can be upgraded to 1 Gbps, and socio-economic drivers should have access to speeds up to 1 Gbps symmetric.
The Greek authorities define the target areas and the services to be provided based on speeds that can be reliably delivered to the end-user. ‘Reliable’ speeds per subscriber are understood as speeds that can be guaranteed at peak times.
Grab All Association wrote: » https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/news/rollout-of-3bn-national-broadband-plan-delayed-yet-again-38498568.html Delayed again, thanks to Timmy O’Tool no doubt.
Sources are blaming a report by the Oireachtas Communications Committee, which wants the broadband network infrastructure to remain in public ownership. But it is understood some work has yet to be completed before the deal with the Granahan McCourt consortium is sealed. …The Department of Communications did not confirm the delay, but said "work to award the NBP State intervention contract is subject to contract close, including finalisation of financial and legal documents".
the Fine Gael parliamentary party unanimously passed a motion last Friday which stated that the Government should proceed as planned. Mr Bruton said he will not be reassessing the tender process but is determined to ensure that the contract is robust.
Mr Bruton said his department is working "at maximum speed" to get the deal finalised but declined to set a new deadline. Asked when the project would be shovel-ready, Mr Bruton said: "I'm determined that we move as quickly as possible to that point. But, equally, I'm very much aware that I have a responsibility to the people of Ireland to conduct the due diligence to see that this is a robust contract."
The Oireachtas Communications Committee has compiled a report which calls on the Government to review the process of awarding the contract. Just one bidder remained in what was supposed to be a competitive tender by the time the contract was awarded. … He said he will compile a "detailed response" to the committee which will be considered by Cabinet before the contract is signed. Mr Bruton said there are some "very practical" suggestions from TDs that will be considered. One the ideas under consideration is Green Party leader Eamon Ryan's proposal that new houses built within the intervention area should have to pay a fee towards the installation of the high-speed broadband. "But we will look through all of the detail and I will go back to Government with the detailed response. We're determined to do this. And we will do it as quickly as possible," Mr Bruton said.
Mr Bruton said he will not be reassessing the tender process but is determined to ensure that the contract is robust. "We don't envisage any initiative that would require restarting the process. And, unfortunately, some of the proposals made would involve completely restarting the processes. That would add five years to the project and this simply could not be countenanced," the minister said.
Mr Bruton said his department is working "at maximum speed" to get the deal finalised but declined to set a new deadline.
The deferral is a blow to the Government as it believed the symbolism of finally getting the project off the ground during the Ploughing Championships would play well with rural voters.
ussjtrunks wrote: » I wonder how the bidder for the contract feels about all this faffing about
