Pique wrote: »
Emmanuel Lemon Louse wrote: » What about this bit?
Interesting detail in Commission statement, mentions "download speeds of at least 150 Megabits per second and upload speeds of at least 30 Megabits per second". Criteria shifting upwards.
The scheme targets areas where no broadband infrastructure offering download speeds of at least 30 Mbps is currently in place
celticbhoy27 wrote: » Commission in granting state aid has said speeds of at least 150 and 30 upload required. Adrian wreckler who I linked via Twitter has it well sumerised
Marlow wrote: » This is the only way, they can limit the amount of providers, that'll provide that without providing it on fiber. I guess it was build to in remove or limit the opportunity to challenge this, which is a smart move on behalf of the commission. It also means, that the department can't go back on their promise on 150/30. So they can not use the state aid for the 5-10% last premises, where they intended to use wireless, unless they opt for premium equipment. They will also here .. have to provide those speeds. This is the part, where premises already covered by two independant providers both offering NGA speeds (30 Mbit/s or more) may be loosing out. The final intervention map should be able to shed light into that. /M
Emmanuel Lemon Louse wrote: » I have heard rumours of some form of agreement being offered by the Department for operators to sign. Did you hear anything about that?
Marlow wrote: » No. /M
Emmanuel Lemon Louse wrote: » You're not really getting it. The network that will be built will support speeds of 150Mb/s. The network can only be built where current speeds are less than 30Mb/s. That is what the recent complaints by WISPs was about. Getting premises that they say are over 30Mb/s removed. It is unclear whether this has happened or not.
celticbhoy27 wrote: » I get it, navi I've followed this bloody thing since inception. The map will not change to exclude areas imagine or any other wisp cover trust me
user1842 wrote: » Even if the map changes it does not matter. The providers have to give the minimum speeds now to everybody.
Marlow wrote: » Where did you get that notion ? Even if the line provided by NBI under the NBP is capable of 150/30 (maximum), that's still a contended product. It certainly won't be uncontended unless you pay a premium. And then there is the fact, that NBI does not fill the line with internet. The wholesale partner does. Every network differs on how it performs. /M
user1842 wrote: » You are nit picking now and I think you know I meant a connection capable of the speeds outlined by the NBP.
Marlow wrote: » The issue with that is, that if the department ignores the submissions or not at least follows up to them with some requirements, then they will be in breach of the state aid decision. And that can jeopardize the entire NBP at that point. It will certainly put them in the hot seat, because there are a lot of providers in the country, that have had enough of being ignored by them and won't let them do it anymore. That's what the last submission showed. When you suddenly have twice the amount of provider submitting, you've certainly p**** somebody off. And that somebody is going to make your life very very hard and difficult. So they better have everything above board unless they want another childrens hospital disaster. /M
Orebro wrote: » Time to stand down on this Marlow, it's over.
Marlow wrote: » This is a discussion. You can't bully people, just because you don't like their opinion. /M
Emmanuel Lemon Louse wrote: » There will be rural premises on FTTC at 35 to 40Mb/s left out of the NBP. Are you saying that they will have to be upgraded somehow to 150Mb/s because that is not the case. If you're not on the map you're out of luck.
user1842 wrote: » I meant premises on the map.
KOR101 wrote: » Except does that change when the EU moves to a 100mb target? It may come down to what is practical. It isn't at the moment but may he after Eir's urban rollout.
Emmanuel Lemon Louse wrote: » It's just a target though. It's not currently enforceable.
