[LINK] Study casts doubt on claims for broadband
georgebray at gmail.com
Tue Nov 30 09:36:54 AEDT 2010
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 7:35 AM, Richard Chirgwin
<rchirgwin at ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>> * Time and again, data that basic broadband brings certain benefits
>> is used to justify investment in fiber – but the investment in fiber
>> must be based on the incremental benefits of higher speed, since (in the
>> developed world) there is already near universal basic broadband
> Define "near universal". In Australia, this statement is wrong, both
> geographically and demographically. My quick estimate at DSL coverage -
> I'm not going to spend a day running a full geographic analysis just for
> an e-mail! - is that around 70% of households are close enough to an
> exchange for DSL to be worthwhile, and that's ignoring the presence of
> RIMs and other factors that block DSL delivery.
I came across a figure where I think the 93% fibre coverage came from.
NICTA's R&D in conjunction with IBES says LR-PON (Long Range PON)
increases the reach of passive fibre runs from 20 km to 60 km from the
However, I'm not sure that you can say if you're within 60 km of a
town you'll be on fibre.
I don't know much about PON, but presumably it's easy/cheap to go
further with active amps of some kind. Does anyone know if the NBN's
LR-PON model has been implemented anywhere else?
More information about the Link