[LINK] FTTP/FTTN

[Ross Kelso]

Tom

What I wrote was based upon page 22 of my doctoral thesis http://eprints.qut.edu.au/16612/ , which said in part:
===
Two forms of ‘open’ access are possible regarding HFC networks, namely, access by competitive ISPs to cable modem capacity (as has been discussed in the US context) and access by competitive service or programme providers to television channels and associated services (as has been discussed in the EU context).

For the former to occur in Australia, barring voluntary action by cable providers Telstra and Optus, the ACCC would need to declare that facet of a cable television network. According to a 2001 interview with an ACCC senior official, “nobody has approached us in any concerted way to ask us to look at declaration” and so to date cable modem access remains closed. (Chirgwin, R. (2001). "Opening up the Cable." CommsWorld: 59-84, 60 probably refers).
===

I subsequently interviewed Michael Cosgrave who confirmed that situation.

At that time (roughly speaking circa 1995/6?), I understand that there were only 3 MAJOR ISPs in Australia; Telstra and Optus certainly did NOT want open access, and then there was Ozemail (yes, a Malcolm Turnbull connection there :) which I recollect around that time was in the market for being sold - so they were totally distracted.  Correct me if I've got that wrong, but I recollect it is roughly the way it was - and who is to argue with Richard Chirgwin's journalism!

No doubt I'm now an old fart rummaging through the entrails of telecommunications history, but IMHO if the ACCC had launched into HFC declaration at that time (OK, the incoming Howard Government may well have then stomped on them?) then open access to the cable modem capacity of the two HFC networks, in addition to what also transpired w.r.t. to the copper network and ADSL, would more than likely have produced a dramatically different competitive ISP industry compared to what we now have, and other developments (eg. the NBN as we currently know it) may well have panned out quite differently…?

Cheers

Ross Kelso


> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 22:00:31 +1000
> From: "TKoltai" <tomk at unwired.com.au>
> Subject: Re: [LINK] FTTP/FTTN
> To: <link at mailman.anu.edu.au>
> Message-ID: <001b01cd1eed$30ee52e0$9b00a8c0 at AB>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: link-bounces at mailman.anu.edu.au 
>> [mailto:link-bounces at mailman.anu.edu.au] On Behalf Of Ross Kelso
>> Sent: Friday, 20 April 2012 11:05 AM
>> To: link at mailman.anu.edu.au
>> Subject: [LINK] FTTP/FTTN
>> 
>> Richard
>> 
>> We have yet to see the detail of the Coalition's plan, but if 
>> it is to include the continued existence of HFC-delivered 
>> broadband (which I guess it would since Turnbull frequently 
>> talks about the current broadband delivery of such 
>> infrastructure) then a possible plan could exclude FTTN from 
>> areas currently covered by HFC networks (Telstra/Optus) and 
>> hence there would be far fewer FTTN nodes required?  This of 
>> course would necessitate a Coalition government leaning on 
>> the ACCC to 'declare' these HFC networks to be 'open' - in 
>> the current climate this should be a doozy, but for those who 
>> recall the mid 1990s the ACCC signally failed to do so, 
>> arguing that the (ISP) industry didn't ask them to act accordingly.
>> 
> 
> Umm, that's not quite true. The ACCC would be incorrect. 
> Both Stewart Fist and I made significant presentations on the necessity
> of opening the Copper and HFC networks to all ISP's.
> 
> I'm pretty sure I was an ISP at the time and on the BSEG advisory
> committee.
> 
> But then one would need to see when the ACC received a mandate to manage
> that part of competitive commerce to understand why they claim that
> ISP's didn't lobby them in 1995 and 1996 and 1997...
> 
> At the time, almost every Canberra Department was claiming jurisdiction
> over the industry...
> And we almost became Television Stations rather than Carriers.
> 
> TomK
>