Re: [LINK] Ported telephone numbers

[Paul Brooks]

See http://commsalliance.com.au/Documents/Publications-by-Topic/LNP
In particular G520 listed at the end. 
(Dont worry about the IT spec documents)



 Original Message 
From: David 
Sent: 8 January 2018 9:57:43 am AEDT
To: Link 
Subject: [LINK] Ported telephone numbers

I've been trying to understand the process involved in porting telephone 
numbers following a problem while porting mine to the NBN.  The number is in a 
range allocated to Telstra but the VoIP service is provided by my ISP, which is 
not Telstra and I believe doesn't have a carrier licence.

It seems each carrier publishes a PLNR ("Ported Local Number Register") file 
every day or so.  This file lists numbers allocated to the carrier which have 
been ported to another (specified) carrier.

https://www.thenumberingsystem.com.au/#/number-register/search displays the 
current status of a number.  For example 1300-300056 is listed as allocated to 
Telstra but currently held by Primus.  However my number is still shown as 
allocated to Telstra and currently held by Telstra, and I'm told only 
"business" and "special" numbers (13x, 1300x, etc.) are shown there.

Can any Linker shed light on how know how calls are routed to a ported number?  
Ported numbers must now be occurring on a large scale given the NBN, and call 
routing would have to be efficient.

David L.

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

-- 
Sent unplugged
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Ported telephone numbers

[Paul Brooks]

On 9/01/2018 12:54 PM, David wrote:
> Just for clarification, I think the way it's supposed to work is that the 
> carrier to which a number is allocated publishes a PLNR ("Ported Local Number 
> Register") file which is available to all other carriers.  This shows the new 
> holder of the number in question, so calls can be routed directly without 
> going near the owner of the number.
Local Number Portability isn't a true 100% multiparty thing unfortunately, so 
there
can be holes. I might be a few years out of date now, but it used to work that 
a new
carrier who wants to receive ported numbers has to execute a separate porting
agreement with each other carrier it wants to receive numbers from, so you can 
get
situations where a small carrier has porting agreements with Telstra and Optus 
but not
AAPT and Primus, so if a customer switches to the new carrier, whether they can 
port
the number or not will depend on which network they are coming from.
I think they also need to have a 4-digit Carrier Access Code still, and an 
Eligible
Party ID code per Comms Alliance for the electronic systems access.
> But what seems to have happened with the advent of the NBN is that numbers 
> may not be ported at all.  Telstra, at least, may hold onto the number and 
> charge to reroute calls, and do so in a way which isn't apparent to retail 
> customers.  The recharge is significant too, $10 p.m. in my case, a third of 
> the old POTS line rental.
Is the new provider a true carrier with a proper 4-digit carrier access code 
(CAC)?
Perhaps they have contracted Telstra to perform the portability functions on 
their
behalf. Telstra can't 'hang on to the number' if it is requested to be ported 
by a
carrier with a porting agreement, but your gaining provider might not have all 
the
arrangements in place to ask them to port it in the first place and have 
instead asked
Telstra to do it as their proxy.
Check out if they have a mark in the 'LNP' column in
http://commsalliance.com.au/Documents/Industry-Lists/EPID

Feel free to ping me off-list if you'd like to delve in to this deeper, and who 
your
gaining provider is.




>
> Grrr...  Is this in the spirit of number portability?
>
> DavidL
>
> ___
> Link mailing list
> Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link


-- 
Paul Brooks   | Mob +61 414 366 605
Layer 10 Advisory | Ph  +61 2 9402 7355
---
Layer 10 - telecommunications strategy & network design



___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Ported telephone numbers

[Paul Brooks]

On 10/01/2018 12:04 PM, David wrote:
> On Wednesday, 10 January 2018 9:57:35 AM AEDT Paul Brooks wrote:
>
>> Feel free to ping me off-list if you'd like to delve in to this deeper, and 
>> who your gaining provider is.
> Thanks...  This is an area which doesn't get much exposure amid all the sound 
> & fury of NBN implementation.  But it seems important because "porting" 
> papers over a fundamental issue with network addressing: traditional POTS 
> addressing is a bit irrelevant in a VoIP-based network (as ACMA have stated 
> in a strategy paper), especially one with so many providers and a volatile 
> customer base.

Sure - but we don't have a VoIP-based network, we have for decades had a
Multi-Technology-MIx voice network, with sections using POTS, ETSI ISDN, ANSI 
ISDN,
VoIP with SIP signalling, VoIP with H.248 signalling, VoATM, and TDM SDH with
SS7/IISUP signalling, others I've forgotten.   All of these are part of the 
PSTN, and
the traditional telephone number addressing is the Universal Voice Glue that 
makes it
all work together relatively seamlessly, and lets someone on a POTS line call 
someone
on IP line without having to be aware of what technology the receiver is using 
at that
moment. Not quite irrelevant!.

> I see, I'd assumed the mandatory requirement to publish a PLNR ("Ported Local 
> Number Register") file was intended to allow all carriers to route calls 
> directly to the carrier currently holding a ported number without going 
> through the donor carrier.  But the whole idea might be suffering scability 
> problems now.
That is the idea - but also, even interconnect arrangements are bilateral as 
well.
'Your' carrier may not even have a bilateral network interconnect directly with 
the
final destination network hosting the number, and may have to route the call 
through a
third network who will provide the transit connectivity (who might or might not 
be the
original donor carrier) - who will do a second lookup of the PLNR in the 
process to
work out which direction to forward the call to.

I believe there is a transition window for a newly ported number where the donor
network will, for a time, accept a call and forward it through to the new 
network, to
have calls work properly during the delay while all the carriers refresh and 
update
their collection of all the other providers' PLNR files and consolidate them to 
start
directing them toward the new network, which might (guess) take a few days, 
maybe a
week for the less diligent ones.

> The other problem I haven't found a precise definition of the meaning of the 
> 'LNP' flag in the EPID.  Do you know off the top of your head?
No - but it will be documented in one or more CommsAlliance operational 
documents
somewhere :)

ALso - Mobile Number Portability uses a completely different process and 
different
form of porting registers. Keeps the IT departments in the various OSS groups 
in the
carriers off the streets.

Paul.


___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Ported telephone numbers

[Paul Brooks]

On 12/01/2018 10:48 AM, Tom Worthington wrote:
> On 10/01/18 16:12, David wrote:
>
>> However IP-based voice connections will be in a huge majority when the NBN 
>> finishes
>> its rollout ...
>
> Will customers want to keep their landline? Is it a good idea?
>
> There is a risk in customers assuming the NBN phone connection will be
> as reliable as the service it replaces.

Tom - we were talking about being IP-based, not reliability - unless you're 
suggesting
that voice services will be inherently less reliable than POTS *because* its 
being
moved to IP, and not due to other reasons that have nothing to do with the 
thread,
such as losing the powered-from-the-network property? 

Paul.



___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Ported telephone numbers

[Paul Brooks]

On 10/01/2018 4:12 PM, David wrote:
> On Wednesday, 10 January 2018 2:34:20 PM AEDT Paul Brooks wrote:
>
>> All of these [voice transport protocols] are part of the PSTN, and the 
>> traditional telephone number addressing is the Universal Voice Glue that 
>> makes it all work together relatively seamlessly, and lets someone on a POTS 
>> line call someone on IP line without having to be aware of what technology 
>> the receiver is using at that moment. Not quite irrelevant!.
> However IP-based voice connections will be in a huge majority when the NBN 
> finishes its rollout, probably enough to warrant a strategic rethink.  Call 
> routing based on POTS number, as currently done by the carriers, logically 
> duplicates a function which could, in principle, be done by the IP (i.e. NBN) 
> network.  Surely it should be possible to integrate the IP and remaining POTS 
> networks so the whole system is more efficient and way less cumbersome.
I think what you're looking for is RFC 6116 ENUM - a DNS lookup of a telephone 
number
to a URI such as a SIP address, and RFC 5067, RFC 5526 "Infrastructure ENUM", 
and RFC
3824 "Using E.164 number with SIP".

Check https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_number_mapping for an overview.

However, having a lot of IP-based access lines is not the same as having a 
world, or
even a country, where everybody can be interconnected end-to-end with a VoIP 
call.

Considerations like lawful interception, metadata retention etc require the 
call to
pass through the RSPs on the way through, it can't just take a shorter routing 
path
direct IP-to-IP or neighbour-to-neighbour like nirvana of IP telephony might 
imagine,
as it might occur within a single campus like a corporate office, so there's 
little
real routing efficiency to be gained.

Sure routing by POTS number duplicates a function that IP networks could do, 
for calls
to another IP line - but the telephone service transcends IP and exists above 
IP, in
an application layer, and needs to work across all the other technologies as 
well - so
it should use an addressing and routing system appropriate to its layer, not be
limited by the shoehorning it into a lower layer. ENUM is the translation 
method from
one to the other.  The reality is that a large number of calls to and from an
IP-enable voice line won't have another IP-enabled voice line at the other end,
they'll hit a gateway in the middle. Incoming calls from international 
locations,
corporate offices and call centres (generally on ISDN-PRI-based PABXs ), mobile
networks and conventional POTS lines will all still need to use a E.164 
telephone
number to reach the consumer.

From the consumer making an outbound call, its still actually easier and 
quicker to
punch in a telephone number than to tap out a long SIP URI, and devices need a 
much
smaller keypad too, and for those using a directory where they select a name or 
a face
(like a mobile handset contacts directory) it doesn't really matter if the 
underlying
entry for the picture is a number or a SIP URI. So from a usability 
perspective, the
conventional telephone number is still actually easier to use.

(Also, re the NBN - The NBN is an Ethernet Layer 2 network, not an IP network, 
and
consists of 121 disconnected islands rather than a national network, so 
national VoIP
interconnection can't and shouldn't be done within the NBN anyway!)

cheers,
    Paul.


 




>
>
>>> I see, I'd assumed the mandatory requirement to publish a PLNR ("Ported 
>>> Local Number Register") file was intended to allow all carriers to route 
>>> calls directly to the carrier currently holding a ported number without 
>>> going through the donor carrier.  But the whole idea might be suffering 
>>> scability problems now.
>> That is the idea - but also, even interconnect arrangements are bilateral as 
>> well.  'Your' carrier may not even have a bilateral network interconnect 
>> directly with the final destination network hosting the number, and may have 
>> to route the call through a third network who will provide the transit 
>> connectivity (who might or might not be the original donor carrier) - who 
>> will do a second lookup of the PLNR in the process to work out which 
>> direction to forward the call to.
> Out of interest I downloaded the full "EnhancedFullDownload.csv" file (81.4 
> Mbytes!) from
> https://www.thenumberingsystem.com.au/#/number-register/search  This shows 
> the allocated and current holders of the entire POTS numbering range, but at 
> a quick look I couldn't see any individual numbers, just ranges.
>
> It's all something of a mystery, I suppose there's probably a degree of 
> ad-hocery going on...
>
> David L.
>



___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Google data collection issues

[Paul Brooks]

On 23/04/2018 8:13 PM, David wrote:
> But the problem is that it's designed to operate at a non-rational level, and 
> the
> world desperately needs *rational* evidence-based decision-making if we're 
> not all
> going to suffer. 

After muddling through for the past 20 to 30 centuries, why on earth would we 
start
that rational stuff now?

P.

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Don’t believe the hype: We’re a long way from 5G

[Paul Brooks]

On 6/06/2018 9:36 AM, Tom Worthington wrote:
> ThOn 5/06/2018 12:19 PM, David wrote:
>
>> This "smart city" ... sensors monitoring everything from air quality
>> to pedestrian traffic, even the flushing of toilets. ...
>
> This doesn't add up to enough data to need 5G or even 4G. Sydney's Green 
> Square,
> which is projected to have a future population density exceeding Hong Kong, 
> 3G data
> rates would do.
>
> For each toilet you would need a few bytes of data transmitted every few 
> hours.
>
> For air quality you would need a few bytes of data every few minutes for each 
> city
> block.
>
> For pedestrian traffic you would need a count for each footpath for each road 
> on
> each block every few minutes.

Tom, I admire your optimism about finding competent software and protocol design
people who have awareness of efficiency in this regard. In a world where 
developers
think a gigabyte-sized 'Hello World' app is OK with drag-and-drop module  
development
tools, the chances of getting those few bytes of information encoded into less 
than
several megabytes of cruft included by default by a library the developer has no
knowledge of is slim.

Paul.



___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] My letter to the local paper

[Paul Brooks]

'shared health record' is what I have a problem with. I don't want a 'shared' 
health
record, I want a MY health record. Seems the department has forgotten what the 
word
'my' means.
For MY health record, the only people who should have access to it is me, and my
chosen doctor. Not other institutions, not any old hospital, not the police, 
not ASIO.

MY health record should be protected as my paper record held at my doctors 
surgery
are, under doctor-patient confidentiality, with similar level of protection 
against
disclosure to ANYONE as legal privilege. Last time my doctor wanted to speak to
another doctor and disclose how I was being treated, he called and asked for my
explicit permission for that particular disclosure for that particular 
treatment at
that particular time.

This system does not provide those protections, or time-limited one-time-only 
access
permissions, or even a reasonable audit-trail (it logs to institution level, 
the first
time they look. Not down to user-level, and not (as I understand it) anything 
after
the first access.)

And certainly not :
"
>
> 70  Disclosure for law enforcement purposes, etc.
>
>  (1)  The System Operator is authorised to use or disclose health
> information included in a healthcare recipient’s My Health Record if the 
> System
> Operator reasonably believes that the use or disclosure is reasonably 
> necessary for
> one or more of the following things done by, or on behalf of, an enforcement 
> body:
>
>  (a)  the prevention, detection, investigation, 
> prosecution or
> punishment of criminal offences, breaches of a law imposing a penalty or 
> sanction or
> breaches of a prescribed law;
>
>  (b)  the enforcement of laws relating to the 
> confiscation of
> the proceeds of crime;
>
>  (c)  the protection of the public revenue;
>
>  (d)  the prevention, detection, investigation or 
> remedying of
> seriously improper conduct or prescribed conduct;
>
>  (e)  the preparation for, or conduct of, proceedings 
> before any
> court or tribunal, or implementation of the orders of a court or tribunal.
>

The 'protection of the public revenue' clause in the Telco Act was how local 
councils
authorised telephone call record metadata collection without warrants or police
involvement for tracking stray dogs and pursuing overdue library books.  I do 
not want
local councils having blanket authorisation to access my health record to see 
if I
really have a condition worthy of the disabled sticker on my car, if I had one.

Paul.


On 24/07/2018 1:43 PM, Jim Birch wrote:
> You might not state it explicitly but there a basic implication that MyHR
> is bad and we're better off without it, isn't there?  Maybe I'm misreading
> and you're in favour of a shared health record but against some aspects of
> the implementation?  In the circumstances you might say so because it is
> rather misleading if you don't.   (And at times like this, every bit of
> sanity helps.)
>
> Jim
>
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2018 at 13:21, Karl Auer  wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 2018-07-24 at 11:12 +1000, Jim Birch wrote:
>>>  "To avoid that risk, you might consider pointing out errors and
>>> untruths specifically and explicitly."
>>>
>>> Sure: what are the specific actual harms that have occurred
>> That is not pointing out an error, that's asking a question. Not a bad
>> question, just an irrelevant one.
>>
>> My concerns are valid even if there has been no harm done yet. "Look, a
>> tidal wave! Run away!" "Nah, nothing's happened yet..."
>>
>> You have not yet provided a single actual counterargument. Just some
>> reasons why you think My Health Record is a good thing, plus the odd
>> insult.
>>
>> Once again: Did I make any untrue statements in my "letter to the
>> paper"? If so, which ones and how are they untrue?
>>
>> Regards, K.
>>
>> --
>> ~~~
>> Karl Auer (ka...@biplane.com.au)
>> http://www.biplane.com.au/kauer
>> http://twitter.com/kauer389
>>
>> GPG fingerprint: A0CD 28F0 10BE FC21 C57C 67C1 19A6 83A4 9B0B 1D75
>> Old fingerprint: A52E F6B9 708B 51C4 85E6 1634 0571 ADF9 3C1C 6A3A
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Link mailing list
>> Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
>> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
>>
> ___
> Link mailing list
> Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link


___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] NBN Co's 'Netflix tax' slammed as push to protect net neutrality grows

[Paul Brooks]

The kickoff article is at
https://www.itnews.com.au/news/nbn-co-floats-its-own-netflix-tax-527507, after 
the
question in the NBN confidential discussion paper was published by CommsDay a 
few days
earlier.
Declaration: I'm quoted.

FWIW, I didn't coin or use the term 'Netflix tax', and at this stage we really 
don't
know what they might have been thinking when they posed it.
But after the term has spread, I'm hoping they take on board the message that 
whatever
they might have been thinking, if it would result in increased charges, its a 
non-starter.

I'm not sure the Network Neutrality argument applies, since presumably whatever 
'price
response' mechanism would apply to all video streaming equally, but it 
certainly has
gotten 'buzzword bingo' journos buzzing.

Paul.



On 3/07/2019 1:30 pm, Antony Broughton Barry wrote:
> https://thenewdaily.com.au/life/tech/2019/07/02/nbn-co-netflix-tax/
>
>
> Antony Barry
> antonybbarry at me.com
> Mob +61 433 652 400
> ___
> Link mailing list
> Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link


___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] NBN Co's 'Netflix tax' slammed as push to protect net neutrality grows

[Paul Brooks]

Response direct from NBNCo at
https://www.nbnco.com.au/corporate-information/media-centre/media-statements/nbn-co-wholesale-pricing-and-product-consultation-and-video-streaming

They allege the intent of the question was to tease out ways of reducing 
charges for
streaming video, not increase.
There is no proposal for any increased charge or network capability on the 
table now,
and I suspect the huge negative public response
should ensure they rethink any plans to introduce something along these lines.

Paul.




On 5/07/2019 10:27 am, Dr.bob Jansen wrote:
> So, given the move of content providers to set up their own channels and move 
> away from aggregators such as Netflix, we will now have to not only partly to 
> acces content but also to view it on our devices. So a double payment .
>
> The world is going bottom line mad!
>
> Bobj
>
> Dr. Bob Jansen
> Owner and Managing Director
> Turtle Lane Studios Pty Ltd
> 122 Cameron St, Rockdale NSW 2216, Australia
> Ph: +61 414 297 448
> Skype: bobjtls
>
>
>> On 5 Jul 2019, at 08:37, JLWhitaker  wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/07/2019 2:09 PM, Stephen Loosley wrote:
>>> Options available to you.
>>>
>>> If the introduction of a monthly data allowance means this service no 
>>> longer meets your needs, you can cancel your service without penalty by 
>>> contacting our Customer Service on Live Chat 
>>> (https://support.myrepublic.com.au/...).
>>>
>>> If no action is taken by you, your service will automatically change to 
>>> include the monthly data allowance described above and move to calendar 
>>> monthly invoicing on 1 August 2019.
>> Not much of an option - take it or leave it. I'm surprised they didn't offer 
>> selling more data packs to you if you need it beyond the 200Gb limit instead 
>> of throttling which will just piss people off.
>>
>> Imagine you're in a household of even 2 children with homework needs, let 
>> alone paid for streaming services for sports viewing.
>>
>> People won't think this is a big deal until Dad is watching the final of 
>> some obscure sporting event and the little 'loading' wheel appears on his 
>> screen. I hope he hasn't been drinking!
>>
>> I think My Republic just lost multiple customer segments.
>>
>> Jan
>>
>> -- 
>> Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
>> jw...@janwhitaker.com
>> Twitter: @JL_Whitaker
>> Blog: www.janwhitaker.com
>>
>> Sooner or later, I hate to break it to you, you're gonna die, so how do you 
>> fill in the space between here and there? It's yours. Seize your space.
>> ~Margaret Atwood, writer
>>
>> _ __ _
>>
>> ___
>> Link mailing list
>> Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
>> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
>
> ___
> Link mailing list
> Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link


___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Advertised NBN plan speeds impossible to achieve: ACCC

[Paul Brooks]

On 12/11/2019 10:32 am, Glen Turner wrote:
> Hi Tom
>
> It *is* widely understood by the general public. That's why the
> definition has retained its popularity.
>
> At the moment if you buy a 100Mbps service and you want to distribute
> that around your house you go to OfficeWorks and buy a 100Mbps "Fast
> Ethernet" switch (or access point, but let's use switch for this
> exposition).

Glen - NBN could always deliver 105 Mbps for the  '100 Mbps' label which would
completely avoid the confusion you refer to.

Many other goods are sold with a little more than the label indicates, often to 
avoid
the sort of 'I was short-changed' complaints to the ACCC or Fair Trading.

400g cans of beans have more than 400g of beans inside them. 1 litre bottles of
softdrink have slightly more than 1 litre of fluid in them.

A 250g packet of eggnoodles actually weighs 280g excl the packet (I just 
checked).

In the other direction, every car speedometer I'm aware of indicates around 5% 
too
high, so that when the needle reads 60 km/h its actually doing 57 km/h or 
thereabouts
to avoid people being booked for exceeding the limit when they were sticking to 
the
correct speed as indicated by the car dashboard.

Theres nothing inherent in the network which requires a 100.0 Mbps  layer-0 
bitstream
- all NBN internal network is gigabit/10/100Gb or higher, the 25.0/50.0/100.0 
Mbps
link speed is purely an artifact of a traffic-shaper algorithm that can be 
changed in
an instant.  Even the physical Ethernet socket on the NTD is a gigabit 
interface on
all the NTDs I'm aware of, so providing 105-ish Mbps of layer-2 throughout 
isn't an
issue there either.

NBNCo could increase their layer-2 throughput for all products by 3 - 7% without
changing the labels, or the understanding at all - and if people are then 
measuring
51.5 Mbps or 103 Mbps on their Internet speed-tests, they have a lot less to 
complain
about than if they measure 97, and are told by engineers 'for the 100 Mbps 
service you
bought, 97 is the maximum you'll ever measure' and try to understand why - or 
worse,
complain to their RSP they aren't getting what they are paying for, and pushing 
all
the customer service costs onto the RSPs to explain 'but but but thats all the 
NBN
delivers to us' and set up another example of finger-pointing.

Paul.


>
> It's readily understandable that if you want to buy a 300Mbps service
> and want to distribute that around your office you go to OfficeWorks
> and buy a 1000Mbps "Gigabit Ethernet" switch.  If people have issues
> with SI units then that's well within the capabilities of OfficeWork's
> staff.
>
> Now let's say the ACCC alter the definition of the Internet service
> speeds, and the client buys a 1.1Mbps service (the description of a
> 100Mbps service which meets the definition of "worst case transport
> layer throughput across the link" which ACCC is proposing, although
> they don't realise it). That OfficeWorks worker would be wholly excused
> when they sold that customer a 10Mbps "Ethernet" switch.  A switch
> which is ten times too slow.
>
> In short, the ACCC is acting suboptimally. Viewing only a small part of
> the consumer experience with networking.
>
> I view the current definition of bandwidth as the "single useful
> rating" which you seek.  It's independent of traffic mix. It informs
> the customer of which matching products they should purchase.  That it
> misstates achievable throughput by a small amount is readily
> understood. A site's technical staff can measure their site's packet
> size distribution and easily calculate the transport-layer throughput
> across the link, should those few percent matter.
>
> -glen
>
> ___
> Link mailing list
> Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link




___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] NBN fault maintenance

[Paul Brooks]

On 1/12/2019 3:03 pm, David wrote:
> When Telstra is eventually rescued by being allowed to buy the NBN we will 
> have turned full circle, from Howard's privatisation of Telecom Australia, 
> through the Three Amigos' network wreck, to the Rudd NBN, and then back to 
> the Howard model.  But we'll be reduced to a hotch-potch network with no 
> end-to-end technical standards or quality control, and customer premise 
> equipment for the most part made cheaply in China, to no national standard 
> regarding ring-tones, etc., and probably with at least one back door.

...which is exactly how the rest of the access networks around the world work, 
and
exactly what we had back in the DSL days - actually worse, because back then it 
was
customer BYO modem, with no inspection or validation of capability or
standards-compliance of the devices pulled off the cheapest-possible shelf at a
retailer, or imported from dodgy websites making gear for overseas markets , and
plugging them into the bare wire of the phone socket. But oddly, mostly it 
worked OK.

Time and again, consumers show they prefer low prices and a
works-well-enough-most-of-the-time network, than the high prices of a fully
end-to-end-verified and engineered gleaming shiny inflexible monolith.

A few DOA  HFC modems are neither here nor there - they're fairly new, so 
replacement
of any failure is a warranty claim at worst, shouldn't cost NBN anything for a 
bad
batch, and as they are standards-compliant, if there are too many duds NBN can 
move to
another vendor.

As for rescuing Telstra - I hope its a cold day in hell before Telstra gets 
their mits
on the NBN though - they are responsible for the need for the NBN in the first 
place,
to break down their monopoly on local loop after the hatchet-job they did on 
the HFC
rollout.  Telstra have been richly compensated by the cutover-bounty for losing 
their
vertical monopoly, and crying poor now from a deal they were very happy to 
agree with
a decade ago really doesn't wash.

P.



___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] NBN fault maintenance

[Paul Brooks]

On 6/12/2019 4:39 pm, JLWhitaker wrote:
>
> That is just as nuts - levy the mobile users. Double-dipping anyone? Hands up 
> how
> many people have both mobile and home services.
> See, if this is their idea, they definitely aren't thinking it through.
> Business customers might bite back a little harder than us plebs.

They aren't levying anything on mobile users. They are levying on fixed-line 
services.

The Bill proposes to levy a $7.10 per month charge on every service connected 
to a
non-NBN fixed-line network, such as TPG’s fibre to the basement network, all the
greenfields housing estates (Opticomm, Pinit, LBNCo, etc), possibly Spirit 
Telecom's
network in apartment towers.

The levy actually can rise each year by indexation, adding further pressure to
increased end-user broadband pricing over time.

The Government through the ACCC record-keeping-rules already knows how many NBN 
and
non-NBN fixed-line services there are - they will be charging the carriers who 
have
built non-NBN fixed-line networks $7.10 for each line they supply, and leave it 
up the
carriers to figure out whether to pass on the extra cost in higher charges to 
their
customers.

https://www.communications.gov.au/documents/regional-broadband-scheme

Note that it isn't yet passed - it was referred to a Committee, closing date for
submissions is December 20th, for review and report by 21 February 2020.

https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Environment_and_Communications/TelcoBills2019

So perhaps make a big batch of Xmas egg-nog, spike it with strong liqueur, and 
spend
your Christmas shopping time over the next 21 days preparing your submssion to 
the
inquiry.

Paul.



___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Propose Video Bandwidth Limit During COVID19 Emergency

[Paul Brooks]

On 20/03/2020 8:34 am, Tom Worthington wrote:
> There is likely to be a high demand for Internet access over the next few 
> months due
> to COVID19. So I suggest that video products be set to limit bandwidth use by
> default. Video streaming and conference tools adjust to the bandwidth 
> available, but
> try to use *all* that bandwidth. This makes them poor online citizens, like 
> someone
> who fills their shopping trolley with toilet paper, if you let them. ;-)

With much respect, I'll take the contrarian view then.

Actually, videoconferencing systems (unlike one-way streaming media like 
youtube)
don't adjust to use all the bandwidth, and I'm not convinced its a problem 
these days
except for people forced to use older, slow links.  In a zoom call with ~10 
endpoints,
I see sustained downstream bandwidth use under 2 Mbps, only a few percent of the
available link capacity.

Auto-adjusting-quality video streams generally requires the video be 
pre-recorded and
stored with several different different quality/bandwidth encoding versions of 
the
whole video file stored in parallel, and the viewing client then selecting the
appropriate file according to its measurement of congestion at the time. That 
isn't
what is done with live video, as it isn't feasible to trans-code a stream after 
it has
been transmitted due to the inherent delays and perception of lag that would 
introduce.

Given the asymmetric nature of our broadband networks (and NBN incredibly 
wanting to
make its products *more* asymmetric rather than less), its generally the 
upstream
direction where congestion is apparent - and the user on the end of one of 
those links
can turn off their own video to free up capacity for the audio quality to 
improve. I
generally see this when a user is trying to use a cellular mobile connection - 
but
even then, in many cases the quality is good. Rarely is there a constraint in 
the
downstream direction, which is where making a blanket change for all VC 
endpoints
might improve.


> There were only a few brief dropouts in the audio (fewer than on ABC Radio 
> National
> that morning). This was with Zoom, which is not my favorite product, as there 
> is no
> way for participants to set the audio or video quality to reduce bandwidth. 
> But it
> is possible to reduce data use to around 220 to 300 kbps by making the video 
> window
> smaller.

I find Zoom works very well, and supports better quality and more users for a 
given
level of bandwidth than most, but horses-for-courses. 220, 300, or even 500 
kbps on
the network downstream, or even upstream, is not much these days, and not worth
optimising further. Several Mbps perhaps, 500 kbps no. If links cannot support 
500
kbps in either direction, then videoconferencing is not appropriate, and the 
user
should dial-in instead. (controversial point for discussion ahead) concerns 
about a
few hundred kilobits being meaningful represents 1990s thinking, not current 
network
capabiities. If the access networks this decade cannot support, then the 
networks need
to be improved, not pandering to last century expectations retained. It works 
fine on
access links with only a couple of Mbps in each direction, which is not an
unreasonable expectation for the 2020s.

> It would be good if the video products, such as Zoom, used a low bandwidth 
> mode with
> a small video window, by default.

With live video such as videoconferencing, bandwidth reduction is done by 
reducing
frame-rate rather than resolution or window size. Zoom does have controls to 
reduce
bandwidth (high-def can be turned off), and to reduce frame-rate, at least for
desktop-sharing presentations - again, to control for restricted upstream 
capacity of
the person doing the presenting.

In my experience, I often find the biggest constraint is not the network, but 
the
limited processing power of older devices, with sluggish videoconference 
performance
due to CPU is maxed out decoding and displaying the video without adequate GPU
assistance. We may get better improvements by upgrading people's equipment, 
instead of
their network connection.

>
> More at: 
> https://blog.tomw.net.au/2020/03/video-conference-on-covid-19-and.html
>
>
Paul.


___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Propose Video Bandwidth Limit During COVID19 Emergency

[Paul Brooks]

On 22/03/2020 9:04 am, Tom Worthington wrote:
> On 20/3/20 5:04 pm, Paul Brooks wrote:
>
>> Actually, videoconferencing ... I'm not convinced its a problem ...
>
> If most people in Australia are at home, what proportion of them can be on a 
> video
> conference at the same time?

Local effects, gated by the capacity of each home's link and how many people in 
the
home are on VCs simultaneously. The main effect is congestion of the local 
house's
access line. Right now I have 3 of the 4 occupants on conference calls either 
audio or
video quite successfully on a 50/20 link, leaving plenty of bandwidth to spare, 
but
slower access lines may not be able to support so many simultaneously.

If its one person per house, then a very large proportion of Australia could on 
VCs at
the same time, outside peak hours - perhaps up to 30 - 40% which would be highly
unlikely in practice.

Secondary effects may be congestion of the POI, and the general
interstate/international backbone, however most VCs are done during daytime or
non-peak hours, when the POI links and backbone/backhaul links are at 50% 
utilisation
or thereabouts. Very few videoconferences amongst the Australian population 
would
occur during the Internet busy-hours of 8pm-10pm. Those hours are peak hours on 
local
access lines primarily due to one-way intertainment streaming, which does 
auto-adjust
up, and the main services have made steps to reduce their bandwidth usage by 
25% or so
per user.

More to the point, for backhaul, longhaul and POI links, if traffic was to rise 
to the
point that congestion was close (e.g. due to a rise in VC use from homes), 
capacity
upgrades can occur within hours, days or at worst around 6-8 weeks if new DWDM
transmission linecards are required - there is so much unused fibre lying 
around that
can be quickly lit up that congestion in the backbone should never be apparent 
to the
general population.

You can check out the utilisation and diurnal curve of one mid-sized ISP at
https://www.aussiebroadband.com.au/cvc-graphs/. Note that almost all of them, 
actual
utilisation between 8am and 6pm is roughly 50% used, 50% idle. That 50% idle 
capacity
can support a very large proportion of the population on VCs during those hours,
without even needing augmentation of the backbones/backhauls.

The best way to limit congestion of Internet infrastructure is for the 
entertainment
streaming services to limit their usage, as they are doing described at:

https://www.itnews.com.au/news/netflix-to-slash-traffic-across-europe-to-relieve-virus-strain-on-internet-providers-539668

https://www.itnews.com.au/news/youtube-amazon-prime-forgo-streaming-quality-to-relieve-european-networks-539673

Paul.



___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Just as everyone's hopping onto Zoom ...

[Paul Brooks]

On 2/04/2020 3:12 pm, Marghanita da Cruz wrote:
> Just informed Inner West Council will be holding an extraordinary Council 
> meeting
> next Tuesday via Zoom!
>
> Electronic meetings have been allowed due to COVID-19 (but webcasting is a
> requirement)
> https://www.olg.nsw.gov.au/programs-and-initiatives/olg-assists-councils-to-manage-covid-19/
>
> Any advice?
>
> Marghanita (Greens Councillor Inner West Council)

Advice: Advise everyone not to click on links appearing in the chat list.

More detail:

The videoconferencing part is OK.

As I read it, the vulnerability occurs if a malicious attacker sends a carefully
crafted clickable link onto the chat pane (so you would have to  have an 
unknown,
unidentified or masquerading attacker inside the zoom call).  If someone then 
clicks
on that link (to go to the website or open the document) then bad stuff happens.

For small closed-group Zoom conferences (say less than 15 - 20 people, where 
you can
identify all the participants as legit) its unlikely to be a problem.

For large webinar-style presentations, where the event is widely advertised and 
open
to many random Joe-and-Josephine-Publics, who then jump on the chat pane to say 
hi, it
could be a significant problem until they release an update.

if your Council meeting is open to the public, and you cannot vouch for 
everyone, then
disable the chat function, or do not click on any clickable link appearing in 
the chat
pane.

Paul.


>
>
> On 1/4/20 4:14 pm, Ambrose Andrews wrote:
>> And some dubious claims by zoom PR...
>>
>> https://theintercept.com/2020/03/31/zoom-meeting-encryption/
>>
>> """
>> Zoom, the video conferencing service whose use has spiked amid the
>> Covid-19 pandemic, claims to implement end-to-end encryption, widely
>> understood as the most private form of internet communication,
>> protecting conversations from all outside parties. In fact, Zoom is
>> using its own definition of the term, one that lets Zoom itself access
>> unencrypted video and audio from meetings.
>> """
>>
>> As I type, I am dutifully installing zoom to participate in remote
>> tutorials for COMP3310 Computer Networks at ANU.  Good case study.
>>
>>    -AA.
>>
>> On 1/4/20 3:27 pm, Roger Clarke wrote:
>>> Zoom for Windows leaks network credentials, runs code remotely
>>> Careful clicking on links starting with \\ in Zoom.
>>> Juha Saarinen
>>> itNews
>>> Apr 1 2020
>>> https://www.itnews.com.au/news/zoom-for-windows-leaks-network-credentials-runs-code-remotely-545883
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> ___
>> Link mailing list
>> Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
>> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
>



___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] All German petrol stations must offer electric car charging

[Paul Brooks]

On 11/06/2020 1:20 pm, David Lochrin wrote:
>
> The other thing which would be useful is an index of charging points.  One 
> doesn't want to run out of charge while driving around looking for one.

ALmost every car GPS sat-nav system - and portable third-party 
(Navman/Garmin/phone
with Google Maps) already has 'fuel stations' and 'car parks' as 
points-of-interest
categories, and you can press a few buttons to be directed to the nearest one 
already.
Adding a flag for 'PEV charger' is trivial. Teslas have the index of charging 
stations
already built into the nav system I believe, and its updated over-the-air in 
much the
same way the car software is, so is continually up-to-date much like Google 
maps is.
So this is a non-issue.

But the real value in 'charging points' is to charge at home. or at work. or at 
the
shops - or anywhere you are stopped for many hours at a time. Seriously, 
installing
charger points at current petrol stations is stupid. We only have so many petrol
stations on every corner because its dangerous and infeasible for everyone to 
have a
fuel store at home and fill the tank overnight or in the morning before 
leaving. If
you could guarantee that every time you reversed down your driveway your fuel 
tank was
full to the top, you would pretty much never ever pull into a petrol station in 
a
suburban area - at worst you might need a topup on a long highway drive to 
another
city/town, when you stop for a meal, a coffee and a driver-change, or you 
charge up at
your overnight accomodation.

Most EVs have a range of several hundred kilometres in a charge - the ones I've 
looked
at, I can drive from Sydney to Newcastle and back again without charging in the
middle. For many cars, several hundred kilometres means charging overnight no 
more
than once a week. You leave your driveway in the morning with the charge full, 
you
return home, plug in, after driving right by all those lonely fuel stations 
losing
patronage and selling more pies and softdrink than fuel. If you do need to 
charge,
they are the last place you would want to go to, because you need 15 mins to a 
couple
of hours to push in a decent charge to make stopping worthwhile, and theres 
nothing
else to do at those places. To me, suburban fuel stations are dodos, and we will
quickly find alternative uses for all those corner real-estate blocks when they 
go
broke from disuse. Putting charger-points at those locations is nuts.

Paul


>
> David Lochrin
> ___
> Link mailing list
> Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link



-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] All German petrol stations must offer electric car charging

[Paul Brooks]

On 12/06/2020 3:32 pm, David Lochrin wrote:
> Yes, I take the point.  But I think a network of fast-charge sites which are 
> available 24x7 will be required for those times when drivers are running low 
> but nowhere near a shopping centre, etc. and/or don't have hours have hours 
> available for a slow charge.

This from 2011 -
https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1061086_roving-recharge-truck-from-nissan-to-aid-dead-electric-cars

The NRMA/RAA/etc roadside assist concept continues, with a portable 
battery-on-a-truck
to recharge your stranded car if you fail to plan your journey


> I hadn't realised a fast charge required such high currents.  For example, 
> the Leaf fast charge requires a 50 amp outlet (presumably single-phase) but 
> this house, built in 2001, only has a 40 amp single-phase supply from the 
> grid, and that has to run everything else too.

There may be scope to have that increased, and install another circuit - 
Ausgrid at
least permits up to 100A from a single-phase supply.

But in any case, a standard 15A power-point (3.6 kW/hour) would charge that 
whole
40kWh leaf battery overnight from empty to full in 11 hours. As pointed out 
earlier,
most commonly you'll plug in to top up after using maybe 1/4 to 1/2 a charge 
during
the day - plug in and set a timer to start charging at 10pm when off-peak 
charges
start, in most cases you'll be full before you wake up, or at least will have
sufficient charge for the days activities, without needing any specialised 
outlet at all.

P.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] All German petrol stations must offer electric car charging

[Paul Brooks]

On 13/06/2020 9:07 am, Tom Worthington wrote:
> On 12/6/20 11:50 am, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
>> ...  recharging is possible (most of the time) in a
>> few hours even from a 10A 240V circuit. ...
>
> That assumes you have a parking space with mains power. If you park on the 
> street,
> or in an complex with allocated parking, there may not be power to charge 
> from.

Sure - In which case, an EV may not be useful to you.

But for a majority of people living in urban areas, who do park their vehicle
somewhere with access to a power point, and do the majority of their trips 
<300km/day,
an EV would be useful, That is a very large proportion of the population. A 
particular
solution or technology need not be able to be taken up by every single 
individual, to
be useful to many/most.

To bring it back on topic regarding chargers, rather than EVs -

Liquid fuel stations work because the dwell-time for pulling in, filling up, and
leaving is very short - 5 minutes or so. With 6 - 9 pumps or so, an average 
suburban
fuel station can service a large stream of cars - say ~1.5/minute, or 100/hour
(possibly gated by the departure rate pulling back on to the main road)  - 
queuing
theory and Ehrlang measures apply. Generally, you can pull in to the next one, 
and be
assured you won't have to queue behind more than one or two others waiting for 
each
lane at most, and you'll be filled and out in under 10-15 minutes.   The same 
rough
dwell-time applies to the air-hose for tyres, generally only one bay available.

An EV charger needs at least 30 mins to several hours to accept a meaningful 
charge,
depending on the charge rate accepted by the EV. To service a reasonable number 
of
vehicles, and to have a reasonable expectation when you pull into a service 
station
that there will be at least one charging bay available, the service station 
would need
to have a very much larger number of charging bays than fuel pumps - and 
physical
real-estate to have all those cars parked, and able to safely move past each 
other to
arrive and leave. Again, queuing theory calculations can apply. Very few
service-stations have that required surface area on their  aprons to serve 
enough cars
per hour to make it worthwhile.

Don't get me wrong - the more charging stations the better. But for many 
reasons,
current fuel-stations are not useful locations for them.

P.

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Security cameras can tell burglars when you're not home, study shows

[Paul Brooks]

On 9/07/2020 10:25 am, Bernard Robertson-Dunn wrote:
> The risk is that "someone who is specifically targeting an individual
> household rocks up outside with a device to try and start passively
> monitoring traffic," he said.
>
> Tyson told CNN that an attacker would require a decent level of
> technical knowledge to monitor the data themselves, but there is a
> chance that someone could develop a program that does so and sell it
> online.

Which is to say - minimal to no risk. For this to be an issue, an attacker 
would have
to be in a position to observe and measure a household's upstream bandwidth 
use. And
be able to separate out and distinguish outbound traffic from cameras from 
outbound
traffic from computer backups, pool monitors, solar power systems, checks for 
firmware
updates from the other 10 - 40 devices in a house that do such things regularly 
even
when nobody is home.

For a fixed-line connection, this would be devilishly difficult, since the 
datastream
typically consists of idle frames between data frames, so anyone viewing the 
line
activity passively will see just a constant stream of bits regardless of 
variations in
'good data' - they would have to be tapped in to the line, and be decoding the 
data,
to tell what is video and what is not, and if they have that level of access to 
your
packets, video camera activity levels are the least of your problems.

For a wireless connection, they would somehow have to detect variations in
transmission duty-cycles, which is credible - but still be able to separate out 
camera
traffic from all the other outbound traffic 'background noise'.

This risk needs to be compared against the consequences of not incurring the 
risk -
the level of risk of a house or garage being burgled or vandalised, and the 
value of
being able to hand over the video-feed to the police to assist in finding the
perpetrators. Personally, I lean towards the latter.

It also needs to be compared to the risk of someone 'rocked up outside' just 
observing
people and car movements, and working out when all the people have left by 
observing
them leave and use of a pencil and notepad.

And of course - if they do break in - there are security cameras, but this 
attack
vector doesn't reveal the locations of the cameras, so a burgler is likely to be
captured by the system they detected was there!

Countermeasures include making sure the detection threshold includes pets moving
around, and having several pets, to make the cameras activate irregularly but 
often
even when no humans are home.

OTOH, smart security cameras that just transmit on motion detection do have 
benefits
in saving of bandwidth, saving of memory chip storage, and savings on power 
usage -
there are battery-operated cameras where the battery lasts up to a year, and so 
don't
need any form of power or other form of cabling to install, saving significant 
cost in
installation. They achieve the long battery life by  only keeping/storing 
snippets
when motion is detected, if they kept transmitting continuously the batteries 
would
run out and need to be replaced monthly. No cabling required at all, just screw 
to a
wall at a suitable place, and change the battery when you change the smoke 
detectors
batteries for convenience. The value of such systems vastly overrrides the risk 
of
this issue as a credible pathway to loss.

P.

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Security cameras can tell burglars when you're not home, study shows

[Paul Brooks]

On 11/07/2020 12:27 pm, Karl Auer wrote:
> On Sat, 2020-07-11 at 11:51 +1000, Paul Brooks wrote:
>> Which is to say - minimal to no risk.
> Agreed on this - but any sufficiently wealthy house could be worth the
> effort for professionals. So the risk increases with your net worth, I
> would say.

Possibly. But when the overall task is determining when nobody is home, then 
the level
of effort and sophistication compared to sitting at the end of the driveway with
pencil and paper is constant, regardless of the length of the driveway, or size 
of the
gates and stone lions mounted on the gateposts.

Notwithstanding that a professional, on determining there were security cameras
present, is just as likely to switch attention to the neighbour - in which 
case, you
could say the security cameras did their job!

P.

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Renewables providing 40% of European electricity’

[Paul Brooks]

On 16/07/2020 9:37 pm, Stephen Loosley wrote:
> ‘Renewables smash new record providing 40% of European electricity’
>
> The ‘highest quarterly figure on record’ was achieved while the share of 
> fossil fuels dropped to 33%, according to a new report
>
> By Dimitris Mavrokefalidis  Tuesday 14 July 2020
> https://www.energylivenews.com/2020/07/14/renewables-smash-new-record-providing-40-of-european-electricity/

The article didn't link to the actual report, which is the '2020 Q1' Electricity
market report on https://ec.europa.eu/energy/data-analysis/market-analysis_en

I went looking to see exactly what fuels they classified as 'renewable' and 
'fossil'.
Turns out they have three major groupings:

Renewable:   hydro, wind, solar, biomass

Fossil: Solid (coals), Oil, Gas

Nuclear: (neither renewable or fossil)

Much of this changes in *percentages* were attributed to COVID-related demand
reduction - less power was needed, and with high winds the generators cut back 
fossil
burning.

The highlight paragraph that these headline stats were extracted from reads for 
context:

> Fossil fuels were caught in the pincer movement of falling demand and rising
> renewables. Coal generation bore the brunt of the pressure, falling by 30%
> year-on-year (-38 TWh). Gas was unable to capitalize on coal’s demise and 
> suffered
> losses as well (-3 TWh). Coal-to-gas switching quickly gave way to a wide
> grey-to-green shift. Thanks to recovering hydro output and record high wind
> generation, renewable energy sources had a very successfulquarter, expanding 
> by 38
> TWh year-on-year and reaching a 40% share in the power mix, their highest 
> quarterly
> figure to date. Not even nuclear energy was spared by the weakening demandand
> rock-bottom wholesale prices.Reactors in Sweden, France and other countries 
> had to
> be taken offline or significantly ramped down. All in all, renewable 
> generators were
> the least affected by the crisis and came out of it relatively unscathed. 

It is important to note these percentages are not really comparable to 
Australia due
to our lack of nuclear. A chart of French mix (Figure 17) shows they have 
negligible
fossil generation anyway, more than 50% is nuclear.

Also, Figure 28 (page 24 for those who care to look) compares Australian 
wholesale
pricing with Japan, EU, US, Russia and Turkey. With these comparators, we in 
Australia
aren't badly off, with wholesale power prices much the same as for the EU over 
the
past 2.5 years, and decreasing.


>
>
> Renewable energy broke another record for the European electricity mix in the 
> first quarter of 2020, reaching a 40% share, the highest quarterly figure on 
> record.
>
> That’s according to the latest quarterly report on European Electricity 
> Markets, which suggests renewables had a very successful quarter, expanding 
> by 38TWh year-on-year and becoming the least affected energy source by the 
> pandemic.
>
> At the same time, the electricity generated by fossil fuels fell from 38% in 
> the first quarter of 2019 to 33% during the same period this year, with coal 
> generation alone dropping to 30%.
>
> The European Commission’s report also estimates the shift away from fossil 
> fuels caused the carbon footprint of electricity generation in the member 
> states to decrease by 20%.
>
> It also notes demand for electric vehicles (EVs) continued to grow as new EV 
> registrations doubled and almost 25,000 new public charging points were added 
> in the first three months of 2020.
>
> Findings of the report also show electricity consumption in Europe declined 
> by approximately 3% year-on-year, a development which is mostly attributed to 
> warm winter conditions and restricted economic activity due to the Covid-19 
> crisis.
> ___
> Link mailing list
> Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link


___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] [EFA-Privacy] Smart meters back in the frame

[Paul Brooks]

However, no smart meters transmit 15 second interval data. Pretty much all 
smartmeters I'm aware of in Australia and elsewhere have at minimum 30 minute 
intervals. 

There are certainly things you can determine with 30- minute data,  such as 
when your electric hot water service kicks in and off,   or when you're cooking 
a meal on an electric shove,  but there's no way they can tell if you have one 
inefficient fridge or three energy-efficient fridges for example. 

A few timers,  such as on a pool pump, creates natural variation.
30 minute intervals are long enough that an observer couldn't tell if you 
turned on a kettle or dishwasher in that interval. 
It could reveal if the whole family was away and when they came back, if you 
had a multi - day baseline to compare to. 

In any case,  this data is said to be anonimised and deidentified from the 
actual house - that is the aspect I'd like to see verified and done properly,   
rather than focusing on the datalake itself. 

There are positive outcomes. A great deal of homes have inoperative solar 
panels, having no benefit, the owner unaware. If the energy network could alert 
these people 'hey... we haven't seen any feed-in energy from your house for a 
while,  you might want to get your solar checked ' would be a big help.

(Fwiw, I get 5-minute interval data, but not from a smartmeter. That *can* tell 
when inhabitants are rising and eating (toaster and kettle in the morning), but 
it doesn't come from a smartmeter)

Paul.


 Original Message 
From: Roger Clarke 
Sent: 7 September 2020 9:55:54 am AEST
To: link@mailman.anu.edu.au, Privacy List 
Subject: Re: [LINK] [EFA-Privacy] Smart meters back in the frame

G'day Jan

On 7/9/20 9:29 am, jwhit--- via Privacy wrote:
> Any truth in this -- you can tell the age of a fridge by a smart meter?
> Seriously
> Not sure it can tell how many people are in the home, either.
> Hype in terms of oversell or over-fear?
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-09-07/amazon-will-soon-see-inside-millions-of-aussie-homes/12582776

With 5-second- or even 15-second-interval data, the signatures of
devices are very distinct.  The obvious one is heat-lamps.

Basically, once they get organised, police forces will know every
smart-meter-connected on-grid indoor marijuana farm, and can then trump
up an excuse to go in, and knock 'em off, in whichever order suits them.
 We can hope they'll limit their focus to the nasty operations and leave
the little guys alone.  (And, to be fair to the police, I've picked up
no vibes of them using the available data to raid 16yo's bedrooms).

And it would be very naive to hope that electricity companies would
think like utilities and respect the privacy of their subscribers.
They're profitable monopolies, and will monetise their massive hoards of
personal data.

Aded to that, legal protection is a forlorn hope.  The Privacy Act was
designed to protect corporations from the ravages of privacy law, not
personal data from private-sector wolves.

So no, it's not an undue scare article.

Oh, and unoccupied premises are obvious even with 30-minute-interval
data, which even the 15-20 year-old digital interval meters transmit.

Surveillance society is alive and well, and there's not enough
appreciation of it, nor enough fightback.

Regards  ...  Roger

-- 
Roger Clarkemailto:roger.cla...@xamax.com.au
T: +61 2 6288 6916   http://www.xamax.com.au  http://www.rogerclarke.com

Xamax Consultancy Pty Ltd  78 Sidaway St, Chapman ACT 2611 AUSTRALIA

Visiting Professor in the Faculty of LawUniversity of N.S.W.
Visiting Professor in Computer ScienceAustralian National University
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

-- 
Sent unplugged
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] NBNCo Report

[Paul Brooks]

On 21/04/2013 11:55 AM, Noel Butler wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-04-20 at 16:04 +, step...@melbpc.org.au wrote:
>
>
>>  
>>
>> "Around a third of homes in the fibre footprint have signed up to the NBN
>> in neighbourhoods where its been up and running for 12 months ... a third
>
> about a third, can be read as around 30%, and from what I can gather
> thats a wild over estimation, but all businesses  "talk themselves up"

Noel - no need to stoop to the Australian's level of commentary. This is 
evidence to a
parliamentary committee, with significant penalties for making false statements 
- you
can bet your disbelieving dollar that the lawyers would not have allowed those
statements to be included in the presentation if there weren't precise takeup 
numbers
justifying the number being within a few percentage points of 33.3%.

Similar levels of independent evidence, not conjecture, are required to 
substantiate
your 'from what I can gather' to give credence to a lower number.
 
>> of NBN fibre users subscribe to the fastest speeds available, and they are
>> downloading around 50 percent more data (47 GB) than an average Australian
>  and I doubt the 31GB for DSL is even real, unless your a warez
> kid, because the average DSL used to be around 10-15GB, so more NBN
> fictitious inflations, but I guess all the kids screaming for NBN are
> mostly all pirates anyway.

The 31GB for current broadband comes from the latest ABS statistics, which is 
based on
reporting from all ISPs with more than 1000 users. Its also consistent with 
usage
figures I've gathered from real ISPs recently. You may doubt it, but unless you 
can
provide figures from your own ISP, and a few others to make a statistically 
valid
sample, which shows a significantly lower average usage per user for a 
representative
customer base, your doubts don't count for a lot. The average DSL used to be 
around
10-15GB several years ago, and this has been growing at ~40% per year, in  line 
with
global Internet traffic. 31 GB is about right for this year, and ISPs I work 
with are
planning to be able to deal with 60+ GB per user per month in the years ahead.

>> broadband connection each month (31 GB) also uploading an average of 14 GB
>> per month."
>>
> Of course, now the kids can file share much easier and get higher
> rankings on p2p networks because of the faster uploads, but we all knew
> that would happen.

And Youtube introduced HD videos, and ABC iView / Yahoo-7 catchup has adaptive 
CODECs
for better quality streams on higher bandwidth links, and people start using
cloud-based photo library synchronisation, and the explosion of tablets and 
phones
that automatically upload photos/movies etc which then automatically download 
to the
home devices, and offsite backup services become viable to use, and Skype video 
calls
become really really nice due to the higher upstream capacity, and people now 
have on
average 6 - 10 Internet using devices in the home, not just "the Internet 
PC" and
all the other things we all knew would happen as well.

Noel - just because you doubt the figures doesn't make them not real.

Paul.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] NBNCo Report

[Paul Brooks]

On 22/04/2013 3:25 PM, Jeremy Visser wrote:
> On 22/04/2013, at 5:49 AM, Paul Brooks  wrote:
>> And Youtube introduced HD videos, and ABC iView / Yahoo-7 catchup has 
>> adaptive CODECs
>> for better quality streams on higher bandwidth links
> I'm curious to see a source for your statement regarding adaptive codecs on 
> ABC iView. Given your reply, obviously you have some reputable well 
> researched citation you can provide for that statement.
>
> I was just curious because I was the developer of (the ex-) Python-iView, and 
> there was no such thing when I last checked, where only one codec and one 
> quality option was available at the time (not counting the separate version 
> for the iOS app). Admittedly the last time I checked would have been mid-July 
> 2012, so it could have changed since then.
Hi Jeremy - no thoroughly researched citation. I recall speaking with some of 
the
people in ABC about the iView app, and they mentioned at least an intention for 
it to
be rate-adaptive, but this was a few years ago, certainly pre-july-2012, so I 
may have
confused the rate-adaptive mobile app as also applying to the web-based player 
- which
I imagine is also the basis for the iView app in the Playstation?

Telstra's video streaming app for content is definitely rate-adaptive, I had 
one of
the heads of Telstra Digital Media demonstrate it last year - I was also 
thinking of that.

P.









> ___
> Link mailing list
> Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link


-- 
Paul Brooks   | Mob +61 414 366 605
Layer 10 Advisory | Ph  +61 2 9402 7355
---
Layer 10 - telecommunications strategy & network design

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] NBNCo Report

[Paul Brooks]

On 22/04/2013 3:25 PM, Jeremy Visser wrote:
> On 22/04/2013, at 5:49 AM, Paul Brooks  wrote:
>> And Youtube introduced HD videos, and ABC iView / Yahoo-7 catchup has 
>> adaptive CODECs
>> for better quality streams on higher bandwidth links
> I'm curious to see a source for your statement regarding adaptive codecs on 
> ABC iView. Given your reply, obviously you have some reputable well 
> researched citation you can provide for that statement.
>
> I was just curious because I was the developer of (the ex-) Python-iView, and 
> there was no such thing when I last checked, where only one codec and one 
> quality option was available at the time (not counting the separate version 
> for the iOS app). Admittedly the last time I checked would have been mid-July 
> 2012, so it could have changed since then.
Hi Jeremy - no thoroughly researched citation. I recall speaking with some of 
the
people in ABC about the iView app, and they mentioned at least an intention for 
it to
be rate-adaptive, but this was a few years ago, certainly pre-july-2012, so I 
may have
confused the rate-adaptive mobile app as also applying to the web-based player 
- which
I imagine is also the basis for the iView app in the Playstation?

Telstra's video streaming app for content is definitely rate-adaptive, I had 
one of
the heads of Telstra Digital Media demonstrate it last year - I was also 
thinking of
that when I mentioned iView instead.

P.









> ___
> Link mailing list
> Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link


-- 
Paul Brooks   | Mob +61 414 366 605
Layer 10 Advisory | Ph  +61 2 9402 7355
---
Layer 10 - telecommunications strategy & network design

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] VDSL/FTTN alternative to NBN-GPON - variation in temperature and reliability

[Paul Brooks]

On 23/04/2013 11:17 AM, Nick Ross wrote:
> Hi Robin,
>
> Did anyone follow up on this? It's a very interesting point. I've asked the
> question of some FTTN cabinet specialists.
>
> I've heard enough about datacenters to know that some flavours of the newer
> ones are designed to run very hot indeed - the electronics can cope with it.
>
> However, I asked about cooling i cabinets before and was told that they
> have several fans in them. But that's surely not going to cut it in an
> Australian summer? Or any perma-hot parts of Australia???

Nick -
The brochure for Alcatel-Lucent's gear (7330 ISAM) indicates it is tolerant to
extended temperature range - -40C to +65C.
Hottest recorded air temperature in Australia is +50.7C (Oodnadatta, 1960).

A cabinet in the direct sun will rise in temperature beyond that and start to 
radiate
heat internally, but with a layer of insulation wool against the inner skin of 
the
cabinet, and sufficient fans to draw in outside air and keep the air temp 
inside close
to the outside air temp, the equipment should be OK.
Mitigation in very hot climate areas could be to locate the cabinets on the 
southern
side of buildings or trees, so that they are in the shade during the hottest 
parts of
the day - that helps a lot in keeping the internal temps down.

Too many days like that might shorten the lifetime of the batteries, but its 
not as if
anything is likely to catastrophically break if the temp rises above a certain
threshold - the lifetime might be a few years shorter than at more temperate 
climes,
but thems the breaks.

P.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] What I don't like about Turnbull's NBN

[Paul Brooks]

While I'm definitely not a fan of the latest proposal, I think it is important 
that
rebuttal should also be based on facts, and that un-challenged assertions are
unhelpful no matter what side you're on.

Frank - you've done a great job of distilling out many of the issues, and I 
don't want
to detract from those, but there is one item that is more urban myth than 
fact...

To that point


On 23/04/2013 6:49 PM, Frank O'Connor wrote:
> 6. Probably won't scale as well as Turnbull estimates, and the signal 
> attenuation and drop-off is much higher than he estimates. Only those living 
> right on top of the cabinets (read ... just outside their door) will get 
> 40-50Mbs ... the other 80 to 100 or so clients per cabinet will get from 
> there down to 5 Mbs ... with I estimate a mean value of about 10-15 Mbs.
Assuming they build the 60,000 cabinets, and shorten all the copper lines to 
being no
more than 800 metres long, then real-world measurements show they should achieve
reasonable speeds over those distances. Signal attenuation and drop-off isn't
dramatically more than ADSL2+, as VDSL2 is just ADSL2, extended to higher 
frequencies.
At a minimum, on maximum length 800 metre lines VDSL2 will deliver at least as 
much as
ADSL2+ would on 800m lines, and usually considerably more.

While these are AlcatelLucent test results, and so subject to the usual vendor
caution, they appear to be based on tests on real-world copper networks.

http://www2.alcatel-lucent.com/techzine/vdsl2-vectoring-in-a-multi-operator-environment-separating-fact-from-fiction/
shows that normal (non-vectored) VDSL2 at 800m should deliver between 28 - 38 
Mbps,
and vectoring should raise this to 50 Mbps, at 800m.

http://www2.alcatel-lucent.com/techzine/vdsl2-vectoring-delivers-on-its-promise/
 shows
vectored VDSL2 delivers at least 40, and for latest tech around 60 - 80 Mbps at 
800
metres. Caution is that we don't know what gauge copper the various telcos had
installed and were tested over, good results might be due to better tech, or a 
telco
infrastructure with thicker wires.

At the very least, everyone should get better than ADSL2+ at 800 metres, which 
is
around 18 - 20 Mbps.

P.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] iiNet sells Transact to NBN

[Paul Brooks]

On 23/05/2013 3:33 PM, Fernando Cassia wrote:
>
> Sounds like steep price to pay(and less competition for the consumer),
> to get access to city-wide underground ducts.
In this case Fernando, there is no need. The bit of network that NBN Co bought 
is an
already  mostly-built GPON FTTP network using Alcatel-Lucent GPON kit, a 
slightly
earlier model of the same equipment NBN Co are using elsewhere. They bought an 
already
deployed network, plus (I presume) the ducts it has been built in. All NBN Co 
has to
do extra is to switch out the NTU for a latest model NTU when a house signs up 
for a
NBN Co service.

>
> I wonder if AU has any competition rules in place to mandate
> incumbents to share its underground ducts, or none?
We do - facilities access requirements are built into the Telecommunications 
Act,
applying to ducts, exchange buildings, radio towers and all other forms of
infrastructure that another carrier might want to access.

see docs at  Access codes---telecommunications facilities
   and 
Schedule 1 of
the Telco Act 
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ta1997214/sch1.html:
"

Part 3 -- Access
 to
supplementary facilities

   

16   Simplified outline

   The following is a simplified outline of this Part:

.   Carriers
 
must
provide other carriers
 
with
access 
 to
facilities for the purpose of enabling the other carriers
 
to:

   (a) provide competitive facilities and competitive carriage
services
;
 or


  (b) establish their own facilities.

17   Access
 to
supplementary facilities

 (1)  A carrier
 
(the
*/first carrier
 
/*)
must, if requested to do so by another carrier
 
(the
*/second carrier
 
/*) give
the second carrier
 
access
 to
facilities owned or operated by the first carrier
.




>
> Spain -there could be many others but due to the same language, that's
> one country I keep an eye on- has put in effect superb rules to that
> effect,even calling for the use of "microducts" to separate cables and
> fibre from different operators inside the same pipe.

We don't specify the method, but it is part of the conditions of having a 
carrier
license that you must provide reasonable access to another carrier, if they 
request it
(subject to a whole pile of assumptions that the request is reasonable, the 
notice
period is reasonable, the second carrier must say please and smile, and so 
on...).
We have separate technical codes and standards  that deals with separation of 
cables
in ducts.

Paul

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] refusing contactless cards

[Paul Brooks]

On 1/08/2013 5:37 PM, Harry McNally wrote:
> I assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that the fast response of PayWave meant it 
> was 
> not authenticating the transaction in real time. So it's not clear to me how 
> the transaction limit will prevent loss (or theft). If the transaction is 
> later declined then the merchant has a loss.
No - if the transaction is later declined after the bank terminal gave the 
green light
for the customer to walk out with the goods, then the *bank* has the loss, not 
the
merchant.

The banks have fairly large provisions for reimbursing fraud, should it occur - 
which
is why they are pushing the chip/pin/wave model. They have significantly lower 
levels
of successful fraud with the technology, requiring lower levels of 
reimbursement, than
the old magstripe and signature models.

Another thought - with the contactless model, the bank can't use the 'you wrote 
the
PIN on a piece of paper in the wallet - so you were negligent and we're not
reimbursing you' defence.

P.

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] refusing contactless cards

[Paul Brooks]

On 1/08/2013 3:02 PM, Kim Holburn wrote:
> Whatever info they contain and however it is encrypted, it is enough to make 
> purchases.  All you need is that data.
'purchase', not 'purchases' - the newer versions of the technology transmit a
one-time-use code that changes with each transaction - so in the case of 
someone using
a rogue scanner to 'clone' your card, they can only get one transaction to work.

Those purchases are limited to under $100, and the bank has systems that cut in 
fairly
quickly to block the card if they see a significantly higher number of 
purchases than
normal in a short time period. Mainly to protect you against physical theft of 
the
card, or having it found in the wallet you accidentally left on the train and 
going on
a shopping spree, but the same protections work against cloning as well.

I seriously doubt that a contactless card, physically stolen or cloned, could 
rack up
a significant value of $99 transactions before the card was locked and you 
received a
call from the bank  to verify if the last few transactions were kosher  - and 
under
the contactless card terms and conditions, those rogue transactions are 
reimbursable
by the bank no questions asked.
In this respect the technology is safer than the contact-chip-and-pin, which if 
cloned
allows the crook to get up to your credit limit in only a handful of 
transactions, and
if stolen is open to claims you might have written your PIN down or allowed 
them to
see it in use.

P.

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] refusing contactless cards

[Paul Brooks]

On 2/08/2013 11:15 AM, Ivan Trundle wrote:
>
> It would seem to me that banks have a major risk (and liability) on their 
> hands. 
>
> I imagine that once the media begins reporting this type of fraud more 
> frequently than bag snatching, then a reversal of thinking and processes will 
> occur. 
>
> I cannot see how any bank would endorse this technology if the risks are 
> realised and unable to be mitigated without regressing to the previous 
> technology. What am I missing here?
Perhaps that the banks do have extensive testing, trialling and evaluation of 
the
risks involved, particularly relative to the risks and costs involved in the 
earlier
technologies, and have worked out that commercially their costs and risks of 
fraud and
badness happening is lowered - and included in that are risks to their 
customers, to
public perception and the banks reputation, which goes into the risk 
assessment. They
don't just change the rules to make the end customer liable for fraud and 
reduce their
costs, because the damage to their reputation when a dozen people go on A 
Current
Affair is worth more than if they simply pay up and write it off against their 
fraud
provisions - so they pay and reimburse people.

Perhaps that the media are not reporting this as happening to any great 
frequency
means it actually isn't, or no more than using the previous technology?

(yeah, I know its not fashionable to defend business on this august list, but 
its
Friday, and I have a relative in the banking risk management area, with which 
I've
talked robustly over this issue several times over while taking the
standard-linker-stance - and I've been on the receiving end of dealing with a
suspected fraudulent transaction, and have received calls from the bank on 
occasion
checking that I knew whether a sub-$50 transaction was ok within 12 minutes of 
walking
out of the restaurant they had on a watch-list or didn't fit my usual pattern 
(it was ok).

is there a risk? certainly. Is the risk higher or lower than the various ways 
the
previous technology can be circumvented? its lower, both for the user, the bank 
and
the merchant.

By all means linkers go on with the all-banks-are-bastards rants - but if all 
you're
going on are stuffs you've read on the Internet in articles about hacks from 
the USA
from 5 years ago, and haven't actually inspected the technology used in 
Australia,
spoken to the people who get paid to evaluate and think about all these things 
and the
risks, attempted the circumvention or spoken directly with someone who has and 
isn't
trying to sell you a metallic screened wallet....its about as trustworthy as the
original article.

Back to work...

-- 
Paul Brooks   | Mob +61 414 366 605
Layer 10 Advisory | Ph  +61 2 9402 7355
---
Layer 10 - telecommunications strategy & network design

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] NBN and personal alarm compatibility

[Paul Brooks]

On 13/08/2013 11:26 AM, Jan Whitaker wrote:
> Interesting article about the other sorts of services that hang off 
> the current phone systems.
>
> http://www.theage.com.au/it-pro/government-it/alarms-may-not-work-with-nbn-20130812-hv1cl.html
>
> But if there are analog conversion ports on the termination boxes and 
> the devices that connect to the analog network now do so 
> successfully, AND we have been told our analog phones can connect to 
> one of those ports, why wouldn't this just work?
>
> BTW, I have LOTS of phone outlets in my house. Assuming that in the 
> 5-6 years still to go before NBN appears at my place (I am definitely 
> not in the first 3 years of rollout), I'm assuming that my analog 
> connection end-point would just be moved to connect to one of those 
> analog ports. Right or wrong?
Its an issue that has been known and worked on for at least the past several 
years,
has been the subject of several reports, and is currently the subject of a Comms
Alliance workgroup looking at cabling practices.

'Standard' houses with standard phone sockets and no special considerations can 
be
connected fairly readily so that the existing sockets all should continue to 
work.

Alarm systems - both security alarms and personal health alarms - cause two 
problems.
1) some of them use non-standard audio tones (NOT like modems and faxes) which
apparently have difficulty getting through the G.711 VoIP conversion
2) many alarms are connected to a 'mode 3 socket', which has to be connected in 
a
special place in the phone-point topology, closest to the first socket/building 
entry.
If the NBN box is connected to the existing in-house wring at any random 
socket, then
the 'mode 3' function doesn't work any more and the alarm system won't see any
dial-tone at all - so you need to be careful about how the in-house cabling is
connected to the NBN NTU
3) alarm suppliers are paranoid about non-stop power, and don't like the NBN's 
battery
backup, or that consumers might not keep battery backup. If the mains power 
fails the
alarm system usualy has a backup battery, but thats not much use if the phone 
socket
is dead because the NBN NTU has lost power.

If you're interested further see
http://commsalliance.com.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/23957/NBN-End-User-Premises-Handbook---Release-2-Jun10.pdf
for an early look at home cabling issues, that also discusses alarm systems.




Paul.



___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] NBN and personal alarm compatibility

[Paul Brooks]

On 14/08/2013 9:03 AM, Tom Worthington wrote:
> The point being that older forms of technology can be accommodated, within 
> reason.
> The analog phone service on the NBN will accommodative most analog devices. 

Indeed - the issue is what to do with the edge-cases that fall outside 'most' 
and
'within reason' - particularly when its an emotive thing like personal alarms, 
the
elderly and frail, or security. And that almost always boils down to "who pays".

On the one hand "Technology moves on, your gear is obsolete and is only working 
by
historical accident - talk to your alarm supplier about changing to a new 
system that
will work". On the other hand "The system works fine now, its the network that 
is
changing and stopping the system from working - the network is incompatible, and
should pay for the replacement system"

P.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Great ambiguity from CBA

[Paul Brooks]

On 12/09/2013 9:09 AM, Karl Auer wrote:
> I just got my statement from the Commonwealth Bank. Enclosed with it was
> a brochure about PIN numbers - they want everyone to use a PIN, because
> they are more secure than signatures, doncha know.
>
> In the brochure was this gem:
>
>"It's important to create a PIN that you can easily
> remember, but can't be easily guessed, such
> as your birthday or other public or semi-public
> information"

Gold. Reminds me of the mouse-over text for http://xkcd.com/1087/ :

"My all-time favorite example of syntactic ambiguity comes from Wikipedia:
"Charlotte's Web is a children's novel by American author E. B. White, about a 
pig
named Wilbur who is saved from being slaughtered by an intelligent spider named
Charlotte."

P.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Geolocation of Au citizen data

[Paul Brooks]

On 2/10/2013 10:37 AM, Jan Whitaker wrote:
> At 10:24 AM 2/10/2013, Bernard Robertson-Dunn wrote:
>> Some consumers might be interested in the potential impact of the
>> Patriot Act on the data that Amazon holds on behalf of its business/org
>> users.
>>
>> We all have complete trust in overseas governments, don't we?
> Now *that* question was asked and he answered that it was ASIO in the 
> case of Australia, which can pretty much do what it wants. His 
> solution was to encrypt everything. They don't do back-ups 
> automatically for customers and he said that deletion is completely 
> in the hands of their client. Back-ups are left to the customer to 
> design into their use of AWS as part of their data recovery strategy.

The issue is not only about physical location. Even if Australian data was kept 
in a
datacentre on Australian soil, under the Patriot act if that data is held on 
hardware
owned by a US organisation or subsidiary, or any organisation in any location 
with a
US 'nexus' (which might be as tenuous as having a .com domain name), the US 
government
also reserves the right to do whatever it wants with the data.

Store it with Amazon in the US, you only have to worry about one government. 
Store it
with Amazon in their Australian walled-garden, and you have to worry about two
governments.

Encrypt it, and then store it under your own bed with an offsite backup under 
the
neighbours bed over the road. Multi-terabit storage arrays are fairly cheap 
these days :-)

P.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Tech support for Obama

[Paul Brooks]

On 3/10/2013 9:05 AM, Andy Farkas wrote:
> Ok, its not quite Friday, but those who enjoy The IT Crowd should get a 
> laugh out of:
>
>   
>
> -andyf
Love it!
also have been having some trouble with screensavers over the past couple of 
days, and
worked out why this morning.

http://www.nasa.gov

No wonder my APOD won't load (Astronomy Picture Of The Day - 
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/)

(solution
http://asterisk.apod.com/library/APOD/APOD%20mirror/APOD%20Asterisk%20Mirror.html)
P.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Next thing, pizza?

[Paul Brooks]

Indeed - and not until they install robust guards around all those propellers. 
The model aircraft operating rules for ensuring separation of craft from 
bystanders are fairly strict.

I'm also wondering about the expected delivery range. They *might* have enough 
juice to cover a football oval and back again before it drops out of the sky 
with a flat battery, carrying that sort of weight.



 Original Message 
From: Bernard Robertson-Dunn 
Sent: Wed Oct 16 07:21:22 AEDT 2013
To: link@mailman.anu.edu.au
Subject: Re: [LINK] Next thing, pizza?

On 16/10/2013 1:07 AM, step...@melbpc.org.au wrote:
> Drones to deliver parcels in Australia starting in March

I wonder what their insurance coverage and legal liabilities are.

-- 

Regards
brd

Bernard Robertson-Dunn
Sydney Australia
email: b...@iimetro.com.au
web:   www.drbrd.com
web:   www.problemsfirst.com
Blog:  www.problemsfirst.com/blog

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

-- 
Sent unplugged
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] An Overhead NBN

[Paul Brooks]

On 08/11/2013 09:25, Jan Whitaker wrote:
> That's the extent of my thinking. I would just be happy with upgraded ADSL 
> connection if I'm not going to be able to get FTTH. Not even that is being 
> talked 
> about, unfortunately, while NBN is the centre of everyone's attention. This 
> is a 
> no-brainer, but of course I still have RIM services. :-( 

You're on a RIM? You lucky lucky person, you've already got FTTN way before the 
rest 
of us! :-)

P.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] An Overhead NBN

[Paul Brooks]

On 08/11/2013 09:55, Karl Auer wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-11-08 at 09:25 +1100, Jan Whitaker wrote:
>> Common sense tells me that putting non-destructable es can l(low?
>> destructable) components along poles wouldn't be any different than
>> putting them underground EXCEPT for the danger of being crashed into
>> and broken by some other thing, like a car.
> Poles take lightning strikes. Poles fall over and cause damage when they
> do.

Cables strung along poles are eaten by cockatoos, and knocked out by vehicles. 
Cables 
pulled underground are eaten by rats, and knocked out by ditch-diggers and 
concrete 
saws. Its a toss-up.
Wooden poles burn down in bushfires. Sufficiently deep underground cables 
rarely melt 
- but can be washed away in floods.

Overhead cabling is faster and cheaper to install, but more unsightly - but the 
organisation putting them up doesn't have to pay for unsightly. At least 
optical fibre 
cable, without any metallic strength component, can be strung up along the 
power wires 
rather than a metre below them reducing the visual impact as they look like 
just 
another power wire - they *should* at least look better than HFC cabling.

P.






>   Poles are unsightly. Poles (as you say) are additional things to be
> run into. Poles can be easily climbed by the young and the insane. Poles
> are obvious, they can be found easily for purposes of attack (whereas
> trenches disappear quite quickly; pits are not obvious; pits can be
> locked). Poles, insulators, mounts and the cables themselves can be shot
> at (very common in rural areas). Suspended cables can be easily reached
> with thrown objects esp. shoes. Suspended cables can be hit by other
> things - high trucks, extended ladders, birds, aircraft, kites etc. When
> a pole fails, for any reason, the cables pose a great danger, especially
> if electrified. Failure in a trench or pit is generally harmless. Poles
> are vulnerable to extreme weather, especially wind and (in some
> countries) ice. Poles block some land uses - can't run or drive through
> them, can't build over them, can't build too near to them etc etc. You
> can't plant trees near the poles or near the path of the wires.
>
> Underground has some similar disadvantages, but in general far fewer, in
> particular it's not unsightly and they are invulnerable to just about
> everything except an earthquake (and maybe flood).
>
> Regards, K.
>

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] FCC, AT&T keen to phase out the PSTN (Public Switched Telephone Network)

[Paul Brooks]

On 2/12/2013 1:32 PM, Robin Whittle wrote:
> According to this story the telephone network is now a "legacy" network
> and plans are being made to wind it up:
>
>   http://phys.org/news/2013-11-eyes-phase-out-network.html

This sort of thing brings out the grumbling pedant in me. They aren't phasing 
out the
PSTN at all - they are looking to phase out POTS, aka analogue copper line 
telephones.

The PSTN will continue long into the future, as VoIP, ISDN, arguably all the 
mobile
technologies, and all sorts of other access technologies are all part of the 
PSTN.

P.

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Amazon Prime Air

[Paul Brooks]

On 3/12/2013 9:12 AM, Rick Welykochy wrote:
>
> After watching the video, I am wondering why the rotor blades are
> not encased in a protective barrier. I wouldn't want an unexpected
> haircut in my back yard while waiting for a book to arrive.
>
> I also wonder how they protect against theft.
and firearms. With the US being as it is, and a fleet of self-steering 
skeets
whizzing by, I doubt if they will all survive the trigger-happy crazies.

(Could also have a lot of fun with GPS jammers
)

P.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Amazon Prime Air

[Paul Brooks]

On 3/12/2013 4:19 PM, Jan Whitaker wrote:
> At 03:47 PM 3/12/2013, step...@melbpc.org.au wrote:
>> Also seem to me that it would be smart to simply make them fly X metres
>> above the existing roads. The roads are already quite accurately mapped.
'Accurately mapped' being a relative term - accurate to a few tens of metres, 
which is
less accurate than the actual width of most residential roads, and subject to 
the
resolution of GPS and the frequency of sampling, which can be +/- 30 metres for 
a
fairly rapidly moving device.

Having watched a 'GPS locked' stabilised hovering quadcopter wander randomly 
around an
area of half a football field, and bob up and down more than 1 metre around a 
nominal
height of 2 metres set by a continuously measuring ultrasonic transducer to 
ground
level, I am quietly confident an autonomous drone might be able to successfully
navigate down the rough centre-line of the Pacific Highway, partcularly as it 
has no
right-angle bends, but in typical 10m wide suburban streets with sharp right 
angle bends?


> Images now of the City Link tunnels being closed because a drone 
> slammed into one of the overhead signs..
And as long as they aren't following Apple Maps, especially the vertical contour
transitions.

P.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] private question for off list - consulting

[Paul Brooks]

On 6/12/2013 10:36 AM, Rachel Polanskis wrote:
> Hi Linkers,
> I have finally accepted a redundancy from my job at  and my last
> day is just on the new year.
>
> I have put together a little business plan, getting an ABN and putting 
> together
> a little website we will host on our NBN FTTH connection, hopefully making
> a small business out of it.
>
> What I am planning is to go into IT consulting, for various projects,
> big and small.  I am studying a diploma in Project Management, so hopefully
> that will go well with (what I believe are) my extensive technical skills.

Nobody yet has mentioned insurance. While you hope you never have to use it,
Professional Indemnity (PI) insurance and Public/Products  Liability insurance 
is IMHO
essential for your own business, as is Workers Compensation insurance for 
yourself
(mandatory) and often a requirement for consultancy tenders especially 
government.
Even if you think you'll never make a human error, its comforting to know that 
if
someone was to falsely accuse you of doing something wrong that the insurance 
company
will pay the legal bills defending the claim. You need to factor the costs of 
this
into the costs of doing business, which points to a higher hourly/daily rate 
than one
would initially estimate.
Also, when working for yourself, Workers Compensation insurance for yourself in 
the
business is mandatory, and look at really good keyman-insurance (aka 
injury/permanent
disability insurance). If you get sick and can't work for several months for 
some
reason, it helps to have some insurance pay your salary when you have no 
business
revenue. Its all tax deductable.

P.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Inquiry to examine Australian internet, phone surveillance

[Paul Brooks]

On 13/12/2013 3:10 PM, step...@melbpc.org.au wrote:
> Sigh ..
>
> "Warrantless Aussie surveillance requests were nearly 300,000 last year"
>
> For 20 million of us that's *one person in every 66 spied on* and without
> a warrant. One in 66 equals six Linkers. What a bunch of privacy perverts.

Warrantless requests are requests for data, such as call records, who called 
who, name
and street address that belong to telephone numbers etc. It would include 
things like
when police get a missing persons report or a hiker goes missing, checking their
mobile phone records and then trying to obtain the name and street address of 
the last
20 people to find out if they've seen the person since they went missing, and 
the
locations of towers the missing person was connected to recently to get a rough 
idea
of location to go searching.
Also attempts to use connection logs from seized servers to try to track each 
source
IP address back to the ISP to find the other users of the service.
One of these incidents might result in several tens or hundreds of information
requests, so I don't think a lot can be read into the quantum of the number. 

As far as I know these requests don't include phone call taps, anyone listening 
in to
conversations or recordings of call data. These should need a warrant.

We can certainly argue about how many is too many, and drill down to what they 
were
for - but personally, I'm happy that some requests for information can be 
warrantless.
If I've fallen down a ravine, I'd like to know the rescue authorities can ask 
the
phone providers for my last rough location, and do it without a warrant so it 
has a
chance of happening before the phone battery runs out, or I die from exposure.

Paul.

>
>
> Inquiry to Examine Australian Internet, Phone Surveillance
>
> By Ben Grubb December 13, 2013 
>  internet-phone-surveillance-20131212-hv5j8.html>
>
>
> A Senate committee will examine internet and telephone surveillance by law 
> enforcement and security agencies after Labor backed a Greens motion for an 
> inquiry on Thursday.
>
> The motion was passed after several recent unsuccessful attempts to launch 
> similar inquiries. 
>
> It was not supported by the government.
>
> Greens communications spokesman Scott Ludlam said the inquiry would break 
> "the complicity of silence about surveillance in Australia".
>
> It would also open up an opportunity for Australian experts, agencies and 
> individuals to participate in "a conversation of what surveillance is 
> necessary and proportionate".
>
> The committee will be charged with a comprehensive review of the 
> Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 in reference to 
> recommendations of a 2008 report conducted by the Australian Law Reform 
> Commission titled "For Your Information: Australian Privacy Law and 
> Practice". Ref: 
>
> It will also examine recommendations from a report tabled earlier this year 
> by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security. That 
> inquiry was tasked with examining more than 40 potential reforms of 
> Australia's national security legislation. 
>
> Ref entatives_committees?url=pjcis/nsl2012/report.htm>
>
> "A review of the deeply flawed Telecommunications (Interception and Access) 
> Act is well overdue," Senator Ludlam said.
>
> "Amended no less than 45 times since the events of 11 September 2001, it is 
> the tool used to bug and snoop on Australians."
>
> Senator Ludlam noted that since 2007, warrantless surveillance of 
> Australians through access to telecommunications data has been possible, 
> with requests of nearly 300,000 in the past financial year.
>
> Ref:  net-phone-use-up-by-20--without-warrants-20121130-2amwp.html>
>
> "Since the revelations of Edward Snowden, the Senate has repeatedly voted 
> to avoid knowing what is going on until today, failing in its primary duty 
> as a parliament."
>
> Cheers,
> Stephen
>
> Message sent using MelbPC WebMail Server
>
>
>
> ___
> Link mailing list
> Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Inquiry to examine Australian internet,

[Paul Brooks]

On 13/12/2013 8:47 PM, step...@melbpc.org.au wrote:
> The extent of use of these powers is surprising. And no less than 40 
> government
> agencies made 293,501 warrantless requests for metadata from internet service
> providers in the 2011-12 financial year. Just 56,898 of those requests were 
> made by
> the Federal Police. Centrelink agents, The RSPCA, Wyndham City Council, the 
> Tax
> Practitioners Board and even the Victorian Taxi Directorate have also been 
> allowed
> to access individual telecommunications data for a ‘law-enforcement 
> purpose’." (end
> quote)

Absolutely, this aspect needs to be examined and tightened - who can access the
information and why.
For mine, only reasonably senior state or federal police should have the power 
to
authorise a request. If the local library wants my IP address details, they can 
go
through the police for it.

P.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Wireless Broadband for Regional Australia

[Paul Brooks]

On 18/12/2013 10:53 AM, Tom Worthington wrote:
>
> The major cost with FTTP is running the cable from street to the home, 
> with FTTN, is installing new cabinets in the street and reconnecting all 
> the copper cables to it. However, an alternative would be to install the 
> optical fibre in the street and then only connect customers as they 
> require a service. Copper cable can be used for up to 1 GBPS, but 
> limited to a distance of about 100 m. Perhaps rugged optical modems 
> could be installed in the existing pits in the street, to provide 
> service to about eight to sixteen homes nearby.
Thats the FTTdp model in the Strategic Review, with the copper driven as VDSL2 
or
better G.FAST when it becomes commercial in a couple of years. The 'dp' 
(distribution
point) is a pit at the bottom of the driveway - or more likely, attached to the 
side
of a nearby power pole, TransACT-style. 1 Gbps is a stretch - as the articles 
below
note, where this is mentioned its usually upstream+downstream summed, but 200 - 
300
Mbps symmetric should be achievable.

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/12/500mbps-internet-over-phone-lines-might-solve-fibers-last-mile-problem/
http://www.itu.int/net/pressoffice/press_releases/2013/74.aspx#.UrDreOJjJoM
and for some idea of the kit:
http://www.adtran.com/web/page/portal/Adtran/group/3463, maybe physically a bit 
smaller.


P.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] A security question

[Paul Brooks]

On 19/12/2013 8:33 AM, Tom Worthington wrote:
>
> These fobs do provide a high level of security, if they have not been 
> compromised.
>
> St George bank uses a lower cost approach, where their system sends a 
> code by SMS to the customer's phone, to verify the first high value 
> transfer to a new account. This has the added advantage that if the 
> customer did not initiate the transaction they would know something was 
> wring when they got an SMS from the bank.
Trouble with mobile phone/SMS is that it relies on the phone number, still 
being in
the correct hands.
There have been several articles about prepared thieves using mobile number
portability to move the target's number
to a device in their own hands - and then the SMS falls in the wrong hands as 
well.

P.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Wireless Broadband for Regional Australia

[Paul Brooks]

On 20/12/2013 8:34 AM, Tom Worthington wrote:
> On 18/12/13 11:40, Paul Brooks wrote:
>
>> ... FTTdp model in the Strategic Review ... distribution
>> point) is a pit at the bottom of the driveway - or more likely,
>> attached to the side of a nearby power pole ...
> If most householders are accessing their broadband via WiFi and Mobile 
> Broadband, could you use it as the link from the distribution point (DP) 
> in the street into the household?  That way no extra equipment would be 
> needed in the house and a service could be provided to mobile users in 
> the street, as well as households.

Sure you could add some form of femto-cell function for augmenting the mobile 
cellular
broadband networks, to serve nearby homes and walking-by pedestrians - but I 
suspect
you'll have real problems with phones in cars driving by due to the extremely 
rapid
cell-switching that would occur every few seconds. Phones in cars wouldn't 
finish the
handshaking with one cell before moving into the next.


I distinguish very separately household networks (generally cabled and WiFi), 
and
public networks (cellular mobile broadband) - and it goes a lot further than 
the link
technology. Household WiFi is generally a private network, with no 
bandwidth/volume
charges, relatively secure (on the household side of the firewall), and often 
relies
on functions within the WiFi router to facilitate non-trivial apps such as NAT, 
port
forwarding, VoIP proxies, multicast proxies, etc - which you lose in that model.
A model such as you propose here (no extra equipment needed in the house) would:
* be effectively forcing everyone (and every device) into the same security 
model as
WiFi access at McDonalds, coffee shops, etc;
* be useless for devices with cabled ports and not WiFi (think printers,
set-top-boxes, DVD players, smart TVs etc),  and high-bandwidth devices such as 
NAS
storage.

So you'll still need a wired hub for these cabled devices, while forcing all 
access
from one of your devices to the files on your NAS through a double-WiFi hop
(remembering that WiFi is only half-duplex). If the data charging model was 
similar to
mobile broadband, it would be unworkable.

Most devices with just WiFi connectivity tend to assume there is a firewall/NAT 
device
located on the other end of the WiFi hub - which would be missing in this 
instance -
and you don't want to have to force your wifi-connected photo frame to have to 
jump
through the web-based captive portal hoops that a tablet or laptop has to go 
through
accessing coffee-shop/airport-lounge wifi systems.

You lose the compartmentalisation that is important for home networks in 
limiting the
scope of network broadcasts, particularly server advertisements. Imagine using 
the
network browser to find a shared drive, and having to wade through all the 
services,
servers, shared drives, network printers, DLNA sources and displays, etc etc 
located
in all of the neighbourhood's homes! (and the security problems that might 
bring).

The alternative might be to keep the WiFi-enabled broadband router in the home 
to keep
the firewall and broadcast containment functions, with the uplink being also 
WiFi, or
cellular mobile broadband to the pole outside - with all the performance 
limitations
that brings.

Personally, I think the initial assumption (most people are accessing their 
broadband
via WiFi and Mobile Broadband) is an incorrect starting point. At home, people 
don't
'access broadband', they use broadband to 'access devices/servers/content' - 
its the
same sloppy thinking that conflates "broadband" with "the Internet". In a home
context, to an increasing degree much of those devices/servers/content is also 
located
in their home and is not accessed over a public broadband link, and would have 
their
utility killed if they were forced to be.
Paul.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Wireless Broadband for Regional Australia

[Paul Brooks]

On 21/12/2013 8:53 AM, Tom Worthington wrote:
> On 20/12/13 13:27, Paul Brooks wrote:
>
>> ... the initial assumption (most people are accessing their broadband
>> via WiFi and Mobile Broadband) is an incorrect starting point. ...
> The ABS reported that at the end of June 2013 mobile wireless broadband
> was the most prevalent internet technology in Australia. It is just
> under half all the broadband connections in Australia:
> http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/D6B00147BF1749E1CA257BFA00127708?opendocument


Numbers of accounts is not a credible proxy for usage or utility.
Mobile wireless broadband stats are misleading and, IMHO, worthless as 
comparisons
with other forms - they are only valid for comparing with past and future 
wireless
broadband stats to look at growth trends within the series.
Mobile wireless broadband stats are counting USB dongles, pocket cellular/Wifi
routers, and dedicated data-only SIMs. By their nature, they are per-person or
per-device (a household with two 3G-enabled tablets will have two SIMs and be 
counted
as 2 in the stats), while other forms of broadband are per-household (very few
households have two forms of fixed/satellite broadband) and could have tens of 
devices
served through the same channel.

Also, it is not either/or - a household with cabled broadband could well also be
represented by several mobile wireless counts as well. My own house would be 
counted
as 1 cabled broadband and 3 wireless broadband in the stats - but the 1 cabled 
link
gets used far more, and relied on far more, than the mobile broadband SIMs 
which get
fired up on odd occasions while travelling.

It is not valid to intercompare the mobile broadband and fixed broadband stats 
in a
meaningful way. Newspapers and politicians do it, but I expect better in here.

>
> I couldn't find any figures for WiFi use at home, but my observations of
> ICT in the home is that WiFi is used much more than wired connections.
Huh? Its not either/or - WiFi is used as a last-few-metres method to connect 
devices
to wired connections. Unless you were deliberately switching your use of the 
word
'wired connection' from a fixed-line broadband connection to referring instead 
to a
hard-wired Ethernet cable linking  a device to the home network, in which case 
I would
observe that 'used more' is ambiguous, and repeat that number of links is not a
credible proxy for usage or utility. My observations of ICT in the home is that 
all
but the simplest homes have a mixture of hard-cabled and WiFi devices using 
their
broadband network, and while there is usually a greater number of WiFi devices, 
the
volume of traffic and performance issues lean to the cabled devices. Yes, most 
people
are happy with wireless for web-browsing and email, but quickly use a cable for 
high
bandwidth uses such as home NAS or video streaming, and when the WiFi isn't 
quick
enough to do what they want to do or doesn't reach the back corners of the 
residence.

>
>> At home, people don't 'access broadband', they use broadband to
>> 'access devices/servers/content' ...
> Provided the cost is not significantly higher, I can't see why people
> would want to access different devices, servers and content at home, to
> the ones they use when out and about.

>> ... its the same sloppy thinking that conflates "broadband" with "the
>> Internet"...
> Do homes have many broadband interconnected devices? Home NAS servers
> don't sound like common consumer items. I assume that most people would
> be using broadband to connect to on-line storage and services outside
> the home, via the Internet, thus making "broadband" and "Internet"
> synonymous.
Not if they have a low-quota broadband service, or a low-speed broadband 
service.
The last 10 years of OS development has been in getting devices in the home
interconnected. Shared drives and printers, ethernet-connected printers, 
'Homegroup'
in Windows and the equivalent in other OSs, all aimed at allowing family 
members on
one computer to access content or devices actually located on a different 
computer.
Home NAS devices are now the preferred way to offload large photo collections 
than
USB-connected external drives, and many home broadband routers can advertise a 
USB
external drive attached to the router as a network-available storage NAS drive.
Are you telling me you have never 'shared' a printer connected to one computer 
so the
other devices in your home could print to it?
You've never shared a drive so you can access the files from another computer 
in your
house?

Sure you can use an external cloud provider for photo storage and files, but its
limited - not if you have tens to hundreds of gigabytes of photos, and not 
unless you
have an unlimited-quota broadband 

Re: [LINK] Turnbull daftness

[Paul Brooks]

On 9/04/2014 7:27 PM, Jan Whitaker wrote:
> The review highlighted a 
> multi-technology
>  
> mix as the best option for building the network. That means it will 
> use a combination of fibre to street cabinets and existing copper to 
> connect premises, as well as all-fibre connections for greenfield 
> estates, pay-TV cables where available, plus fixed-wireless and 
> satellite connections where required.
>
> 
>
> So, since pay TV cables are outside my house, then if I want 
> highspeed affordable internet, not the 8Mbps limit I currently face 
> because of RIMs, then I would have to lock into a monopoly provider. 
> Or are they going to open up competition for access to the hybrid 
> cables now? Somehow I doubt Telstra will go for that. I guess I can 
> be happy that I won't lose my landline. Or will I? Does anyone know?
Depends on how closely they follow the recommendations in the report.

For HFC the report recommended the existing HFC networks be expended, and made
wholesale-open-access the same as the NBN optical fibre is, so you could 
connect to an
HFC cable and still have your choice of ISP.

For landline service (which I read as copper-line dialtone), the Optus HFC 
network
currently provides landline functionality using IP telephony, and there is no 
reason
why this capability would need to be abandoned, and it could be extended to the
Telstra cable infrastructure in future.

P.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] FTTP soon normal

[Paul Brooks]

It's single-mode fibre, so is OK for long runs - but the installer might have 
been
trying to use the tech-speak to justify doing a lazy installation.
NBN's standards allow for  around 40m of flexible fibre inside the premises from
memory as a "standard install"  - or longer if needed to replicate an existing 
copper
telecommunications connection inside your home or business. If the homeowner 
wants the
NTU installed somewhere that requires longer fibre run internally they are 
supposed to
do it after confirming you'll pay for a non-standard connection fee.

See
http://nbnco.com.au/get-an-nbn-connection/home-and-business/connecting-fibre/fibreinstallation.html

Sounds like there is a lot of snow from installers trying to get away with the 
fewest
minutes on-site as they can get away with, irrespective of NBNCo's standards.



 


On 28/04/2014 11:56 AM, Scott Howard wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 6:38 PM, Rachel Polanskis wrote:
>
>> Also, when it comes to the internal fibre link from the wall outside,
>> we were told it is Single Mode Fibre and so is only suitable for short
>> runs.
>>
> You probably mean Multi-mode fiber, which is only good for runs up to about
> 500 metres (but can do more depending on the wavelengths used).
>
> Single-mode fiber is good for runs measured in the 10's of kilometres or
> more.
>
>   Scott
> ___
> Link mailing list
> Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] FTTP soon normal

[Paul Brooks]

On 28/04/2014 1:36 PM, Rachel Polanskis wrote:
> On 28 Apr 2014, at 12:58 pm, Paul Brooks  wrote:
>
>
>
> Sounds like there is a lot of snow from installers trying to get away with 
> the fewest
> minutes on-site as they can get away with, irrespective of NBNCo's standards.
>
> I think this is the case.  The people who did my install were run off their 
> feet
> at the time and it was right before the election….

Thanks Rachel.
The installers are probably paid on the same plan as Foxtel and the former 
Austar
satTV installers - a fixed amount per house connected (around $50 possibly)  no 
matter
if its is a 'hard' or 'easy' install.
Gives them reason to try to hurry up the hard ones to get in as many as possible
during the day, and reason to refuse to even start the 'almost impossible' ones 
at all
and move on to the next in the list.

P.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] FTTP soon normal

[Paul Brooks]

On 29/04/2014 8:37 AM, Tom Worthington wrote:
> On 28/04/14 09:32, Richard Archer wrote:
>
>> Sorry to be a spoil sport, but your story about networking inside the
>> premises has nothing to do with FTTP nor FTTN. ...
> Sorry to disagree, but why spend billions of dollars getting high speed 
> broadband up to people's homes, if you can't then get it the last few 
> metres inside, for them to actually be able to use?
>
> The debate has been about if the fibre should be terminated in the 
> street (FTTN), or run an extra tens of metres to the home (FTTP). The 
> last few few metres within the home has been ignored in this discussion. 
> If householders can't or wont cable this last bit at high speed, then 
> perhaps we have been debating the wrong issue.
Thats just silly Tom. Are we going to buy everyone a shiny new PC with a gigabit
ethernet port just because they have a NBN connection but are using it from a 7 
year
old laptop? No we aren't.

By at least getting it to the wall, you turn it from a large-scale engineering 
issue
to a personal preference and resources issue that can be solved by each 
household
according to their means and knowledge.
We don't need to specify the internal arrangements any more than we need to 
wring our
hands that some people might be using older equipment that might not be able to 
stress
out the connection.

Some people could afford 9600bps modems when they came out, others were happy to
continue using their 2400bps and 1200/75 bps units until they could each update 
on
their own terms, or remain happy with what they had. The device was the 
bottleneck,
and could be updated individually to suit.
Over the past broadband years, the network external to the users control became 
the
bottleneck.
This 'debate' and infrastructure investment removes the bottleneck from a 
location
where the individual can't influence it, and allows their own equipment and
arrangements they can control and update to become the new bottleneck again. 
This is a
good thing.
And Robin's correct, it has nothing to do with the external network being FTTN 
or FTTP
or wireless or whatever. In-home distribution is a different problem.

While the inhome network distribution is the bottleneck, then we've done a good 
thing
with the external network.

P.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Telstra WiFi Network

[Paul Brooks]

On 22/05/2014 8:22 AM, Tom Worthington wrote:
> On 21/05/14 01:42, Stephen Loosley wrote:
>
>> ... Telstra ... showering the country with new modems for
>> broadband customers who choose to act as wi-fi hotspots using Fon ...
> A colleague of mine is a very enthusiastic user of Fon in Europe. This 
> is a system of WiFi equipped routers which share the bandwidth securely 
> between the customer who has the device in their home and nearby users: 
> http://blog.tomw.net.au/2008/12/la-fonera-20-linux-wireless-broadband.html
>
> It is unfortunate that a WiFi sharing facility was not built into the 
> NBN. That way customers would not need any extra equipment or cabling to 
> use the service.


...but it would be extra cost built into the construction cost of the NBN that 
would
be outside its charter and raison d'etre.
The NBN is already a camel - it doesn't need extra straw loaded on its back, 
lest the
camel's back breaks.


If NBN built such a WiFi facility in, it would be providing a retail service to
end-users which is inconsistent with the NBN charter. They would also need to 
put in
all the administrative, billing and OSS/BSS crap that is required when dealing 
direct
with end-users, which is a huge extra cost overhead. In this case, the FON 
system is a
function loaded into the consumer's WiFi-enabled broadband router - which NBN 
Co does
not (and should not) supply. If they did in order to do as you suggest, they 
would be
removing choice of the end-user in which broadband router they could use and 
dictating
gold-plating functionality to end-users and ISPs.

If they built it in as a facility to be wholesaled, they would need to do it in 
such a
way that it could be multi-tennanted and up to hundreds of ISPs could 
simultaneously
use the functionality to provide an ISP-labelled WiFi service - which is not a 
trivial
exercise.

For this NBN-enabled WiFi service to be of any practical use in improving
communications in the community NBN Co should install it in the outdoor plant, 
since
end-users can already install WiFi within their homes. However, until recently 
NBN Co
wasn't going to have any significant outdoor plant. Now they are doing FTTN with
outdoor cabinets polluting the footpaths every few hundred metres they probably 
could
- but then so could any of the ISPs.

Instead, it is fortunate the NBN concentrates on solving the problem it was 
created to
solve - lack of competition in last-mile connectivity - and lets each ISP 
wholesale
customer of NBN choose whether to install such a WiFi function themselves, at 
their
discretion and cost, and run it as a retail service as they see fit.

You could also say It is unfortunate that they also didn't don't build a 
bike-rack on
the side of the fibre cabinets, and a dog-poo bag dispenser as often seen in 
council
ovals, as a community service to help keep the country 
clean...and...and...and...but
the same arguments apply.

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Australian Crime Commission's ambit claim

[Paul Brooks]

Both Brandis and Morrison need to read the second verse of our national anthem.
Actually, we need to swap the order of the first and second verses, so the 
second
verse is sung in parliament and at major sports events.

On 5/09/2014 6:25 AM, Frank O'Connor wrote:
> Mmmm, but they're simply doing what that great Protector of 'Freedom', George 
> Brandis, wants,
>
> It's remarkable how selective he is with his 'freedom'. Bigots must be free, 
> but the rest of us must be under control and do what the government wants. 
> 'Freedom of Speech' is Paramount - but no way in hell would he award that to 
> Joe Public in a  Bill of Rights. Freedom of Association is OK for despicable 
> sexist foul mouthed Young Liberals, but not for bikies and Muslims. You can 
> have your Freedom of Religion - but only as as long as you're a Christian, 
> and preferably a Roman Catholic Christian. 
>
> Privacy? Protection from the State? Court based curbs on the State's power.
>
> Why do you need that? We mean you no harm. It's all for your own good. I 
> mean, you want to be secure don't you? Well, security means you have to give 
> things up.
>
> Sometimes I despair of anything approaching rational policy coherence from 
> our Attorney General.
>
> Just my 2 cents worth ...
> ---
> On 5 Sep 2014, at 1:28 am, Stephen Loosley  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Australian Crime Commission rejects limits on website blocking
>>
>> ACC also wants inquiry to examine penalties for non-compliant ISPs
>>
>>
>> By Rohan Pearce (Computerworld) on 04 September, 2014
>> http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/554221/
>> http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House/Infrastructure_and_Communications/Inquiry_into_the_use_of_section_313_of_the_Telecommunications_Act_to_disrupt_the_operation_of_illegal_online_services/Submissions
>>
>>
>> The Australian Crime Commission has rejected calls for limits on the 
>> government agencies that can issue notices under Section 313 of the 
>> Telecommunications Act 1997.
>>
>> The ACC has also raised the possibility of creating some mechanism for 
>> penalising ISPs for not complying with Section 313 notices.
>>
>> "The success of s.313 for the lawful blocking of websites relies upon 
>> private sector compliance with law enforcement requests," states an ACC 
>> submission to a parliamentary inquiry examining the use of Section 313.
>>
>> "It is noted that failure to comply with a request to lawfully block a 
>> website pursuant to s.313 does not carry any consequences. In addition to 
>> the terms of reference being considered by this inquiry, consideration could 
>> also be given to addressing this issue."
>>
>> The federal government launched the inquiry in July. The inquiry follows 
>> bungles by ASIC in 2013. In an attempt to block websites implicated in 
>> investment fraud, the financial watchdog issued Section 313 notices that 
>> also blocked access to unrelated websites.
>>
>> The ACC's submission also rejected the creation of a list of government 
>> agencies authorised to issue Section 313 notices because it "will not enable 
>> flexible responses to the inevitable evolution of the online landscape".
>>
>> In a similar vein, the organisation argued against requests being limited to 
>> a "list of defined offences".
>>
>> "However, recognising the extent of power to disrupt online services s313 
>> provides, there is merit in considering the proportionality of the activity 
>> being conducted or facilitated," the ACC submission stated.
>>
>> Adding a "proportionality threshold" would "provide response agencies with 
>> sufficient flexibility to respond to a wide range of criminal or national 
>> security threats," the ACC argued.
>>
>> Submissions to the inquiry by iiNet, the Internet Society of Australia 
>> (ISOC-AU), and industry bodies the Australian Mobile Telecommunications 
>> Association (AMTA) and the Communications Alliance all called for 
>> restrictions on the government agencies that can issue Section 313 requests.
>>
>> The ACC said it believes that the agencies should be able to continue to 
>> self-authorise their Section 313 notices, with staff of an organisation 
>> submitting a written application to an "authorised officer".
>>
>> The submission also argued that although the ACC supports "consideration of 
>> a formal transparency and accountability regime" — although organisations 
>> that issue the notices should not be required to publish "certain 
>> information" that could jeopardise investigations or the safety of 
>> individuals.
>>
>> A transparency regime could include measures such as an appeals mechanism or 
>> a reporting regime similar to the annual report published by the government 
>> on the use of the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Stephen
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Link mailing list
>> Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
>> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/

Re: [LINK] Australian Crime Commission's ambit claim

[Paul Brooks]

I was indeed referring to the bolded former third verse.
I have learnt new things today - thankyou Roger.



On 8/09/2014 8:48 AM, Roger Clarke wrote:
> At 8:20 +1000 8/9/14, Paul Brooks wrote:
>> Both Brandis and Morrison need to read the second verse of our national 
>> anthem.
>> Actually, we need to swap the order of the first and second verses, so the 
>> second
>> verse is sung in parliament and at major sports events.
> Nice.
>
> But unfortunately ambiguous.
>
> I'm sure you're referring to the now-second-verse but originally-third-verse, 
> not the politically incorrect originally-second-verse:
> http://www.hamilton.net.au/advance/lyrics.html
>
> __
>
>> On 5/09/2014 6:25 AM, Frank O'Connor wrote:
>>> Mmmm, but they're simply doing what that great Protector of 'Freedom', 
>>> George Brandis, wants,
>>>
>>> It's remarkable how selective he is with his 'freedom'. Bigots must be 
>>> free, but the rest of us must be under control and do what the government 
>>> wants. 'Freedom of Speech' is Paramount - but no way in hell would he award 
>>> that to Joe Public in a  Bill of Rights. Freedom of Association is OK for 
>>> despicable sexist foul mouthed Young Liberals, but not for bikies and 
>>> Muslims. You can have your Freedom of Religion - but only as as long as 
>>> you're a Christian, and preferably a Roman Catholic Christian.
>>>
>>> Privacy? Protection from the State? Court based curbs on the State's power.
>>>
>>> Why do you need that? We mean you no harm. It's all for your own good. I 
>>> mean, you want to be secure don't you? Well, security means you have to 
>>> give things up.
>>>
>>> Sometimes I despair of anything approaching rational policy coherence from 
>>> our Attorney General.
>>>
>>> Just my 2 cents worth ...
>>> ---
>>> On 5 Sep 2014, at 1:28 am, Stephen Loosley  
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Australian Crime Commission rejects limits on website blocking
>>>>
>>>> ACC also wants inquiry to examine penalties for non-compliant ISPs
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> By Rohan Pearce (Computerworld) on 04 September, 2014
>>>> http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/554221/
>>>> http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House/Infrastructure_and_Communications/Inquiry_into_the_use_of_section_313_of_the_Telecommunications_Act_to_disrupt_the_operation_of_illegal_online_services/Submissions
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The Australian Crime Commission has rejected calls for limits on the 
>>>> government agencies that can issue notices under Section 313 of the 
>>>> Telecommunications Act 1997.
>>>>
>>>> The ACC has also raised the possibility of creating some mechanism for 
>>>> penalising ISPs for not complying with Section 313 notices.
>>>>
>>>> "The success of s.313 for the lawful blocking of websites relies upon 
>>>> private sector compliance with law enforcement requests," states an ACC 
>>>> submission to a parliamentary inquiry examining the use of Section 313.
>>>>
>>>> "It is noted that failure to comply with a request to lawfully block a 
>>>> website pursuant to s.313 does not carry any consequences. In addition to 
>>>> the terms of reference being considered by this inquiry, consideration 
>>>> could also be given to addressing this issue."
>>>>
>>>> The federal government launched the inquiry in July. The inquiry follows 
>>>> bungles by ASIC in 2013. In an attempt to block websites implicated in 
>>>> investment fraud, the financial watchdog issued Section 313 notices that 
>>>> also blocked access to unrelated websites.
>>>>
>>>> The ACC's submission also rejected the creation of a list of government 
>>>> agencies authorised to issue Section 313 notices because it "will not 
>>>> enable flexible responses to the inevitable evolution of the online 
>>>> landscape".
>>>>
>>>> In a similar vein, the organisation argued against requests being limited 
>>>> to a "list of defined offences".
>>>>
>>>> "However, recognising the extent of power to disrupt online services s313 
>>>> provides, there is merit in considering 

Re: [LINK] From my friend re NBN change

[Paul Brooks]

On 11/12/2014 3:44 PM, JanW wrote:
> At 01:45 PM 11/12/2014, Jan Whitaker you wrote:
>> 2. They are charging her $189 for installation she thinks 
> Correction:
> The NBN will be installed free,  but from their box to the modem will cost.
> --
>
> I don't understand that. any help here?

If she's on HFC cable, that connection should not need to be changed. It'll be 
her
voice service on the copper pair that needs to be migrated to the NBN, not the 
HFC
broadband service. However, as no providers are offering just stand-along 
telephony on
NBN yet that I am aware of, there's not much point taking up an NBN 
voice+Internet
bundle, and keeping the HFC as a second Internet service!, so the HFC broadband 
ends
up being migrated unnecessarily.

1. She could give up the copper telephone service, switch to using a mobile 
service
for all voice, and keep the HFC for Internet. No migration to NBN, no forced 
charge to
install the Telstra box.

2. If she has Optus HFC in range, she could move to Optus HFC for Internet and
telephone - Optus runs telephone over their HFC, Telstra does not. No migration 
to the
NBN (yet), no forced charge to install the Telstra box. Probably an Optus 
installation
charge though.

3. Telstra appear to be forcing all NBN connections to buy and connect a
Telstra-provided home gateway/router to the NBN connection to provide the 
telephone
service as VoIP using the Telstra gateway, not using the in-built VoIP 
capability of
the NBN box.

4. If the Telstra service is recent, then she's probably within some sort of 
contract
period. Contracts should work both ways - customers must pay the bills, 
provider must
charge the rates listed in the contract and no more. If so, I'd be pushing back 
and
telling Telstra "you want me forcibly migrated, you do it at your own cost", as 
per
the contract. And/or go to the TIO on grounds of Telstra not honouring their 
contract.

The bit about going to a non-Telstra service provider "but you might be 
throttled" is
pure competition scare-tactic poppy-cock. No reason to think any other service
provider will be more or less throttled than Telstra. Its not an NBN issue, its
Marketing. Maybe time to consider a different service provider.

The bit about not being able to use the house wiring is probably not correct 
and just
laziness, especially if nobody took the trouble to go to the house and inspect 
the
house telephone wiring. There are ways to wire up the NBN connection to re-use 
the
existing phone points and re-direct them to the NBN voiceport at the first 
socket.
However this is a bit complex so they are telling people "you can't use your 
existing
wiring" because its easier/lazier than doing it properly.
See Comms Alliance G649 "Cabling existing telecommunications services in the
customer’s premises for the NBN via FTTP"
http://www.commsalliance.com.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/43855/G649_2014.pdf

The jumper link from existing wiring will need to be to the voice port on the 
Telstra
gateway, not the voice port on the NBN box, if she ends up going with the 
Telstra
migration. She may well need to get a cabler in to make the modifications to 
use the
existing ports, but they aren't usually extensive changes needed. Alarm systems
complicate matters though.

Paul.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] From my friend re NBN change

[Paul Brooks]

On 12/12/2014 4:10 PM, Jim Birch wrote:
> Paul Brooks wrote:
>  
>
> 3. Telstra appear to be forcing all NBN connections to buy and connect a
> Telstra-provided home gateway/router to the NBN connection to provide the 
> telephone
> service as VoIP using the Telstra gateway, not using the in-built VoIP 
> capability of
> the NBN box.
>
>
> Is there a technical or commercial reason for this?  It's a fairly onerous
> constraint to go to a telstra router if you want to do anything non standard 
> with
> your connection (as I would.)
I believe its primarily a technical reason - I understand its for the telephone
service, that Telstra only allow the certified SIP client they have tested and 
are
familiar with in their CPE to connect to their SIP servers to provide the 
telephone
service using VoIP - they don't blindly trust random SIP client implementations 
from
other CPE.
Best to ask Telstra though.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] A real world NBN connection experience

[Paul Brooks]

Jan - sounds like your friend was on the wrong side of a dodgy installer, and 
Telstra
management of the process. She should complain vigorously to Telstra and have 
them
send a different tech back to relocate the unit to a better location and 
reinstate the
formal lounge room - it has never been supposed to occur as this unfolded, and 
the
installer should be counselled and subjected to further training.

Here is how it is supposed to work:
http://www.nbnco.com.au/connect-home-or-business/information-for-home/fixed-line/installation.html
http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco2/documents/NBN581_Preparing%20for%20the%20NBN_OBB_Apr14_V7.pdf

Telstra should have made documents and guides like this available to your 
friend well
before the tech turned up to do the work.

Yes, it needs to have a powerpoint - but many people already have one somewhere
discreet in the house where the fibre units can be installed out of the way. 
Yes,
there is some phone cabling required to make all the original phone points 
work, and
this isn't included in the standard installation - but she should have been 
able to
choose where in the house the fibre unit and battery goes, and these additional 
costs
shouldn't have been a surprise.

Paul.






On 14/02/2015 11:31 AM, Jan Whitaker wrote:
> Linkers may remember asked about connecting phone points to an NBN box. This 
> is a FTTH connection. Thought you might find the experience of the actual 
> person of interest. It's not as rosy as the NBN Co. are presenting. My friend 
> was told this is compulsory (she is NOT in a green field estate) and the 
> cut-off for any comms services other than NBN is midyear 2016. They are 
> advised not to wait til the last minute as there may not be enough techs to 
> do it all in 2016.
>
> She had in the last couple months just signed up for cable internet and gone 
> through all that expense, assuming she would be set. But no. Here is her 
> experience as told to our computer club yesterday.
>
> 1. The box inside the house is quite large, and the battery back up beside it 
> is same size.
> 2. They would only install in the nearest wall to the street. That happens, 
> as with many Australian house designs, to be her formal lounge room. Very 
> unsightly.
> 3. It requires a double power point. She had to have one installed.  kaching! 
> $$$
> 4. She was first told she would need to pay for the battery back-up, but 
> talked them out of that and because they stuffed up other things, they gave 
> her one so she will continue w/ phone service in any power outage.
> 5. Batteries need to be replaced every 2 years she was told.   kaching! $$$
> 6. Remember the loungeroom location? her desktop computer is in another room 
> and didn't have wi-fi. Needed to get a wifi 'dongle' kaching! $$$
> 7. The phone points were not connectable without a comms tech to connect 
> things in the wall. She does now have active phone points in all original 
> places. But kaching! $$$
> 8. Telstra (her ISP) charged her for BREAKING HER CONTRACT, a charge of over 
> $230. Of course she rang them and told them she wasn't breaking her plan, but 
> changing to the new NBN plan. They finally understood, after many phone 
> calls, and said they would credit her next account. In the meantime, her 
> phone bill was OVER $600, what with the break charge and the installation 
> extra charges. She will have to pay that, then get credit later.
> 9. There are wires everywhere near the boxes, which are a safety hazard. She 
> said she was finding herself tangled up when she went to close her drapes. 2 
> connections from the modem to the NBN box and power cables for both. She has 
> a table for the modem to sit on because the instructions re the boxes are to 
> not set anything on them, so it's in the way, too.
> 10. The battery box gets hot, therefore it cannot be hidden behind curtains. 
> She had to get a tie back and clip to hold her curtains away from them. Did I 
> forget to mention this was the only place they could install the stupid boxes?
> 11. She sees no difference in performance in her internet usage. So all 
> kaching! $$$ with no benefit whatsoever. 
>
> She brought pictures to show us and it wasn't nice. We had a long discussion 
> about elderly people (it's a rather elderly group, with even more elderly 
> parents!) not being even aware of this change and the loss of their 
> traditional landlines. The reason they may not be aware is that NBN is only 
> putting letterbox drops of really bland junkmail looking cards. The print is 
> so small, I doubt many could even read it.
>
> This is so poorly planned (or not) in terms of impact, someone should lose 
> their jobs over it, and not the last mob who did, but the new mob who seem to 
> think they know better. 
>
> Anyone on Link who has the ear of the people doing this project? Consumers, 
> at least this person who is moderately tech savvy, aren't happy.
>
> Jan
>
>
> I write books. http://janwhitaker.com/?page_id=8

Re: [LINK] Fwd: No battery backup

[Paul Brooks]

The battery backup unit is NBNCos, and backs up the NBN Co box's telephone 
ports (but
not the data ports).
The 'home gateway' modem her phone plugs into is Telstra's, which connects to 
the data
port in the NBN Co Box - as Telstra Bigpond don't use the telephone ports in 
the NBN
box, they insist on phones being connected to Telstra's modem. Telstra's  modem 
isn't
backed up by the NBNCo battery unit.

Other ISPs use the NBN voice ports to provide telephony - Telstra does not.

Her complaint seems to be fairly at the feet of Telstra - and given that 
response from
Telstra, she should complain to the TIO, and possibly write a letter to ACMA. 
Probably
not NBN Co - they just install what Telstra tells them Telstra needs for the 
Telstra
retail service. To keep the Telstra modem running she would need to install 
another
small UPS for that.

Does your friend use a cordless telephone - does her phone need a mains power 
to work?

The NBNCo brochure actually does explain a lot of this -
http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco/documents/nbn-fibre-user-guide.pdf, 
around
page 14 onwards - but if this wasn't provided to her.
 
P.


On 1/03/2015 7:41 PM, Jan Whitaker wrote:
> >From my friend's experience. We had a whopper of a storm last night. She's 
> >in Keysborough and they may have above ground power lines. Mine are 
> >underground.
>
> I've told her she shouldn't have to pay, and would insist they come back and 
> do it right. And if they refuse, complain to NBN, TIO, ACMA and Turnbull.
>
> Jan
>
>> Well,  my power went off in the storm last night,  and guess what?   My 
>>  phones don't work.   
>>
>> I spent a long time on the phone this morning and found out that the way my 
>> set-up  is wired up the phones work  through the modem, which isn't backed 
>> up by the battery.    So actually, the battery is doing nothing.    
>> The nice young man (who, surprisingly was in Townsville, not overseas),  
>> contacted the sales dept. to see if a tech can come and change the wiring. 
>> Â Â  He was told I would have to pay another $192 fee 
>> !
>>
>> There is no way I am paying again,   so I said I will go to the local shop 
>> this week and have a talk with them.     I can't see why it was done 
>> this way when I already had the  battery backup box.     I certainly 
>> wasn't told any of this, and wasn't  given an opportunity to do things 
>> differently.
>>
>> I don't understand  what the differences are.    I hope someone at the 
>> shop can explain.
>>
>> However,     I expect that nothing will be changed.
>>
>> I am sick of it all 
> I write books. http://janwhitaker.com/?page_id=8
>
> Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
> jw...@janwhitaker.com
> Twitter: JL_Whitaker
> Blog: www.janwhitaker.com 
>
> Sooner or later, I hate to break it to you, you're gonna die, so how do you 
> fill in the space between here and there? It's yours. Seize your space. 
> ~Margaret Atwood, writer 
>
> _ __ _
> ___
> Link mailing list
> Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Fwd: No battery backup

[Paul Brooks]

On 1/03/2015 10:07 PM, Paul Brooks wrote:
> The battery backup unit is NBNCos, and backs up the NBN Co box's telephone 
> ports (but
> not the data ports).
Correction - apparently the battery backup does keep the data ports going 
during a
mains power outage these days. It didn't in the early days, but they've changed 
it
recently.

Paul.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Fwd: No battery backup

[Paul Brooks]

On 2/03/2015 9:17 AM, Jeremy Visser wrote:
> On 01/03/15 22:07, Paul Brooks wrote:
>> Other ISPs use the NBN voice ports to provide telephony - Telstra does not.
> This is no longer true as of mid-2013.  Telstra provides voice services over 
> the UNI-V port.
Telstra retail Bigpond, or Telstra Wholesale?

Voice-only services, or voice+data bundles?

My understanding is that Telstra Bigpond retail, providing a voice+Internet 
bundle,
require the customer to take a Telstra Home Gateway, and use the PSTN ports on 
the
Telstra gateway to provide dial tone, the Ethernet ports on the Telstra gateway 
to
provide the Internet, and the Telstra gateway connects to the NBN NTU using a 
UNI-D port.
Glad to be updated if this is no longer correct?

Paul.

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Teaching Encryption Soon to be ILLEGAL w/o a PERMIT

[Paul Brooks]

Tempered somewhat by exemptions: (http://www.defence.gov.au/DECO/DSGL.asp)
---

The DSGL contains a number of exemptions that can apply to technology that may
otherwise be controlled. These include technology that is::

  * 'in the public domain' - if the technology is already available to the 
public, for
example, in publications, product brochures and public blogs, websites, 
podcasts
or databases, then it is not controlled. This exemption applies to all 
software
and technology in the DSGL;
  * 'basic scientific research' - any technology which extends only to the
"/fundamental principles of phenomena or observable facts/", and is "/not
primarily directed towards a specific practical aim or objective/", falls 
within
the definition of basic scientific research, and would therefore not be
controlled. This exemption applies to all technology listed on the DSGL.

---

So developing a completely new algorithm using 4096 bit keys and teaching that 
might
need a permit - but teaching standard Diffie-Hellman key exchange and public key
encryption isn't, even with 4096bit keys, its already published.

 



On 27/05/2015 9:43 AM, Jan Whitaker wrote:
> This is daft. 
>
> Teaching Encryption Soon to Be Illegal in Australia
> http://bitcoinist.net/teaching-encryption-soon-illegal-australia/
> Natalie Johnson
> May 23, 2015
>
>
> Under the Defence Trade Control Act (DTCA), Australians could face up to ten 
> years in prison for teaching encryption. Criminal charges will go into effect 
> next year. The new legislation will make it illegal for Australians to  teach 
> or provide information on encryption without having a permit.
>
> Australia’s Department of Defence originally passed the Defence Trade Control 
> Act on November 13, 2012. However, amendments were made to the DTCA and 
> passed into law just last month in April. There is a 12-month implementation 
> period, so Australians are safe for now.
>
> The purpose of this law is to control the transfer of defense and strategic 
> goods technologies. The Australian government says it wants “to strengthen 
> Australia’s export controls, and to stop technology that can be used in 
> conventional and weapons of mass destruction from getting into the wrong 
> hands…”
>
> The Defense and Strategic Goods List (DSGL) goes hand in hand with the 
> Defense Trade Control Act. The DTCA prohibits anyone without a permit from 
> supplying “DSGL technology” to anyone outside of Australia. Since encryption 
> falls within these classifications, any citizen of Australia who shares 
> information on encryption with a person outside the country Australian 
> Government Dept of Defencecould face criminal charges.
>
> Teachers at schools or universities will have to be approved to teach 
> encryption if students are outside of Australia. This presents unique 
> challenges in regards to online education and international students. 
> Researchers and those who publish information on encryption will also be 
> affected. The DTCA could also impact open source privacy software and the 
> computer security industry.
>
> It is also important to consider the implications of this law for digital 
> currencies such as Bitcoin. Advanced encryption techniques are at the heart 
> of Bitcoin and digital currency. In cryptography, encryption is one of the 
> primary techniques that gives digital currency users anonymity.
>
> The Defence Trade Control Act is not the only piece of legislation 
> threatening change to Australia’s Bitcoin landscape. However, what does it 
> mean for the future? The progress and development of digital currency and 
> open source projects rely on a constant free flow of information, shared 
> among people worldwide. Due to the nature of sharing information, anyone in 
> the world could be affected by the restrictions of the DTCA, not just 
> Australians.
>
> Is this new Australian law an act of censorship or the government’s way of 
> protecting “national defense”? Please give your comments!
>
>
>
>
> I write books. http://janwhitaker.com/?page_id=8
>
> Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
> jw...@janwhitaker.com
> Twitter: JL_Whitaker
> Blog: www.janwhitaker.com 
>
> Sooner or later, I hate to break it to you, you're gonna die, so how do you 
> fill in the space between here and there? It's yours. Seize your space. 
> ~Margaret Atwood, writer 
>
> _ __ _
> ___
> Link mailing list
> Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] web: The NBN satellite Malcolm Turnbull never wanted prepares for liftoff

[Paul Brooks]

On 7/09/2015 9:54 AM, JanW wrote:
> At 09:40 AM 7/09/2015, David Lochrin wrote:
>
>> A late comment...  The technical person at an NBN roadshow here in the 
>> Highlands, where wireless will be employed in some of the outlying hamlets, 
>> told me each registered wireless user is assigned a dedicated channel so 
>> there's no congestion.  I understand it's essentially 3G/4G technology.
> For now.
>
> Demand will change that. 
Only if the number of premises in the tower footprint changes dramatically - 
someone
combines four properties into a few hundred chalets, each needing their own 
dedicated
connection, for example.

When the number of endpoints within the tower footprint is pretty well known 
before
the tower is built, demand doesn't change that much.

Of course, the ISP's link into the NBN might get congested, but thats not NBN's
problem. Its resolving this finger-pointing that will be the test of consumer
experience as time marches on - but we already have that between ISPs and other
wholesale network services.

>
> Did anyone find out if people who are in underserved suburban areas can 
> access the satellite delivery? Frex, I'm fully limited where I am to 8Mb 
> down/256Kb up (ADSL).
Sadly no. NBN's systems allocate each dwelling to one and only one technology - 
if (in
the future) you will be served by FTTN or FTTP, you aren't permitted to connect 
to a
different technology in the interim. They don't want people connecting to 
satellite or
fixed wireless, and then churning off to a different technology a couple of 
years later.

Paul.


___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] itN: Perth-Singapore Cable Cut

[Paul Brooks]

On 2/10/2015 12:50 PM, Roger Clarke wrote:
> Cut submarine cable cripples Apple services for Telstra customers
> Break in SEA-ME-WE cable [a week ago] behind slow speeds.
> Allie Coyne
> itNews
> 2 Oct 2015, 10:35AM
> http://www.itnews.com.au/news/cut-submarine-cable-cripples-apple-services-for-telstra-customers-410006
>
> The Internet routes around broken links and congestion?
>
Not congestion. The Internet will route around a broken link - but will happily 
pile
more traffic into congestion.

Re-routing around a broken link also is dependent on there being an alternative 
link,
and that it has sufficient headroom (which at all other times might be regarded 
as
'waste').

With increased amounts of traffic-engineering and path-locking using 
technologies such
as MPLS to steer traffic onto specific paths and networks, ignoring other 
possible but
sub-optimal paths, the ability for traffic to flow around a break is also 
increasingly
reduced.

Paul.

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] itN: Perth-Singapore Cable Cut

[Paul Brooks]

The cable cut was in Indonesian waters. Nothing to do with NBN, any slowness is 
due to each RSPs inadequate  international arrangements.


 Original Message 
From: Andy Farkas 
Sent: 2 October 2015 4:27:39 pm AEST
To: link@mailman.anu.edu.au
Subject: Re: [LINK] itN: Perth-Singapore Cable Cut

On 02/10/15 14:25, Robert Brockway wrote:
> In this case a cable has been cut and routers are indeed sending traffic
> via alternative paths.

Now which dummy at nbn(tm) thought that removing the redundant
links in the fibre backhaul was a good idea? Oh that's right - faster,
cheaper, more affordable.

-andyf

ps. did you also note at the sky muster launch yesterday it was all
thanks to Bill Morrow and his team, with Ziggy sitting in the VIP
chair at the observatory deck

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

-- 
Sent unplugged
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] itN: Perth-Singapore Cable Cut

[Paul Brooks]

Except with the NBN "the Internet" doesn't start until the traffic hits the RSP 
(arguably). The GPON is a point-to-multicast single-fibre "tree" technology 
that doesnt tolerate multiple possible paths between OLT and ONT - it aint 
Ethernet with Spanning Tree.
At best, a technician would have to be sent out to manually re-plug/re-patch an 
alternative path fibre (possibly several hundred connectors if downstream of 
the splitters) at the appropriate junction-points either side of a broken cable 
to get customers back up. THEN you'd have to send out a splicing truck. THEN 
possibly patch them all back.

I can see both sides - if you have to send out a crew, might as well send out a 
splicing truck to the break and do it once. 

>From memory the previous redundant fibre paths were only upstream of a 
>spliitter cabinet anyway - so if the backhoe was downstream of the splitters 
>customers had to wait for a re-splice repair anyway.


 Original Message 
From: Andy Farkas 
Sent: 3 October 2015 10:34:23 am AEST
To: link@mailman.anu.edu.au
Subject: Re: [LINK] itN: Perth-Singapore Cable Cut

On 02/10/15 23:42, Paul Brooks wrote:
> The cable cut was in Indonesian waters. Nothing to do with NBN, any slowness 
> is due to each RSPs inadequate  international arrangements.
>

My point was unclear. I was referring to fact that with redundant
cables the Internet can route around faults, but with the idiots at
nbn(tm) removing the redundancy in *its* network, once a cable
is cut, that's it, you're down until it's fixed.

IIRC this came up a couple months ago. See:

http://blog.jxeeno.com/nbn-releases-mtm-network-design-rules/

-andyf

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

-- 
Sent unplugged
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] NBN spent $14m on 1800km of new copper for FTTN

[Paul Brooks]

On 21/10/2015 2:16 PM, David Boxall wrote:
> What's the logic here? :/
> 
>
Nothing to see here, move on.
There was always a need for copper cables between the pillar and the adjacent 
node
cabinet - with roughly 200 premises served by a pillar, thats roughly 400 
pairs+extra
required, and if the cabinet is anything up to 100 metres away (and 
occasionally up to
300m apparently) thats roughly half a kilometre of 100-pair cable required to 
hook up
a single node cabinet.

as I said on another list just now, next journos will be making a mountain out 
of the
hectares of sheet steel required to build the ~60,000 cabinets.
 
Paul.

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] NBN Long Term Satellite restrictions

[Paul Brooks]

On 23/10/2015 10:50 PM, JanW wrote:
> At 08:53 PM 23/10/2015, David Boxall wrote:
>
>> 
>> Looks like they've finally realised that satellite isn't fibre - nor 
>> even copper or terrestrial wireless. 
> Fascinating data in there re usage levels.
> Hard to understand what everyone is doing with all that use -- torrents? 
> Multiple people on the same account?
> My highest monthly uses has been 31.61GB in April this year and 30.60GB in 
> March 2014. Avg per month looks like around 12GB on a plain ADSL line maxing 
> at data rates of 8mbps. Of course, that's not using Netflix data because that 
> isn't charged in my account. I suppose if I did more video intensive stuff, 
> my usage would go up, but I haven't gone totally off FTA tv.

Multiple people, and many devices - an entire household - on one account.

It might not necessarily be video. It wouldn't be too hard to get 1 - 2 GB each 
month
just with smartphone app updates, and if you have a few in the house...
The latest Playstation 4 firmware update was ~ 300MB, others have been several 
GB in size.
Popular this month was the new Star Wars Battlefront betatest game, which was 
~16 GB
in two downloads. Other downloadable games can be 30 GB+.
All it takes is for someone to kick one of those off, and it will run for days 
and nights.
Windows/Mac software updates can add up, especially if there are several 
devices in
the house - between desktops and laptops in my house, OS updates and patches are
downloaded at least 6 times. Then occasionally you plug in a new mouse, and end 
up
downloading several GB of driver installation software.  

And this is satelllite, which is installed in rural areas, so it wouldn't 
surprise me
if a lot of users are working extensively with satellite imaging data and 
trusty BOM
weather radar maps, which can also add up (Does anyone know how much data is
downloaded if the BOM weather radar animation is left running 24x7)?


It all adds up.

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] NBN woes in Toowoomba 'caused by excess demand'

[Paul Brooks]

It isn't the NBN fibre component that is the cause of the problem, this is 
clear in
the article. It is the backhaul link outside the NBN, from the POI to the ISP, 
becoming congested and not being increased by the ISP in a timely manner in 
line with
the increased customer traffic. It wouldn't matter what technology the 
customers of
that ISP from that POI were on - fibre, wireless, or satellite, they would be 
seeing
the same congestion problems.

This is no different to the myriad of exchanges where the backhaul links into 
the
exchange-based DSLAM network become full, for ADSL-type services, on the old 
platform.


On 31/10/2015 1:50 PM, David Boxall wrote:
> Even fibre isn't adequately provisioned, it seems.
> 
>> The resident, who declined to be named, signed on to the new fibre 
>> optic system when it was first installed in his suburb about a year 
>> ago and enjoyed a faster connection for a few months.
>>
>> But as more customers signed on, his internet speeds began to slow to 
>> the point where the service drops out completely.

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] NBN woes in Toowoomba 'caused by excess demand'

[Paul Brooks]

On 31/10/2015 1:50 PM, David Boxall wrote:
> Even fibre isn't adequately provisioned, it seems.
> 
In other words, its not 'NBN woes' it is 'iiNet woes'

Paul.




___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Tech startups release manifesto for policy change after government's Policy Hack

[Paul Brooks]

On 14/11/2015 9:00 AM, Tom Worthington wrote:
> The Australian proposal to do this through the NBN is a bit dated. In the 
> education
> community we have moved from thinking about classroom education, through 
> computer
> education and now on to mobile education involving a social component. The 
> NBN is no
> use for this, as it is a fixed, not mobile, infrastructure. 
Tom - I find this extremely limited and woolly thinking. The only truly 'mobile'
infrastructure that doesn't rely on a fixed network foundation is a satellite 
network
- and I do not imagine for a minute you are suggesting all the education 
community is
thinking of distance education by satellite!

All 'mobile' infrastructure has a foundation of fixed infrastructure. On 
cellular
mobile networks the path between handset and content is only 'mobile' for the 
last
kilometre or two - the vast majority of the path is on fixed - usually 
fibre-optic-
infrastructure. WiFi networks even more so. Enhancements in radio technology to
achieve faster speeds and lower latency all revolve around *shortening* the 
final
radio link that enables mobile terminals to be mobile - 'mobile infrastructure' 
is
evolving to incorporate more and more fixed infrastructure, not less.

I rather think you must be confusing mobile infrastructure with mobile 
terminals for
user interaction. I can well understand how the education community might be 
embracing
the use of movable, mobile devices to deliver educational outcomes, removing 
the need
for students to travel to a certain location or sit in a certain place. This is 
*not*
the same as requiring a mobile  infrastructure - the NBN fixed infrastructure 
forms a
fine backhaul network to enable ubiquitous WiFi and other radio technologies to
connect mobile devices to educational content and to each other.

Paul.


___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Tech startups release manifesto for policy change after government's Policy Hack

[Paul Brooks]

On 16/11/2015 9:41 AM, Tom Worthington wrote:
> On 15/11/15 16:33, Paul Brooks wrote:
>
>> All 'mobile' infrastructure has a foundation of fixed infrastructure. ...
>
> Yes, *almost* all mobile devices require a fixed infrastructure. But building 
> a
> fixed infrastructure all the way into people's homes is not an efficient way 
> to
> support their mobile devices.
No - all mobile devices need one or more networks that enable the device to
communicate while mobile.

Efficiency is a completely separate beast and depends entirely on the metric - a
network that is efficient at providing connectivity while the device is 
stationary at
ground level may be completely unfit and inefficient at providing connectivity 
while
the device is travelling at 100km/hr, or 3000m below the surface of the ocean, 
or
10,000 metres above the ground, or while located in a different location - and 
vice
versa. A network efficient at providing kilobit-per-sec capability over 
hundreds of
kilometres may not be efficient at providing gigabit-per-sec capability over 
hundreds
of metres. There is no such thing as 'one size fits all use cases' for network
infrastructure, whether fixed or mobile. Efficiency is also not related to
effectiveness - a network that is efficient for communication may not be able 
to do so
effectively everywhere, regardless of how efficient it might be.


>
>> ... NBN fixed infrastructure forms a fine backhaul network to enable
>> ubiquitous WiFi and other radio technologies to connect mobile
>> devices to educational content and to each other. ...
>
> Most of the cost of the NBN is in the last few hundred metres, getting fiber 
> from
> nodes in the street into homes. If this part was wireless, it would eliminate 
> a
> major cost.
Thats a disputable opinion Tom - to be a factual statement it needs to have 
context
and qualification.

If this was wireless, it would be ineffective and not fit for purpose for many
people's purposes, and you should choose a different metric. If this part was
wireless, and provided the same utility and capability as the fibre component 
(or even
copper, since we're discussing fixed line), it would cost more than the fixed
component, not less.

> The idea that you use one fixed data network at home and then you to switch 
> over to
> a different "mobile" one when you step out the front gate seems an antiquated 
> idea.
> Hardly anyone does that for making phone calls any more, so why should should 
> they
> do it with data?

Because the use-cases and destinations for data transfer are completely 
different than
for making phone calls. "Phone calls" are a particularly bad exemplar, because 
they
don't have any use-case for communicating with another phone located in the 
same room
or home.

The notion that traffic between my mobile devices, storage systems, display 
devices,
home sensors and the exercise monitor on my wrist should be forced to hair-pin 
on low
bandwidth, lossy and variable links across a suburb or across a city and back 
again
when they are physically located a couple of metres away from each other is 
ludicrous
and inefficient.

The idea that a mobile device can only use one type of network seems an 
antiquated
idea. Mobile devices contain many interfaces and can use many networks, and are
generally smart enough to use the network that is best suited for the task at 
hand,
depending on the location and demand. I *want* my mobile device to switch from 
the
low-capacity suburb-scale radio network when I'm out of my house to the 
high-capacity
house-scale network when I am inside it, so the data can travel freely, 
securely and
without tarriffs between my device and my other devices located close by, 
within my
security perimeter.

Paul.



___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] First test of anti-piracy website-blocking laws targets small ISP

[Paul Brooks]

On 20/11/2015 2:42 PM, Jan Whitaker wrote:
> http://www.theage.com.au/technology/technology-news/first-test-of-antipiracy-websiteblocking-laws-targets-small-isp-20151119-gl3l5f.html
>
> The AG (one thinks it must involve them?) can't be serious if this is their 
> test case.
> If they don't understand the difference between trademark, patent and 
> copyright law, we are in deep trouble.
Jan - the AGD is not involved in this one.  Its a private matter, with these
provisions being obliquely referred to in a letter from a law firm representing 
a
private Australian company.
The lawyers appear to think they can cite this law to block a website using an
Australian firm's logo without permission.
No government involvement - I'm hoping this private Australian company aren't 
paying a
great deal for their legal advisors.
Nothing to see here.

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] FTTN in Canberra

[Paul Brooks]

More likely because there is no POTS line cards to terminate the calls and 
generate dial tone in the VDSL2 node equipment.


 Original Message 
From: Tom Worthington 
Sent: 4 January 2016 9:45:18 am AEDT
To: link@mailman.anu.edu.au
Subject: Re: [LINK] FTTN in Canberra

On 31/12/15 15:25, Alex (Maxious) Sadleir wrote:

> ... Telephone now must come over the internet ...

Is this because the VDSL2 would interfere with an analogue phone
connection (POTS)?

The fiber optic termination is in the basement of my apartment block. 
There is only about 30m of copper cable from there to the apartments. 
Some pairs are used for data and some for POTS. Presumably this is too 
short for interference.


-- 
Tom Worthington FACS CP, TomW Communications Pty Ltd. t: 0419496150
The Higher Education Whisperer http://blog.highereducationwhisperer.com/
PO Box 13, Belconnen ACT 2617, Australia  http://www.tomw.net.au
Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards
Legislation

Adjunct Senior Lecturer, Research School of Computer Science,
Australian National University http://cs.anu.edu.au/courses/COMP7310/
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

-- 
Sent unplugged
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] NBN backup service

[Paul Brooks]

On 2/02/2016 11:45 AM, David Lochrin wrote:
> So I wonder whether the Bowral telephone exchange would have any part to play 
> after
> full cutover? I believe there are only 120-150 points of interconnect (POIs) 
> in the
> whole network, the great majority in Telstra exchanges, and the Campbelltown 
> POI
> services a wide area besides the Southern Highlands - see
> http://www.mynbn.info/csa/CSA20010151

After the full cutover, Bowral exchange is likely to have no further function, 
and
presumably could be sold off. Full cutover though will be many years away, when 
even
the special services (ISDN, DDS, traffic-light-service-whatever-that-is, etc) 
that are
preserved from the initial consumer-level migration have been replaced and 
moved on to
a different network.


> Presumably call handling & routing will be done at the POI with the remaining 
> path
> to a subscriber just a matter of packet-switching data for a node. Does 
> anyone have
> any understanding of this level of current NBN architecture?

No - call routing and handling will be done by the ISP's softswitch, likely to 
be
located in the nearest capital city - I doubt there will be any voice-handling
infrastructure in a node or POI, just effectively an Ethernet tunnel between NTU
analog port and softswitch through the backhaul-POI-NNI-CVC-AVC-NTU chain.

Paul.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] FTTN architecture

[Paul Brooks]

On 4/02/2016 11:52 AM, David Lochrin wrote:
> This thread follows on from "NBN backup service"...
>
> On 2016-02-02 12:14 Paul Brooks wrote:
>
>> No - call routing and handling will be done by the ISP's softswitch, likely 
>> to be located in the nearest capital city - I doubt there will be any 
>> voice-handling infrastructure in a node or POI, just effectively an Ethernet 
>> tunnel between NTU analog port and softswitch through the 
>> backhaul-POI-NNI-CVC-AVC-NTU chain.
> My understanding is that an ISP must have a connection to every POI which 
> services an area containing their customers.  A POI services a "connectivity 
> service area" or CSA and all communication within a CSA is done at OSI 
> level-2, with ADSL / VDSL between the nodes & users.
>
> So someone with existing ADSL & VoIP services doesn't need to change anything 
> much when they migrate to an FTTN-based NBN service except that they'd have 
> to configure a properly allocated VoIP telephone number for communication 
> with other telephone users on the national network, and perhaps some other 
> minor configuration changes.
Most probably they'll be replacing their ADSL modem with a VDSL2-capable modem, 
so
they might need to do some re-working of the config in the new modem, but 
essentially
correct - the number shouldn't need to change, and however they are connecting 
to the
VoIP service is likely to be very similar.

>
> But what do traditional POTS users do when the local NBN network is fully 
> cutover and the exchange effectively closes down?  Will they each be issued 
> with an NTU, or do the kerbside nodes contain analogue signal converters?
For FTTN they'll each need to obtain a VDSL2-capable modem, from their RSP or 
possibly
from a retail store, which complies with/is certified for the NBN 
infrastructure. Most
of these also include an analogue voice port and VoIP software inside, which
effectively replaces the analogue socket on the wall. Ideally the RSP will 
program up
the VoIP module in the router to talk to the RSP's softswitch, and the user 
will just
unplug their analogue handset from the wall, and plug it into the voice port on 
the
modem/router.

Alternatively they might get a stand-alone VoIP SIP adapter, and plug their 
handset
into that.

Note also that the ISP need not be the same as the voice RSP - the VoIP call 
might
pass through the ISP to a different service provider providing the telephone 
service.
The telephone RSP doesn't need a connection to any POI or the NBN anywhere.


>
> An ISP which doesn't connect to all 121 or so POIs must have a connection to 
> a service provider which can route voice calls to / from users in those CSAs. 
>  So how does an ISP decide how to route a call when the called number may be 
> with them, with a user on a different ISP in the same CSA, or with a user in 
> a different CSA to which the ISP has direct access, or another CSA altogether?
The same way they do now - they have an upstream connection to a voice call 
provider
who can direct the call onwards - locally, nationally, and globally. If the 
call is
directed to another number that is not directly with that RSP, the RSP's 
softswitch
passes it upstream to be handled.

There are two national call routing databases - the ACMA register of which 
number
ranges have been allocated to which networks/providers, and the ported number 
register
that holds the exceptions.

Eventually the call gets passed up to a voice network with hooks into the 
national
call routing databases, which routes the call to the provider servicing the 
number
being called - which somehow makes the destination phone ring.

See https://www.thenumberingsystem.com.au/#/number-register/search (you can 
download
the entire range allocation database at bottom right) and look up your own 
number to
see the original carrier the number was allocated to.


>
> Is there some sort of online directory which maps telephone number, CSA, ISP, 
> and level-2 address?  Who maintains it, NBNCo?
As above - ACMA maintains the directory mapping telephone number to 
provider/network. 
Its up to each provider to work out the rest of how to direct an incoming call 
to make
their own customer's handset ring, whether its on NBN, copper, fibre, wireless, 
or wet
string.

>
> The more I think about this the more questions arise.  For example, the 
> potential for maintenance problems and "finger pointing" seems quite high.  
> And it may be difficult to define enforceable service standards.
There are already enforcible service and call quality standards, put in place 
way back
when service/network competition was introduced (think calling from fixed to 
mobile,
or copper to HFC voice). Adding the NBN into the mix as just one more possible
transport 

Re: [LINK] How fast is the NBN?

[Paul Brooks]

On 24/02/2016 11:11 PM, Glen Turner wrote:
>> Rod Tucker's info-graphic for The Conversation envisages a typical 
>> Australian home in 2020 having a tablet computer, a laptop, four 
>> smartphones and three TVs, all in use simultaneously: 
>> https://theconversation.com/infographic-how-fast-is-the-nbn-54392
> Hi Tom
>
> Rod's wrong (sorry mate). Go into JB HiFi and simply *look*: speakers, 
> games consoles, televisions, PVRs, blueray players all want internet. Even 
> the water systems in Bunnings want a wifi link, let alone the doorbells.  

Agreed. In addition, the traffic to/from all of Rod's devices is mediated, 
triggered
or controlled by people. He's completely missed the M2M background traffic 
sources
where no human interaction is required to trigger it. Periodic or continuous 
off-site
backups of computers/laptops, or NASs, software/firmware checks and updates from
everything, permanently streaming security cameras/nannycams. Four to six
laptops/desktops each downloading the same antivirus database updates hourly.

He's also missing games consoles, which trigger multi-gigabyte updates almost 
weekly,
and those updates aren't smoothed out by the average speed of video playback 
like a
video stream might be (17GB tonight, thankyou) - instead they attempt to occupy 
full
line-rate, whatever that might be, almost guaranteeing contention during those
minutes/hours.

P.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] How fast is the NBN?

[Paul Brooks]

On 26/02/2016 8:30 AM, Tom Worthington wrote:
>  
>
> The first mile of fiber is cheap to install. The expensive part is getting 
> the fiber
> from the street into people's homes. It is much easier to put an antenna on a 
> pole
> outside in the street.
Easier? perhaps. Cheaper? probably not, since you've got to do a truck-roll or 
two anyway.

How about this Tom - deploy this radio network of yours, and we'll appoint you 
Chief
Maintenance Officer. You'll be responsible for the cost of the vast fleet of 
repair
vans, spares holdings, warehousing, and technicians to keep all those radio
transceivers and antennas all running, fixing all the blown power supplies and
transceivers after lightning strikes within CSG timeframes, and then you can 
press the
'go' button each time the firmware in the radio transceivers on the poles needs 
to be
updated and reflashed, hoping you've ensured compatibility with the units 
inside the
homes so that all the millions of radio links come back up again once their 
reboot
cycle completes - because you're also responsible for the call-centre that will 
take
the complaint calls when the radio links break.

> Six laptops seems a lot for the average home of less than three people. I 
> doubt that
> they will have any laptops or desktops in the future. All you need is a 
> docking
> station for your mobile device, to connect it to a large screen and keyboard.

'average home of less than three people'? - thats like saying the average human 
being
has precisely one boob AND one testicle, and then building a factory to make 
clothes
for that average person - I would hazard a guess that actual homes of three 
people
don't form a large proportion of homes. I do know that in my household of 4 
people we
have three desktops, four laptops, plus tablets and phones - and that doesn't 
count
the obsolete ones that aren't turned on much - because devices are generally 
cheap
enough that you can use one appropriate to your needs at the time.




___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] How fast is the NBN?

[Paul Brooks]

On 29/02/2016 11:13 PM, Bernard Robertson-Dunn wrote:
> On 29/02/2016 5:55 PM, David Lochrin wrote:
>
>> Just for the record...  Analogue or digital, 1980's synchronous modem or 
>> 2020 fibre, no matter what the technological cleverness any communication 
>> channel is subject to Shannon's Law.
> True.
>> This states that the maximum channel capacity is a function of transmitted 
>> power, bandwidth, and signal-to-noise ratio.
> True,
>
> However, Shannon's law is silent on the number of channels that a medium
> can carry. Fibre can carry many more channels than copper, coax or radio.
>
> Fibre modems, using Wavelength-division multiplexing can, currently,
> handle up to 160 channels. This means that a basic 10 Gbit/s system over
> a single fiber pair can be expanded to over 1.6 Tbit/s. [*]
>
> And just for the record, you don't have to change the fiber, just the
> boxes at either end.

True. And just for the record, current WDM systems are 100Gbit/s and 200Gbit/s 
per
channel, with 400Gbit/s and 1000Gbit/s coming from the labs.
That means a single fibre pair can be expanded to over 10 - 20 Tbps total 
capacity,
and growing.
Just by changing the boxes on each end - and often not even having to change any
amplifiers in the middle for long-haul runs.

In the context of access networks to homes - WDM-PON, which provides for a 
dedicated
optical wavelength channel per home, is commercially available already.

Paul.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] How fast is the NBN?

[Paul Brooks]

On 1/03/2016 8:57 AM, Tom Worthington wrote:
>
> On 28/02/16 13:46, Frank O'Connor wrote:
>
>> So all the observed trends, the increase in speeds ... aren’t gonna
>> appear...
>
> Speeds will increase, but people want stuff they can carry around with
> them, not have it stuck on a desk at home.
Only the devices I choose to carry around. I want my TVs, security alarm 
system, audio
system, kitchen appliances stuck at home - and operating connected 24x7, so a 
docking
station system where everything stops when I take the CPU away with me in my 
pocket
need not apply. They are also likely to require far more capacity and speeds 
than any
stuff that is small and light enough that I might carry around.


>
>
>>> Cell phones were invented to overcome the limited spectrum.
>>
>> ... I’m interested in knowing EXACTLY what you were trying to say.
>> ...
>
> Cell phones use radio transmission in small geographic areas, called
> "cells", which allows the spectrum to be reused. The cells were
> originally many kilometers, but now can be tens of meters (for
> example covering a few houses in a street):
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellular_network#Frequency_reuse
When cell-sizes are many kilometres radius, covering areas of up to 100 square
kilometres, it is efficient to build the high cost of the central radio 
transmitters,
receivers, masts and mountings, power connection and fibre or microwave backhaul
connection, as this cost was very small in comparison to running a real link to 
each
of the locations within the area, or compared to the large number of mobile 
devices
and people that could be served in that area and the costs amortised over.
When you shrink the cell-size, so that much the same capacity and radio 
bandwidth is
shared amongst a much smaller set of users, and you then need vastly greater 
numbers
and costs of basestation infrastructure that efficiency evaporates at some 
point and
it becomes more costly (and more prone to failure) to build a gazillion 
base-stations
than to just dig and run a cheap cable.

Also, in the context of frequency re-use, the signal strength at the edge of 
the zone
has to be weak so as not to interfere with an adjacent zone using the same
frequencies. This means there is a band around the circumference where the 
signal
strength is measurable, but too low to provide satisfactory service - yes the 
signal
extends many kilometres, but the outer half-kilometre is useless. In a large 
cell this
zone is a small proportion of the total area, so is acceptable. As you shrink 
the cell
diameter, that 'useless zone' becomes a larger and larger proportion of the 
total area
of the cell, and the cell becomes less space-efficient.

A cell with only 'tens of metres' range, covering a few houses in a street, 
might
provide sufficient signal strength at the street to provide great service to 
cars and
all the letterboxes at the bottom of the driveways - but that's not where 
people need
service. At the actual dwellings at the end of 5- - 15 metre driveways, and with
signal levels dropping further through the walls, is precisely where the signal 
will
be weakest and slowest - the useless zone.

Paul.

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] NBN domestic installations

[Paul Brooks]

On 3/03/2016 4:56 PM, David Lochrin wrote:
> But back to domestic _FTTN_ installations...
>
> Does anyone know whether some form of network termination device is installed?
NBNCo do not install any form of NTD or CPE. Ideally your ISP will supply a 
suitable
VDSL2 modem/router, or you will need to procure one yourself.
It does need to be one of the models tested and approved by NBNCo to have all 
the
VDSL2 functions and options required - some VDSL2-capable modems on the market 
do not.
Perhaps ask your ISP for a list. They might need to ask NBNCo for the list.

>
> If so, does it:
> (a)   include a VoIP adapter and an Ethernet interface for data, similar to 
> FTTP installations,
It might or might not - NBNCo are certifying the VDSL2 part, not the user-facing
ports, of VDSL2 modems they are testing.

> (b)   or does it just provide the Ethernet data interface without the VoIP 
> adapter,
> (c)   or does it just provide raw VDSL?
>
> If (a) or (b), the average non-technical householder would need an approved 
> electrican to run LAN cable from the NTD to their WiFi or whatever router and 
> set it up.  If (c), the electrician might have to isolate the POTS wiring 
> from the VDSL so there's no interference, and the householder still needs 
> someone to set up the router and VoIP adapter.
Usual deployment is for the VDSL2-capable modem/router to replace any existing 
ADSL2+
gear, and so there is no need to connect old to new. Alternatively, possibly 
the new
VDSL2-capable modem can be put into some sort of 'passthrough' mode, if the old 
ADSL2+
modem also supports an ethernet uplink.

There does need to be a central filter/splitter installed on the telephone line 
to
isolate POTS from VDSL2, and reduce noise on the VDSL2 spectrum. There was talk 
that
NBNCo contractor should install this when the FTTN service is enabled, but I'm 
not
across the latest version of the process - it might be something the end-user 
has to
arrange with a sparky themselves. The ISP should know.

For voice - you'd hope the ISP can program up the VoIP capability in the new 
VDSL2
modem  to talk to their softswitch, so all the end-user has to do is plug their
handset cord into the analogue socket on the modem - but you'll need to check 
with the
ISP (not NBNCo. NBNCo doesn't do voice). If the ISP is supplying the 
VDSL2-capable
modem, hopefully they have it all programmed up already and the user doesn't 
have to
do much.


There has also been rumours that NBNCo are doing 'voice passthrough', and the 
analogue
POTS signal will remain on the line and keep the handset connected through to 
the
exchange, so there is no need to move the voice service to a VoIP port on the 
modem.
This is likely to be a temporary measure though.

Hope this helps, but check everything with the ISP. If the ISP doesn't know, 
they need
to check with NBNCo, because the ISP *should* know all this.

Paul.

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] NBN domestic installations

[Paul Brooks]

On 3/03/2016 7:04 PM, Andy Farkas wrote:
> On 03/03/2016 16:26, Paul Brooks wrote:
>> On 3/03/2016 4:56 PM, David Lochrin wrote:
>>> But back to domestic _FTTN_ installations...
>>>
>>> Does anyone know whether some form of network termination device is 
>>> installed?
>> NBNCo do not install any form of NTD or CPE. Ideally your ISP will supply a 
>> suitable
>> VDSL2 modem/router, or you will need to procure one yourself.
>
> Yes, let's pass on the cost to the consumer thanks malcs
>
> (FTTH: you plug your existing router straight into the supplied NTU)

Not really - I don't hear anyone complaining about buying ADSL1/2/2+ modems for 
use on
an ADSL line as "passing the cost to the consumer".  Or about buying their own
analogue modem in dial-up days.
And you can only plug your existing router straight in to the NTU if you have a
relatively new one with dual uplink ports, ADSL + Ethernet. The vast majority 
of the
existing ADSL1/2/2+ modem fleet don't have any Ethernet WAN port, just the DSL 
port,
so will need to be binned in any case.

The reality is that, like ADSL2+, there is a wide variety of VDSL2 capable 
modems
available on the market, prices are set low by competition, so it makes sense to
permit the customer to get one that suits their functionality, needs and 
budget. GPON
NTUs aren't widely available from multiple vendors, aren't a competitive 
supply, and
largely aren't interoperable between vendors - so it makes sense that it is 
supplied
as part of the FTTP network service.

(But if you don't like that, you'll LOVE that it looks like the same scenario 
for HFC
- customer to supply own DOCSIS3/3.1 compliant cable modem!)


>
>> It does need to be one of the models tested and approved by NBNCo to have 
>> all the
>> VDSL2 functions and options required - some VDSL2-capable modems on the 
>> market do not.
>> Perhaps ask your ISP for a list. They might need to ask NBNCo for the list.
>
> nbn(tm) will *not* tell you which VDSL modems are approved:
>
> <https://delimiter.com.au/2016/01/06/nbn-co-rejects-foi-request-for-basic-fttn-modem-details/>
>
No - but nbn have published a technical specification that details the VDSL2 
support
that is required, and they will work with ISPs to test them,  and the community
(Bless-em!) have put together a living list of compatible and tested modems at
http://whirlpool.net.au/wiki/fttn_registered_modem_router. I don't know what 
derailed
the FOI process, but the technical requirements for the VDSL2 capability are 
published
in Section 7 of
http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco2/documents/sfaa-wba2-product-catalogue-nebs-product-tech-spec-fttb-fttn_20150904-to-20151102.pdf.


>
>> There does need to be a central filter/splitter installed on the telephone 
>> line to
>> isolate POTS from VDSL2, and reduce noise on the VDSL2 spectrum.
>
> You do not need a splitter. The POTS line will be switched off.
>
> You may not be able to get your existing phone number ported to VoIP.
>
> Thanks malcs.

This is incorrect. You do need a splitter, especially if you will be keeping 
the POTS
service running, to isolate crappy internal house wiring from affecting the 
VDSL2
signal. Star-wiring to multiple internal sockets will seriously screw with the 
VDSL2
signal due to reflections and impedance mismatches at high frequencies. 
Alternatively,
disconnect all internal sockets.
The POTS line may not always be switched off - NBN and some RSPs are using 
'Voice Pass
Through' and maintaining the original dial-tone for a while. It depends on the 
RSP.
See 
http://commsalliance.com.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/50548/WC68-IGN-008.pdf,
Section 5.1, and any references to 'VPT' or 'NVPT'.

If you are unable to get your existing telephone number ported to VoIP, thats 
entirely
the fault of a screwed-up service provider - either your old one, or your new 
one, not
properly supporting Local Number Portability out or in.
It has NOTHING to do with nbn, and this time nothing at all to do with Malcs.
If your old or new service provider won't port your number, report them to the 
TIO.


>
>
>> There has also been rumours that NBNCo are doing 'voice passthrough', and 
>> the analogue
>> POTS signal will remain on the line and keep the handset connected through 
>> to the
>> exchange, so there is no need to move the voice service to a VoIP port on 
>> the modem.
>> This is likely to be a temporary measure though.
>>
>
> A lot of homes have 2 pairs of copper running into the house. The idea is that
> you leave the existing active service on the first pair and use the second 
> pair
> for your FTTN service. To do this it will cost you $297.

Nope. You could choose to do this, but would be nuts, and unnecessary. Nothing 
to do
with Malcs.

Paul.


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] NBN domestic installations

[Paul Brooks]

On 3/03/2016 8:34 PM, Kim Holburn wrote:
>
> I have non-NBN VDSL2 through transACT.  When it goes through normal POTS 
> copper you don't use a splitter, you just plug the VDSL2 pair straight into 
> the modem.  I don't think VDSL2 plays nicely with normal POTS voice.  As I 
> understand it, it doesn't play nicely with ADSL in the same node either.

TransACT VDSL and VDSL2 was a special case.  The TransACT copper cable 
installed to
the house contained four separate twisted pairs, just like a conventional Cat 5
ethernet cable. With the older pre-standards VDSL in TransACT, the VDSL data 
signal
(for data and the TV SetTopBox) were on a separate pair from the pair that 
carried the
conventional POTS signal, so no splitter was required. When the older VDSL gear 
was
replaced with VDSL2, I would be very surprised if they bothered to combine them 
- they
are likely to still be provided on different pairs, each from different boxes 
in the
TransACT network cabinets (and you've probably also still got two spare pairs!).

VDSL2 on the rest-of-Australia copper network deployed by Telstra has the POTS 
signal
and VDSL2 signal superimposed on the same line pair - so a splitter is required.

Paul.



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] NBN domestic installations

[Paul Brooks]

On 4/03/2016 12:22 PM, David Lochrin wrote:
> Thanks, Paul, for all your input.
>
> On 2016-03-03 22:22 Paul Brooks wrote:
>
>> And you can only plug your existing router straight in to the NTU if you 
>> have a relatively new one with dual uplink ports, ADSL + Ethernet. The vast 
>> majority of the existing ADSL1/2/2+ modem fleet don't have any Ethernet WAN 
>> port, just the DSL port, so will need to be binned in any case.
> But an NTU is only supplied for FTTP installations, yes?  So with an FTTN 
> installation the VDSL2 cable goes straight to the user's modem/router, which 
> should support VoIP.
Yes, NTU is only supplied for FTTP. And also for fixed-wireless and satellite - 
but
not for FTTN. In FTTN the cable from the 'data'  port of the splitter goes 
straight
into the user's modem/router. Whether that modem/router needs to support VoIP is
largely up to the user's requirements - if they are happy to rely on mobiles 
and have
no intention of having a home phone service, the modem/router need not support 
VoIP.

> And the domestic POTS wiring should be physically isolated from the VDSL 
> signal as I
> suspected. I think this would be necessary regardless of whether it's starred 
> or
> daisy-chained (which I believe is officially required).
Yes. It also helps keep the copper length as short as possible, since even an 
extra 10
metres of in-house wiring can cause a measurable decrease in linespeed achieved.

>
>  So the average non-technical NBN user would have to fund an electrician to 
> connect
> the VDSL appearance to their modem/router, and also to isolate the existing 
> POTS
> wiring and connect it to the router's VoIP FXS port.
I believe this is still being negotiated between the Government, NBN and 
possibly
ISPs, but there have been proposals that the NBN tech will attend the house and
install the splitter/filter as part if the installation process, and it won't 
have to
be arranged separately by the average non-technical user. The NBN guy has to go 
to the
pillar/cabinet nearby to perform the jumpering there anyway, so the house is
guaranteed to be within a kilometre or two. Yes, *somebody* will have to 
arrange a
tech to rearrange the house phone sockets, since that rearrangement has to be 
done on
the telco side of the network boundary - but it might (and I stress 'might') 
not be
the end-user that has to arrange it.

Paul.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] NBN domestic installations

[Paul Brooks]

On 6/03/2016 10:33 AM, Andy Farkas wrote:
> On 06/03/2016 08:51, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>> On 06/03/16 01:22, Andy Farkas wrote:
>>>
>>> That was then. Now we're talking about how malcs destroyed the
>>> previous NBNv1 plan. Back then, an NTU was supplied, for free, in
>>> to the premises. You connected your computer straight into it. No
>>> modem required.
>>
>> Not really - that gives you exactly one computer connection. You had to 
>> supply your
>> own router (or accept your reseller's bundle) if you wanted more than one 
>> computer,
>> WiFi, a firewall etc.
>
> Are you trying to deliberately miss the point, especially since
> you cut out all the context? FTTP provides a ready to go service
> that does not need a modem.
>
> Technically, you can plug in 4 ethernet connections into the NTU.
> (and also two phones)

Unfortunately no. The 4 ports are not bridged - only one port is active, for 
each
Internet service. The NTD does not do any firewalling, no NAT, no DHCP, none of 
the
functions that a home router might perform. A PC plugged directly into the NTD
ethernet will get the one-and-only public IP address assigned by the ISP, and be
completely wide open to all public traffic and attack packets. I've seen 
estimates
that such a PC if not specially hardened might last up to 10 minutes before 
being hacked.
No other device could be connected to the Internet.

The four ethernet ports on the NTD are to support having multiple services from
multiple service providers simultaneously. For example, Internet from an ISP on 
one
port, television using the NBN multicast platform on a second port, and 
possibly a
corporate closed private network on a third port. Each needs to be enabled by 
NBNCo,
and a service provider, separately, and they don't share traffic, routing, 
bridging,
or anything.

You still need a separate home router/gateway, with an Ethernet WAN port, to 
connect
to the Ethernet port on the NTD  for any form of home network.


___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] NBN domestic installations

[Paul Brooks]

On 10/03/2016 3:43 PM, David Lochrin wrote:
> On 2016-03-06 10:33 Andy Farkas wrote:
>> With FTTN you will have to get a new modem/router/voip device.
> I believe FTTN provides a VDSL2 interface, and VDSL2 can negotiate down to 
> ADSL2+ and ADSL2, at least.  So it should be possible to use an existing 
> modem when the user doesn't mind the speed degrade.
Actually no - The NBNCo interface also requires G.INP and G.VECTOR 
functionality to be
implemented in the modem. ADSL2+ modems generally do not implement G.INP or 
vectoring.
Non-vectored VDSL2 can certainly degrade gracefully to non-vectored ADSL2+ - 
but NBNCo
require vectoring to ensure the speeds of the parallel VDSL2 services on other 
pairs
can be maintained, so a non-vectored ADSL2+ modem won't be accepted.

This aspect is a real problem, as it prevents NBNCo enabling VDSL2 mode on the 
line
while the user continues to use their existing ADSL2+ modem, and then the user
upgrading the modem on their own timetable at a later stage.

Note the reverse timing is OK - the user can obtain a VDSL2-capable modem early,
attach it to the line while the line is still connected to a ADSL1/2/2+ and it 
should
work fine - and then when the NBN switchover occurs, the modem should sync up 
in VDSL2
mode automagically. (note *should*)

Paul.

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] NBN domestic installations

[Paul Brooks]

On 11/03/2016 11:04 AM, David Lochrin wrote:
> Many thanks for all the knowledge and experience collected in this thread.
>
> One last thing, I assume there's no line rental with an FTTN service?
>
> David L.
Line rental still paid to Telstra by the end-user for the 'naked subloop' 
copper?  No.
The user pays the ISP's retail service fee, the ISP pays the NBN wholesale fee, 
NBN
and the C'wealth pay Telstra something, I think non-recurring.

If for some reason you retain a Telstra dial-tone on the line for a PSTN 
service, then
yes, you'll probably still pay Telstra for the telephone service - because 
Telstra is
then your RSP for voice.

Paul.


___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] FTTN notes

[Paul Brooks]

On 18/03/2016 5:48 PM, Andy Farkas wrote:


>
> Also #5 - It's not "If a user subscribes to a VoIP voice service" but rather 
> "When a
> user is forced to subscribe to a VoIP voice service".

Pedantic - its a "voice service", not a "VoIP voice service". It might use VoIP
technology from the modem or NTU into the network to the ISP, but if the service
interface is a standard 4-pin analogue socket then its a conventional voice 
service,
and the VoIP bit is immaterial, its just a transport method that the provider 
worries
about.

Its only a "VoIP service" if the provider tells you all the SIP  or H.323 
signalling
details and requires you to provide your own VoIP gateway, possibly built into 
a VoIP
handset.

For those that care about such things - its still the PSTN, but its no longer 
POTS.
Many people use the two terms interchangeably, but they aren't.

My personal opinion is that this is a good thing, and the transition to digital
telephony can't happen fast enough. Audio quality can finally improve over the 
awful
'toll quality' rubbish benchmark we've been limited to for the past 100 years 
while
we've been tied to analogue POTS.

Paul.

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] NBN chief seeks advice of US tech giants as broadband technology debate rages

[Paul Brooks]

By building for the far-off future - which doesn't require significantly more 
upfront cost - makes it more likely to make a financial return, not less 
likely, by extending the time period they can receive wholesale rental revenue 
by a  decade or more.


 Original Message 
From: David Boxall 
Sent: 21 March 2016 8:53:16 pm AEDT
To: Link 
Subject: [LINK] NBN chief seeks advice of US tech giants as broadband 
technology debate rages


> He said those advocating for NBN to build for the far-off future were 
> ignoring the fact that it was set up as an enterprise required to make 
> a financial return, rather than as a public service.

Can't have government providing services, can we?

-- 
David Boxall | "Cheer up" they said.
  | "Things could be worse."
http://david.boxall.id.au| So I cheered up and,
  | Sure enough, things got worse.
  |  --Murphy's musing

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

-- 
Sent unplugged
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] FTTN notes

[Paul Brooks]

On 21/03/2016 7:44 AM, Tom Worthington wrote:
> On 20/03/16 14:41, Paul Brooks wrote:
>
>> Pedantic - its a "voice service" ...
>
> Is it a voice telephony service under the Telecommunications Act?
>
> There are obligations on the providers of voice telephony services, for 
> example with
> Triple Zero (000) emergency calls.
>
>
Yes, it should be a 'standard telephony service' under the Act, unless the 
provider's
brochures and contract material states that it isn't.
The definition of what constitutes a 'standard telephone service' are
technology-neutral, and somewhat recursive - if you can call and be called by 
another
telephone service, then you are using a standard telephone service.
Whether the service is provided by analogue-over-copper, ISDN-over-anything,
VoIP-over-anything, VoATM, cellular mobile (digital or analogue, and any 'G') 
doesn't
matter.
This means all the normal obligations, safeguards, and requirements apply as a
baseline. Triple-Zero, directory assistance, inclusion in IPND, etc all still 
apply.

Paul.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Does NBN need a third satellite?

[Paul Brooks]

Alternative view - a third is needed to be planned at least, to provide N+1
redundancy, because of the very long replacement time if one of the existing
satellites is knocked out by debris, meteoroid, accident or malfunction.

We've seen what happens in the current Basslink cable situation. For a decade 
the
Basslink electricity cable has been criticised by Tasmanians as an unnecessary 
and
expensive parasite on the Tasmanian budget.  Now that it has unexpectedly 
failed for a
few months, it has suddenly become critical infrastructure with calls for 
several
state and commonwealth inquiries, heads to roll, and a second cable to be built 
to
ensure non-stop supply from the mainland so that Tasmania never again has to 
choose
between drinking the water or keeping the lights on.

Thats what happens when you rely on one of something.

Same calls at the moment for the optical fibre cable component, with calls for
'someone' to build another fibre cable into Tasmania, even though Tasmania 
still has 2
out of 3 optical fibre cables operating.

The initial NBN satellite was planned as a pair, operating as active-active with
roughly 50% load on both, to provide this redundancy if one should fail in 
orbit (or
be lost at launch), with latent capacity to cater for a decade of future 
growth. The
experience of the interim service demand profile indicates both satellites will
running above 50% capacity soon after the second is launched - which means if 
one of
the satellites fails in orbit, the satellite NBN service will instantly become 
as
congested and unusable as the current interim service is - and would remain 
like that
for years if the replacement satellite wasn't even on the planning table at the 
time.

Paul.



On 25/03/2016 8:40 AM, David Boxall wrote:
> A third? The first isn't fully operational and the second hasn't even 
> launched!
> Didn't Turnbull say that the satellites are unnecessary extravagances?
>
> 
>
> "Australia’s efforts to become a leader in the global digital economy will 
> soon take
> another giant stride ..." Sounds like propaganda.
>
> "The NBN is a visionary nation building infrastructure project ..." Come now! 
> It's
> an effort to repair some of the harm done by alienating essential 
> natural-monopoly
> infrastructure from public ownership.
>
> "... there is growing demand from business and industry for improved 
> broadband in
> regional and remote Australia." At what point does it become more 
> cost-effective to
> build optical fibre infrastructure, with its century or so service life, than 
> to
> repeatedly replace multi-billion-dollar satellites, with their one to two 
> decade
> service life?
>
> "Australia has been lagging behind other nations when it comes to building
> infrastructure and providing future-proof broadband, especially in regional 
> and
> remote areas." Was that true before the infrastructure was privatised? Are
> satellites future-proof?
>

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] A non-sensationalist look at Australian internet speeds

[Paul Brooks]

Except that's not what the ABS stats measure or show  at all. 
The ABS measures data volume transferred not link capacity or bandwidth - these 
two aspects are only loosely related with each other.
Data volume can increase by many times without link bandwidth changing at all.



 Original Message 
From: David Boxall 
Sent: 25 March 2016 8:16:33 pm AEDT
To: Link 
Subject: [LINK] A non-sensationalist look at Australian internet speeds


> Australia has dropped down to 48th place in a global average broadband 
> connection speed rankings list published by Akamai Technologies.
> ...
> According to the report, the average broadband speed for Australia in 
> the fourth quarter of 2015 was 8.2Mbps, putting it in the 48th spot 
> (down from 46th) compared to the rest of the world.
>
> In terms of average peak internet speeds, at 39.3Mbps, Australia fared 
> far worse, plummeting to 60th position (down from 46th) in the quarter.
> ...
> Australia's average and peak internet speeds have increased by 11 per 
> cent and 6.4 per cent year-on-year, respectively.
> ...
With ABS data showing demand for bandwidth doubling every two years or 
so, that might be a problem.

-- 
David Boxall | "Cheer up" they said.
  | "Things could be worse."
http://david.boxall.id.au| So I cheered up and,
  | Sure enough, things got worse.
  |  --Murphy's musing
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

-- 
Sent unplugged
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] A non-sensationalist look at Australian internet speeds

[Paul Brooks]

On 29/03/2016 8:19 AM, David Boxall wrote:
> On 28/03/2016 11:36 PM, Paul Brooks wrote:
>> ...
>> The ABS measures data volume transferred not link capacity or bandwidth - 
>> these two
>> aspects are only loosely related with each other.
>> Data volume can increase by many times without link bandwidth changing at 
>> all.
>> ...
>
> I'd be interested to see anyone explain to an everyday audience (say, The Age 
> or
> Sydney Morning Herald) how the ABS data can continue to rise exponentially 
> without
> impacting bandwidth.
>

I hate to say it, but the easiest example is using videos/movies.

Lets say people in a house watch more and more streamed video over time. They 
start
out watching one movie per week. After a few weeks they start watching two 
movies per
week. The next month they watch three movies each week.
As long as they aren't trying to watch them at the same time, they are 
transferring
once, twice and then three times the data volume each month, without using or
requiring any more bandwidth. Its only when the household starts trying to do 
multiple
things *all at the same time* that they might start seeing congestion and 
looking to
upgrade to more bandwidth.

In this way, averaged over the whole population, data volume consumed can grow
considerably each month even though actual bandwidth doesn't need to grow 
nearly as much.

P.

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] A non-sensationalist look at Australian internet speeds

[Paul Brooks]

What I'm getting at is that, over the course of a month or 6 months, the average
broadband link utilisation is less than 1%. Sure there are instantaneous peaks 
when
somebody is actually trying to do something, but most of the time the link is 
idle.
If the average link was (say) 10 Mbps, then most of the time it might peak to 
2, 4 or
even 10 for a few milliseconds, seconds or even minutes, then falls to zero or
background noise most of the time.
The average over a month is almost never 2 Mbps, these days its still less than
300kbps for most people.
Even watching video is not a steady stream - if you actually watch the traffic 
of a
nominal 2 - 3 Mbps video stream, it consists of a sequence of bursts up to full
line-rate for a fraction of a second (shorter or longer depending on your actual
bandwidth line-rate) punctuated by 3 - 5 seconds of idle - when anything else 
can jump
in and have no effect whatsoever on the stream, or the anything else.

There are plenty of time windows for devices in the household to do much much 
more
without impacting on anything else. And the vast majority of applications are 
not
perturbed significantly even if there are multiple things trying to happen at 
the same
time, which cause the link to drive to full capacity for a few seconds - 
increase the
number of phones/tablets/laptops accessing email from 1 to 40, and they'll 
never be
aware of simultaneous access congestion, because at all happens in the 
background and
the only visible effect is that a message might take 2.6 seconds to appear on 
the
screen instead of 2.3 seconds (for example) if it was the only device in the 
house.
Total aggregate data transferred through this example link would jump from 1x 
to 40x
(roughly), without any discernable requirement for extra bandwidth.

And all this breaks down on low speed links that some are lumbered with, around 
the 1
Mbps level, when many applications can drive it to 100% utilisation for many 
minutes
or appreciable fractions of an hour - THEN you'll notice the congestion effect 
of
trying to do more things at the same time, and look for extra bandwidth before 
you can
play a bigger part in the data volume statistics - but these don't form a 
significant
fraction of the ABS stats.


Note I'm definitely NOT saying there isn't a case for increasing most people's
bandwidth - all I'm saying is that data volume can rise greatly without 
bandwidth
increasing significantly. Its definitely not a linear relationship - its 
logarithmic,
and can be modelled using queueing theory and Ehrlang equations. Confusing the 
two
things, or assuming that you have to double one to double the other, is a 
common fallacy.



On 29/03/2016 9:14 AM, Karl Auer wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-03-28 at 23:36 +1100, Paul Brooks wrote:
>> Except that's not what the ABS stats measure or show  at all. 
>> The ABS measures data volume transferred not link capacity or 
>> bandwidth - these two aspects are only loosely related with each 
>> other. Data volume can increase by many times without link bandwidth
>> changing at all.
> I'm not sure what you are getting at.
>
> As long as the volumes being transferred do not exceed the available
> bandwidth, you are right. But as soon as the aggregate volume being
> transferred approaches or exceeds the available bandwidth, the data
> volume is effectively capped. Available bandwidth puts an upper bound
> on data volumes. The relationship is only "loose" as long as the data
> volume is not soaking up all the available bandwidth.
>
> So if we say (simplistic example here) that the average link is 10Mb/s
> and the average data volume is 2Mb/s, we don't (on average) have a
> problem. Our data volume can double twice before we have a problem.
>
> But it CAN'T double again, because the capacity is not there to let it.
> We will be constrained by the available bandwidth.
>
> Talking about averages is also tricky. There are plenty of people who
> are already being constrained by their available bandwidth, and saying
> that "on average" we are all doing fine really doesn't help them. The
> same is true for those with data quotas, who are suffering an artificia
> l constraint on their data volumes. These people are presumably not
> reflected in the stats because their data volumes are being capped at
> less that what they actually need.
>
> Regards, K.
>

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] A non-sensationalist look at Australian internet speeds

[Paul Brooks]

On 29/03/2016 1:17 PM, David Boxall wrote:
> On 29/03/2016 12:54 PM, Paul Brooks wrote:
>> ... averaged over the whole population, data volume consumed can grow
>> considerably each month even though actual bandwidth doesn't need to grow 
>> nearly as
>> much.
>> ...
> Which is where your argument fails. If the average grows, then so probably 
> does the
> peak. That's the complaint I keep hearing: businesses with high peak 
> bandwidth needs.

The argument doesn't fail, because we were talking about ABS stats, not business
usage. Averaged over the whole population, the ABS stats for data volume 
indicate the
business segment isn't a big contribution.
If you want to talk about a 'typical' business service, fine, open a different 
thread
- but we weren't.
Paul.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Fwd: Re: The wonders of NBN

[Paul Brooks]

Jan - did the original complainant ring the 1800 number and talk to to the NBN 
help
desk, maybe even open a ticket?
They're usually fairly responsive, especially when it concerns a fault in an 
existing
service, rather than an installation query.

There's also the TIO, which the original ISP should have alerted them to, who 
will
kick the ISP and NBN's butts until its fixed.

Paul.



On 29/03/2016 9:47 AM, JanW wrote:
> Linkers,
> You may remember that I wrote to Senator Fiona Nash last month about the NBN 
> fiasco as David shared re the people in Tasmania. (original message below for 
> reference)
>
> I got a reply today -- from someone in the Dept of Communications and the 
> Arts, via a no-reply delivery system, with a non-copyable PDF attached. Since 
> I don't think Link allows attachments, I decided to create a blog post so I 
> could share this letter (you can download the PDF linked to within my post). 
> It makes for interesting reading.
>
> http://janwhitaker.com/a-minister-replies-re-nbn-sort-of/
>
> Jan
>
>
>> Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 12:26:15 +1100
>> To: senator.n...@aph.gov.au
>> From: JanW 
>> Subject: Re: [LINK] The wonders of NBN
>> Bcc: David Boxall 
>>
>> Dear Minister Nash
>>
>> Here is something you can possibly attend to or push someone in your new 
>> area of responsibility to attend to. This sounds like a right stuff-up.
>> You're stuck with a dud system. Perhaps you can influence some improvements.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Jan Whitaker
>> Berwick Victoria
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> 
 Today is day 21 with a failed NBN connection for us. We live in Port 
 Huon, Tasmania, in the beautiful rural Huon Valley.

 We have had one occasion where an NBN technician has turned up, the 
 day before a scheduled appointment because the technician was in the 
 street doing another job. We were not at home.

 Since then there have now been four scheduled appointments to which no 
 NBN technician has shown up. Excuses, via the ISP from NBN have 
 included - 'We didn't have all the correct information" which is 
 incorrect. "They weren't home, so we left a card in the post box" 
 which has never happened. "We went to the wrong address" which is 
 unverifiable, oh and my favorite "We don't often go down there." Which 
 is clearly correct. I await with interest the excuse for the no show 
 on Friday, appointment 4, perhaps " The dog ate my Purchase 
 Order/IPhone/Car Keys?"

 We are struggling to cope with one iPad with Telstra 3G for which we 
 will likely need to take out a mortgage.

 My business is seriously affected.

 No one appears to have control over the activities of the NBN, and I 
 am grateful for the efforts of my ISP. it appears to be ineffective 
 however.

 I am at a loss as to how to move forward. Direct contact with the NBN 
 results in "There's nothing we can do" there is no mechanism for 
 members of the public to address this kind of appalling service. There 
 is no accountability.

 All we need is for the NBN box in our house to be fixed.

 please does anyone have any strategies, ideas or ways to move this 
 forward?
>>> Our government clearly wants to screw up our telecommunications.
>> I write books. http://janwhitaker.com/?page_id=8
>>
>> Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
>> jw...@janwhitaker.com
>> Twitter: JL_Whitaker
>> Blog: www.janwhitaker.com 
>>
>> Sooner or later, I hate to break it to you, you're gonna die, so how do you 
>> fill in the space between here and there? It's yours. Seize your space. 
>> ~Margaret Atwood, writer 
>>
>> _ __ _
> I write books. http://janwhitaker.com/?page_id=8
>
> Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
> jw...@janwhitaker.com
> Twitter: JL_Whitaker
> Blog: www.janwhitaker.com 
>
> Sooner or later, I hate to break it to you, you're gonna die, so how do you 
> fill in the space between here and there? It's yours. Seize your space. 
> ~Margaret Atwood, writer 
>
> _ __ _
> ___
> Link mailing list
> Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Anticipated service life of fibre

[Paul Brooks]

On 5/04/2016 10:45 AM, Karl Auer wrote:
> Even glass is touched by time. Perhaps it will become slowly more opaque, 
> carry
> certain wavelengths better (or less well), become more fragile, or deform (as 
> old
> windows have flowed down so they are fatter at the bottom).

Given the educational/informational origins of this list, may I chime in here 
to point
out that this 'old glass flows/deforms and gets thicker at the bottom' is an 
urban
myth that has been debunked. The glass doesn't flow, the thickness gradient is a
byproduct of the pouring process, and panes have been found that were installed
upside-down, with the thicker part still at the top.

http://io9.gizmodo.com/the-glass-is-a-liquid-myth-has-finally-been-destroyed-496190894
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fact-fiction-glass-liquid/

That doesn't stop the rest of the comments being very valid - the likely service
lifetime of an optical fibre cable is certainly decades, but beyond that - who 
knows.
Certainly the glass fibres aren't prone to the deterioration, corrosion, and 
shorting
that copper is, but there may be other effects which become evident.
Optical fibre cable is much more 'brittle' and more easily broken by excessive
stretching, and being bent around corners too tight than metallic cables.
Suspended aerial fibre cables swing in the breeze and may develop 
micro-fractures.
Other components of the cable - the protective jacket, plastic bits, 
waterproofing,
fibreglass strength members, insect-resistant coatings etc wont last infinitely 
long.

And they are all just as susceptible to being chewed through by cockatoos and 
rats,
and ants
(http://www.networkworld.com/article/2367202/lan-wan/hungry-ants-knock-out-my-fios-service-again.html).

For a vaguely on-topic reference point - subsea optical fibre cable systems are
generally guaranteed for 25 years. The actual cable may well last longer before 
it
deteriorates to the point of being unusable, but nobody knows when that might 
be, so
nobody is willing to provide a warranty for it.

Paul.




___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Anticipated service life of fibre

[Paul Brooks]

On 5/04/2016 10:17 PM, Karl Auer wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 22:10 +1000, Paul Brooks wrote:
>> this 'old glass flows/deforms and gets thicker at the
>> bottom' is an urban myth that has been debunked. The glass doesn't 
>> flow, the thickness gradient is a byproduct of the pouring process, 
>> and panes have been found that were installed
>> upside-down, with the thicker part still at the top.
> I did not know that. Thank you.
>
> I did know about the cylinder and disk production methods, but never
> put two and two together properly.
Amazing the things you learn from Dr Karl on JJJ podcasts :-)
Turns out its human nature, the most comfortable way to carry something is with 
the
heavier section to the bottom, as its more stable - even when the weight 
imbalance is
very subtle. Same if it needs to be stored by leaning it up semi-vertically 
against a
support.
So when the stained-glass (and normal glass) window panes were being carried to 
the
cathedral, in the vast majority of cases the thicker edge with the excess 
weight would
have been carried and installed as the lower edge - leading to the 'discovery' a
century or two later 'hey look - most of these glass sections are thicker at the
bottom than the top - they must have flowed/slumped over the years' - a classic 
case
of 'correlation isn't causation' if ever there was one.

P.



___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link