I'd like to know.....

Tweet

Read more! If everyone in this country was connected to a min 100Mbps symmetrical pipe, or more, by 2015, and let's assume that those who like using the Net level out the usage for those who don't, what exactly would it cost and to whom? Not the actual FTTH solution but the bits that will need to be transported around the country....how much will they cost and what precisely do we need to achieve that aim?

This blog post can be read at 5tth.blogspot.com



We all hear how scarce they are, these bits, and we know that the core network is struggling anyway, but JANET upgraded their core network recently so we must have actual hardcore (ouch!) figures to play with.

Don't stress over how it gets to each person, just assume it does. What do we need in Telecity, Telehouse, datacentres, bitmines etc etc to achieve what Erol Ziya wrote about all those years ago - the cheapest country within which to move [unlimited - my addition] data?

Which, it seems to me at the end of a long week, is what we surely STILL need to achieve.....

But how to do it practically? The investment needs to come not in the first mile alone (like *that* is happening, ho hum), nor in the middle mile alone, nor in the core alone. It needs to be across the board.

Ergo, my tired little brain would suggest, this requires a cunning plan. A collaboration. A big picture with a road map to the endgame.

So, who out of our dear, expensive analysts has considered this? Who has the requisite data?

Because, it seems to me, that every which way we turn it all seems to be "too expensive" to do. Telcos don't want to do FTTH in the first mile and are struggling to even see the point of less suitable technologies as economic solutions to properties; backhaul is bloody expensive for communities, ISPs, etc; and longhaul seems to be a struggle too if you talk to ...well, pretty much anyone.

So, what do we need to solve the problem of transporting bits around this country in the most economical and affordable fashion possible to help bring a long-awaited end to those arguments?

Your thoughts are welcomed.....

Read more!

Lessons from Louisiana

Tweet

Read more! After three weeks of subzero temperatures, Louisiana makes a very welcome change. I'd forgotten what sun felt like! Am sitting here attached to a 25Mbps symmetrical pipe, boostable to anywhere up to a gig - direct into the vein! I am currently in a data exchange which has a carbon toeprint rather than a footprint, is providing cloud computing services over the community fibre network to local businesses, and is housed within a business centre which survived, only just, Katrina ....

The best bit? It was conceived and is run by an amazing, dynamic lady, the building is owned by another female visionary, it includes a Women's Business Centre, the whole focus is on economic development, and the replicability of this set-up would be simple. Even in the UK. The only reason we can't do it is that the places where this set up is most needed are those places where there is currently insufficient infrastructure to do so.

What should we be doing? Well, firstly, the sooner we resolve the cost issues of backhaul in all areas of UK, rural and urban, the better. The UK Government should spend the first tranche of money from the rural Broadband pot putting in new open fibre, owned by the community networks it has constantly supported in words (DBR, Caio etc) if not in action. It should be a co-operative, not for profit venture, so that from now far into the future, every single person, business and community in the UK has a CHOICE about who to buy backhaul from, and the telcos and incumbents are finally faced with true competition. Yes, the government will say they cannot go directly in competition with the telcos, but there are ways round all of these arguments about anti-competition, as other nations have discovered (EU included). Think Amsterdam, Vasteras, Korea etc etc. Think about who wins and why that in itself makes it essential....

The telcos need to face up to the fact that competition is going to happen. I have in front of me the figures for building a middle mile network in the UK as a co-operative venture, and these figures have been created by a group of fibre legends, and are based on sound and known principles and costs. It isn't actually as expensive as I had thought it would be, and there are undoubtedly investors out there who want to take BT et al on at their own game and take Britain into the 21st century and beyond.

This would level the playing field and bring the data transit costs down to their real value, (cost plus) level, rather than over-inflated corporate greed-need levels. It would boost usage and access to the core network in a way that no other action can. It would immediately encourage innovation and therefore help to stimulate the economy, create new jobs, and support diversification, especially in rural areas. That co-operative needs to be started and run by members of the communities who are already up and running, and then as more communities create their own networks, they too can join the co-op. There should be no telco interest, or equipment supplier interest within that co-op, just consumers and communities, who by the very own end-user self-interest will ensure that the co-op is run for the benefit of all.

I suggest it may well, and should definitely, happen in the UK soon too. If anyone has some spare cash in the bank and wants to be involved, or you are a community network in desperate need of affordable backhaul, please do get in touch.

More from the USA soon - I now have 40+ pages of notes and my head is reeling with facts, figures, ideas and information from the amazing people who I have met and who have been generous and forthcoming in the extreme with their contributions to the discussions and answers to my seemingly never-ending stream of fibre questions. Many of these people are very well-known within our sphere and I am honoured to be invited and welcomed into their world. Thank you all. You know who you are!!



Read more!

What should the UK be in terms of data transport?

Tweet

Read more! I am reproducing Erol Ziya's article from the ABC site because I hope it will stimulate next gen debate...

(First published approx 4-5 years ago)

Light that Fibre! – effecting change in the UK

by Erol Ziya
ABC’s core objective is to effect change. So far we have not effected as much change as I would have liked. From my past experience of effecting change, with the campaign for unmetered telecomms (CUT), to effect meaningful change, you need to find a single core issue that you can line up as much support behind as possible. With CUT we were able to combine the support of major corporations like AOL and Intel with a grassroots user voice, all focused clearly on a single issue. This is what I believe ABC now needs to do.

What’s the issue?

For me the simple clear cut issue, that almost everyone should be able to line up behind, is the cost of moving around data within the UK. It is now middle mile costs (moving data from a local aggregation point to say Telehouse or some other point) that are the core problem. Historically there has been much talk and focus on the issue of the first/last mile, and rightly so.

There are now new exciting ways to deal with local distribution, from community based wifi solutions to commercial LLU solutions. In both terms of technical advancements (wifi, low-cost mini DSLAMs and others) and in terms of regulation (LLU and others) there has been much improvement in first / last mile options. However all of these options, community and commercial, are now being hampered by the cost of getting data from a local aggregation point outwards and onwards. I believe that this does not need to be the case.

Look at the massive amounts of unused fibre in the ground within the UK (some estimates are as high as 98% of all the fibre in the ground in the UK is just unlit and unused) and if you look at the cost of ‘middle mile’ connectivity in other countries, then the only reasonable conclusion is it could be and should be cheaper in the UK. To the argument that it cost billions to put this fibre in, I would simply say it’s better to get something from this investment than the nothing that is currently being accrued from it.

What’s the target?

The UK government, via the Broadband Stakeholders Group, is currently in the process of defining the targets for Broadband Britain 2010. I think the single target that, if achieved, would place the UK in forefront of the digital revolution, is to aim to make the UK the cheapest place in the world within which to move data. If we could achieve this one single target (and given the amount of network resource already in the ground in the UK I believe we can) then we would see an explosion of usage and uses for modern digital networks that would lead the world.

We need to create a ‘wired commons’ throughout the UK. We need to take the benefit accrued by ISPs, through the non profit Linx Exchange organisation, of near zero cost interchange of data and extend this benefit down to every local aggregation point in the UK and ultimately every user in the UK. We need to aggregate every piece of data in the UK onto a single unified dumb IP transport system.

What’s the how?

How could we do this? This objective will not be easy to achieve and it will need much thought and discussion from people far cleverer than me. In the hope of starting this process of debate here are some thoughts of mine:

We need to create a dumb IP overlay network

This network should initially extend to every DSL enabled BT telephony exchange in the UK.
It should offer at least 10Mbps ethernet connections to anyone who wants to connect to them that should be able to route traffic to any other point in the UK.
It should be based on a single flat fee for end users. The revenue from these end users connections should then be divided out to those that carry the traffic.
This idea has serious benefits and can make money. As an infrastructure provider the more traffic you carry on this ‘UK IP overlay network’ the greater the proportion of end user fees you would accrue. Any ‘data transport’ company or entity should be able to interconnect into this network at any point. Whenever there is a choice of routes the data will always route to the carrier that has the most unused capacity at that time. Thus, the way to make more money, if you have infrastructure, would be to make it available.

The idea is to create a commercial incentive to deliver abundance (that already exists and is currently unused) as opposed to the existing drives to maintain a false scarcity.

What’s the who?

The government is the crucial ‘pump primer’ that could create the initial density to make an IP data commons in the UK a reality. If any and all government expenditure on Broadband networks in the UK was spent on generic dumb IP overlay network elements, that could be used by anyone and interconnected into by any carrier, instead of 1000’s and 1000’s of separate and ‘rationed out’ exclusive links, I believe the vision of a UK data commons could be achieved.

The benefits of aggregation belong as much to those that create the data being aggregated as those that carry the aggregated data. We must find ways to maximise these benefits of aggregation, by aggregating all data within the UK. We must find ways of delivering these benefits of aggregation to as many people as possible. Getting everyone behind this aim is the way to effect significant change.



Read more!