<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/83162/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
With all of the negative press about Australia’s National Broadband Network (NBN), consumers who have the option to switch to the NBN from a working broadband connection might be forgiven for being cautious.
After the NBN is made available in an area, residents have up to 18 months to switch from their current plans to one provided on the NBN. Once it is available in an area however, residents are usually deluged with offers from various internet service providers (ISPs) about switching, making it hard to ignore. 
<h2>Moving to NBN on HFC</h2>
In my area in Western Australia, I have had HFC from Telstra for many years and so changing to the NBN does not involve a change in the underlying technology. Although some researchers have classified HFC as being an inferior technology to Fibre to the Node, it is actually capable of delivering speeds of 100 Mbps down and 40 Mbps up. Within the next one to two years HFC will be capable of 1 Gbps speeds with the roll out of DOCSIS 3.1. 
HFC connections may still suffer if ISPs do not adequately provision adequate CVC capacity on the NBN but HFC does not have the same limitations as Fibre to the Node with regard to the distance from the node. There is also a possibility that the NBN will see more homes connected to a node than was the case when Telstra ran the network. This may also impact performance.
In my case, I was consistently getting speeds of 100 Mbps for downloads but only 2 Mbps for uploads. Prior to the NBN, these speeds have been a luxury for those Australian’s who lived in areas that were services by Telstra and Optus with HFC.
Making the switch to the NBN was relatively simple but uncovered some decisions that it is worth spending time considering. If doing a conversion, some of the options aren’t made obvious by the sales team and so need to be explicitly requested.
<h2>The question of speed</h2>
Once you have decided on an ISP, there is the question of what speed of connection is available at any given residence. HFC doesn’t suffer from a slowdown based on the distance from the “node” and so speeds up to 100 Mbps are available. ISPs like Telstra however, sell plans based on download limits and at the default of 25 Mpbs. Choosing up to 100 Mbps costs another AUD 30 a month. 
It seems that for most Australians who have connected to the NBN, the default of 25 Mbps has been the most popular choice, with 53% of fixed connections being at 25 Mbps and a further 29% at the lowest tier of 12 Mbps. For the average family just watching streaming video and using social media and browsing, this is likely to be fine. It has resulted however in the overall average speed of internet connections in Australia remaining low at 10.1 Mbps.
<h2>Choice of wireless router</h2>
Another choice that doesn’t seem important at the time is the choice of wireless router that ISPs offer. Here again, the default for Telstra is a basic Sagemcom F@ST 5535. And it is basic. It doesn’t support the fastest wireless protocols used by recent smartphones and laptops, 802.11ac. The fixed cable connections from the router are also not the fastest kind. Not having the fastest wireless can make a significant difference to the overall speed of the internet connection of devices and so it is always worth upgrading. 
Some of the routers also have the ability to fail over to using 4G if the NBN connection is not available for any reason. This may be important because on the NBN, the landline phone is switched over to using the main internet connection using Voice over IP (VoIP) and not the physical connection over the old copper network. However, if the power goes out, the phone will also be unavailable even by this route.
Other than for the phone connection, any wireless router can be connected to the NBN modem. The Telstra router can then be simply used for the phone connection and its WiFi switched off. 
<h2>Making the switch</h2>
For me, and I stress the personal nature of this, the switch was fast, efficient and painless. From contacting Telstra, the wireless router was shipped within 4 days and the appointment with the NBN technician booked for a week after the order was placed. Any interaction with the Telstra NBN connection staff involved little wait times and the only negatives were some confusing emails and an order status that said the order was delayed when it wasn’t.
The NBN technician arrived and didn’t need to switch the physical box attached to the wall outside the house. It was just a question of plugging in the modem, making sure it worked, and telling NBN and Telstra to switch it all on. The technician gave me advice of avoiding being disconnected when making the switch over from the old system to the new and then left, although I had been barraging him with questions about how the rollout was going. 
Getting connected was just a question of connecting the wireless router to the NBN modem, switching it on and connecting to the wireless network. As I mentioned above, I use Apple wireless routers and so altered the configuration after things were connected.
<h2>And the results?</h2>
The download speed dropped from the Telstra non-NBN connection. During the morning, I got about 94 Mbps download. The massive difference was in the upload speed which is now about 38 Mbps. This is a huge bonus over the existing connection which gave 2 Mbps. Upload speeds are never really thought about as a problem until you realise that synchronising with services like iCloud, Google Drive and DropBox all become significantly faster with the NBN connection. 
However, in the evening, the speed dropped to between 50 - 70 Mbps download and 23 - 35 Mbps upload. This was something that didn’t happen on the Telstra non-NBN connection which was consistent even in the evenings. 
It is still early days and as more people connect in my immediate area, bandwidth may be further affected. Telstra may also ramp up the capacity so that there are not these changes in speed based on the time of day. 
<h2>Update from NBN Co</h2>
In response to the article, a spokesperson from NBN Co clarified the following points:
[1] With regard to the number of HFC connections per node:
“At present Telstra runs around 1000 premises on an HFC node sharing 1Gbps of capacity. On the nbn we will have only 650 premises per Node and once we reach full DOCSIS 3.1 we will have 10Gbps of capacity available”
[2] Regarding the speed drop I had experienced in the evenings:
“Your speed drop in the evening is almost certainly CVC related”
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/david-glance-148" target="_blank">David Glance</a> is Director of UWA Centre for Software Practice, University of Western Australia and author for <a href="https://theconversation.com/au" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Things to consider when making the switch to the NBN and what to expect

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/77780/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Eight years into the Australian government’s National Broadband Network (NBN) project, the nation has an average internet speed – 50th in the global rankings – that lags well behind many advanced economy countries. 
Ongoing secrecy around the NBN, a project that’s likely to cost more than A$50 billion, makes it impossible for the public in most cases to know when and what quality service they will receive. Further, new research shows the NBN rollout was politically motivated and socioeconomically biased from the beginning. 
It is perhaps time to remind ourselves of the ups and downs of the project that was once announced as a dream national infrastructure project for the 21st century. This requires a ten-year journey back in time, before we can figure out what needs to be done next.
The ups
In November 2007, after 11 years of Coalition government, Labor was elected on a policy platform that promised a national broadband network. 
The NBN company was announced in April 2009 to provide terrestrial fibre network coverage for 93 percent of Australian premises by the end of 2020. Fixed wireless and satellite coverage would serve the remaining 7 percent. 
Looking back, it’s hard to deny the influence the NBN has had on Australian politics. Perhaps the peak influence was when three independent MPs cited the NBN as one of the key reasons why they supported a Labor government over the Coalition when the 2010 federal election produced a hung parliament. 
The final 60 early NBN rollout locations were then announced. The plan was for the first stage of the large-scale rollout to follow, connecting 3.5 million premises in 1,500 communities by mid-2015.
The downs
The early NBN rollout experienced significant delays. This attracted a great deal of “overwhelmingly negative” media coverage. Public opinion polls reflected growing dissatisfaction with the national project. 
This dissatisfaction and the September 2013 federal election result changed the fate of the NBN. In 2013, the new Coalition government suspended the first stage of the large-scale fibre-to-premises NBN rollout to reassess the scale of the project. 
In 2014, the government announced that the NBN rollout would change from a primarily fibre-to-premises model to a multi-technology-mix model. The technology to be used would be determined on an area-by-area basis.
This change of direction resulted in a prolonged state of uncertainty at the local government level. As it was rolled out, the NBN was widely criticised for being slow, expensive and obsolete.
Current state of play
Delays continue in the construction of the Coalition’s NBN. What can only be described as a downgrade of the original national project is now seriously over budget. 
In September 2016, a joint standing committee of parliament was established to inquire into the NBN rollout. The inquiry is continuing.
The bleak status quo only gets worse when the on-the-ground reality of the NBN rollout is considered. While fibre-to-premises rollout is supposed to be limited in the Coalition’s NBN, disturbing examples of misconduct in the NBN installations are highly concerning. 
The image below shows one example of many in which heritage-listed buildings (in this case also public housing) are disrespected to the point that suggests an absolute lack of communication between NBN contractors, local government, or heritage agencies.
<img src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/files/171251/width754/file-20170529-6367-ez3j2i.JPG" alt="">
<div class="enlarge_hint">
One heritage-listed house with two NBN installations (Judge Street, Woolloomooloo, NSW). Image: Stacey Miers, Author provided
</div>
Who misses out?
In the Coalition’s NBN, the provision of universal high-speed capacity – as envisioned in the original NBN – has been transformed into a patchwork of final speeds and different quality of service. This leads to an important question about equity. It also puts the 60 early rollout locations in the spotlight as these could potentially be the only ones across the nation that enjoy fibre-to-premises NBN.
My new research points to the political motivations in the selection of these lucky 60 sites. Voting patterns in these locations were compared with all electorates in the federal elections from 2007 to 2013. The analysis shows the selections were skewed for potential political gain.
ALP-held seats were the main beneficiaries of the early NBN rollout; safe Coalition-held seats were the least likely to receive the infrastructure. 
Tony Windsor, one of the three influential independent MPs in 2010, famously said of the NBN:
Do it once, do it right, and do it with fibre. 
He secured priority access for his regional electorate to the early NBN. 
However, most regional localities were not that lucky. Indeed, research on the sociospatial distribution of the early NBN rollout shows the limited share of regional Australia.
What to do?
It is convenient to blame one political party for the state of chaos that the NBN is in right now. However, politicisation of the project has been part of the problem since day one. 
Instead, we call for telecommunication infrastructure to be considered for what it really is: the backbone of the fast-growing digital economy; the foundation for innovation in the age of smart cities and big data; and a key pillar of social equity and spatial justice.
In reality, however, in the age of big data and open data, the lack of transparency around the NBN is shocking. In evidence to the parliamentary committee inquiry in March 2017, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission expressed concern about the lack of transparency on NBN performance. 
Policing the leaks of NBN data is not going to clean up the mess. Quite the opposite: the Australian government needs to share the NBN data, so the exact nature and scale of the problems can be determined. Only then can we talk about finding a way forward in this long journey.
Tooran Alizadeh is senior lecturer, Director of Urban Design, University of Sydney and author for The Conversation. She can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/tooran-alizadeh-377838" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

The NBN: how a national infrastructure dream fell short

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/81562/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Half of all Australians are now able to connect to the NBN.
But around 40 percent of eligible households have chosen not to connect to the network. Our modelling shows that subsidising the NBN is key to encouraging more Australians to connect. This would benefit the economy as a whole, but hurt the government’s plans to privatise the network.
The government is currently counting both on receiving ongoing revenue from the NBN, as well as the proceeds from its eventual privatisation. To achieve both goals, the NBN charges for access to the network.
Switching from a pricing model that charges for access to the network to one that subsidises access will mean the government won’t get a return on its investment. 
The NBN’s pricing model
The NBN currently charges internet service providers, such as Telstra, for access to the network. The internet service providers then sell the service on to consumers - businesses and households.
Our model tried to find an NBN access price that would generate the greatest benefit to consumers, internet service providers and the network. We set our model in the future - when the NBN has been fully constructed, the cost of construction has been paid, and the government is preparing to privatise it.
In order to maximise the shared economic benefit from the network, we found that the access price has to be less than zero - a subsidy. The network shouldn’t be charging internet service providers to access the network, it should instead pay them to connect. 
The internet market in Australia is dominated by four large internet service providers (Telstra, Optus, TPG and Vocus) so we can’t expect the subsidy to be fully passed on. But competition means consumer prices would drop, and the number of customers connecting to the network would increase by as much as 25%. The benefit to the economy as a whole would outweigh the costs, but the cost falls entirely on the NBN, which would have to run at a loss. 
The NBN as a public service
We know that regulators want the NBN to benefit the whole economy. This requires more customers to connect to the network. Our model shows that means prices need to be reduced. 
This will weigh on the plans to privatise the NBN. There was a similar issue over access to Telstra’s copper network, which was marked by repeated litigation and public wrangling between Telstra and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission over access pricing. 
Private companies won’t invest in infrastructure such as the NBN unless they can earn a profit in return. In fact, neither Telstra nor its competitors managed to build a fibre network themselves precisely because they couldn’t agree with the ACCC on how much profit they would be allowed to make from it. 
But the NBN is financed and currently owned by the government. This means it doesn’t necessarily have to run at a profit. 
Our model shows the NBN should be treated like other services the government provides - roads, education and doctors visits. All of these services can theoretically be provided by the private sector but are subsidised because the benefits of broad access outweigh the costs. 
Any guarantee of a profitable NBN also means that the benefit to consumers and the economy will be suboptimal. With the nbn Co. due to finish construction and be polished up ready for privatisation in less than four years, it’s time for our politicians and regulators to start transparent conversations with the public, investors and broadband businesses about how many consumers will be connected to Australia’s broadband future.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/troy-s-barry-392664" target="_blank">Troy S Barry</a> is PhD Candidate in Economics, University of Western Australia.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ishita-chatterjee-392690" target="_blank">Ishita Chatterjee</a> is Economics lecturer, University of Western Australia.
Both are authors for <a href="https://theconversation.com/au" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

The NBN needs subsidies if we all want to benefit from it

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Cost is a central issue in the ongoing debate about the best approach to building Australia’s National Broadband Network (NBN).
In 2013, the Coalition argued that Labor’s original all-fibre to the premises (FTTP) network could cost as much as A$94 billion. In the 2016 NBN Corporate plan the figure was revised down to A$74 billion to A$84 billion, while NBN Co’s multi technology mix (MTM), incorporating fibre to the node (FTTN) and upgraded hybrid fibre coax (HFC) was less costly, with a price tag of A$46 billion to A$56 billion.
Since the Coalition announced these numbers, Labor has said that, if elected, it will not go back to an all-FTTP network, but instead pursue a half-way option, in which the HFC component of the MTM is retained but FTTN, the slowest and most limited technology, is phased out.
It’s worth looking more closely at cost difference between FTTP and FTTN to see if the claimed A$84 billion to A$56 billion maximum cost comparison stacks up, and see where Labor’s new half-way solution sits.
<h2>Capital costs</h2>
The NBN 2016 Corporate Plan states that the average capital cost (capex) to connect a home or business to the NBN using FTTP is A$3,700. But the real cost for a FTTP connection is probably less than this.
The A$3,700 figure quoted by nbn co is based on old construction techniques that have been superseded in other parts of the world. The costs of rolling-out FTTP in New Zealand, for example, have been dropping steadily in recent years and will soon be A$2,900 per premises. For some reason, NBN Co has yet to acknowledge the lessons learned in New Zealand.
Let’s give NBN Co the benefit of the doubt and assume that the A$3,700 cost per premises for FTTP is correct. In comparison, the 2016 Corporate Plan states that the average capital cost for a FTTN connection is A$1,600, or A$2,100 less than FTTP.
For an upgraded hybrid-fibre-coax (HFC) connection the capital cost is A$1,100, or A$2,600 less. However, in light of recent revelations in a <a href="https://www.scribd.com/doc/291057120/Leaked-NBN-document">leaked document</a> from NBN Co published by Fairfax indicating that it may be necessary to overbuild Optus’ HFC network, the savings offered by HFC will not be as good.
Using these numbers, it is easy to compare the capital costs of different networks.
At the end of construction, the MTM network will provide FTTN to 4.5 million premises and HFC to 4 million premises. Labor’s new approach is to replace as many as possible of these 4.5 million FTTN connections by FTTP. The maximum additional capital cost to do this would be 4.5 million times A$2,100, or A$9.5 billion. This figure corresponds to A$790 per premises averaged across all 12 million premises in Australia.
An all-FTTP network could be achieved by also replacing the HFC connections with FTTP. The total additional capital cost of this hypothetical all-FTTP network would be A$19.9 billion, or A$1,658 per premises averaged across all premises.
<h2>Peak funding</h2>
Of course, it is necessary to also consider operational expenditure (opex) – the cost of running the network – and revenues from the network. These factors all contribute to the peak funding figures in the 2016 Corporate Plan.
Peak funding is the maximum cash outlay required before cash flow becomes positive. Peak funding is a useful measure of cost because it is a direct measure of the cash outlay required. But it is not necessarily a good measure of the cost of the network infrastructure or a good measure of the net financial cost/benefit to the Australian taxpayer.
Operational expenditure is a major issue for the MTM network because of factors including the need for new software management systems, the additional costs of maintaining the degrading copper wires in the FTTN network, and the cost of the electricity required to power the FTTN nodes located in suburban streets. Importantly, an FTTP network would incur none of these costs.
In fact, the leaked nbn co document mentioned earlier shows that the operational costs of FTTN network are 67% more than for FTTP, and the operational costs of HFC are 25% more. Over the lifetime of the network, this difference could amount to billions of dollars, greatly reducing the overall difference in costs between FTTN and FTTP.
Another factor that reduces the cost difference between the Coalition’s network and Labor’s new alternative is that a Labor’s FTTP/HFC network would be capable of generating higher revenues through the delivery of premium services that would not be achievable with a slower-speed FTTN network.
This is well documented by high-profile companies such as Ovum, which predicts FTTP services will drive the highest global growth rates for broadband revenues over the next five years, based on premium speeds of 100 Mbps and higher.
<h2>Timeframes</h2>
In light of all these factors, why is NBN Co’s cost estimate for a hypothetical FTTP network so large? The NBN Corporate plan provides no detailed information on its financial modelling, but it states that an all-FTTP network would take until 2026 to 2028 to complete.
If the timeframe was indeed as long as this, the revenue stream would be delayed. This could indeed lead to unrealistically large numbers for the peak funding cost of FTTP.
So where does the 2026 to 2028 timeframe come from? My guess is that NBN Co has simply extrapolated from the present rollout rate for FTTP, which has not increased much since 2013. One piece of supporting information comes from a Senate Estimates meeting, where NBN Co confirmed that its A$74-84 billion number was not for a “continued” FTTP network but for a “restart” from the current plan.
NBN Co waited until September this year to hire additional staff, increasing the number of employees from 3,400 to 4,500 to speed up the rollout of FTTN. If it had hired these additional staff in 2013 and focused on the FTTP rollout, the network could well have been completed by around 2020 or 2021.
Rod Tucker is laureate emeritus professor, University of Melbourne, and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rod-tucker-2000" target="_blank" style="line-height: 1.3em;">here</a>.
</body></html>

What will the NBN really cost?

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/69711/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Internet and broadband connectivity are the foundation of the networked economy.
But to ensure the benefits of the networked economy are evenly distributed, the Australian government needs to ensure access to the internet to encourage and support innovation. 
A recent report from SGS Economics and Planning highlights a widening gap between the economic workhorses of Sydney and Melbourne and regional Australia. 
All of the key sectors experiencing growth depend upon the networked economy. The emerging economic environment is leveraging the rapid rise in real-time connectivity between people, businesses, devices and systems. 
The result is the digitisation of many transactions and growing importance of data. The Productivity Commission’s draft report on data use and availability highlights the need for clear thinking to make this transformation fair for all stakeholders. 
When the telephone network was rolled out, this was enshrined in the Universal Service Obligation (USO), a framework to provide a basic level of connectivity. 
A key question is whether the USO principle of connectivity is sufficient for the emerging Australian networked economy. The answer is very clearly “yes”. But urgent attention is required to deliver fair, equitable and cost-effective access to broadband and internet connectivity to enable economic development in the cities and the regions.
To be digitally inclusive, Australia needs to overcome the digital divide. There is a significant divergence in the nature and availability of communication and internet services for regional Australia. 
nbn co’s broadband index clearly highlights the widening gap between metropolitan areas and regional areas not serviced by an NBN plan. 
The reaction from regional Australia has been very clear. A new Regional, Rural and Remote Communications Coalition between the Australian Customer Action Network (ACCAN), the National Farmers’ Federation, the Country Women’s Association of NSW, the Isolated Children’s Parents’ Association and AgForce Queensland is advocating for better access in five key areas. 
This sentiment is supported by Internet Australia’s submission to the Productivity Commission. The group, which includes the Melbourne Networked Society Institute, argues for important changes to ensure connectivity. 
So, what is being advocated? 
Universal service obligation
Australians need a new USO provision that incorporates both voice and data connectivity to ensure internet access is guaranteed to all citizens. 
This will address digital cohesion and ensure everyone can participate in the growing networked economy. nbn co should be allowed to provide retail services to customers where there is only one commercial provider to encourage competition and access. 
Service guarantees and reliability
As broadband deployment and uptake increase, service offerings need to provide better and more transparent guarantees to customers. The network should have better reliability measures and offer services with certain quality of customer experience. 
Countries such as the UK already provide a reporting framework to make ISPs accountable for their performance. This includes the speed of connection customers can expect to receive during peak hours. 
Such requirements support competition by focusing service providers on differentiation while lifting performance. This creates incentives for investing in resources to address emerging issues such as the effect of backhaul networks on broadband performance.
Mobile network access
Mobile network technology is critical for the economic activities of regional Australia. Ensuring that network coverage is expanded to everyone also promotes social cohesion. 
Regional Australia needs network coverage to take advantage of emerging opportunities from technologies such as the internet of things. This will enable significant productivity gains in industry sectors such as mining and resources, agriculture and food processing, as well as professional services. 
A government commitment to mobile network coverage is a key step to guarantee such investments and make it attractive for network operators to build the network. 
Fair and equitable broadband access
nbn co’s SkyMuster satellite services (the second satellite will be available in 2017) and its fixed wireless services will face significant demand, which presents issues for fair and equitable access. This will create difficulties in matching the needs of different stakeholders across regional Australia. 
On the one hand, new services such as internet access on (Qantas and Virgin) flights could potentially add congestion to satellite services, depending on the access and allocation of resources. 
Alternatively, new business opportunities enabled by the internet of things and the digital economy might demand low-latency connectivity, which a satellite service cannot provide in regional Australia. 
Therefore, to realise the potential gains, nbn co needs to support investment in development and adoption of new broadband technologies that can provide greater bandwidth, or lower latency, services cost-effectively to regional Australia.
Digital capacity building
Through the government’s digital transformation agenda, it is imperative to ensure regional Australia is empowered through programs focused on digital capacity building. 
This should include skills development, assistance to access new technologies and support for businesses and consumers. As the data becomes a key economic enabler, data skills and platforms for regional Australia will also become a major priority.
While the case for lifting the economic and social participation of regional Australia in the emerging networked economy is very strong, will the policy framework evolve to make it a priority? The bush is crying out for equitable access to broadband.
Thas Ampalavanapillai Nirmalathas is director - Melbourne Networked Society Institute, professor of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Co-Founder/Academic Director - Melbourne Accelerator Program, University of Melbourne and author for The Conversation.
He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/thas-ampalavanapillai-nirmalathas-824" target="_blank">here.</a>
</body></html>

Regional Australia is crying out for equitable access to broadband

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/81334/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has pledged to get tough on any Internet Service Providers that mislead consumers about National Broadband Network speeds.
But how do you know if you’re getting a good deal when you connect to the NBN? How do you know if you’ll be getting the high-speed connection you were promised?
NBN Co is building the infrastructure, with 5.7 million premises now able to connect to the network via fibre, hybrid cable, wireless or satellite. To make that connection though, you have to deal with one of almost 150 listed ISPs.
<h2>Customers are ‘confused’</h2>
The ACCC’s chairman Rod Sims says we should expect a healthy and competitive sector. But he also says many consumers are “confused about broadband speed advertising” and the industry has been “inconsistent in making clear, accurate information available”.
So it is crucial for the ACCC to ensure that companies do not mislead consumers about the speeds offered by their ISP.
The Australian market is different to that in the United Kingdom, where the regulator Ofcom actively provides accurate information to consumers to enable a comparison of services.
Australia takes a different approach, relying on protections available via consumer law, and encouraging industry self-regulation to provide the right information to the consumer.
The experience you get really depends on a range of factors relating to transmission quality, reflected as speed of connectivity and latency (delays) in exchanging information across the internet. Key factors include:
<ul>
<li>how you connect to the internet router in your house (such as by Wi-Fi or ethernet)</li>
<li>the transmission quality from home to the Point of Interconnect (where the ISP’s network connects to the NBN) </li>
<li>transmission quality within the ISP network </li>
<li>transmission quality of the content delivery network. </li>
</ul>
<h2>Measuring the speed of your internet connection</h2>
A basic speed test of any internet connection is a measure of the time it takes to transfer a fixed file from a server. The result is usually given in Mbps (Megabits per second).
Many ISPs, such as Telstra, Optus and iiNet, currently provide internet speed tests for their customers.
But speeds measured this way tend to reflect the connectivity from the ISP to the consumer. The speeds you experience in general use can be significantly lower than the “peak” speed advertised by the service provider. 
To get a better idea of the real speed of your internet connection you should use another speed testing service, in addition to the one recommended by your ISP. 
You should also repeat this measurement at various times of the day and keep detailed notes of any results. Some typical speed tests are:
<ul>
<li>Oz Broadband Speed Test</li>
<li>Ookla</li>
<li>Speed of Me</li>
<li>Speedtest.net</li>
<li>Testmy.net</li>
</ul>
Speeds can change over time for even the fastest NBN connection.
Currently most ISPs offer a higher speed for downloading and lower speed for uploading. As many users often download the same content, the network can be optimised to take advantage of this and offer higher speeds. 
But users also upload unique content, such as photos to social media accounts or files to cloud storage. This does not have the advantage of scale and thus speed of access could be lower. 
As cloud-based storage and content-delivery networks – such as Netflix, Foxtel and others – become more highly trafficked, our requirements are changing. Many users now prioritise more symmetrical internet connectivity, with similar download and upload speeds. 
<h2>How fast should the internet be in Australia?</h2>
In Australia, premises with fibre connections to the NBN can theoretically get a peak rate of 100Mbps. In fact, in Australia there are 5 tiers of NBN connections, varying between Tier 1 (12Mbps download/1Mbps upload) to Tier 5 (100Mbps download/40Mbps upload). 
But the measured speeds can often be slower than promised by your provider.
There are various reasons for this. It could be that there is a problem between the premises and the NBN network, or there could be delays or oversubscription within the ISP network. 
There can be congestion and delays in national and international networks due to inadequate investment by various stakeholders to keep the capacity of the network in scale with the increasing number of customers. 
Your experience can also vary across the day and from one service to another. As the number of users varies quite markedly over 24 hours, the state of the network (NBN, ISP network, Content Delivery Network) can change with various levels of congestion. 
This leads to different speeds of connectivity at different times when accessing different types of services. For example, web access might be slower given the location of a server, compared with an internet video streaming service that might be optimised to deliver the most popular content within the region. 
While many internet service providers advertise a typical speed, in Australia there is no expectation that they should indicate the variability (the range of minimum and maximum speeds).
<h2>When so slow is too slow</h2>
If you think your NBN connection is too slow and not what you were promised, you should raise the problem with your ISP. If they fail to resolve the issue you should report it to the ACCC.
To improve information about broadband speeds, the ACCC is currently running a A$7 million trial of NBN speed monitoring and it wants consumers to be part of it.
Australia could have anticipated these speed issues and established a broadband performance reporting framework as part of access to the NBN infrastructure by providers.
The Australian Communications Consumers Action Network (ACCAN) has been crying out for a scheme to monitor the performance of ISPs.
But this hasn’t happened yet. So for now it’s left to you as a consumer to monitor your NBN connection speeds, and report any ongoing problems to the ACCC which hopes to start publishing speed and performance data later this year.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/thas-ampalavanapillai-nirmalathas-824" target="_blank">Thas Ampalavanapillai Nirmalathas</a> is director - Melbourne Networked Society Institute, Professor of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Co-Founder/Academic Director - Melbourne Accelerator Program, University of Melbourne and author for <a href="https://theconversation.com/au" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

Australians left to monitor their own NBN broadband speeds

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/57114/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
A National Broadband Network (NBN) based on Fibre to the Premises (FTTP) was, and still is, the right answer for Australia’s broadband needs.
Compared to the original FTTP-based NBN, we are currently on the way to a much poorer performing broadband network with a mix of FTTP, fibre to the node (FTTN) and other technologies. It will entail increased long-term costs and be completed at about the same time as the original project would have been completed.
Around the world, the direction in which new builds of fixed broadband networks are headed has become clear. The world is increasingly moving towards FTTP. As a consequence, advances are being made in FTTP technology that make it cheaper and easier to deploy.
These developments, which have taken place in the last few years, have only reinforced the rationale for basing Australia’s NBN on FTTP.
<h2>Not too late to change</h2>
It is not too late to change the current direction of the NBN, but that change would need to be made in a controlled and managed way to ensure the project is not subject to another major disruption.
Why has it been so hard to get at the facts regarding the costs and timing of the FTTP-based NBN? The answer, as we all know, is that the NBN project has been from its inception a contentious political issue.
Initiated by the Labor party back in 2009, it was a good example of a government being courageous enough to initiate a large and complex project for the public good.
The original NBN was a visionary project and would have created a valuable asset for the Australian public. It didn’t take long, though, for the attacks on the project to start.
But the fact – confirmed this week - remains that over the past three years, Australia’s world ranking for average peak connection speeds dropped from 30th to 60th. We shouldn’t have been happy with being ranked 30th in the first place.
Yet the drivers of faster speeds and capacities for fixed broadband have not abated. Quite the contrary.
The latest Australian Bureau of Statistics data shows internet usage has been increasing over the years, from 191,839 terabytes downloaded in the month of December 2010 to 1,714,922 terabytes in December 2015. That’s nearly a ninefold increase in five years.
What’s more, Cisco is forecasting that global broadband speeds will nearly double between 2015 and 2020.
<h2>From megabits to gigabits</h2>
That’s why the debate in the United States and Asia is about gigabit per second speeds, not about whether 25MBps or 50Mbps is sufficient.
It is a bit surprising that we continue to hear the argument that nobody is buying a 1Gbps service today, so why build a network that can deliver that much speed? 25Mbps to 50Mbps is more than enough.
This has been a mantra for the Coalition, and it was supported in the view by the Vertigan committee, which was set up to review the NBN. In its final report, the committee assumed that the median household would require only 15Mb/s by 2023.
It seems especially curious that a government that styles itself as the innovation and infrastructure government should argue this. Because this argument betrays a complete lack of understanding of what the original FTTP NBN was all about.
It was about providing the vital infrastructure that Australia needs in order to remain competitive internationally in the 21st century.
It is arguable that, today, most homes and businesses can get by with speeds of up to 50Mbps. But already there are many home-based businesses that can’t and are demanding 100Mbps or more.
Gigabit services are just starting to emerge elsewhere in the world, so the applications that can take advantage of this type of speed are in their infancy. But we all know they are coming.
To spend billions of dollars on building a major piece of national infrastructure that just about meets demand today, but doesn’t allow for any significant growth over the next ten or 20 years is incredibly short-sighted.
It is such a pity that so much time and effort has been spent on trying to discredit and destroy the original FTTP-based NBN plan. Equally, it’s a pity the Coalition has put its faith in what has turned out to be a short-sighted, expensive and backward looking multi-technology mix (<a href="https://www.nbnco.com.au/blog/the-nbn-project/what-is-the-nbn-multi-technology-mix">MTM</a>) plan based on copper.
The nation is going to be bearing the consequences of those decisions for years to come – in higher costs and poorer performance in an area that is critical to its long-term future. Betting tens of billions of taxpayers dollars at this time on copper access technologies, as the Coalition has done, is a huge miscalculation.
The number of telcos still focussed on squeezing out the last bit of value from their old copper networks continues to decrease every year. Even the UK’s BT, which has been the poster child for FTTN, is now planning to increase its FTTP deployment, in part as a response to pressure from the UK regulator, Ofcom.
<h2>Come the election</h2>
No matter what the outcome of the upcoming election, the original vision of a broadband network built largely on a future-proof FTTP solution is now going to happen over a longer period and at a greater cost to taxpayers.
The Coalition is likely to continue with the FTTN and Hybrid fiber-coaxial (HFC) deployments and the peak funding is likely to be in the range of A$49 billion to A$56 billion. It will take a “heroic” effort, as NBN Co’s chairman Ziggy Switkowski has said, to have the network completed by the end of 2020.
Just when the FTTN equipment will need to be upgraded to provide higher speeds is an unknown but given what is happening overseas, it is unlikely to be very long. No one has yet made public the estimated costs of this upgrade.
Should the Labor party win the election, we can expect a managed transition from FTTN to FTTP, increasing the number of premises served by FTTP by about two million.
Given what we now know about the deployment costs of FTTP versus FTTN, I would not expect this transition to FTTP to make a big difference to deployment costs or timing of completing the NBN. It will result, however, in a network that is a step closer to the desired end state.
While it is impossible to turn back the clock on the MTM, it is still possible to make changes to the current direction, without introducing another major disruption. Changes that will get us closer to building the right network for the long term.
It is becoming increasingly obvious, especially to customers, that an NBN based on FTTP is a much better network than an MTM-based NBN from every angle – speed and capacity delivery, maintenance costs, reliability, longevity and upgrade costs.
An FTTP network would be a much more valuable public asset and could generate greater cash flows for the government due to lower maintenance, higher revenues and almost no upgrade costs. And it would be vastly superior in driving growth through the wider economy.
So it is a great pity that before making the shift to the MTM, the Coalition did not heed the words re-quoted by the then independent MP for New England, Tony Windsor: “Do it right, do it once, do it with fibre.”
Mike Quigley is adjunct professor in the School of Computing and Communications, University of Technology Sydney and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/mike-quigley-276502" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

The need for speed: there’s still time to fix Australia’s NBN

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/74611/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">GUEST OBSERVER
The latest complaints about the National Broadband Network (NBN), including concerns about slow download speeds and frequent dropouts, show that all is not well with the NBN.
A recent report by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) also flags Australia’s broadband speeds as among the worst in the OECD, beating only Mexico, Chile and Greece in terms of internet speed and penetration.
This raises questions on NBN’s continued use of fibre to the node (FTTN) over a large proportion of the total NBN footprint.
When the coalition government came to power in 2013, it instructed a new NBN management team to stop rolling out fibre to the premises (FTTP) and instead build a multi-technology-mix (MTM) version of the NBN.
But, as predicted, it is becoming clear that the FTTN component of the network is inadequate for Australia’s future needs.
Who’s to blame?
NBN chief executive Bill Morrow has deflected some of the blame for low speeds away from NBN and onto retailers, suggesting that their networks might not be up to the task.
He has correctly pointed that part of the problem is that many customers are opting for cheaper, slower services rather than the more costly faster ones.
In defence of its network, NBN points out that existing slow-speed ADSL services dominate the speed data quoted in the OECD report. It suggests that rolling out the NBN out across the entire country will help to improve Australia’s broadband ranking.
But this argument ignores any future developments in other OECD countries. There are numerous broadband initiatives in the OECD, and many of these initiatives use FTTP networks, which offer much higher speeds than FTTN.
Faster speeds overseas
Worldwide, the proportion of fixed broadband services using FTTP has increased by 77% in the past year and those using copper, such as FTTN, have decreased by 11.6%.
While the OECD and the rest of the world are moving forward with ramped-up FTTP deployments, Australia is moving backwards with its continuing rollout of FTTN.
New Zealand, for example, currently sits three places ahead of Australia in the OECD report. But in New Zealand, the telco and internet provider Chorus is installing FTTP around the country.
It announced in September last year gigabit-per-second services across its fibre footprint, starting at a wholesale price of NZ$60 (A$55) per month. This follows the announcement of gigabit services in Dunedin in 2015.
In Spain, more than one-third of customers have access to FTTP and this fraction is growing. A similar surge in FTTP connections is taking place in France.
In the United States, fibre rollouts are expanding, and countries such as Sweden and Finland already have a large penetration of fibre in their networks. Many countries in Southeast Asia either have rolled out, or are rolling out, high-speed FTTP networks.
One of the reasons why FTTP deployments are expanding worldwide is that newer construction techniques and cabling technologies are driving down the cost of FTTP.
Enter Fibre to the Curb (FTTC)
NBN Co announced last September that it will roll out Fibre to the Curb (FTTC) to around 700,000 premises originally slated to use an upgraded version of the Optus HFC network.
FTTC is a relatively new technology in which fibres link the local telephone exchange to small existing pits in the street, outside a home or business. FTTC potentially provides speeds in excess of 500 Megabits per second.
Up to the pit, FTTC is essentially the same as a FTTP. The key difference is that in FTTC, a small waterproof electronic box in the pit connects the fibre to the existing copper wires that run into the home.
But FTTC is largely untested in large deployments such as Australia’s NBN. So a rollout of FTTC will carry a degree of technological risk.
NBN says it will cost about A$2,800 to roll out FTTC to each premises, which is only $630 more than FTTN. Like FTTP, the cost of rolling out FTTC will decrease over time using newer construction techniques. FTTC and FTTP are both becoming more cost competitive.
With speeds as much as ten times higher than FTTN, FTTC has the potential to improve Australia’s rankings in broadband speeds and accelerate Australia’s transition into the digital economy. These were the original objectives of the NBN.
In a blog post, NBN’s chief network engineering officer, Peter Ryan, says that FTTC and FTTN are closely related, and uses this premise to paint a picture of how easy it will be to upgrade from FTTN to FTTC.
But FTTC has a natural relationship to FTTP and not to FTTN. In FTTN, fibres feed a cabinet on the side of a road that is connected to nearby 240-volt power lines. The power supplies backup batteries and banks of electronics that connect to the premises via the existing copper wires.
In FTTC (and FTTP, for that matter) the expensive powered node is not needed, meaning that the cabinets in the street could have to be trashed when FTTN is upgraded.
In an attempt to bolster its arguments for FTTN, NBN has asserted that those cabinets are “an extremely valuable asset … which can be used for a range of purposes”. But it is very hard to imagine what these purposes could be.
Taking stock
Despite the excitement over FTTC, it’s getting harder to cancel contracts for FTTN and move to a more sensible strategy.
Ryan points out it’s not possible to “tear up 18 months” of FTTN planning as that would only delay some connections for two to three years.
Rod Tucker is a Laureate Emeritus Professor at the University of Melbourne, in the University of Melbourne’s Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rod-tucker-2000" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Australians could get faster broadband with more kerbside NBN connections: Rod Tucker

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/57114/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
And there has not been a delay of the NBN… Because of Malcolm Turnbull’s management of the NBN, it will all be finished by 2020, not 2024 as Labor was promising, with speeds that people want and need. – Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science Christopher Pyne, speaking on Q&amp;A, May 23, 2016.
The election campaign has brought national broadband network policy back into the spotlight, particularly as the incumbent prime minister was responsible for the National Broadband Network (NBN) in his previous role as communications minister.
Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science Christopher Pyne told Q&amp;A there has not been a delay of the NBN. Is that right?
<h2>2013: the year of election promises and reviews</h2>
The Conversation contacted a spokesperson for Christopher Pyne seeking comment and sources to support his statement, but did not hear back before deadline.
Nevertheless, most of the documents on the recent history of the NBN can be found online.
As acknowledged in this Coalition document, the previous Labor government promised to deliver an NBN by a deadline of 2021 (not 2024 as Pyne stated on Q&amp;A).
Prior to the 2013 federal election, the nbn co under the then-Labor government said it planned to deliver a predominantly fibre to the premises (FTTP) network by 2021.
But there were delays in negotiating with Telstra for access to ducts and pits, the discovery of asbestos in some of Telstra’s network, and other teething problems.
In their 2013 pre-election promises, the Coalition said its goal was to provide everyone in the nation with access to broadband with download data rates of between 25 and 100 megabits per second by the year 2016. They also planned to deliver between 50 and 100 megabits per second by the end of 2019 to 90 percent of the fixed line footprint. That election commitment, the Coalition said, “assumes the current NBN Co satellite and fixed wireless networks are deployed on schedule.”
But after the election, the Coalition’s dropped its promise to deliver 25 to 100 megabits per second to everyone in the nation by 2016.
Then communications minister Malcolm Turnbull said that a December 2013 Strategic Review of the NBN commissioned by the new government had found that the NBN is in a fundamentally worse position than the Labor Government at any time disclosed to Parliament or the Australian public.
The strategic review also said that Labor’s NBN would not have been completed until 2024.
<h2>2015: New plans</h2>
In 2015, the nbn co issued its 2016 corporate plan.
In this document, the company now estimated that Labor’s plan for an all-FTTP fixed line rollout could be completed by 2026 but possibly as late as 2028.
However, this revised estimate has been challenged by former nbn co CEO, Mike Quigley, who said in a 2015 article that
For that to be correct, one has to assume that for the next 13 years, nbn co will roll out just 12,300 premises per week on average. Fewer premises than it regularly passes each week today… It is almost certainly true that an all-FTTP NBN would take longer to complete than its inferior MTM counterpart [the Multi-Technology Mix proposed by the Coalition]. But it would likely only be longer by one to three years.
In late 2015, an nbn co spokesman was reported as saying that the company had deliberately chosen to take a more gradual approach to [fibre to the node or FTTN] activations than was originally flagged.
<h2>The 2016 leaks</h2>
Early in 2016, internal nbn co documents were leaked to the media.
These and other leaked documents – which were at the centre of a recent Australian Federal Police raid on a Labor offices and a staffer’s home in an effort to find the leaker – were reported as showing bottlenecks and delays in the fibre to the node (FTTN) and hybrid fibre coax (HFC) components of the NBN rollout.
In response, nbn co said: NBN has met or exceeded every key target for six quarters in a row.
Current nbn co chair Ziggy Switkowski wrote on May 28, 2016 that "The company will meet its targets for the ninth quarter in a row… There are no “cost blowouts” or “rollout delays” to the publicly released plans."
It’s beyond the scope of FactCheck to say with any certainty whether the leaked documents accurately reflect the full picture.
It’s important to note that as any technical and other teething problems are resolved, nbn co should be able to ramp up the roll-out rate to improve its chances of meeting a 2020 completion project date.
Internet access speeds around the world are growing rapidly, and this growth is expected to continue for the foreseeable future. Australia’s internet speeds are slow compared to other developed countries.
Verdict
Christopher Pyne’s assertion that there have been “no delays” in the implementation of the NBN is inaccurate. Some delays occurred under the Labor government, and the early stages of the FTTN rollout under the current government have been slower than the Coalition originally envisaged.
Leaked documents and reported statements by an nbn co spokesperson also suggest delays occurred under the Coalition government. However, nbn co rejects that, saying it has met or exceeded its key targets.
Labor promised a completion date of 2021, not 2024 as Pyne said. It was the December 2013 Strategic Review of the NBN commissioned by the Coalition government that said Labor’s NBN would not have been completed until 2024. – Rod Tucker
REVIEW
This article is factual and correct. As stated in the article, delays in the nbn co’s roll out is also self evident by comparing the original deployment date promises made before the 2013 federal election with the the revised schedule outlined in the December 2013 strategic review of the NBN, initiated by the Coalition government. – Thas Ampalavanapillai Nirmalathas
Rod Tucker is laureate Emeritus Professor, University of Melbourne and author for The Conversation. He con be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rod-tucker-2000" target="_blank">here</a>.
 
 
</body></html>

Election FactCheck Q&A: has the NBN been delayed?

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/81360/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Rod Sims, Chairman of the Australian Competition &amp; Consumers Commission (ACCC) has signalled that it is going to take a tougher stance against internet service providers like Telstra, Optus and Vocus about misleading consumers about NBN broadband speeds.
In particular, Sims has said that Telstra’s continued use of terms like “Very Fast” and “Super Fast” to describe theoretical, but often unobtainable, broadband speeds need to stop. 
The ACCC has indicated that it is likely to bring court cases before the end of the year if these practices don’t stop.
In a speech at the Unwired Revolution Conference, the ACCC talked of the findings of a review into the Australian communications sector. In particular, he drew attention to the fact that the Australian public were opting for slower speeds on the NBN mainly because ISPs were unwilling to sell faster speeds because of the high costs of the connections (CVC) provided by NBN Co. 
The pricing of wholesale connections provided by NBN Co are set in order for them to recoup money that has been invested, in large part by the Australian federal government, and so unless NBN Co directed to do something different by the government, the situation is unlikely to change. 
Part of the problem is the lack of transparency with regard to the extent of the problem of NBN customers not getting what they thought they had paid for. Many properties that are being supplied with a Fibre to the Node (FTTN) connection may never be able to get the fastest connection plan of 100 Mbps because they are too far from the node. As the chart below shows, speeds of 100 Mbps can only be achieved if the house is within 500 meters of the node.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/07/21/file-20170720-23980-fdpmr7.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/07/21/file-20170720-23980-fdpmr7.png" alt="">
<h4>
FTTN speed slows with distance from the node. NBN MTM
</h4>
A map of properties in Australia highlights that 2 houses on opposite sides of a road can have very different maximum speeds because of the nodes they are connected to. Telstra has previously admitted that some customers were sold plans for speeds they would never be able to attain at their premises.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/07/21/file-20170720-23983-c8g9d0.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<h4><img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/07/21/file-20170720-23983-c8g9d0.png" alt=""></h4>
<h4>
NBN street map showing distance from node and calculated speed. NBN MTM
</h4>
In addition to this, there are the number of connections to that node and in particular the capacity of the ISP to handle peak demand by having spare CVC capacity. There is also other factors that would affect a property’s connection including the state of the copper wiring between the node and the house.
What the ACCC wants ISPs to do is to tell customers not only what the theoretical maximum speed may be for their property using a given technology, but also what the speeds may drop to during peak demand. 
NBN Co has this data and could make it public, but it won’t because it claims that it is the responsibility of the ISPs to tell their own customers. Shadow communications minister Michelle Rowland has filed a freedom of information request for the NBN data of theoretical speeds for each property.
The ACCC is recruiting volunteers to install special hardware and software to monitor speeds and quality of internet connections at their homes. The results of a pilot trial reported in 2015 showed that the problems with peak demand and variability of internet speeds existed on pre-NBN internet services like Telstra’s HFC cable service. As the figure below highlights, even fibre to the premises (FTTP) connections from one provider varied dramatically, dropping significantly every evening.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/07/21/file-20170720-23980-dpxp0o.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<h4><img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/07/21/file-20170720-23980-dpxp0o.png" alt=""></h4>
<h4>
Average download speed of FTTP connections. ACCC
</h4>
Whilst the data that the ACCC is collecting will be useful and will ultimately assist in highlighting ISPs that are not providing promised services, it would be far better if NBN Co provided this data publicly in the first place. 
If the politics and economics of the NBN means that consumers are going to mostly stick to slower speed plans, many of the proposed economic and social outcomes that were originally envisioned will not be realised. Whilst it may represent a slightly better situation for some people who currently have a poor connection via ADSL, it is hard to justify the AUD 20.3 billion that has been invested by the Australian government in the network so far.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/david-glance-148" target="_blank">David Glance</a> is director of UWA Centre for Software Practice, University of Western Australia and author for <a href="https://theconversation.com/au" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

Nbn

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Nbn