Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Telstra Breakup (Was Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions)
From: Leo Bicknell <bicknell () ufp org>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 07:22:41 -0800

In a message written on Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 08:56:10AM -0500, William Allen Simpson wrote:
I've read through the entire thread thus far, and there are several very
interesting points.  I'd like to know more about the Australian experiment?

For those not watching the news:

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/86782/20101130/telstra-nbn-deal-set-to-reshape-australia-s-telecommunication-industry.htm
http://www.theage.com.au/national/parliament-approves-telstra-split-20101129-18dy0.html

The summary is that Australian Parliament just voted to break up
Telstra (which is partially state owned) into two parts.  At a high
level it is supposed to be a split between wholesale (wires in the
ground) and retain (services on top).  The idea is to enable better
retail competition.

I've not seen any reporting with enough details to figure out yet
exactly how this is going to work, and thus if this has a chance
of working.

Still, it makes sense.  Infrastructure in the ground is expensive,
and should be done once.  I have one power feed to my house, one
water line, one telephone line, one cable TV line.  They are all
provided by or regulated by the government.  The Internet will get
to the same point one day, fiber to the home will be standard and
able to offer all the services a residential user needs.  I think
this is why the telcos and cable cos fight municipal broadband
networks so strongly, they know they cannot compete (as well) in
that market.

Anyway, I think we should all keep an eye on Australia.

-- 
       Leo Bicknell - bicknell () ufp org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/

Attachment: _bin
Description:


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]