Fibre to the Distribution Point (FTTdp) has received relatively little national attention to date as a serious technology option for the Australian NBN. In recent months there has been further publication of difficulties of FTTP (Fibre to the Premises) connections, with fibre cabling failure rates of the order of 30%. These difficulties add to a long list of known challenges for FTTP in the national brown-field context. The FTTN (Fibre to the Node) approach faces a potentially equal number of different challenges, not the least of which is the very real prospect that FTTN will not deliver a significant enough increase in communication network capacity to satisfy connectivity increases. The reality is that FTTN is incapable of meeting the needs of high demand customers now, and the distribution of customer demand requirements is evolving rapidly.

The seminar considers the FTTdp option, where large savings in network installation cost and time are expected by avoiding individual deployment of fibre lead-in for the vast majority of customers. The key deployment and network capability differences between the three options of FTTP, FTTdp, and FTTN are outlined. This effectively presents a crude cost-benefit comparison, and suggests that a technology between the extremes of FTTP and FTTN must be fully considered for the nation to expect to maximise the cost-benefit relationship. FTTdp, with fibre to the street lead-in pit, provides the natural technology candidate for Australia to meet what may be somewhat unique deployment challenges.

FTTdp provides a significantly deeper fibre penetration compared to FTTN. Any future network upgrade involves limited (or nil) wide-scale civil works components. A fibre-on-demand model, paid for by consumers, and installed by independent contractors, provides a manageable and flexible upgrade path. The core network provider (NBN Co), is able to focus on maintenance and upgrade of active network elements to ensure sufficient network capacity continues to exist once the FTTdp network construction phase is completed.

While FTTdp is reliant upon the use of copper lead-in pairs, the very short length of copper involved, coupled with the relative lack of shared lead-in, contributing to cross talk, allows for extremely high data throughput. In this sense, FTTdp provides much of the network capability of FTTP, for potentially similar initial outlay to FTTN. The total lifetime cost of FTTdp is possibly significantly better than that of an initial FTTN build. FTTdp must not be dismissed prematurely due to prejudice obtained by observing other national network deployments globally, or by rigid adherence to a FTTN versus FTTP dichotomy.

AFTER the conclusion of Craig's and Kelvin's presentation at 1.30pm, there will be an opportunity for you to network with your industry colleagues over tea and coffee until 2.00pm.