Given this premise (that it is too expensive to provide access to rural areas), 
can you explain why nearly 100% of North Dakota is serviced by FTTH solutions. 
The exceptions being the areas still run by the traditional LECs?

I’m not to sure this should be an urban/rural debate. 

> On Feb 28, 2022, at 2:53 PM, Josh Luthman <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
> 
> Ryan,
> 
> This discussion was in regards to urban areas.
> 
> Regarding your example, though, I expect you're in a hard to reach rural area 
> based on your description.  It looks like there are absolutely a massive 
> amount of trees, making it hard for fixed wireless.  Since it sounds like 
> your only option, which is better than no option at all, that's probably why 
> no wired solution has decided to build service there.  At $50k/mile being a 
> pretty modest cost, at $200/mo does that seem like a viable business plan to 
> you?
> 
> On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 11:25 PM Ryan Rawdon <r...@u13.net 
> <mailto:r...@u13.net>> wrote:
> 
>> On Feb 16, 2022, at 4:46 PM, Michael Thomas <m...@mtcc.com 
>> <mailto:m...@mtcc.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 2/16/22 1:36 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>> What is the embarrassment?
>> That in the tech center of the world that we're so embarrassingly behind the 
>> times with broadband. I'm going to get fiber in the rural Sierra Nevada 
>> before Silicon Valley. In fact, I already have it, they just haven't 
>> installed the NID. 
>> 
>> Mike
>> 
>> 
>> 
> I will provide another specific example albeit not San Jose but similar 
> enough.  I am in  Loudoun County less than 25 minutes from Ashburn, VA.    My 
> best option is fixed wireless from All Points Broadband (hi Tim) which is 
> 15/3mbit/s costing $199/mo (they have cheaper, slower tiers available).  
> 
> Verizon FiOS serves a dense developer-built community less than 1 mile down 
> the street from me, but everyone else outside of the towns and 
> developer-built communities have almost zero options.
> 
> Similar to the San Jose examples, we are near some of the most dense 
> connectivity in the world.  Travel 20-30 minutes in certain directions from 
> Ashburn and you’re quickly seeing farms and limited connectivity.
> 
> Ryan
>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 4:28 PM Michael Thomas <m...@mtcc.com 
>>> <mailto:m...@mtcc.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 2/16/22 1:13 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>>> I'll once again please ask for specific examples as I continue to see the 
>>>> generic "it isn't in some parts of San Jose".
>>>> 
>>>> On the note of the generic area of San Jose, I'm all but certain this has 
>>>> a lot to do with California and its extraordinarily complicated and near 
>>>> impossible accessibility to obtain CLEC status.  This makes competition 
>>>> pretty much impossible and makes the costs of operating one 
>>>> extraordinarily high.  I'm obviously not going to be one that claims that 
>>>> government is good or bad, just pointing out a certain correlation which 
>>>> could potentially be causation.
>>> Sonic has been installing fiber in San Francisco and other areas, but they 
>>> are really small. Comcast can't be bothered that I've ever heard. The only 
>>> other real alternative is things like Monkeybrains which is a WISP. It's 
>>> really an embarrassment. 
>>> 
>>> Mike
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 12:52 PM Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com 
>>>> <mailto:o...@delong.com>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Feb 11, 2022, at 13:14 , Josh Luthman <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com 
>>>>> <mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Because literally every case I've seen along these lines is someone 
>>>>> complaining about the coax connection is "only 100 meg when I pay for 200 
>>>>> meg".  Comcast was the most hated company and yet they factually had 
>>>>> better speeds (possibly in part to their subjectively terrible customer 
>>>>> service) for years.
>>>>> 
>>>>> >An apartment building could have cheap 1G fiber and the houses across 
>>>>> >the street have no option but slow DSL.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Where is this example?  Or is this strictly hypothetical?
>>>> 
>>>> There are literally dozens (if not thousands) of such examples in silicon 
>>>> valley alone.
>>>> 
>>>>> I am not seeing any examples, anywhere, with accurate data, where it's 
>>>>> what most consider to be in town/urban and poor speeds.  The only one 
>>>>> that was close was Jared and I'm pretty sure when I saw the map I 
>>>>> wouldn't consider that in town (could be wrong) but again, there's gig 
>>>>> fiber there now.  I don't remember if he actually got his CLEC, or why 
>>>>> that matters, but there's fiber there now.
>>>> 
>>>> Pretty sure you would have a hard time calling San Jose “not in town”. 
>>>> It’s literally #11 in the largest 200 cities in the US with a population 
>>>> of 1,003,120 (954,940 in the 2010 census) and a population density of 
>>>> 5,642 people/sq. mile (compare to #4 Houston, TX at 3,632/Sq. Mi.).
>>>> 
>>>> Similar conditions exist in parts of Los Angeles, #2 on the same list at 
>>>> 3,985,516 (3,795,512 in 2010 census) and 8,499/Sq. Mi.
>>>> 
>>>> I speak of California because it’s where I have the most information. I’m 
>>>> sure this situation exists in other states as well, but I don’t have 
>>>> actual data.
>>>> 
>>>> The simple reality is that there are three sets of incentives that 
>>>> utilities tend to chase and neither of them provides for the mezzo-urban 
>>>> and sub-urban parts of America…
>>>>    1.      USF — Mostly supports rural deployments.
>>>>    2.      Extreme High Density — High-Rise apartments in dense arrays, 
>>>> Not areas of town houses, smaller apartment complexes, or single family 
>>>> dwellings.
>>>>    3.      Neighborhoods full of McMansions — Mostly built very recently 
>>>> and where the developers would literally pay the utilities to pre-deploy 
>>>> in order to boost sales prices.
>>>> 
>>>> Outside of those incentives, there’s very little actual deployment of 
>>>> broadband improvements, leaving vast quantities of average Americans 
>>>> underserved.
>>>> 
>>>> Owen
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 4:05 PM Brandon Svec via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org 
>>>>> <mailto:nanog@nanog.org>> wrote:
>>>>> What is the point of these anecdotes? Surely anyone on this list with 
>>>>> even a passing knowledge of the broadband landscape in the United States 
>>>>> knows how hit or miss it can be.  An apartment building could have cheap 
>>>>> 1G fiber and the houses across the street have no option but slow DSL.  
>>>>> Houses could have reliable high speed cable internet, but the office park 
>>>>> across the field has no such choice because the buildout cost is 
>>>>> prohibitively high to get fiber, etc.
>>>>> 
>>>>> There are plenty of places with only one or two choices of provider too.  
>>>>> Of course, this is literally changing by the minute as new services are 
>>>>> continually being added and upgraded.
>>>>> Brandon Svec 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 12:36 PM Josh Luthman 
>>>>> <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com <mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
>>>>> OK the one example you provided has gigabit fiber though.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 8:41 AM Tom Beecher <beec...@beecher.cc 
>>>>> <mailto:beec...@beecher.cc>> wrote:
>>>>> Can you provide examples?
>>>>> 
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twe6uTwOyJo&ab_channel=NANOG 
>>>>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twe6uTwOyJo&ab_channel=NANOG>
>>>>> 
>>>>> Our good friend Jared could only get 1.5M DSL living just outside Ann 
>>>>> Arbor, MI, so he had to start his own CLEC. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I have friends in significantly more rural areas than he lives in ( 
>>>>> Niagara and Orleans county NYS , between Niagara Falls and Rochester ) 
>>>>> who have the same 400Mb package from Spectrum that I do, living in the 
>>>>> City of Niagara Falls. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> This is not to say that rural America is a mecca of connectivity; there 
>>>>> is a long way to go all the way around regardless. But it is a direct 
>>>>> example as you asked for. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 3:57 PM Josh Luthman <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com 
>>>>> <mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
>>>>> >There are plenty of urban and suburban areas in America that are far 
>>>>> >worse off from a broadband perspective than “rural America”.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Can you provide examples?
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 3:51 PM Owen DeLong via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org 
>>>>> <mailto:nanog@nanog.org>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> > On Jun 2, 2021, at 02:10 , Mark Tinka <mark@tinka.africa 
>>>>> > <mailto:mark@tinka.africa>> wrote:
>>>>> > 
>>>>> > 
>>>>> > 
>>>>> > On 6/2/21 11:04, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>>>> > 
>>>>> >> I disagree… If it could be forced into a standardized format using a 
>>>>> >> standardized approach to data acquisition and reliable comparable 
>>>>> >> results across providers, it could be a very useful adjunct to real 
>>>>> >> competition.
>>>>> > 
>>>>> > If we can't even agree on what "minimum speed for U.S. broadband 
>>>>> > connections" actually means, fat chance having a "nutritional facts" at 
>>>>> > the back of the "Internet in a tea cup" dropped off at your door step.
>>>>> > 
>>>>> > I'm not saying it's not useful, I'm just saying that easily goes down 
>>>>> > the "what color should we use for the bike shed" territory, while 
>>>>> > people in rural America still have no or poor Internet access.
>>>>> > 
>>>>> > Mark.
>>>>> 
>>>>> ROFLMAO…
>>>>> 
>>>>> People in Rural America seem to be doing just fine. Most of the ones I 
>>>>> know at least have GPON or better.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Meanwhile, here in San Jose, a city that bills itself as “The Capital of 
>>>>> Silicon Valley”, the best I can get is Comcast (which does finally 
>>>>> purport to be Gig down), but rarely delivers that.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Yes, anything involving the federal government will get the full bike 
>>>>> shed treatment no matter what we do.
>>>>> 
>>>>> There are plenty of urban and suburban areas in America that are far 
>>>>> worse off from a broadband perspective than “rural America”.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Owen
>>>>> 
>>>> 
> 

Reply via email to