On 11-Feb-13 13:13, Jay Ashworth wrote: > From: "Stephen Sprunk" <step...@sprunk.org> >> Sure, almost nobody asks for dark fiber today because they know it costs >> several orders of magnitude more than a T1 or whatever. However, if the >> price for dark fiber were the same (or lower), latent demand would >> materialize. Why would I pay through the nose for a T1 when I can light the >> fiber myself with 10GE for $20/mo? > This was part of my argument, yes. > h > And it even occurred to me over the weekend that this will reduce the > engineering charges to get me onto the already-built backbone loops: > > They don't need to build to my *CO*, just to a splice at the edge of my city, > and *I* can backhaul the uplinks in myself.
Good point. I missed that since I was applying the same general model to the (suburban) municipality where I live, which already has no shortage of fiber _to the CO_. In the rural case originally described, reducing the "middle mile" problem helps too. >> What you're missing is that in this model, _every_ connection is L1 from the >> fiber owner's perspective. Let service providers worry about L2 and above. > In fairness to Scott, he didn't *miss* it, he simply has his "feasible" > slider set to a different place than I/we do. I disagree; he is obsessing over how to reduce the amount of fiber, which is a tiny fraction of the total cost, and that leads him to invite all sorts of L2 problems into the picture that, for a purely L1 provider, simply would not apply. >> Why would the ISP "have to build and maintain a lot of >> infrastructure"? All they need is a fiber-capable Ethernet switch in a colo >> to turn up their first customer. That's a lot simpler than trying to turn up >> their first customer via an ILEC's DSLAM, for instance. > Well, that means *they have to build out in my city*; I can't aggregate L1 > and backhaul it to them. As the saying goes, you "must be present to win." If there's _any_ fiber available to the CO, there shouldn't be much trouble getting an ISP to show up when they have ridiculously cheap access to your customer base. >> There's nothing wrong with the muni operating a L2 (or even L3) carrier of >> last resort, just to ensure that _some_ useful service is available to >> residents. However, it should (a) be priced high enough to attract >> competitors and (b) be a distinct entity, treated by the fiber arm as no >> different from any other L1 customer. None of the shenanigans like the ILECs >> play, where the wholesale rate to competitors is higher than the retail rate >> for the ILEC's own service. > That's true at L3, but at L2, my goal is to encourage *much smaller* ISPs > (like the one I used to engineer in 1996, Centurion Technologies; we were > profitable with about 400 dialup customers into a 40 and a 20 modem dialup > bank backhauled by 512kb/s *and I would come to your house and make it work > if I had to*. :-). > > By having the city run L2 over our L1, we can accomplish that; unlike L3, I > don't believe it actually needs to be a separate company; I expect most ISP > business to be at L2; L1 is mostly an accomodation to potential larger ISPs > who want to do it all themselves. > > Or FiOS. :-) We have a philosophical disagreement here. I fully support public ownership of public ownership of "natural" monopolies, and the fiber plant itself (L1) certainly qualifies. However, running L2 (or L3) over that fiber is _not_ a natural monopoly, so I do _not_ support public ownership. At most, I could stomach a "provider of last resort" to guarantee resident access to useful services, in the IMHO unlikely event that only one (or zero) private players showed up, or a compelling need to provide some residents (eg. the elderly or indigent, schools, other public agencies, etc.) with below-cost services. >> (Note that inside wiring is a completely separate issue, and carriers _will_ >> have to train techs on how to do that since few are familiar with fiber, but >> that is an optional service they can charge extra for. The L1 provider's >> responsibility ends at the NIU on an outside wall, same as an ILEC's, so >> it's not their problem in the first place.) > The L2 might end there, too, if I decide on outside ONTs, rather than an > optical jackblock inside. I think the ILECs got this part right: provide a passive NIU on the outside wall, which forms a natural demarc that the fiber owner can test to. If an L2 operator has active equipment, put it inside--and it would be part of the customer-purchased (or -leased) equipment when they turn up service. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
