Subject: Re: Muni Fiber and Politics Date: Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 06:56:40PM -0500 Quoting Leo Bicknell (bickn...@ufp.org): > > On Jul 30, 2014, at 1:47 AM, Mark Tinka <mark.ti...@seacom.mu> wrote: > > > Symmetrical would be tough to do unless you're doing Active- > > E. > > I'm an outlier in my thinking, but I believe the best world would be > where the muni offered L1 fiber, and leased access to it on a > non-discrimatory basis. That would necessitate an Active-E solution > since L1 would not have things like GPON splitters in it, but it > enables things like buying a dark fiber pair from your home to > your business, and lighting it with your own optics. That to me is > a huge win. > > It also means future upgrades are unencumbered. Want to run 10GE? > 100GE? 50x100GE WDM? Please do. You leased a dark fiber. If the > muni has "gear" (even just splitters) in the path they will gatekeeper > upgrades. > > It may be a smidge more expensive up front, but in the long run I > think it will be cheaper, more reliable, and most importantly hugely > more flexible.
GPON is basically unheard of in Sweden. All "fiber" access is either copper to a switch in the basement/similar in multi-tenant houses or direct pairs to CO. Some middle solutions exist where there's a rugged switch in a pole or roadside cabinet, but they are exceptions. I think the Amsterdam buildout is similar. It is better, both for the customer and the provider. The only "loser" is a potential third party acting as comms provider on L1, possibly L2. -- Måns Nilsson primary/secondary/besserwisser/machina MN-1334-RIPE +46 705 989668 DON'T go!! I'm not HOWARD COSELL!! I know POLISH JOKES ... WAIT!! Don't go!! I AM Howard Cosell! ... And I DON'T know Polish jokes!!
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
