On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 8:04 PM, Jacob Broussard
wrote:
> Who knows what technology will be like in 5-10 years? That's the whole
> point of what he was trying to say. Maybe wireless carriers will use
> visible wavelength lasers to recievers on top of customer's houses for all
> we know. 10 year
Who knows what technology will be like in 5-10 years? That's the whole
point of what he was trying to say. Maybe wireless carriers will use
visible wavelength lasers to recievers on top of customer's houses for all
we know. 10 years is a LONG time for tech, and anything can happen.
On Mar 25, 20
- Original Message -
> From: "Ray Soucy"
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> > > It'll never be done though. Too much to lose by creating a
> > > topology which allows you to unbundle the tail.
> >
> > A municipality hasn't much to lose; they can declare a monopoly.
True, but it's the one monopoly where you get a vote.
I'm not sure it's fair to call a municipality a monopoly ... but that's
just me.
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Nick Hilliard"
>
> > > wiring center you enable all technologies.
- Original Message -
> From: "JC Dill"
> On 25/03/12 8:56 AM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> > In a message written on Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 11:47:58AM -0400, Jay
> > Ashworth wrote:
> >> Well, for my part, /most of the poiny/ of muni is The Public Good;
> >> if /actual/ bond financed muni fiber is
- Original Message -
> From: "Nick Hilliard"
> > wiring center you enable all technologies. GPON today, direct GigE
> > or 10GE where necessary, and all future technologies.
>
> yep, agreed - much more sensible, much more resilient to failure and
> only marginally more expensive.
>
> It
It varies from state to state ...
In Maine, we've run an E-rate filing consortium for several years that uses
E-rate funds and makes up the difference with a
state telecommunications tax so schools and libraries don't need to pay for
service.
Up until a year or two ago, Verizon was always contrac
Owen DeLong wrote:
Right, but a better approach would have been for the FCC to say "If you don't
build fiber, you won't keep getting USF money."
The FCC failed to look at the public interest and got rolled by the RBOCs again.
Owen
Regulatory capture. Nobody is immune. The only effective ma
On Mar 26, 2012, at 9:32 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 08:59:34 -0400, Rodrick Brown said:
>> HIgh frequency trading does provide a service to the financial markets as a
>> whole despite what the media and government politicians will have you think.
>
> OK, I'll bite. W
-Original Message-
From: david peahi [mailto:davidpe...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 1:54 PM
To: Jared Mauch
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: last mile, regulatory incentives, etc (was: att fiber, et al)
>I have discovered that the Federal School Lunch E-Rate program has built
I have discovered that the Federal School Lunch E-Rate program has built
out an entirely parallel fiber optic infrastructure in the USA, bypassing
telco fiber in many urban areas such as Los Angeles/Southern California.
There are now companies that exist solely to construct E-Rate fiber.
Sunesys is
Nathan Eisenberg wrote:
-Original Message-
From: joshua.kl...@gmail.com [mailto:joshua.kl...@gmail.com]
But they also deserve to have or enjoy the benefits that comes with
living in the big cities
I grew up in a rural area served by dialup for the first 15 years of my life,
so please
Here in Maine, after seeing no strong proposals were being put forward by
others, we went after American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds to
address a major lack of middle-mile infrastructure in the state.
Verizon had stopped making new investments in Maine for nearly 10 years
before pulling ou
> -Original Message-
> From: joshua.kl...@gmail.com [mailto:joshua.kl...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 2:10 AM
> To: Owen DeLong; Frank Bulk; Jay Ashworth
> Cc: NANOG
> Subject: Re: Muni Fiber (was: Re: last mile, regulatory incentives,
> etc)
>
> But they also deserve to have
- Original Message -
> From: "joshua klubi"
> But they also deserve to have or enjoy the benefits that comes with
> living in the big cities
Well, "deserve" is a strong word... but the underlying thought is my
primary reason for believing that municipal fiber is a good solution, and
I'll
Active Ethernet solution outdoor enclosure sfp+2xGE+2xPOTS is about 350 without
optics
Inside device is closer to 150-160.
... Certainly agree on install costs.
Jared
On Mar 26, 2012, at 8:23 AM, Masataka Ohta
wrote:
> Jared Mauch wrote:
>
>>> Another important expense of FTTH is at the la
On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 08:59:34 -0400, Rodrick Brown said:
> HIgh frequency trading does provide a service to the financial markets as a
> whole despite what the media and government politicians will have you think.
OK, I'll bite. What benefit does the market *as a whole* get from the ability
to do t
On Mar 23, 2012, at 2:45 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
>>> The massive drop in latency is expected to supercharge algorithmic stock
>>> market trading, where a difference of a few milliseconds can gain (or lose)
>>> millions of dollars.
>> But it should be illegal to
On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 12:16:53 +0200, Tei said:
> I imagine a easier solution. Use a random number generator in both
> sides, with the same seed. Then use a slower way to send "packets
> re-sync" that will contain the delta from the generated number, to the
> real actual number.
Congrats. You've
Tei wrote on 03/26/2012 06:16:53 AM:
> I imagine a easier solution. Use a random number generator in both
> sides, with the same seed. Then use a slower way to send "packets
> re-sync" that will contain the delta from the generated number, to the
> real actual number.
>
> I suppose this speeds
Jared Mauch wrote:
>> Another important expense of FTTH is at the last yards of
>> dropping cables fro the laed fiber, where SS needs simple
>> closures and shorter dropping cables than PON.
> These enclosures (including all electronics but SFP) are around $350.
What?
What do you mean "includin
On 23 March 2012 13:31, Aled Morris wrote:
> On 23 March 2012 11:53, Eugen Leitl wrote:
>
>> All three cables are being laid for the same reasons: Redundancy and speed.
>> As it stands, it takes roughly 230 milliseconds for a packet to go from
>> London to Tokyo; the new cables will reduce this b
But they also deserve to have or enjoy the benefits that comes with living in
the big cities
--
Sent from my Nokia N9
On 25/03/2012 15:47 Jay Ashworth wrote:
Well, for my part, /most of the poiny/ of muni is The Public Good; if /actual/
bond financed muni fiber is skipping the Hard Parts, i
On Mar 25, 2012, at 4:14 PM, Masataka Ohta wrote:
> Nick Hilliard wrote:
>
>> most of the expense of laying fibre is associated with ducting + wayleave.
>
> Another important expense of FTTH is at the last yards of
> dropping cables fro the laed fiber, where SS needs simple
> closures and short
24 matches
Mail list logo
