nanog mailing list archives

[mild flamage] Re: Policy News


From: Mike <mike-nanog () tiedyenetworks com>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 08:36:11 -0800

Jared Mauch wrote:
How about just mandating that it's illegal to build anything but fiber/gpon for services.
I would expand on this and say we should make it illegal for any telecom carrier to refuse to put their assets into service wherever they may be, and going forward we should force conditions on all telecom carriers to sell to all at any technical feasible point to all comers, and further to require planned points of interconnection for competitors and rules about how much overbuild is required (minimum fiber counts that should be reserved for 'the public interest') and so forth. We saw how the telecoms gamed the 96 telecom act, so now we know and we can do better and design in indefeasble rules that take away the game playing and replace it with service that actually gets to people who need it.

I happen to be an operator in a rural area and the realities are that prices are waaayyyy high (over $100/mbps), where you can get any sort of bigname telco service at all. At the same time however, there is plenty of fiber in the ground, on the poles and passing thru regeneration huts all thru the area that is doing absolutely no good for the local populations. There are plenty of already existing possible points of interconnection, but there's no requirement that they be forced to sell to you at these points. An example in my area is Level3 communications, who has an international fiber route running thru my county and 2 regeneration huts and at least one of these confirmed as having all necessary gear to sell ethernet/tdm handoff services. I have a competitor who was able to get into this one before l3 bought it (former Wiltel sites) and enjoys $20/mbps but since then although there's been plenty of discussion the bottom line is l3 simply isn't _interested_ in selling _us_ service, leaving us (and our county) at the mercy of att for all connectivity, making att a single point of failure, empowering att to charge outlandish prices for connectivity services since everything has to go at least 100 miles away (triggering those 'loop charges' we're all so fond of, since they won't dare put in opteman or other advanced distance insensitive options, oh heavens no you need those old expensive copper tdm services and anything you want to connect to is gonna be a long, long ways away....)

What really burns me up is that L3 had the odacity to apply for federal BTOP dollars for creating exactly the problem they are proposing to resolve. Gee what an original idea - get federal grant money to sell a service that we're already sellling at a zero cost!

Ok Im don't spewing now, thanks for letting me vent.






Current thread: