Re: Muni Fiber and Politics

[Corey Touchet <corey.touchet () corp totalserversolutions com>]

But in the cases of small rural communities it¹s perfectly reasonable to
just setup wifi to cover the town and backhaul a DS3 back to a more
connected location. There¹s plenty of small wireless companies out there
trying to serve these folks.





On 8/2/14, 3:15 PM, "Leo Bicknell" <bicknell () ufp org> wrote:

> There are plenty of cities with zero ISP's interested in serving them
> today, I can't argue
> that point.  However I believe the single largest reason why that is true
> is that the ISP
> today has to bear the capital cost of building out the physical plant to
> serve the customers.
> 15-20 year ROI's don't work for small businesses or wall street.
>
> But if those cities were to build a municipal fiber network like we've
> described, and pay
> for it with 15-20 year municipal bonds the ISP's wouldn't have to bear
> those costs.  They
> could come in drop one box in a central location and start offering
> service.
>
> Which is why I said, if municipalities did this, I am very skeptical
> there would be more than
> a handful without a L3 operator.  You can imagine a city of 50 people in
> North Dakota
> or the Northern Territories might have this issue because the long haul
> cost to reach the
> town is so high, but it's going to be a rare case.  I firmly believe the
> municipal fiber networks
> presence would bring L3 operators to 90-95% of cities.
>
> On Aug 2, 2014, at 2:04 PM, Scott Helms <khelms () zcorum com> wrote:
>
> > Happens all the time, which is why I asked Leo about that scenario.
> > There are large swarths of the US and even more in Canada where that's
> > the norm.
> >
> > On Aug 2, 2014 1:29 PM, "Owen DeLong" <owen () delong com> wrote:
> > Such a case is unlikely.
> >
> > On Aug 1, 2014, at 13:32, Scott Helms <khelms () zcorum com> wrote:
> >
> > > I can never see a case where letting them play at Layer 3 or above
> > > helps.
> > > That¹s bad news, stay away.  But I think some well crafted L2 services
> > > could actually _expand_ consumer choice.  I mean running a dark fiber
> > > GigE to supply voice only makes no sense, but a 10M channel on a GPON
> > > serving a VoIP box mayŠ
> > >
> > > Even in those cases where there isn't a layer 3 operator nor a chance
> > > for a viable resale of layer 1/2 services.
>
>
> -- 
>       Leo Bicknell - bicknell () ufp org - CCIE 3440
>        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/