Re: Muni fiber: L1 or L2?

[Stephen Sprunk <stephen () sprunk org>]

On 03-Feb-13 14:33, Scott Helms wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:
> > Is it more expensive to home-run every home than to put splitters in the neighborhood? Yes. Is it enough more 
> > expensive that the tradeoffs cannot be overcome? I remain unconvinced.
> This completely depends on the area and the goals of the network.  In most cases for muni networks back hauling 
> everything is more expensive.

Slightly more expensive in the short term, yes.  In the long term, no,
especially if you consider the opportunity costs of _not_ being able to
deploy new technologies in the future--something only home run dark
fiber can guarantee.

> Handing out connections at layer 1 is both more expensive and less efficient.  Its also extremely wasteful (which is 
> why its more expensive) since your lowest unit you can sell is a fiber strand whether the end customer wants a 3 mbps 
> connection or a gig its the same to the city.

So what?  How any particular fiber happens to be lit is irrelevant to
the muni--and it doesn't change their cost structure one iota.  Dark
fiber is dark fiber.

> I'm not saying you shouldn't sell dark fiber, I'm saying that in 99% of the cities you can't build a business model 
> around doing just that unless your city doesn't want to break even on the build and maintenance.

As a private operator, no, you probably can't build a business model
around that.  A muni has different economics, though.  At the cost
levels being thrown around here, it doesn't seem like there would be
_any_ difficulty in breaking even, which is all a muni needs to do.

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

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature