| Broadband Political Climate: Hypothetical Q Not too long ago the FCC concluded that the cable broadband operators did not have to open their networks to their potential competition even though this might have benefit ted consumers greatly.
The idea of a cable operator allowing a wholesaler onto their network is deemed unacceptable completely unacceptable by the cable industry, but this cannot be said in view or practice for the telephone network operators.
ILECs typically have open networks in that they allow wholesalers to have access to their network for the intent of reselling access. An example of this can be seen in how Earthlink has access to and resells said access to broadband networks owned by telephone companies.
But what would happen if the telephone industry decided (demanded) the same treatment by the FCC to not allow such access? How would these wholesalers survive? Well, this is a good question that doesn't seem to get discussed in a public forum much. I am sure it is discussed in B2B forums, but ...
So, imagine if you will that SBC, Quest, Verizon, and BellSouth decided to find a way and implement a means to not allow wholesale access to their networks, existing or future. How would these wholesale agents survive?
I know ELNK does resell very limited access on cable broadband networks. Could someone like ELNK make arrangements with BPL and municipal projects to circumvent these potentially new obstacles in order to survive? Could wholesale access to municipal networks be the [money] key to getting projects up and running without hindering utilization by exclusivity conditions? |
|
|
|
 tschmidtPremium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
kudos:5
 ·Fairpoint Commun..
 ·Hollis Hosting
| Supporting third party ISP's is much more difficult over Cable then Telephone network.
Telephone wiring is point-to-point and the ISP "rents" unused bandwidth above voice.
CATV is a shared network so this sort of sharing does not work. I'd don't know what sort of arrangement would even be possible.
To answer your specific question Telcos have pretty much done what you said. The FCC only requires line sharing over copper circuits. Verizon does not have to share their FIOS FTTP network with third parties.
/Tom |
|
| reply to GhostDoggy
Tom, I could have sworn that Verizon stated a few months back that they would be wholesaling access to their Fios network?
Also, it is not beyond the realm of technology to make it possible for a cable broadband network to accommodate a wholesale presence. Where there is a will there is a way. |
|
tschmidtPremium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
kudos:5 Reviews:
·Fairpoint Commun..
·Hollis Hosting
| said by GhostDoggy:I could have sworn that Verizon stated a few months back that they would be wholesaling access to their Fios network? You might be right. I tend to forget there are two ways broadband ISPs gain access to Telco customers.
1) Unbundled Copper plant - ISP sets up co-location equipment in the CO and rent unbundled copper customer circuits. (This is what I was thinking when I posted.)
2) Verizon wholesale DSL - Verizon uses ATM to transport data between customer and ISP. ISP provides typical ISP services and backbone connectivity. Telco provides first-mile transport.
said by GhostDoggy: Also, it is not beyond the realm of technology to make it possible for a cable broadband network to accommodate a wholesale presence. Where there is a will there is a way. I don't disagree but what does it accomplish? If you don't own the physical connection and have to rent it from someone else and that same someone else also provides retail service and gets to set the rental price does not seem to be a very attractive business model.
I'm in favor of separating commodity bit-delivery from value add services.
I think we spend too much time figuring out how to modify legacy cable plant, either Telco or Cable. Legislative effort should be focused on fiber and wireless. I'd prefer to see legislation to encourage roll out of both and do so in a way that facilitates network neutrality.
/Tom |
|
| reply to GhostDoggy
Well, opening the network, especially a costly fiber-only network, acts to subsidize. Isn't this what Projact Utopia was suppose to do when themunicipalty built the fiber infrastructure and provided open access to everyone for wholesale activities?
It somewhat removes the costs on the individual provider for buildout, and subsidizes the revenue to allow natural market competition.
For instance, let's say a fiber to the home infrastructure suddenly appeared to every home over all across America and it did it in a single night. How many telco and cable companies do you think would be seeking access to it? I'm betting all of them will. |
|
tschmidtPremium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
kudos:5 Reviews:
·Fairpoint Commun..
·Hollis Hosting
| said by GhostDoggy:Well, opening the network, especially a costly fiber-only network, acts to subsidize. Isn't this what Projact Utopia was suppose to do when themunicipalty built the fiber infrastructure and provided open access to everyone for wholesale activities? Subsidize it probably not the correct term. A company building a first-mile network would of course prefer to have no restrictions on what services they offer. Any legislative requirement that first-mile access be shared will need to insure it is profitable for network owners.
You are correct the business model of many muni projects is wholesale. This is akin to the superhighway/trucker or airport/airline model. Government owns the enabling infrastructure and private enterprises compete to deliver services. Personally I think that is the preferred way to deliver national infrastructure.
I doubt legacy Cablecos and Telcos would be interested in delivering service over someone else's network. They have been in the physical network business for years. The successful players will likely be start ups that do not have a lot of legacy baggage and able to optimize business model for this new business model.
/Tom |
|
| reply to GhostDoggy
Actually, my hope would be to unlock and unbundle the first mile by having municipalities build and own/operate the first mile while offering wholesale access to anyone and everyone.
This affords a level playing field by all competitors, removes the burden of an access provider from deploying an updated last-mile, and promotes a more non-profit management of the last-mile neighborhood not bent (controlled) on corporate spin dogma. |
|
tschmidtPremium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
kudos:5 Reviews:
·Fairpoint Commun..
·Hollis Hosting
| said by GhostDoggy:my hope would be to unlock and unbundle the first mile by having municipalities build and own/operate the first mile while offering wholesale access to anyone and everyone. That is my preferred option also. I'd like to see Munis build out the first-mile FTTP access network. Numerous private companies would then compete to provide Internet services. To do this efficiently requires first-mile access network designed as a wholesale network.
I've been disappointed the Electric Power Industry has not be more proactive building out FTTP. With deregulation they are well positioned as a first-mile common carrier. Power generation capacity can be provided by anyone.
I attended a seminar years ago and the point made was electric utilities are in a powerful position: they have access to RoW (Rights of Way), guys with trucks, and know how to send you a bill every month. I'd add that unlike Telcos and Cablecos they have no legacy investment to protect.
/Tom |
|
| reply to GhostDoggy
quote:
I attended a seminar years ago and the point made was electric utilities are in a powerful position: they have access to RoW (Rights of Way), guys with trucks, and know how to send you a bill every month. I'd add that unlike Telcos and Cablecos they have no legacy investment to protect.
I agree. Seems that even the county water utility is in the same position. Unlike the electrical companies, not every county is blanket-served by one retail provider, though.
For instance, I am in Georgia. There is GA Power, but then there are a mix in electrical co-ops on the county level. With the water/sewer provider, you are either on their service on on well water. But the point of men in trucks, RoW access, and existing billing infrastructure already in place, the advent of turnkey solutions seems natural.
I guess it is time to send a letter to both my electrical co-op and the county water department. |
|
