how-to block ads
|
|
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
 MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | reply to wifi4milez
Re: You can take the fiber to the Co-Lo but will the ISPs come said by wifi4milez:said by Matt:No kidding. And if a startup wanted to offer service, they are a mere cross-connect away from the Tier-1 guys. No more local loop charges for the ILEC, although I'm sure they'll invent a "cross-connect" fee which is just as much and somehow convince themselves that it costs $500/month to maintain a 20' piece of CAT-5e or fiber. Its actually a lot more complicated than that. First, the "neighborhood POP" would need to be built someplace. The LEC is surely not going to build, power, and maintain this "meet me room" facility just so they can lose business. Secondly, even after (assuming) a 3rd party provider has installed all their equipment there is MUCH more involved than a simply cross connect. Unless every one of the 3rd party providers wants to build fiber from their main POP to the neighborhood POP, they will need to lease some sort of a loop from the LEC. The LEC certainly isnt going to provide them dark fiber, so this means they will need to buy a DS3 or an OC3 depending on how many end users they think they can sign up. This is no longer a cross connect, and is now a traditional private line. Given that the LEC controls this circuit (and given that the nearest 3rd part POP could be miles away), this local loop could cost thousands of dollars. All these things considered, how much do you think a 3rd party provider is willing to spend just for the chance to provide someone with $30 a month internet service??? Your planning process is seriously short-sighted and flawed at the most basic level. It is really that easy. Most cities already have fiber laid and can get around those pesky right of way agreements because they approve them.
If every citizen paid $3k into the system, that would be more than enough for a B/GPON infrastructure to be installed. And yes, I know they have to put the PON infrastructure somewhere, I happen to have one up the street for my fiber. It's about a 20x20 concrete pad fenced in and hidden rather nicely.
The LEC doesn't build and maintain anything but their connection to the central POP. The cost of the last mile pays for everything to the central POP, including any regional POPs. Once you add in the business who would take advantage of this, it becomes very reasonable.
What type of infrastructure do you think Verizon, AT&T, Time Warner and Comcast already utilize? This exact model. Do you think their biggest expense is in providing a single (or redundant) huge pipe to a single location, or hundreds of thousands of DSL/Fiber and cable lines to individual houses? What about the engineers to maintain and monitor, the truck rolls, all the supporting infrastructure.
You seem to be stuck in a "Pay the LEC" model, which is understandable as they WANT you to believe they are the only game in town who can provide data connectivity. The whole point to this however, is REMOVING the local incumbent provider from the last mile, which will require an entirely new infrastructure to be laid. Rome wasn't built in a day and neither will this if it were implemented. Overbuilding is what caused the collapse of many companies in the .com era and would doom this to collapse as well.
Now is a unique time in the history of our country where the copper infrastructure is starting to show its age and fiber is becoming affordable enough to run in the last mile. We're at a crossroads and the incumbents know it, if they lose the last mile they lose control. | |
 wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | said by Matt:What type of infrastructure do you think Verizon, AT&T, Time Warner and Comcast already utilize? This exact model. Do you think their biggest expense is in providing a single (or redundant) huge pipe to a single location, or hundreds of thousands of DSL/Fiber and cable lines to individual houses? What about the engineers to maintain and monitor, the truck rolls, all the supporting infrastructure. Of course the LEC uses that infrastructure, THEY OWN THE NETWORK! What we are talking about here is completely different, and I have a basic drawing to help explain it to you.
In the drawing you see here, lets say "Carrier 1" is a local CLEC that will be competing with the LEC. "Carrier 2" is also another CLEC located in the same city, and they plan on selling services to the end users in the "Subdivisions". As you can see, both "Carrier 1" and "Carrier 2" first need to purchase transport capcity to the LEC ("Carrier 1 backhaul (2) and Carrier 2 backhaul (2)). This is of course assuming they already have purchased IP capacity (internet access) from another vendor, but thats not even relevant here. Next, both "Carrier 1" and "Carrier 2" need to purchase backhaul trasport from the LEC in order to get to the 3rd Party POP (we will discuss that in a moment). Depending on how many subscribers they think they can bring on, they might buy a DS3 or an OC3 of capacity (remember, ALL consumer internet services are oversubscribed).
So lets look at the potential issues here. First, the LEC owns and controls both backaul 1 and backhaul 2. This means that they control the cost of these circuits. In reality, just because the customer can get to the "3rd Party POP" without using the LEC is pointless. Its not like all the CLECs have their own fiber running all over town, so the end users is STILL using the LEC and the CLECs are STILL PAYING the LEC. Second, someone needs to build and procure the "3rd Party POP". Especially if you have more than two carriers trying to offer services from the "3rd Party POP", the space and power requirements will be a big issue. Who is going to find, maintain, and power this meet me room?
The last mile is really only a small part of the problem. The fact remains that 90% of the "carriers" out there have nothing more than a few Cisco boxes in a LEC colo, and then simply bridge the end user to an IP provider. The majority of them arent "real" carriers, and dont actually own any network.
If this "fiber last mile" solution instead proposed that each resident purchase a fiber line all the way to the nearest carrer exchange, that would be something different indeed. However, the proposal as it stands does nothing more than move the LEC one small step farther away from the end user, and would in fact end up costing the end user a lot more money.
--
If history teaches us anything, it teaches that simple-minded appeasement or wishful thinking about our adversaries is folly.
-Ronald Reagan-
| |
MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | 
Appropriate Example |
There would be no Carrier 1 and 2 between the 3rd party POP and the LEC. I'm not sure why you're not getting this.
Your picture would be better represented by replacing the 3rd party pop with a LOCALLY owned POP, the Carrier 1 and 2 backhaul is also part of the central fiber network, and then the LEC should be a common carrier facility ... which is where all the various providers pull their circuits into.
I tried to edit your but my Paint kung-fu is weak. My example shows what wrestling the "last-mile" from the incumbents would actually encompass. | | |
|
Reviews:
 ·WOW Internet and..
1 edit | the fails to see it this way due to he thinks that people/cities anyone other than the LECs/Cable Cos can not provide service. Haven't you read some of his posts. Especially ones that start off with a city failing at doing something or thinking about doing it another way- such as iProvo or Utopia
Also it this would work around the US where actual CLECs own a good share of their own network or they're actually willing to put it in or someone else. | |
wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | reply to Matt
The only problem with your drawing is that it doesnt represent the situation described in the article. My drawing on the other hand, does. Your drawing illustrates your version of how to remove the LEC from the delivery model. I am not questioning whether your design has merit, rather I am pointing out the flaws of the proposed design referenced in the article. | |
|
