Own Your Own Last Mile Fiber - Neutral peering, customer owned fiber, and competition
Links: home · search · speed test · login · more ·
Own Your Own Last Mile Fiber Neutral peering, customer owned fiber, and competition 09:26AM Friday Aug 01 2008 by Karl Bode tags: Fiber · competition · business · alternatives · networking
The Google Blog has an interesting write up on a unique fiber optic deployment in Ottawa where instead of paying monthly rates, 400 homeowners are being allowed to buy their own last mile fiber connection. The project estimates that the costs would be around $2,700 per homeowner, with costs dropping depending on penetration. Members would then theoretically choose among several competing carriers -- who'd only have to worry about connecting to a neutral neighborhood peering point. A specialized construction company is already rolling out fiber to every home, and it will recoup its investment from individual homeowners who will pay to own fiber strands outright, as well as to maintain the fiber over time. The fiber terminates at a service provider neutral facility, meaning that any ISP can pay a fee to put its networking equipment there and offer to provide users with Internet access. Notably, the project is entirely privately funded. While that will please the free marketeers who hate taxpayer involvement in such projects, it won't please incumbents, who'll fight tooth and nail against the threat of open competition. So while incumbent lobbyists will ensure this never happens on a large scale, this test bed will be an interesting case to watch. Related:- Colorado Fiber To The Home
- Ooma Drops Device Prices
- Verizon Considers 'Fiber to the Node' FiOS
- Time Warner Cable Deploys 100Mbps FTTH
- Locals Try To Keep Utopia Afloat
- Kansas City Gets Surewest 100Mbps Fiber
- Wednesday Evening Links
- Friday Evening Links
|
Links: New Topic
Forums »
nklb @ 1st Aug 09:27AM:
Novel idea
Very novel idea!
But yes, I totally agree with the article that the companies already in place will lobby very heavily against this, in the name of "the consumer" who they will claim shouldn't have to pay the essentially one-time fee.
I can see this becoming a standard feature of homes, just like sewer lines (which the homeowner owns and is responsible to maintain up until it connects with the city main)
--
for all your Linux questions
reply
Matt @ 1st Aug 09:31AM:
This is how to do it
I've always thought this would be the BEST way to do it.
Let the homeowner be responsible for maintenance, a portion of their fees can go toward maintenance of the neutral colocation facility. It's a win-win really. It would jump start small business in the area due to the ability of customers to choose their own fiber maintenance company, and fiber installation companies ... along with the possibility of just about ANYONE laying the fiber for the customer, connecting it to the neutral colocation facility and offering service.
reply
TK Junk Mail @ 1st Aug 09:32AM:
You can take the fiber to the Co-Lo but will the ISPs come
The big question is will the ISPs find it worthwhile to put their equipment in the Co-LO and sell service to the homeowners and at what price will they provide services. With only 400 potential customers, I just don't see the ISPs falling over themselves to sell service.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk?
reply
vpoko @ 1st Aug 09:38AM:
Re: You can take the fiber to the Co-Lo but will the ISPs come
Why wouldn't they? With so much of the infrastructure already in place it's easy profit without much risk. And any ISP with access to the internet backbone could do it, even ones who would not have had enough capital to wire up the houses individually. In any case, it would only take one more step for the homeowners to lease a line of their own accord, in effect becoming their own ISP. Everything simply comes down to the last mile.
reply
Matt @ 1st Aug 09:38AM:
Re: You can take the fiber to the Co-Lo but will the ISPs come
said by TK Junk Mail :
The big question is will the ISPs find it worthwhile to put their equipment in the Co-LO and sell service to the homeowners and at what price will they provide services. With only 400 potential customers, I just don't see the ISPs falling over themselves to sell service.
So use a BPON/GPON infrastructre to backhaul the little, neighborhood POPs to a larger facility so the big carriers only have to maintain a single connection (or redundant set).
reply
Matt @ 1st Aug 09:43AM:
Re: You can take the fiber to the Co-Lo but will the ISPs come
said by vpoko :
Why wouldn't they? With so much of the infrastructure already in place it's easy profit without much risk. And any ISP with access to the internet backbone could do it, even ones who would not have had enough capital to wire up the houses individually. In any case, it would only take one more step for the homeowners to lease a line of their own accord, in effect becoming their own ISP. Everything simply comes down to the last mile.
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.
reply
miser @ 1st Aug 09:47AM:
I love it!
I'd be all over that if I could buy a piece of the neighborhood fiber (that is, if my neighborhood had fiber). I am on the edge of DSL service and while nice, I'd love to have something faster.
.. and I'm sure everyone is right - the incumbents will bribe^Ylobby like crazy I'm sure to stop this.
Cheers,
Miser
reply
MyDogHsFleas @ 1st Aug 10:02AM:
This is going to fail
If you RTFA and do the math it's like this:
400 homes, assume 10% will sign up @$2700, total cost = 40*2700 = $108,000.
First, that seems like a very low cost to run a 400-home fiber deployment. I would expect true costs to be much higher.
Second, it seems like a very big assumption that they'll get 1 out of 10 homeowners to agree to pay $2700 up front just to get POTENTIALLY faster Internet connections. Especially when they'd ALSO have to pay standard ISP charges, most likely higher than they are paying now. That is a large chunk of money for basically nothing. It's like the "seat license" fees that teams charge that give you the privilege of buying season tickets.
Third, how are they going to get the ISPs to sign up to offer service via this means? What incentives do they have? They will certainly not charge less just because they don't own the final mile. Why should they?
reply
keyboard5684 @ 1st Aug 10:07AM:
Re: Novel idea
I can forsee resistance as well, in a way. I tried to set up a mesh network in my neighborhood. I got business owners to allow me to put radio equipment up and everything. Had the mesh network halfway running and was able to offer 5 megs symetric to homes.
Well, what happened is the local crappy analog TV station fought it, the borough fought it, and many people and businesses fought it. Why? Because most people already paid a fee to the local coop (the cable company) and felt they should be doing it, which they never will.
This was a few months ago and I gave up because of money. I technically had it up and running but people were suing, it was nuts. I was really just trying to start up a business that was not going to make tons in this small community but bring nice broadband and phone to the area.
So I lost a ton of money on equipment, I have a fiber connection to my home intended for the customers (really unused, I just go to BBR and email mostly), and the only options are 3Mbps/768k Verizon or 512/128k cable. And now people are complaining to ME!
What needs to happen, and I think is a better idea, is the local government needs to run fiber to every home from a building, or even several buildings, and each strand is offered up to competing providers. Just like my garbage, water, sewer, and roads... let the government provide the pipe and then the customer pick the person who connects to the strand.
I know, been tried, whatever, but it is the only way I think it can work.
Do you think the people that pave my roads are the local government? Nope, it is a contractor after people bid on it.
Sewer, bids. Water, well that is the borough. Garbage, bids.
The government picks up where corporate entities fail because of lack of profit. Well, yes, we get hit with taxes over time but if you put a ten year ROI on it, spread it out on taxes, you would have one happy town.
My thoughts. Yes, I would pay for the fiber (did) but 60% will not or cannot.
reply
telcolackey @ 1st Aug 10:43AM:
Re: This is going to fail
Yepp... this is cool "stick it to the man" type of initative. It also falls far short of having much business intelligence around it and doomed to failure without any external involvement.
reply
telcolackey @ 1st Aug 10:44AM:
Re: Novel idea
Business economics will be enough resistance to impact this effort. No external involvement will be necessary
reply
King P @ 1st Aug 10:58AM:
Re: Novel idea
It's too bad that us taxpayers already paid the telcos to run fiber to our homes. 12 years ago!
reply
TemporalFlux @ 1st Aug 11:03AM:
I'm in!
I'm in! Hey guys I live in the west end. Drop me a strand!
reply
tiger72 @ 1st Aug 11:09AM:
+1 to the Milton Friedman reference
I like this idea very much. The town controls the peering point, and the consumers own their last mile...
reply
anon @ 1st Aug 11:25AM:
Re: This is going to fail
right not a big cost, but remember, the home owner is not paying the 2700 to the isp, they are pay 2700 to teh contractor to put the fiber in the ground, from there house to the local everyone can use co, which in this case is going to be a large building of a patch panel, so really think of it like this, company A, a telco runs fiber from there plant to this new co location, ties into a fiber patch the to a fiber switch to the customers home. Company B a local cable company does the same thing, cost to deploy fiber to these customers, not as much as you would think because chances are they already have fiber in the area that isn't being used, and they would splice the fiber to the new location for the customers homes to tie in. The largest part of the investment would come from buying fiber switches to connect these houses. the incentive for the ISP is we get to run fiber to a single location and not have to pay for each house to get hooked up, and we still get to charge what we would charge users where we had to pay to get the fiber to the house. Makes great sense to me, if i owned the isp, and i had to pay 2700 bucks for each house, i would hold back to, but if i had a chance that 10% for a 400 house development would have that fiber installed, i would be all over it. Having home owners pay the 2700 isn't to make the isp charge less for the service its to get the service into the area, total cost of FTTH is what is killing this in a large scale deployment. Look at FIOS when they first started it, laying fiber in the streets, turning around to go back and run to each house, had they known who wanted service they would have saved big bucks. That guessing game of who is going to want this technology is already done, now all they have to do is "hook them up" and I'm going to assume that in this localized CO building its going to resemble an old school switch board at a telco, plug and play type technology.
reply
baineschile @ 1st Aug 11:19AM:
And when..
the line gets cut because of digging/lawnmowers? what a replacement cost!!!
reply
davidl @ 1st Aug 11:22AM:
Re: And when..
How often has your telephone line been cut because of digging and lawnmowers...that's what home insurance is for.
reply
iansltx @ 1st Aug 11:23AM:
Re: This is going to fail
Meh, I disagree. This is Canada, where indie ISPs are just waiting to get off of Bell DSL...which costs them $20ish per month for the local loop, plus band rate if you don't have telephone service.
So with this fiber service, you could save $25 a month on costs and pass those savings to the customer, with $15-$25 a month 5/800 tiers, and options for MUCH faster connections since we're talking about fiber here. Granted, it may take eight years or so to pay off the fiber line, but in those eight years you might go from 5/800 for $15 to 50/20 for $30 or something crazy like that, that could never be pumped over copper.
With the right marketing and business models, ths could very well work.
reply
anon @ 1st Aug 11:30AM:
Never happen here...
This is STILL basically muni-fiber, the only difference being individuals are suckered into paying the full cost if they want service, but otherwise the problems that plague mini-fiber will be present here.
Reputable companies like AT&T, VZ, Comcast, et al., will not be attracted to this either. The products they offer require end-to-end control, and this doesn't fit the bill.
reply
HardwareGeek @ 1st Aug 11:44AM:
Why?
Why would I want to pay 2700 for a mile of fiber, and pay for it's upkeep and pay to replace it if it goes bad for some reason? Then also pay an ISP for service.
When I can just pay an ISP and they will maintain everything for me.
So my signal levels are bad, and it's between the colo and my house, how much will it cost me to find the problem and repair it?
Sounds cool to own the last mile and 2700 dollars may sound cheap but in the long run it's more of a hassle.
--
Email/MSN: Michael at hardwaregeeks.com
AIM: MikeR35292
reply
Richard B @ 1st Aug 11:50AM:
Re: Novel idea
Lets see you tried to go the private route and provide a service but many in the community was not buying in. Let put it in another way, if it isn't broke don't fix it. They are happy what the got. Now you want government to force it down their throats because you failed. Ironic enough is the government may be the problem with franchising. If you could not do it what in hell do you thing government can do a better job. I got news for you, you come across to me as arrogant. Some people are happy what they got, or "I am already paying for what I got why do I need you" attitude. perhaps you would saw this if you did better premarket research.
Secondly there seem to be a local attachment to the cable company. Somebody known in the community? Perhaps its time you moved on.
reply
davidl @ 1st Aug 11:57AM:
Re: Why?
Really?
- Bell ExpressVu - $80.00/mth
- Bell Telephone - $30.00/mth + long distance
- ISP - $40.00/mth
=============
$150.00/mth
=============
$1,800.00/year + taxes
...if you can get all that through 1 x $2,700 fiber + whatever ISP costs, it would pay for itself pretty quick
reply
james1 @ 1st Aug 12:21PM:
Re: Novel idea
said by Richard B :
I got news for you, you are an arrogant holier than thou troublemaker.
It really isnt necessary to call him names, I'm sure he could think of all sorts of things to call a furry.
reply
wifi4milez @ 1st Aug 12:37PM:
Re: You can take the fiber to the Co-Lo but will the ISPs come
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???
--
If history teaches us anything, it teaches that simple-minded appeasement or wishful thinking about our adversaries is folly.
-Ronald Reagan-
reply
Richard B @ 1st Aug 12:53PM:
Re: Novel idea
I had worst in mind, his post comes across to me as very arrogant like I know what better for the community. His brodband business failed so his solution is to get big government to ram it down everybody throat. It like same say I started a furry themed restaurant that fails, therefore the only solution is government owned cafeterias.
I edited that statement leaving in the arrogant.
reply
Matt @ 1st Aug 12:53PM:
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.
reply
BosstonesOwn @ 1st Aug 01:38PM:
Re: Novel idea
Guess reading what the person wrote is a bad thing, you should try it some time.
The guy stated he got sued out of business. Not that he failed.
Geez , reading is fundamental.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!"
reply
vv1r3d @ 1st Aug 01:49PM:
Re: You can take the fiber to the Co-Lo but will the ISPs come
My LEC provides dark and lit fiber.... CenturyTel, aka LightCore....
:)
reply
j_on_fire @ 1st Aug 01:59PM:
Re: Novel idea
yes reading is fundamental. The guy actually has a good plan. He just got sued because the cable company was taking their money and not doing the job he was doing. And of course he isn't going to do it for free.
"let the government provide the pipe and then the customer pick the person who connects to the strand."
Other than government inefficiency, as opposed to greedy corporations, why wouldn't this be a good plan?
reply
questionable @ 1st Aug 02:20PM:
Re: Why?
I could also be a selling point of your house... Hey wow you could recoup the cost when you sold your house... CONCEPT
add a extra 2700 on selling it and explain to the new owners (could be a feature) that they are on Fiber... If the person is tech savvy and internet junky you just added a incentive for him to buy your house
reply
wifi4milez @ 1st Aug 03:04PM:
Re: You can take the fiber to the Co-Lo but will the ISPs come
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-
reply
Matt @ 1st Aug 03:44PM:
Re: You can take the fiber to the Co-Lo but will the ISPs come
Ok, nice picture, but you're still missing the point.
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.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 1st Aug 04:01PM:
Re: You can take the fiber to the Co-Lo but will the ISPs come
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.
reply
keyboard5684 @ 1st Aug 04:23PM:
Re: Novel idea
I live in the community and was trying to do a service. People complain, still even after the venture, about the fact there is not better broadband services.
I never failed, I just did not want to lose my house over it. I do not have as much money as Verizon or the cable company. Seems to me if they would have left me alone I would have succeeded.
I fail to understand how this is arrogant? Really is was two different things, one an action I was taking to provide better services and two, an opinion on how I think it could/should be done.
Again, I live in this community and they express there opinion on what they want very vocally. Failure to me would be no one buying my service, that is not the case. The problem was the borough, cable company, and Verizon would not allow me to succeed, or even try. A business failing is when no one wants to buy their service. In my case big duopolies seemed to have forced me out using legal methods. I do not have a team of lawyers and they know that.
Your analogies do not compare at all to the situation.
The only part I consider arrogant is that I said *uck it, if they want to fight me on it then I will just keep my 45meg connection and not do it. No loss on my end, just the community loses by not getting good service. In 5 years the community will still be stuck with 3megs and their 768 upload.
As far as the business, it still operates to serve business customers with workarounds, no residential. Because I cannot hang fiber on poles I cannot get the capacity I need for all those customers but using radio mesh I can get enough to serve the businesses.
I really do not know why I took the time to write this. In real life I would just punch you for your lack of understanding, we would clearly have a reason to fight. You insulted me and the community I live in. Visit us sometime, we will be waiting for you.
reply
anon @ 1st Aug 06:36PM:
Re: Never happen here...
yea they will still need equipment in the home for fiber tv service, computers without fiber cards, all the equipment to convert light data to electrical data, Major Providers pay more in the actual wiring to the home when it comes to fiber, think of it like this, if they were to light up the whole neighbor hood, they would spend the 2,700 plus the cost of getting it there, so figure 40 houses want the service 2700*40=108,000 plus add the cost of the fiber to the neighborhood which depending on distance is where the cost would come from, so lets use 4 miles as the example, and that 4 miles was to cost roughly 8,000,that would be $116,000. Now if the homes that wanted fiber to the house service covered the last mile, the isp saves 108,000 and it only cost them 8g's to make much more, there investment is paid off faster, cause they didn't spend as much. And please remember the last mile is a term in the industry to describe the connection from the ISP to the customer, not a physical mile of fiber, and remember that fiber doesn't break down like copper over time, the local cable company here in az where i live has used the same fiber that connects the nodes to the head end for 20 years, and the only reason they are changing it is because they are re doing there entire network to gear up for a fiber loop between all there headends in the are, and a docsis 3.0 launch
reply
Richard B @ 1st Aug 06:43PM:
Re: Novel idea
said by keyboard5684 :
I live in the community and was trying to do a service. People complain, still even after the venture, about the fact there is not better broadband services.
I never failed, I just did not want to lose my house over it. I do not have as much money as Verizon or the cable company. Seems to me if they would have left me alone I would have succeeded.
If it was the city I would stand aside you but according to your own words.
said by keyboard5684 :
Well, what happened is the local crappy analog TV station fought it, the borough fought it, and many people and businesses fought it. Why? Because most people already paid a fee to the local coop (the cable company) and felt they should be doing it, which they never will.
It seems your problem is more than just the city but many your community. Perhaps I was wrong arrogant is not word Messianic Complex is. "I" had this great idea now how dare they "rejected me".
I still stand that going to government provided service is worst, you could be happy just providing yourself an alternative and everybody is happy.
said by keyboard5684 :
"In 5 years the community will still be stuck with 3megs and their 768 upload.
well adds a little more to this story Broadband is available I assume, have it occurred to you that people are happy what they have. My mother in the city will not upgrade from dial up and the only reason I stick with 6mgeg cable is Comcast's cost with basic cable is still less than Verizon DSL, IF Comcast jack up the price, I will dump Comcast for 3meg 768 upload in a heartbeat because I really do not need the speed.
This makes my point about government. It seem you can get people excited for bigger toys so get the government and we the tax payers to ram it down their throats.
said by keyboard5684 :
As far as the business, it still operates to serve business customers with workarounds, no residential. Because I cannot hang fiber on poles I cannot get the capacity I need for all those customers but using radio mesh I can get enough to serve the businesses.
I assume the city and county prohibits you, if this is the issue, it is why I am against franchising laws. If you build it there should be way to grant an easement to lay you own fiber.
said by keyboard5684 :
I really do not know why I took the time to write this. In real life I would just punch you for your lack of understanding, we would clearly have a reason to fight. You insulted me and the community I live in. Visit us sometime, we will be waiting for you.
Do not threaten me I will take legal action. I sad nothing about your town, but again it proves my point about Messianic complex if you can win by debate turn to intimidation and violence. Is this why your opponents turned to the courts? You intimidation left no other choice?
We agree to disagree we are done with this conversion.
reply
anon @ 1st Aug 09:33PM:
msg deleted
deleted by a moderator
reply
CableConvert @ 1st Aug 09:34PM:
Re: Novel idea
Glass houses buddy...YOU come across as arrogant. Oh...spell check, its a beautiful thing (you're on your own with the bad grammar)
reply
anon @ 1st Aug 09:42PM:
msg deleted
deleted by a moderator
reply
hottboiinnc @ 1st Aug 11:40PM:
Re: This is going to fail
very true! this could be a great thing for Rocky over at TekSavvy. Something that I have been saying. A great way to get rid of bell. And the best part---he wouldn't really have to build out the last mile! But OH NO! They couldn't have that they still want to ride on the Bell Network.
reply
Enlightener @ 1st Aug 11:42PM:
Re: Why?
Maybe I should RTFA but I'm wondering `how` would you repair it? If there is a break, do you somehow have permission to go digging in front of the house 2 blocks down the street?
I could understand it being community property perhaps owned by an association with everyone sharing the expenses, but to own it out right, hell I don't know how you could hold title.
reply
mlerner @ 2nd Aug 10:21AM:
Re: You can take the fiber to the Co-Lo but will the ISPs come
said by TK Junk Mail :
The big question is will the ISPs find it worthwhile to put their equipment in the Co-LO and sell service to the homeowners and at what price will they provide services. With only 400 potential customers, I just don't see the ISPs falling over themselves to sell service.
I can almost guarantee you the big ISPs will want to get in on the action, Bell Canada (which is our big telco provider) already provides co-location downtown.
--
"If bullshit was money this guy would be richer that Bill Gates." - quote by olebiker on Mirko Bibic
reply
mlerner @ 2nd Aug 10:24AM:
Re: Why?
said by Enlightener :
Maybe I should RTFA but I'm wondering `how` would you repair it? If there is a break, do you somehow have permission to go digging in front of the house 2 blocks down the street?
I could understand it being community property perhaps owned by an association with everyone sharing the expenses, but to own it out right, hell I don't know how you could hold title.
I'm thinking perhaps the construction company will maintain the lines or a contracting company since you'd be paying them maintenance fees.
--
"If bullshit was money this guy would be richer that Bill Gates." - quote by olebiker on Mirko Bibic
reply
wifi4milez @ 2nd Aug 04:18PM:
Re: You can take the fiber to the Co-Lo but will the ISPs come
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.
reply
Core0000 @ 2nd Aug 07:25PM:
Interesting Idea...
The idea sounds interesting.
I think it would be cool if ISPs, if the customer were willing, would turn on fiber if you paid for the line to be run from the co to your house.
And of course the ISP would have a modem with out charge if you stayed hooked up for two years with em?
reply
hottboiinnc @ 3rd Aug 11:46AM:
Re: You can take the fiber to the Co-Lo but will the ISPs come
their a CLEC here in Toledo and offer Dark and lit fiber after they bought the KMC Network here several years back.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 3rd Aug 11:49AM:
Re: I love it!
if its a gated community they really couldn't. And actually it would give Telco and Cable Co's the advatange. Why? they do not have to manage the last mile, they do not have to have to worry about anyone stealing services, they do not have to do anything really but provide the service. The people who live in the HOA already own the lines so its actually gives ATT, VZ, Qwest, TWC, Comcast, and Cox the advantage. Especially since they have a fiber optic network in place that they NEVER had to spend a dime on. Qwest, ATT, and Comcast would love that!
reply
hottboiinnc @ 3rd Aug 11:54AM:
Re: +1 to the Milton Friedman reference
basically, but in this community its the home owners or the HOA that controls the CO that would have to be built. Which means its right in their neighborhood. Could be a good thing for many cities around the Country to do. Instead of using Muni-FTTH they could just all join in and build something like this. They could build small COs for access for the neighborhoods and let which Homeowner wants to install fiber from their house to that location. Then decide on which ISP/TV provider they want.
Would be much better in terms of getting FTTH than what this country is doing now.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 3rd Aug 11:58AM:
Re: Never happen here...
what do you mean by having fiber cards? WTF! VZ is NOT using fiber cards in computers for their FiOS instead its actually Cat5 from the ONT to the router and then wifi to the computers or cat5 or 6. Who in the hell would want to spend the $$$$ on a fiber card! Get real!
Plus its not actually Muni! The only ones that WANT the service PAY to have their fiber line installed. Which means they wouldn't have people like you or JasonOD bitching about paying for it if they didnt want to.
It's a win, win for both the non-wanting people and the people that want it and a win-win for the providers. They do not have to pay for the last mile EVER! They eliminate spending a BIG CHUNK OF MONEY ON IT!
reply
hottboiinnc @ 3rd Aug 11:59AM:
Re: Why?
that or saying that here is a list of Telephone, Internet, and cable tv providers that have access direct to the house. All by 1 fiber optic line that's already installed and just connects up the street!
Many people would be pleased to have a choice in who they have for phone, internet, and tv.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 3rd Aug 12:02PM:
Re: Interesting Idea...
a free modem? why? the customer already would own everything direct to their house and the ONT where everything would go in. They really wouldn't need a modem since they could use one that would work with all the providers that would be located in the CO in the neighborhood.
Also the ISP wouldnt own anything or maintain anything except the link from them to the CO.
reply
Core0000 @ 4th Aug 07:14PM:
Re: Interesting Idea...
Good point.
reply
Thank you for using lo-fi dslreports.com - report bugs
© 99-2008 silver matrix LLC