[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Muni Fiber
Nick Hilliard wrote:
>> wiring center you enable all technologies. GPON today, direct GigE
>> or 10GE where necessary, and all future technologies.
>
> yep, agreed - much more sensible, much more resilient to failure and only
> marginally more expensive.
You should suspect cost figures provided by those who want to
keep their monopoly.
At least, if population density is below some threshold, SS is
less expensive than PON, because the expected number of
subscribers to share a fiber with reasonably short drop cables
is small.
> It'll never be done though. Too much to lose by creating a topology which
> allows you to unbundle the tail.
It is still possible to unbundle PON if regulators want to do so.
See our paper:
Competition Promoting Unbundling of PON
http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1914349
Masataka Ohta
- References:
- last mile, regulatory incentives, etc (was: att fiber, et al)
- From: john.kreno at gmail.com (John Kreno)
- Muni Fiber (was: Re: last mile, regulatory incentives, etc)
- From: jra at baylink.com (Jay Ashworth)
- Muni Fiber (was: Re: last mile, regulatory incentives, etc)
- From: frnkblk at iname.com (Frank Bulk)
- Muni Fiber (was: Re: last mile, regulatory incentives, etc)
- From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
- Muni Fiber (was: Re: last mile, regulatory incentives, etc)
- From: jra at baylink.com (Jay Ashworth)
- Muni Fiber (was: Re: last mile, regulatory incentives, etc)
- From: bicknell at ufp.org (Leo Bicknell)
- Muni Fiber
- From: nick at foobar.org (Nick Hilliard)
- Muni Fiber
- From: bicknell at ufp.org (Leo Bicknell)
- Muni Fiber
- From: nick at foobar.org (Nick Hilliard)