[no subject]

--
Hugo

On Mon 2014-Jul-21 20:58:48 +0200, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike at swm.pp.se> wrote:
>On Mon, 21 Jul 2014, William Herrin wrote:
>
>>The only exception I see to this would be if localities were 
>>constrained to providing point to point and point to multipoint 
>>communications infrastructure within the locality on a reasonable 
>>and non-discriminatory basis. The competition that would foster on 
>>the services side might outweigh the damage on the infrastructure 
>>side. Like public roads facilitate efficient transportation and 
>>freight despite the cost and potholes, though that's an imperfect 
>>simile.
>
>While I might not agree with the parts of your email you cut out, I 
>would definitely like to chime in on this part. Muni fiber should be 
>exactly that, muni *fiber*. Point to point fiber optic single mode 
>fiber cabling, aggregating thousands of households per location, 
>preferrably tens of thousands.
>
>It's hard to go wrong in this area, it either works or it doesn't, and 
>in these aggregation nodes people can compete with several different 
>technologies, they can use PON, they can use active ethernet, they can 
>provide corporate 10GE connections if they need to, they can run 
>hybrid/fiber coax, they can run point-to-point 1GE for residential. 
>Anything is possible and the infrastructure is likely to be as viable 
>in 30 years as it is day 1 after installation.
>
>-- 
>Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike at swm.pp.se
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20140721/c995d9d7/attachment.pgp>