Muni fiber: L1 or L2?

Sun Feb 3 17:04:43 UTC 2013

In a message written on Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 10:53:04PM -0500, Scott Helms wrote:
> tightly defined area that is densely populated today.  I'd also say that
> this is not the normal muni network in the US today, since generally
> speaking muni networks spring up where the local area is poorly served by
> commercial operators.

Exactly, that's what I would like to fix.  I personally haven't
talked much about the poltical and regulatory polices that go along
with the technical details I've discussed, but I want to build these
muni-networks in the areas today dominated by the cablecos and
telcos, and force them to use it rather than doing their own builds
along with everyone else.

As a citizen I get less people digging up streets and yards, and
more competition since now more than just the incumbant telco and
cableco can play ball.

If Glasgow Kentucky (population ) can have fiber between any two
buildings in town for $300 a month, why can't I?  Somehow a small
rural town of 14,000 can do it, but the big cities can't?

http://www.epblan.com/ethernet.html

I also suspect we could drop that cost a full order of magnitude with
some economies of scale.

People are doing this, and it does work, it's just being done in
locations the big telcos and cablecos have written off...

-- 
       Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 826 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20130203/bc64ce1f/attachment.sig>