Rollup: Small City Municipal Broadband

Mon Feb 4 19:57:13 UTC 2013

Scott;

I apologize.   You could very well sincerely not realize you are wrong.
Obviously, erroneous thinking is not the same as making things up.

However, it is not good that bad information is out there and it should be
corrected.    First you refer to them as "dry copper" or "dry pair" which
has no regulatory meaning.   I don't know if using the wrong term is part
of the reason you have had difficulty ordering them.   The proper term is
Unbundled Network Elements(UNE) copper loops.  UNEs are the elements the
ILECs are required to sell to CLECs.  There are a variety of different
types of UNE loops.   The most accurate way to identify them is probably
referring to an ILEC wholesale tariff filed on a state-by-state basis.
The FCC defines Section 251 requirements, but individual state PUCs
administer the tariffs for their locations.

Second, going to any document by the NTCA, an advocacy organization, for
information on this topic is a mistake for obvious bias reasons.   The
controlling documents are the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Telco Act),
the FCC's Triennial Review Order[s](TRO), various ILEC tariffs and the
individual InterConnection Agreements(ICA) between ILECs and CLECs.   Under
the Telco Act, UNE loops are a Section 251 requirement.    The FCC has
primary responsibility for administering Section 251 requirements and the
FCC's rules for doing so are put forth in the TROs.   The last TROs were
released in 2004, so that would be the last time "the rules changed" as you
put it.   So there has not been a recent change in the rules resulting in
residential CLEC demise.

Third, it is true that an ILEC is not required to add capacity.   However,
it is hard for me to believe anyone would say with a straight face that any
residential CLECs went out of business primarily because ILECs are not
required to add copper.   In a period where there is steady erosion of
landlines resulting in a lot of unused copper loops, lack of copper loops
is a small issue.   Some residential CLECs went out of business because
they had broken business models.   Some residential CLECs became successful
business CLECs as well, check out Earthlink (NASDAQ: ELNK).   The
controlling issues are more financial than regulatory.   We have had the
same regulatory regime for almost a decade.

Any prudent DSL provider, ILEC or CLEC, should have plans for a transition
to copper, but the copper network still has useful life in it for
residential CLECs as well as other markets.

Fletcher

On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Scott Helms <khelms at zcorum.com> wrote:

> Fletcher,
>
> Your specific case may vary, but I am most certainly _not_ "making stuff
> up".  In many territories, especially outside of major metro areas, you
> cannot order dry pairs.  This has been because of a combination of relaxed
> rules (if you really want I can dig up the NTCA reports on this) and
> because the rules never required the ILEC to add capacity once they were
> used up.
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 9:29 PM, Fletcher Kittredge <fkittred at gwi.net>wrote:
>
>>
>> In this particular post, your making stuff up.   There are still
>> "residential focused" CLECs and ordering Unbundled Network Elements(UNEs)
>> is not more difficult than in the past.   The rules haven't changed.
>>
>> What is certainly true is that many CLECs have found that it is more
>> lucrative to sell to businesses, but I don't think there is a correlation
>> with residential getting more difficult.   We used to be 75%/25%
>> residential/business and are now 45%/55% business, but that reflects the
>> *rapid* growth of the business market.
>>
>> regards,
>> Fletcher
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Scott Helms <khelms at zcorum.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Joe,
>>>
>>> I'm assuming from your domain that you're in Canada where yes dry pairs
>>> are
>>> still generally available.  I apologize for not making it clear that my
>>> comment was specifically about the US where dry pairs are nearly
>>> impossible
>>> to order today and the CLEC market has almost entirely abandoned the
>>> residential space. In fact, the only state in the US that I still see any
>>> residentially focused CLECs is Texas which tells me there is something
>>> about the regulations in that state that makes it more feasible.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Joe Abley <jabley at hopcount.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>> >
>>> > On 2013-02-03, at 14:39, Scott Helms <khelms at zcorum.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Dry pairs are impossible to order these days for a reason.
>>> >
>>> > Dry pairs are trivial to order round these parts. Generalisations are
>>> > always wrong, no doubt including this one.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Joe (putting the N back in NANOG)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Scott Helms
>>> Vice President of Technology
>>> ZCorum
>>> (678) 507-5000
>>> --------------------------------
>>> http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
>>> --------------------------------
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Fletcher Kittredge
>> GWI
>> 8 Pomerleau Street
>> Biddeford, ME 04005-9457
>> 207-602-1134
>
>
>
>
> --
> Scott Helms
> Vice President of Technology
> ZCorum
> (678) 507-5000
> --------------------------------
> http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
> --------------------------------
>

-- 
Fletcher Kittredge
GWI
8 Pomerleau Street
Biddeford, ME 04005-9457
207-602-1134