Muni fiber: L1 or L2?

Masataka Ohta mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp
Wed Feb 6 07:50:33 UTC 2013


Eric Wieling wrote:

> I don't think it is that much more expensive to allow other
> ISPs an ATM PVC into their network.

Wrong, which is why ATM has disappeared.

> ATM may not be the best technology to do this,

It is not.

> but the basic concept is not bad.

It is not enough, even if you use inexpensive Ethernet. See
the subject.

> What *I* want as an ISP is to connect to customers,

You may. However, the customers care cost for you to do so, a lot.

L1 unbundling allows the customers to choose an ISP with best
(w.r.t. cost, performance, etc.) L2 and L3 technology, whereas
L2 unbundling allows ILECs choose stupid L2 technologies such
as ATM or PON, which is locally best for their short term
revenue, which, in the long run, delays global deployment of
broadband environment, because of high cost to the customers.

						Masataka Ohta




More information about the NANOG mailing list