Muni fiber: L1 or L2?

Wed Feb 6 15:54:59 UTC 2013

> >
> > That's incorrect, you simply don't have as many available but in a
> current
> > "normal" build you could easily provide 100+ dark fiber leases that
> extend
> > from your MDF (still don't like using this term here) all the way down
> > to the home or business.
>
> And, conversely, I could, actually, *build a ring atop home run*; it would
> just be a folded ring, where the active gear is at the end of each run.
>

Yep, that's likely what will happen over the long term anyhow.  That's why
I asked about a new apartment building in your territory.  You decision
would be either run additional fiber to support each apartment as an end
point, simply provide backhaul  to some other provider, or put your own
actives somewhere nearby.

>
> > > I realize it is your argument that one doesn't need to do so,
> > > there's no market for it, etc. However, I don't agree with you.
> >
> > No, my argument is that the demand for dark fiber is very low and so
> > building your network so you can provide every single connection as
> > dark fiber is wasteful.
>
> Doing things which are not quite cost effective *yet* is pretty much
> the *hallmark* of government, is it not?  Hybrid car tax breaks, Solar
> PV install tax breaks... these things are all subsidies to the consumer
> cost of a technology, so as to increase its uptake and push it onto the
> consumer-cost S-curve; this is a government practice with at least a
> century long history.
>
> It's pretty much what I'm trying to accomplish here.  And thanks for
> teasing that thought out of my head, so I can make sure it's in my
> internal sales pitch. :-)
>

All of those items have some chance of mass deployment.  Mass deployment of
Layer 1 connectivity in the US is much *much *less likely.

>
> > First, exactly how many and what Layer 2 technologies BESIDES Ethernet
> > do you think you have a market for?
>
> GPON/DOCSIS/RFoG?  That's one people are deploying today.
>

That question was in reference to commercial accounts not service providers.

>
> Over the 50 year proposed lifetime of the plant?  WTF knows.  That's
> exactly the point.
>
> To paraphrase Tom Peters, you don't look like a trailbreaker by
> *emulating what other trailbreakers have done*.
>
> I'm not *trying* to do the last thing.
>
> I'm trying to do the next thing.  Or maybe the one after that.
>
> > First, there are very few businesses in the size town we've been
> discussing
> > that even have this scenario as a wish list item.
>
> "...now."
>
> >                                                       Second, how many
> > businesses that need/want remote connectivity for their workers at home
> > AREN'T running Ethernet on their corporate LAN and at the employees'
> home?
>
> Course they are.
>
> > Another thing to remember is that many businesses run VPNs because of the
> > encryption and controls it provides, not because they can't get or afford
> > direct connectivity. You have a vanishingly small set of potential
> > customers IMO.
>
> Perhaps.  But the *current* potential customer base does not merit
> locking in a limited design in a 50-year plant build.
>
>
That's a business call, but like a lot of decisions you're making a ton of
assumptions as well.  You're assuming for example that the costs of running
additional fibers won't go down significantly during that 50 year time
span.  You're assuming that the cost of DWDM gear won't go down
sufficiently that running new fiber is simply not needed to support the
new architecture.  You're also assuming that Layer 1 will at some point
have a reason for customer adoption when the entire world is working on
Layer 3 methods of doing this.

> > > Admittedly, this only works for the employees that live within range,
> but
> > > it's an example of the kinds of services that nobody even imagines
> today
> > > because we can't get good L1 services cheap yet.
> >
> > This is the key point. IF someone was able to put together a nationwide
> or
> > even regional offering to allow inexpensive Layer 1 connectivity things
> > would be different.
>
> How, Scott, would you expect that sort of thing might happen?
>
> By people taking the first step?
>
> Yeah; thought so.
>

There are more "first steps" that are never followed up than people
actually starting a trend.  There is a guy in my neighborhood that swears
we can all drive around in cars powered by recycled frying oil and he built
one to prove it works.  I should point out that your idea is not new nor
are you the first to try to build something like this.

>
> My county doesn't have the same first-trencher advantage my city does...
> but it does have the advantage that *it is nearly 100% built out as well*;
> we are, I believe, the densest county *in the United States*; maybe
> Manhattan beats us.  Maybe DC; maybe Suffolk County in Mass.
>
> So it's not at all impossible that we might be the first domino to fall;
> there are a lot of barrier island communities near me that would be
> similarly
> easy to fiber, since they're so one-dimensional.
>
> (Geographically; I'm sure their residents are quite nice. :-)
>

Today there are networks based on this premise in every state I've cared to
check.  Here in Georgia the independent phone companies formed a seperate
organization called US Carrier (which was recently sold for much less than
they put into it).  The muni's formed a partnering (initially) network
called MEAG that was later renamed to GA Public Web (
http://www.gapublicweb.net/).  When the two were first constructed in the
early 2000's they actually had a interconnects and could sell off each
other's network, but that fell apart over time.

>
> >                      However, that's not going to happen AND we already
> > have good cheap solutions to deal with that. Most commonly VPLS over GRE
> > or VPN whose only real cost beyond the basic home Internet connection,
> > is a ~$350 CPE that supports the protocol.
>
> You're paying $350 for VPN routers?
>
> Could I be one of your vendors?
>

VPLS and good remote management is well worth $350.

>
> >                                           So, if you're running a company
> > with regional or nationwide offices and home workers would you be
> attracted
> > to a more limited method of connection that is only available in certain
> > areas as opposed to the solution that works everywhere? Which is easier
> for
> > your IT staff to support?
>
> Accurate, but not germane.  They're not my target market.
>

Owen brought up that example.

>
> Cheers,
> -- jra
> --
> Jay R. Ashworth                  Baylink
> jra at baylink.com
> Designer                     The Things I Think                       RFC
> 2100
> Ashworth & Associates     http://baylink.pitas.com         2000 Land
> Rover DII
> St Petersburg FL USA               #natog                      +1 727 647
> 1274
>
>

-- 
Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
ZCorum
(678) 507-5000
--------------------------------
http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
--------------------------------