FCCs RFC for the Definition of Broadband

Frank Bulk frnkblk at iname.com
Fri Aug 28 21:55:04 CDT 2009


I'm not following you here -- which party has the right of first refusal?

If I had to guess, what really happened here is that the rural LEC is able
to build out FTTH because they are counting on USF (high cost loop support
and interstate common line support) to help pay it, while the LEC in an
urban area receives no USF, and is not able to financially justify it even
with a dense customer base.


-----Original Message-----
From: James Downs [mailto:egon at egon.cc] 
Sent: Friday, August 28, 2009 1:07 AM
To: nanog at nanog.org
Subject: Re: FCCs RFC for the Definition of Broadband

On Aug 26, 2009, at 5:00 PM, Roy wrote:

> I think it has become obvious that the correct definition of  
> broadband depends on the users location.  A house in the boonies is  
> not going to get fiber,  Perhaps the minimum acceptable bandwidth  
> should vary by area.  A definition of "area" could be some sort of  
> user density

Except this is exactly what happened.  The players with vested  
interests were allowed a sort of "first refusal" on projects.  In  
areas where they had lots of customers, they passed on the projects.   
So, we find that in urban areas, you can't get fiber in the home, but  
there are countless rural farms and homes that have fiber just lying  
around.  I have an acquaintance 60 miles from the closest commercial  
airport in TN, telling me about the fiber internet he has.


More information about the NANOG mailing list