Exploiting a non-facilities CLEC relationship

Tue Aug 16 03:27:53 UTC 2011

On 8/15/11 10:14 PM, "Jon Lewis" <jlewis at lewis.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 15 Aug 2011, Graham Wooden wrote:
> 
>> To clarify ... We have a new customer who is just that ... A non-facilities
>> based CLEC. They don't want to resell AT&T's network anymore as they want to
>> start building their own network, little bit at a time.
>> 
>> I was thinking .. Well, shoot .. If all they want to do is sell Internet T1s
>> (for example), then have them pulled back to a collo somewhere over a
>> channelized DS3 on the backend and an equivalent speed internet connection
>> the front - and they will be on their way ...
>> 
>> So the question remains ... will they still be able to capture the savings
>> of getting such loops because they are a CLEC, if indeed they are not
>> 'facilities based' and just handling the loops as if they were the customer?
>> I believe they have no intentions on becoming a facilities based CLEC.
> 
> If I understand your question, yes.  We did this some time ago.  Colo in
> various ILEC and CLEC central offices, order T1 loops (but it's only half
> a loop...from customer to CO), so you're saving there, and because you're
> ordering it as a CLEC, most people would be shocked how cheap a T1 can be.
> Connect the various colos together with a network of T1's and T3's
> (especially if you can establish a relationship with a carrier who's
> on-net in all or most of the COs you want to be in), and you're set.

Yup, that is the model they are looking to do.  The main question was that
if they were going to be able to cash in on the loops savings, etc if they
remain paper based. With that, could they locate in the LEC's CO? Sure there
is a fee for a paper based CLEC. I was thinking just in a regular collo
would be just fine.

> Someone looking to start this model now, I'd say is about 10 years late, 5
> years too late.

Well, I think they need to "move" to this model (from what I am
understanding the situation) as they need to expand their horizons.

Thanks Jon for the reply.

-graham