last mile, regulatory incentives, etc (was: att fiber, et al)

Keegan Holley keegan.holley at
Thu Mar 22 12:44:19 CDT 2012

If it's done on a box owned by the incumbent then sharing has evolved into
giving away free service to competitors.  It's different when copper pairs
into a house could be latched onto anyone's switch.  Once you start
requiring a carrier to give away capacity in it's network that's
different.  Also, diversity/redundancy becomes dodgy at this point.  Not
that the billions of dollars they are making didn't come into the
discussion, but it seems like its more complicated to share fiber access
than it was to share copper pairs.

2012/3/22 John Kreno <john.kreno at>

> This sharing can be done at a layer-3 or as you say at the time slot level
> or lambda level. It's no different than what is happening with the copper
> already. It's not like they have to give it away for free. They just have
> to offer it to other carriers at cost. This will hopefully provide more of
> a competitive market. But I don't see Verizon giving into it, nor Comcast
> or any other provider that has fiber. Verizon campaigned hard to have fiber
> removed from the equal access legalize so like most of these other large
> companies, they don't want to share their new toy with the other children.
> -John
> Keegan Holley <keegan.holley at> wrote:
> >2012/3/22 Jared Mauch <jared at>
> >
> >>
> >> On Mar 22, 2012, at 11:05 AM, chris wrote:
> >>
> >> > I'm all for VZ being able to reclaim it as long as they open their
> fiber
> >> > which I don't see happening unless its by force via government. At the
> >> end
> >> > of the day there needs to be the ability to allow competitors in so of
> >> > course they shouldnt be allowed to rip out the regulated part and
> replace
> >> > it with a unregulated one.
> >>
> >
> >
> >Maybe I'm missing something, but how exactly does one share fiber?  Isn't
> >it usually a closed loop between DWDM or Sonet nodes?  It doesn't seem
> fair
> >to force the incumbents to start handing out lambdas and timeslots to
> their
> >competitors on the business side.  I guess passive optical can be shared
> >depending on the details of the network, but that would still be much
> >different than sharing copper pairs.

More information about the NANOG mailing list