Muni fiber: L1 or L2?

Tue Feb 5 11:51:54 UTC 2013

Hi Jay,

Le 29/01/2013 18:54, Jay Ashworth a écrit :
> Hmmm.  I tend to be a Layer-2-available guy, cause I think it lets smaller
> players play.

Please let me present the french regulatory rules about that. It has
been an ongoing debate for a few years and is now almost stable.

French regulation has divided the territory in thow zones : dense and
non-dense areas, dense beeing city centers wuth multi-tenant buildings.

In both case, it is mandatory to install at least two point to point
fibers between a residence and a patch-panel.

In dense areas, building owners or home owner associations are to choose
a "building operator" to install the fiber strands in the private areas
and the patch panel made available to other service providers. This
building operator then informs service provider of the location of the
patch panel and provide a public offer to ISPs to either buy a strand or
rent one, and get some space for their own patch chords in the panel.

In non-dense areas, zone operators have to build concentration points
(kind of MMRs) for at least 300 residences (when chaining MMRs) or 1000
residences (for a single MMR per zone). Theses MMRs often take the form
of street cabinets or shelters and have to be equiped with power and
cooling units to enable any ISP yo install active equipments (either OLT
or ethernet switch).

Building and zone operators can be public (muni-owned) infrastructure
operators or public-owned corporations. We've also seen NFP associations
applying for such roles. It is mandatory for them to provide a L1 point
to point service to ISPs.

Infrastructure operators can also provide a L2 service but are still
required to offer L1 service to any willing ISP. In such case,
collocation space in street cabinets (or the ability to install their
own side by side with passive cabinets) is required.

This model has been choosed because it lets both network types be
deployed : either point to multipoint (GePON) or point to point is
possible on any of these fiber networks, thanks to the local-loop
(between residences and MMRs) beeing point to point only.

Smaller ISPs usually go for L2 services, provided by the infrastructure
operator or another ISP already present on site. But some tends to stick
to L1 service and deply their own eqipments for many reasons.

What comes to mind is the usual incompetence of infrastructure operators
regarding to multicast services or maintenance-windows beeing too loose
for most SLAs. Some ISPs also stick to P2P topologies because it's
simplier to manage and brings less features in the network equipment.
They strongly believe that a robust network is a stupid network (and I
tend to agree with them, seeing many interoperability and scalability
issues in P2MP network equipments).

Now, about individual rights, civil liberties and constitutional vantage
point, infrastructure operators can't operate a network without an L1
offer, and most also propose an L2 offer. Still, ISPs are the only
enitites capable of identifying a user because the infrastructure
operator don't have a contract with the end-user in any case. Therefore
court orders are sent to ISPs and infrastructure operators ain't concerned.

I hope it clarifies what's beeing done on actual fiber networks and how
can this issue be regulated (either by common sense or law).

Best regards,
-- 
Jérôme Nicolle
+33 6 19 31 27 14