Will wholesale-only muni actually bring the boys to your yard?

Jean-Francois Mezei jfmezei_nanog at vaxination.ca
Wed Jan 30 04:21:50 UTC 2013


On 13-01-29 19:39, Jay Ashworth wrote:

> It rings true to me, in general, and I would go that way... but there is
> a sting in that tail: Can I reasonably expect that Road Runner will in fact
> be technically equipped and inclined to meet me to get my residents as 
> subscribers?  Especially if they're already built HFC in much to all of
> my municipality?

I do not have numbers, but based on what I have read. municipal
deployments have occured in cases where incumbents were not interested
in providing modern internet access.

What may happen is that once they see the minucipality building FTTH,
they may suddently develop an interest in that city and deploy HFC and
or DSL and then sue the city for reason X.

The normal behaviour should be: "we'll gladly connect to the municipal
system".

A good layer 2 deployment can support DHCP or PPPoE and thus be
compatible with incumbents infrastructure. However, a good layer2
deployment won't have "RFoG" support and will prefer IPTV over the data
channel (the australian model supports multicast). So cable companies
without IPTV services may be at a disadvantage.

In Canada, Rogers (cableco) has announced that they plan to go all IPTV
instead of conventional TV channels.



More information about the NANOG mailing list