Will wholesale-only muni actually bring the boys to your yard?
jra at baylink.com
Thu Jan 31 02:10:31 UTC 2013
----- Original Message -----
> From: "William Herrin" <bill at herrin.us>
> As long as they support open peering they can probably operate at
> layer 3 without harm. Tough to pitch a muni on spending tax revenue
> for something that's not a complete product usable directly by the
That's one problem, yes. My solution there is to tap the Third Local
ISP, who are already the competitive provider over Bright House, and
have them at the letter of intent stage, at least informally, before I
go to the council with a proposal.
> > 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?
> Not Road Runner, no. What you've done, if you've done it right, is
> returned being an ISP to an ease-of-entry business like it was back in
> the dialup days. That's where *small* business plays, offering
> customized services where small amounts of high-margin money can be
> had meeting needs that a high-volume commodity player can't handle.
And this argument, Bill, plays right into my hands. Thanks.
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra at baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA #natog +1 727 647 1274
More information about the NANOG