Muni Fiber and Politics

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Sat Aug 2 17:26:09 UTC 2014


I don't pretend to be the original person with this idea. But I would very much like to see it implemented. 

> On Aug 1, 2014, at 13:24, Joly MacFie <joly at punkcast.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>> MHO, experience has taught us that the lines provider (or as I
>> prefer to call them, the Layer 1 infrastructure provider) must be
>> prohibited from playing at the higher layers
> 
> 
> 
> A few years back Fred Goldstein proposed defining a Layer 1 infrastructure provider as a "LoopCo", where the local loop is passively provided to service providers to light it as they see fit.  He  even wrote draft legislation, where the incumbent LEC is divided into a "Facilities Entity" and a "Services Entity":
> 
> http://www.ionary.com/separationbillproposal.htm
> 
> That proposal generally requires something like a CLEC to light the wire locally, and makes CLECs viable again.  
> 
> He has also proposed requiring ILECs (and cablecos) to provide low-layer (layer 2, mostly) common carriage on an open basis; as filed in the current NN docket:
> 
> http://www.ionary.com/separationbillproposal.htm
> 
> 
> j
> 
> -- 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
> WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
>  http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
>  VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -


More information about the NANOG mailing list