Level 3 blames Internet slowdowns on Technica

Frank Bulk frnkblk at iname.com
Thu Mar 27 05:11:43 UTC 2014


And MSOs, wireless carriers, and satellite providers aren't competitors to
RLECs?

Frank

-----Original Message-----
From: Owen DeLong [mailto:owen at delong.com] 
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 9:05 PM
To: Frank Bulk
Cc: Naslund, Steve; nanog at nanog.org
Subject: Re: Level 3 blames Internet slowdowns on Technica

Since a second build-out is impractical (if not actually impossible) and
they don't
sell UNEs, they are, in fact, pretty much exempt from direct competition for
the
same services.

Owen

On Mar 23, 2014, at 8:20 PM, Frank Bulk <frnkblk at iname.com> wrote:

> I think I understand what you're saying -- you believe that RLECs that
don't
> have to provide UNE's are exempt from competition.  I guess I don't see
the
> lack of that requirement meaning that there's no competition -- it just
> means that the kind of competition is different.
> 
> Frank
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Naslund, Steve [mailto:SNaslund at medline.com] 
> Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 10:16 PM
> To: Frank Bulk
> Cc: nanog at nanog.org
> Subject: RE: Level 3 blames Internet slowdowns on Technica
> 
> Many rural LECs are not required to provide unbundled network elements.
As
> a network provider you can resell their service but they are not required
to
> provide unbundled elements necessary to compete against them as a
facilities
> based provider.  So, for example, in Alamo Tennessee or Northern Wisconsin
> you can get a T-1 from a competitive carrier that resells their services
but
> you cannot get competitive POTS service.  You can buy DSL service from
> anyone but they are reselling the RLECs DSL access services not just
running
> on their cable pairs.  One of the biggest players that specializes in
being
> a rural LEC is Frontier Communications.
> 
> Yes, there are wireless carriers and satellite providers but especially in
> rural areas they are not a real viable alternative for high speed data
since
> we know the characteristic of satellite service and WISPs have the same
> density problem in providing service in rural areas.  It is hard for a
WISP
> to be profitable when you only have a handful of customers per mile.  Same
> formula, low density, long distances, high infrastructure per customer
cost
> for the WISP.
> 
> Steven Naslund
> Chicago IL
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frank Bulk [mailto:frnkblk at iname.com] 
> Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 10:08 PM
> To: Naslund, Steve
> Cc: nanog at nanog.org
> Subject: RE: Level 3 blames Internet slowdowns on Technica
> 
> Not sure which rural LECs are exempt from competition.  Some areas are
> effectively exempt from facilities-based (i.e. wireline) competition
because
> it's unaffordable, without subsidy, to build a duplicate wireline
> infrastructure.  There are also wireless carriers and WISPs the compete
> against RLECs, as well as satellite providers.  I'm not aware of any
> exclusivity.
> 
> Frank
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Naslund, Steve [mailto:SNaslund at medline.com]
> Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 9:00 PM
> To: Joe Greco
> Cc: nanog at nanog.org
> Subject: RE: Level 3 blames Internet slowdowns on Technica
> 
> <snip>
> 
> In a low density area you can never fund a build out which is where
> universal access charges came from and the reason that rural LECs are
exempt
> from competition.  In return for building a network that is not profitable
> easily they get exclusive access to sell services on it to give them a
> chance.  Will your NRC be reasonable anywhere outside a major metro area?
> 
> <snip>
> 
> Steven Naslund
> Chicago IL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 






More information about the NANOG mailing list