Customer owned fibre - the way ahead?

Interesting article about a project in Canada to sell the last mile to
customers for about 3000USD per household:

http://arstechnica.com/articles/cult...wned-fiber.ars

I'm particularly optimistic about the analogy of how we moved from telco-
owned CPE to customer-owned CPE, and how customer-owned fibre will bring
similarly dramatic benefits to customers.

--
<http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) ((E-Mail Removed))
23:39:03 up 21 days, 2:14, 3 users, load average: 0.08, 0.05, 0.01
Convergence, n: The act of using separate DSL circuits for voice and data

On Fri, 01 Aug 2008 22:53:02 +0000, alexd passed an empty day by writing:

> Interesting article about a project in Canada to sell the last mile to
> customers for about 3000USD per household:
>
> http://arstechnica.com/articles/cult...wned-fiber.ars
>
> I'm particularly optimistic about the analogy of how we moved from
> telco- owned CPE to customer-owned CPE, and how customer-owned fibre
> will bring similarly dramatic benefits to customers.

And who is responsible for repairing it when the water board cut it?

--
I collect spam + please send it to: (E-Mail Removed)

Klunk wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Aug 2008 22:53:02 +0000, alexd passed an empty day by writing:
>
>> Interesting article about a project in Canada to sell the last mile to
>> customers for about 3000USD per household:
>>
>> http://arstechnica.com/articles/cult...wned-fiber.ars
>>
>> I'm particularly optimistic about the analogy of how we moved from
>> telco- owned CPE to customer-owned CPE, and how customer-owned fibre
>> will bring similarly dramatic benefits to customers.
>
> And who is responsible for repairing it when the water board cut it?
>
Quite. It also seems to suppose that providing each customer with their
own fibre to the exchange is the way forward. I would have thought that
switching at the cabinet was still a possible solution.

On Sat, 02 Aug 2008 11:07:56 +0100, Nick wrote:

> Klunk wrote:
>> On Fri, 01 Aug 2008 22:53:02 +0000, alexd passed an empty day by
>> writing:
>>
>>> customer-owned fibre will bring similarly dramatic benefits to
>>> customers.
>>
>> And who is responsible for repairing it when the water board cut it?

> Quite.

Given that it'll be your fibre, that sort of decision could be made in
the same way that you decide who repairs your car when it gets crashed
into. You could insure your fibre, or you could hope for the best and pay
up when it goes wrong.

> It also seems to suppose that providing each customer with their
> own fibre to the exchange is the way forward. I would have thought that
> switching at the cabinet was still a possible solution.

There's no reason why "a carrier-neutral colocation facility, where a
variety of ISPs would have a presence" might not be a cabinet. Given that
"a presence" could be as little as a VLAN tag on your port, there's no
reason that thousands of carriers might not be present in every cabinet.

--
<http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) ((E-Mail Removed))
11:13:54 up 21 days, 13:49, 3 users, load average: 0.00, 0.01, 0.00
Convergence, n: The act of using separate DSL circuits for voice and data

"alexd" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:489393cd$0$623$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Interesting article about a project in Canada to sell the last mile to
> customers for about 3000USD per household:
>
> http://arstechnica.com/articles/cult...wned-fiber.ars
>
> I'm particularly optimistic about the analogy of how we moved from telco-
> owned CPE to customer-owned CPE, and how customer-owned fibre will bring
> similarly dramatic benefits to customers.

I picked up on this bit:

"After years of litigation and regulatory uncertainty, in 2005 the Supreme
Court confirmed that cable incumbents were not subject to open-access rules.
Soon afterwards, the FCC threw in the towel on open access for the Baby
Bells as well. The result was the now-familiar duopoly: most American
consumers can now get broadband service from their local phone company or
their local cable company, but that's it."
Not what you'd expect from "the land of the free"?

George

alexd wrote:
> On Sat, 02 Aug 2008 11:07:56 +0100, Nick wrote:
>
>> Klunk wrote:
>>> On Fri, 01 Aug 2008 22:53:02 +0000, alexd passed an empty day by
>>> writing:
>>>
>>>> customer-owned fibre will bring similarly dramatic benefits to
>>>> customers.
>>> And who is responsible for repairing it when the water board cut it?
>
>> Quite.
>
> Given that it'll be your fibre, that sort of decision could be made in
> the same way that you decide who repairs your car when it gets crashed
> into. You could insure your fibre, or you could hope for the best and pay
> up when it goes wrong.
>

So I could just go out and dig up the road or pavement?


>> It also seems to suppose that providing each customer with their
>> own fibre to the exchange is the way forward. I would have thought that
>> switching at the cabinet was still a possible solution.
>
> There's no reason why "a carrier-neutral colocation facility, where a
> variety of ISPs would have a presence" might not be a cabinet. Given that
> "a presence" could be as little as a VLAN tag on your port, there's no
> reason that thousands of carriers might not be present in every cabinet.
>

There still needs physical network. I actually like the loop unbundling
idea where a company provides the physical network and other companies
provide the service, VLAN if you like.

I can't see any real merit in people having their own physical fibre.

On Sat, 02 Aug 2008 11:32:23 +0100, Andy Burns passed an empty day by
writing:

> On 02/08/2008 11:21, alexd wrote:
>
>> You could insure your fibre, or you could hope for the best and pay up
>> when it goes wrong.
>
> or you could sue whoever damaged it.

And whilst you are fighting for months other who is responsible for it....

BT, even now, rarely manage to nail down people who damage it's plant in
the street. They often know who it is and when they did it - but making
it stick just ain't that easy. Even with the best lawyers in the land.

Furthermore, with the loss of revenue for the local loop if customer
owned fibre took off, what do you think would happen to the cost of
hooking that fibre into the backhaul network? Do you think you would get
it for £10 a month of something?

Everyone wants fast, everyone wants cheap - nobody wants to pay the going
rate. You don't just shit a network out in the streets.

--
I collect spam + please send it to: (E-Mail Removed)

Klunk wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Aug 2008 22:53:02 +0000, alexd passed an empty day by writing:
>
>> Interesting article about a project in Canada to sell the last mile to
>> customers for about 3000USD per household:
>>
>> http://arstechnica.com/articles/cult...wned-fiber.ars
>>
>> I'm particularly optimistic about the analogy of how we moved from
>> telco- owned CPE to customer-owned CPE, and how customer-owned fibre
>> will bring similarly dramatic benefits to customers.
>
> And who is responsible for repairing it when the water board cut it?
>

The water board...

Nick wrote:

> I can't see any real merit in people having their own physical fibre.

ISP/Telco don't have to worry about it, and can charge you to repair it
for you. That's after the US$3,000 you just wasted on it.

On Sun, 03 Aug 2008 14:22:10 +0100, Cork Soaker wrote:

> Klunk wrote:
>> On Fri, 01 Aug 2008 22:53:02 +0000, alexd passed an empty day by
>> writing:
>>
>>> Interesting article about a project in Canada to sell the last mile to
>>> customers for about 3000USD per household:
>>>
>>> http://arstechnica.com/articles/cult...wned-fiber.ars
>>>
>>> I'm particularly optimistic about the analogy of how we moved from
>>> telco- owned CPE to customer-owned CPE, and how customer-owned fibre
>>> will bring similarly dramatic benefits to customers.
>>
>> And who is responsible for repairing it when the water board cut it?
>>
>>
> The water board...

Yawn.