[116993] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: FCCs RFC for the Definition of Broadband
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jack Bates)
Fri Aug 28 11:36:38 2009
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 10:34:43 -0500
From: Jack Bates <jbates@brightok.net>
To: Peter Beckman <beckman@angryox.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0908281125110.85863@nog.angryox.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Peter Beckman wrote:
> I like that idea, except for the problem that I don't want my neighbors to
> have access to the colo, or at least my feed, but I want access to my feed
> to I can reboot whatever device is connected there. There would have to
> be individual locked cages of some standard size so I could access and
> reboot or change my router out, but could not disconnect or modify my
> neighbors connection.
And then there's the matter of who's paying for it. Even if initial cost
is covered by the home owners in a new development project, there is
maintenance costs associated with such a setup. If the ILEC is
responsible, but doesn't subsidize costs by controlling all customers or
billing out to the other ISPs, it creates an unfair disadvantage on the
ILEC.
Jack
