[133706] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Some truth about Comcast - WikiLeaks style
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jared Mauch)
Thu Dec 16 08:02:15 2010
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
In-Reply-To: <4D09AEDA.4030202@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 08:02:02 -0500
To: JC Dill <jcdill.lists@gmail.com>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Dec 16, 2010, at 1:16 AM, JC Dill wrote:
> On 15/12/10 9:29 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
>>=20
>> The underlying problem, of course, is lack of usable last-mile =
competition;
>=20
> I agree.
>=20
>> see also my running rant about Verizon-inspired state laws =
*forbidding*
>> municipalities to charter monopoly transport-only fiber providers, =
renting
>> to all comers on non-discriminatory terms, which is the only =
practical
>> way I can see to fix any of this.
>=20
> The problem is that this should have been addressed 5-10 years ago, =
when there *were* alternative ISPs who could have provided competition. =
Now that Comcast has a monopoly on cable, and fiber is so bleeping =
expensive to install, at best we might get *one* alternative to Comcast, =
and a duopoly is really no better (for consumers, for the marketplace) =
than a monopoly.
This is why I suggested it might take regulatory action, or changes in =
state laws.
If I want to start up a coop, or convince my local county/state they =
should be a neutral provider of conduits/dark fiber as roads are =
rebuilt, etc.. there are various barriers. Even if the cost would be =
nominal. I scaled-up some quotes to be an area-wide effort for fiber =
down every public road ROW, and came back with $100mil. (you private =
road types need to shell out your own cash for that leg).
The barriers to doing this as a project are well known. Even if you =
don't like ars, they have decent articles on these topics:
=
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/01/municipal-fiber-needs-more=
-fdr-localism-fewer-state-bans.ars
=
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/06/monticello-appeals-court-w=
in.ars
=
http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2008/07/telco-wont-install-fiber-sues-t=
o-keep-city-from-doing-it.ars
Similar to the above, I could not even get Comcast to give me a quote to =
build to my area. AT&T ... good luck getting any data from them. I can =
tell they are filling in the gaps based on the trenching/boring going =
on, but there's no good way to motivate them. And even if I decided to =
drop $10k to install a bunch of POTS service for 1 month to force a =
build, who knows if that build would bring the right level of service. =
(As the POTS is regulated with a low install fee).
The incentives are clearly skewed here, but without that $100mil, =
reaching the 125k properties (111k residences) in my local area may be =
tough. (Note: there may be actual cost savings by not running down =
*every* public road, but using public road mileage and property counts =
seemed like a good method without actually designing the final fiber =
plant).
My notes are here:
http://puck.nether.net/~jared/blog/?p=3D84
The reply I received from my elected reps:
"Additionally, offering a millage to build a network for the general =
public may violate recent provisions within the Michigan =
Telecommunication Act."
- Jared=
