[134076] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Some truth about Comcast - WikiLeaks style
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jay Ashworth)
Thu Dec 23 12:19:23 2010
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 12:19:38 -0500 (EST)
From: Jay Ashworth <jra@baylink.com>
To: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <201012210541.oBL5fqSQ003384@mail.r-bonomi.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert Bonomi" <bonomi@mail.r-bonomi.com>
> "Overbuild" is practical *ONLY* where: (a) the population density is
> high,lowering 'per customer' costs, and (b) service 'penetration' is high
> enough that the active subscriber base (as distinct from 'potential'
> subscribers) sufficient to support the 'overhead' of two complete, parallel,
> physical plants. This tends to be 'self-limiting', to up-scale, high-density
> housing, neighborhoods. The 'raw economics' of the situation may well be
> distorted by local government 'intrference' -- e.g., requiring a provider serve
> _all_ households within arbitrary boundaries, rather than just 'low hanging
> fruit' areas.
Yup.
And that's just another argument in favor of muni fiber -- since it's municipal,
it will by definition serve every address, and since it's monopoly, it will
enable competition by making it practical for competitors to start up, since
they'll have trival access to all comers.
And since D-CATV is pretty much delivered over IP these days *anyway*,
it won't even be technically difficult for cable providers to hook up
customers over such a backbone.
Gee... I wonder if the teeny little town I live in wants to be the first
in our county to do that. :-)
Cheers,
-- jra
