[151628] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Muni Fiber
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jared Mauch)
Tue Mar 27 12:49:13 2012
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
In-Reply-To: <4F71C891.6020102@meetinghouse.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 12:47:10 -0400
To: Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mar 27, 2012, at 10:02 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
>> 2015 - First communities coming online, 100M to the home (probably =
Gigabit
>> line rate, but throttled).
>=20
In most cases I've seen, the 100m fiber hardware is more expensive than =
the 1G, or the same price.
The challenge here is getting the fiber there. One can use an =
inexpensive media converter that takes a SFP for $20-25 (RJ45 <-> SFP). =
Two and bi-di optics run around $220 (10km). Further distance =
(20/40/80km optics) increase the cost some, but not significantly.
Some CPE hardware can be had for as low as sub-$200 (indoor unit). You =
may spend more for the pedestal than the hardware on the end.
I would like to see part of any road reconstruction projects the =
requirement to install conduit or other fiber optic cabling. This would =
cause most areas to organically receive this upgrade along the way. I'm =
not actually opposed to the current incumbent having access to it or =
realizing the lower cost in conjunction with another project. What I do =
take issue with is winter time construction of cabling that is not =
fiber, even if part of service restoration. Extending the reach at that =
time can only provide value long-term. I'm not seeing the incumbents =
making those decisions.
- Jared=
