[160044] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Muni network ownership and the Fourth
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jason Baugher)
Wed Jan 30 17:13:51 2013
In-Reply-To: <55834D03-E9A6-45BB-9C43-805F73FC6939@delong.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 16:13:38 -0600
From: Jason Baugher <jason@thebaughers.com>
To: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Sorry Owen, but I live in Illinois. Government corruption is a way of life
here.
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
>
> On Jan 30, 2013, at 6:33 AM, Jason Baugher <jason@thebaughers.com> wrote:
>
> > There is much talk of how many fibers can fit in a duct, can be brought
> > into a colo space, etc... I haven't seen much mention of how much space
> the
> > termination in the colo would take, such as splice trays, bulkheads,
> etc...
> > Someone earlier mentioned being able to have millions of fibers coming
> > through a vault, which is true assuming they are just passing through the
> > vault. When you need to break into one of those 864-fiber cables, the
> room
> > for splice cases suddenly becomes a problem.
> >
> > The other thing I find interesting about this entire thread is the
> > assumption by most that a government entity would do a good job as a
> > layer-1 or -2 provider and would be more efficient than a private
> company.
> > Governments, including municipalities, are notorious for corruption,
> fraud,
> > waste - you name it. Even when government bids out projects to the
> private
> > sector these problems are seen.
>
> I now this is a popular refrain, but in reality, it's not all that
> accurate.
>
> I have no problem with allowing L1/L2 to be done by private enterprise, so
> long as said private enterprises are required to abide by the following
> rules:
>
> 1. They are not allowed to sell L3+ services.
> 2. They are not allowed to own any portion of any L3+ service
> provider.
> 3. They must sell their L1/L2 services to any L3+ service provider on
> equal terms.
>
> Owen
>
>
