[160841] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Muni fiber: L1 or L2?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Chris Hindy)
Thu Feb 14 20:53:28 2013
From: Chris Hindy <chindy@lwpca.net>
To: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>, Mark Andrews
<marka@isc.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 01:50:29 +0000
In-Reply-To: <511D7DB1.5040905@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Guys=8Awe're done on this. Let it go, already.
-c
On 14-02-13 19:13 , "Masataka Ohta" <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
wrote:
>Mark Andrews wrote:
>
>>> Sadly, it is impossible to say FTTC not "fiber optic broadband",
>>> because it is "broadband" (at least with today's access speed)
>>> with "fiber optic".
>>=20
>> And by that argument pots dialup is fiber optic because the packets
>> went over a fiber optic link to get to the CO.
>
>Well, not pots, but, NTT was, against ADSL, advertising their
>128Kbps ISDN dial up as "high speed Internet".
>
>So, 128Kbps dial up might have been "broadband" at that time
>at least for NTT, until, in late 2001, Japanese government
>defined "high speed Internet access network" access network to
>be able to smoothly download music data etc. with examples of
>xDSL, CATV and Wifi.
>
> Masataka Ohta
>
