[170192] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Level 3 blames Internet slowdowns on Technica
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Mon Mar 24 22:08:32 2014
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <001c01cf4710$0441be60$0cc53b20$@iname.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 19:04:45 -0700
To: Frank Bulk <frnkblk@iname.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Since a second build-out is impractical (if not actually impossible) and =
they don=92t
sell UNEs, they are, in fact, pretty much exempt from direct competition =
for the
same services.
Owen
On Mar 23, 2014, at 8:20 PM, Frank Bulk <frnkblk@iname.com> wrote:
> I think I understand what you're saying -- you believe that RLECs that =
don't
> have to provide UNE's are exempt from competition. I guess I don't =
see the
> lack of that requirement meaning that there's no competition -- it =
just
> means that the kind of competition is different.
>=20
> Frank
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Naslund, Steve [mailto:SNaslund@medline.com]=20
> Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 10:16 PM
> To: Frank Bulk
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: RE: Level 3 blames Internet slowdowns on Technica
>=20
> Many rural LECs are not required to provide unbundled network =
elements. As
> a network provider you can resell their service but they are not =
required to
> provide unbundled elements necessary to compete against them as a =
facilities
> based provider. So, for example, in Alamo Tennessee or Northern =
Wisconsin
> you can get a T-1 from a competitive carrier that resells their =
services but
> you cannot get competitive POTS service. You can buy DSL service from
> anyone but they are reselling the RLECs DSL access services not just =
running
> on their cable pairs. One of the biggest players that specializes in =
being
> a rural LEC is Frontier Communications.
>=20
> Yes, there are wireless carriers and satellite providers but =
especially in
> rural areas they are not a real viable alternative for high speed data =
since
> we know the characteristic of satellite service and WISPs have the =
same
> density problem in providing service in rural areas. It is hard for a =
WISP
> to be profitable when you only have a handful of customers per mile. =
Same
> formula, low density, long distances, high infrastructure per customer =
cost
> for the WISP.
>=20
> Steven Naslund
> Chicago IL
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frank Bulk [mailto:frnkblk@iname.com]=20
> Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 10:08 PM
> To: Naslund, Steve
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: RE: Level 3 blames Internet slowdowns on Technica
>=20
> Not sure which rural LECs are exempt from competition. Some areas are
> effectively exempt from facilities-based (i.e. wireline) competition =
because
> it's unaffordable, without subsidy, to build a duplicate wireline
> infrastructure. There are also wireless carriers and WISPs the =
compete
> against RLECs, as well as satellite providers. I'm not aware of any
> exclusivity.
>=20
> Frank
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Naslund, Steve [mailto:SNaslund@medline.com]
> Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 9:00 PM
> To: Joe Greco
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: RE: Level 3 blames Internet slowdowns on Technica
>=20
> <snip>
>=20
> In a low density area you can never fund a build out which is where
> universal access charges came from and the reason that rural LECs are =
exempt
> from competition. In return for building a network that is not =
profitable
> easily they get exclusive access to sell services on it to give them a
> chance. Will your NRC be reasonable anywhere outside a major metro =
area?
>=20
> <snip>
>=20
> Steven Naslund
> Chicago IL
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
