[170400] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Level 3 blames Internet slowdowns on Technica
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Thu Mar 27 02:33:29 2014
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <005c01cf497b$0b8e1660$22aa4320$@iname.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 23:31:40 -0700
To: Frank Bulk <frnkblk@iname.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Depends.
On some services (L3, etc.), yes, they compete.
That should not be conflated with competing at the L1 service.
MSOs deliver L1 co-ax or HFC.
RLECs deliver copper pairs and/or GPON.
Satellite is it=92s own peculiar sets of L1 transport.
None of them compete head-to-head on the same technology on L1.
Owen
On Mar 26, 2014, at 10:11 PM, Frank Bulk <frnkblk@iname.com> wrote:
> And MSOs, wireless carriers, and satellite providers aren't =
competitors to
> RLECs?
>=20
> Frank
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Owen DeLong [mailto:owen@delong.com]=20
> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 9:05 PM
> To: Frank Bulk
> Cc: Naslund, Steve; nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Level 3 blames Internet slowdowns on Technica
>=20
> Since a second build-out is impractical (if not actually impossible) =
and
> they don't
> sell UNEs, they are, in fact, pretty much exempt from direct =
competition for
> the
> same services.
>=20
> Owen
>=20
> On Mar 23, 2014, at 8:20 PM, Frank Bulk <frnkblk@iname.com> wrote:
>=20
>> 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
>=20
>=20
