[173392] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Muni Fiber and Politics
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mikael Abrahamsson)
Wed Jul 23 08:58:29 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 14:58:20 +0200 (CEST)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Scott Helms <khelms@zcorum.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMrdfRwMK9ikgWLUXRwnHH9GCi+akh0hgC=q+K-KR3PNUdGiqA@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Wed, 23 Jul 2014, Scott Helms wrote:
> for a more open approach. The people involved in the bond arrangements
> almost invariably see having the city the layer 3 provider as more reliable
> path to getting repaid than an open system.
Another model is the one described for instance in
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXYaAd5ubok . This has worked successfully
in Sweden as well, people getting together and putting in ducts or fiber
themselves.
In the countryside, people (at least in Sweden) people are used to
cooperating in maintenance of roads and other things, one neighbor has a
backhoe, second one has a snowplow attachment and everybody helps out.
It's a lot easier to accept digging on your property when it's your
neighborhood people getting together in doing something, instead of
$BIGTELCO that has screwed you before and will screw you again, wanting to
do the same thing. Also, after putting it in, you own the infrastructure,
so it might actually be a good investment and raise your property value.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
