[31452] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: The Backhoe Summit
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Lesher)
Sun Sep 24 07:17:07 2000
From: David Lesher <wb8foz@nrk.com>
Message-Id: <200009241116.HAA31933@sigma.nrk.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu (nanog list)
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 07:16:10 -0400 (EDT)
Reply-To: wb8foz@nrk.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Forwarded message:
> I've come to the conclusion that a lot of these problems could be
> avoided with a bit of enforced cooperation. Recent ordinances require
> competing cell providers to licence or share existing towers before
> new tower permits are allowed. We don't allow multiple rows of
> telephone poles in the same easement. Why do we allow unconstrained
> underground work? The rampant "competition" just isn't tenable.
>
> WSimpson@UMich.edu
This has been very visible in DC; the PhiberPholks have had every
ingress route torn up multiple times, making our (already 2nd
worst in US) traffic far less tolerable.
Mayor saw the issue on his radar, declared a moritorium and made
lots of noises about requiring cooperation al-la Richmond.
If such is now happening; I've not seen mention of it. The
carriers all claimed they could not tell their competition where
they were headed for, and I suspect no one will willing to buy
space in advance they'd not want for 6+ months.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
