[83238] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: fcc ruling on dsl providers' access to infrastructure
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michael Painter)
Mon Aug 8 03:43:38 2005
From: "Michael Painter" <tvhawaii@shaka.com>
To: "Joe McGuckin" <joe@via.net>,
"Richard A Steenbergen" <ras@e-gerbil.net>,
"Douglas Otis" <dotis@mail-abuse.org>
Cc: "Randy Bush" <randy@psg.com>, <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2005 21:42:22 -1000
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
From: "Joe McGuckin" <joe@via.net>
Subject: Re: fcc ruling on dsl providers' access to infrastructure
> On 8/7/05 7:20 PM, "Richard A Steenbergen" <ras@e-gerbil.net> wrote:
>
>> Maybe what we need is a certain class of
>> company who will be responsible for running and maintaining the public
>> data infrastructures. They could have lots of government regulations to
>> ensure that they are charging a "fair" price while still being guaranteed
>> a profit, and they could provide the last mile service for all those ISPs
>> out there who are the ones that can actually compete and innovate.
>
>
> Yes, it's called structural separation.
Curious what others might think about this, assuming it's not snake-oil:
http://www.shorecliffcommunications.com/magazine/news.asp?news=4404
http://www.xgtechnology.com/plots.htm
Very low power and could be deployed right now in the unused adjacent-channel NTSC VHF spectrum. VHF (and/or UHF) would seem to
solve many of the problems with "wireless"
--Michael
