----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Helms" <khelms@zcorum.com>
Owen I think the confusion I have is that you seem to want to create solutions for problems that have already been solved. There is no cost effective method of sharing a network at layer 1 since DWDM is expensive and requires compatible gear on both sides and no one has enough fiber (nor is cheap enough in brand new builds) to simply home run every home and maintain that.
That's my fundamental design assumption, and you're the first person to throw a flag on it. I'm hearing $700 per passing and $600 per sub; those seem sustainable numbers for a 30 year service life amortization. I'm not yet 100% clear if that's layer 1 only or layer 2 agg as well. [ And note that for me, it's practical; most everyone else is merely along for the ride. ]
ISPs that would want to use the shared network in general (>95% in my experience) don't want to maintain the access gear and since there is no clear way to delineate responsibilities when there is an issue its hard.
You're talking about what I'm calling L2 clients. If layer 2 falls over it's my fault, and believe me, I'll know about it.
The long and short of it is lots of people have tried to L1 sharing and its not economical and nothing I've seen here or elsewhere changes that.
You just changed gears again, no? I'm not trying to share L1 *drops*. I'm trying to make it possible to share *the entire L1 deployment between providers*, a drop at a time.
The thing you have to remember is that muni networks have to be cost effective and that's not just the capital costs. The operational cost in the long term is much greater than the cost of initial gear and fiber install.
Depends on what you're trying to do. But yes, I do know the difference between CAPEX and OPEX. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA #natog +1 727 647 1274