On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Colton Conor <colton.conor@gmail.com> wrote:
If a new operator or city is building a greenfield access network from the ground up,
Hi Colton, We just had a long discussion in this forum to the effect that if a city builds a greenfield access network, it would be best limited to "layer 1" services. That is, deliver dark fiber and invite as many service providers as possible to light it with whatever services they're inclined to sell. Commercially, the L1 infrastructure presents the barrier to entry. That's why you don't have enough competitive commercial entities mooting the need to even discuss providing Internet as a municipal service. Even the smallest city is attractive to competitive commercial service providers when they can lease in-place L1 infrastructure ad hoc. This isn't as sexy as delivering gigabit Internet in the way roads aren't as sexy as the cars which drive on them but it relieves the city of having to make most of the hard-to-get-right decisions that could tank your effort and turn it into a boondoggle. Let commercial entities worry about what car will be popular next year and let commercial entities figure out which stores folks will drive those cars to. Just worry about where to build roads. On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@arbor.net> wrote:
I'm not criticizing you; I'm just trying to make the point that instead of concentrating on vendors and technologies and hardware and software, it's better to concentrate on *people* who have the requisite experience and expertise, and go from there.
This. So much this. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/> Can I solve your unusual networking challenges?