On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:27 AM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
On Mar 23, 2012, at 6:21 AM, Masataka Ohta wrote:
Jared Mauch wrote:
It is already a monopoly. Most places are served by one of the utilities: power, telephony or cable. He that controls the outside plant controls your fate.
The difference is in how the services can be unbundled.
Power is additive (if in phase) that network topology is irrelevant.
For telephony, unbundling for DSL at L1 is just fine.
So is optical fiber if single star topology is used.
WDM PON can still be unbundled at L1.
However, with time slotted PON, unbundling must be at L2, which is as expensive as L3, which means there effectively is no unbundling.
Or, CLEC may rent a raw fiber at L1 and operate its own PON. However, as CLEC has less customer density to share the fiber than ILEC, CLEC's fiber cost per customer is higher than that of ILEC, which is why PON promotes local monopoly.
It doesn't promote local monopoly if you don't allow the L1 company to provide L2+ services.
If the L1 company is required to be independent of and treat all L2+ services companies equally, then, the ILEC, CLEC, et. all have the same cost per customer.
Hi Owen, Just for grins, I wonder: what is the minimal set of _structural_ requirements that could end the kind of abuses we see from the ILECs without relying on good behavior? The problem with regulatory compulsion is that it restrains the march of technological progress too. Minimum is good. Here's what I'm thinking: 1. Any company which provides more than "5%" of the OSI Layer 1 services in a given locality is prohibited from providing any Layer 7 services except those strictly incidental to the operation of the L1 service (e.g. billing or customer service web sites, internal corporate network). 2. Such a communications infrastructure company may vend L1-L6 services only in units suitable for connecting single customers. For example, they're not allowed to lease "a multi-customer coaxial cable in the King street neighborhood." The service unit is "a dedicated coaxial cable from 44 King street to the head end" or "A dedicated cable channel from 44 King Street to the head end" or "25mbps/25mbps from 44 King strreet to the head end" or "25 mbps / 25 mbps from 44 King Street to 888 King Street". 3. Such a communications infrastructure company is compelled to provide reasonable and non-discriminatory access too all who would interconnect. Charge whatever you want but no quantity or special discounts and if you bill any service provider at the head end of the connection then you bill them all the same. No settlement free peering for this guy while that guy pays. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004