Mark Tinka wrote:
Yes, but nobody cares about Layer 1 or Layer 2.
As you wrote:
You can't tell me that US$700 million being spent to build a > submarine cable around a continent is something to scoff at.
you do care.
Look, I'm not saying the ITU are bad
FYI, I'm not arguing especially for ITU. But, it do have some regulatory influence for its Members.
FYI, IS-IS is part of OSI, which was jointly developed by ISO and ITU, not by IETF at all.
You might be forgetting that the IETF adapted IS-IS to IP networks:
Just as RIP was imported from XNS world, which does not deny Xerox and ITU/ISO primarily contributed to develop the protocols.
I have zero interest in being the profit police. Who am I tell anyone that they are earning too much?
Anti-trust agencies, of course.
Access networks are subject to regional monopoly unless unbundling is forced by regulatory bodies. Worse, with PON, such unbundling is hard (not impossible, see https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5616389).
Submarine cables are usually either owned by one party, or a small club.
Submarine cables are for backbone. That's why you must distinguish access and backbone. Masataka Ohta