RE: The Backhoe Summit
On Sat, 23 September 2000, John Fraizer wrote:
On 23 Sep 2000, Sean Donelan wrote:
On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 rdobbins@netmore.net wrote:
Do the large carriers now participate in 'one-call' operations like power and gas companies do? At least in Virginia a couple of years ago, they didn't. It might be a good idea for them to do so.
"For competitive reasons we can't tell you the location of our fiber."
- An anonymous representative of a very large telco
Wow. They must not have any fiber near our facility. The folks running the digging operations are keeping Plastikote in business selling orange paint. There seems to be more orange than black on the blacktop -- all of it marked pretty clearly with the carrier name.
Ask them for a map. Yeah, I know a lot of folks have resorted to calling OneCall, getting the street painted orange, and making their own maps.
Sean Donelan wrote:
"For competitive reasons we can't tell you the location of our fiber."
- An anonymous representative of a very large telco
Ask them for a map.
Yeah, I know a lot of folks have resorted to calling OneCall, getting the street painted orange, and making their own maps.
Yeah, had that experience here (refusal to provide a map). Indeed, a little FOIA research got the official explanation that they won't even provide the city with a map. The city only has the generic plans listed when they apply for permits to tear up specific streets or cross city property. On the MCI lay that I personally watched, I compared the actual to the plan, and the actual is at least 40 feet away from where it is listed as going thru a city park. I watched the contractor carefully note location and depth measurements, but those as-builts were never filed with the city. In the ensuing years, there have been several more lays along the same general route (a lot of relocation of power and phone for an upcoming bridge replacement where the power and phone ducts were embedded in the bridge deck), and the city also added ducts for traffic controls. The orange MCI poles have long since been run over by later equipment, and markings have been haphazard at best. The result: Edison hit the MCI ducts last spring, and they had to dig 40-50 feet down near/under the river for the repair. An amazing crater, with a lot of pumping and dams to avoid diverting the river. Weeks of traffic disruption and inconvenience for neighbors. I've come to the conclusion that a lot of these problems could be avoided with a bit of enforced cooperation. Recent ordinances require competing cell providers to licence or share existing towers before new tower permits are allowed. We don't allow multiple rows of telephone poles in the same easement. Why do we allow unconstrained underground work? The rampant "competition" just isn't tenable. WSimpson@UMich.edu Key fingerprint = 17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26 DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32
I've come to the conclusion that a lot of these problems could be avoided with a bit of enforced cooperation. Recent ordinances require competing cell providers to licence or share existing towers before new tower permits are allowed. We don't allow multiple rows of telephone poles in the same easement. Why do we allow unconstrained underground work? The rampant "competition" just isn't tenable.
Well, one little issue here.. if everyone shared the same path, that means the backhoes can do more damage with one swing. Yeah, the frequency may be offset by better records, but the impact of each one will be much greater. Its a no-win situation. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Wayne Bouchard [Immagine Your ] web@typo.org [Company Name Here] Network Engineer http://www.typo.org/~web/resume.html ----------------------------------------------------------------------
I can add that a lot of cities in the Silicon Valley area do now require having a handful of companies together before they let you dig a trench. I'd imagine this trend will spread as people in metropolitan areas get tired of having their streets dug up every few months. craig
-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of Wayne Bouchard Sent: Monday, September 25, 2000 1:28 PM To: William Allen Simpson Cc: Sean Donelan; nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: The Backhoe Summit
I've come to the conclusion that a lot of these problems could be avoided with a bit of enforced cooperation. Recent ordinances require competing cell providers to licence or share existing towers before new tower permits are allowed. We don't allow multiple rows of telephone poles in the same easement. Why do we allow unconstrained underground work? The rampant "competition" just isn't tenable.
Well, one little issue here.. if everyone shared the same path, that means the backhoes can do more damage with one swing. Yeah, the frequency may be offset by better records, but the impact of each one will be much greater. Its a no-win situation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Wayne Bouchard [Immagine Your ] web@typo.org [Company Name Here] Network Engineer http://www.typo.org/~web/resume.html ----------------------------------------------------------------------
participants (4)
-
Craig Holland -
Sean Donelan -
Wayne Bouchard -
William Allen Simpson