Article View: alt.internet.wireless
Article #207Re: FCC Broadband Proposal: too little, too late, too timid
From: AES
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 15:53
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 15:53
23 lines
2428 bytes
2428 bytes
In article <bPidncrTJ7axezzWnZ2dnUVZ8uadnZ2d@bt.com>, Bob <bob@invalid.invalid> wrote: > > While this is probably common in the US I don't believe it would be > allowed in countries who wish to push forward broadband expansion and > capability. If a company is prepared to "light the fibre" they should be > allowed to do so for a "reasonable" fee payable to the owner of the fibre. There are two sides to this problem: Situations where companies (or other organizations) own dark fiber but aren't willing to lease it, but also situations where dark fiber is available for lease but prospective users aren't willing to lease, even for backhaul purposes. We have a neighborhood where AT&T could install Uverse with some local trenching, then lease currently dark fiber owned by a municipal system to complete the connection to their central facility several miles away. Sorry, says AT&T -- we won't go into any situation where we don't _own_ the entire fiber setup, all the way from the customer to our central facility. Hmmm -- wonder why that's their policy?
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<siegman-1F9176.08535118032010@sciid-srv02.med.tufts.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!news.kjsl.com!usenet.stanford.edu!siegmanReferences:
<o8tvp5d7h3tmeo0p52vr7rqh9qdfus6mt9@navasgroup.com> <hnousq$4b1$1@speranza.aioe.org> <e0dc14f4-7ab8-425a-8b0e-d8484667d285@s36g2000prh.googlegroups.com> <hnrec2$m5f$1@news.eternal-september.org> <Xns9D3EC322CDCE6thisnthatroadrunnern@216.196.97.131> <higgy-72F5F2.19580717032010@news.announcetech.com> <7ZadnYpgfvHYJzzWnZ2dnUVZ_t6dnZ2d@posted.southvalleyinternet> <higgy-4B9801.23133217032010@news.announcetech.com> <bPidncrTJ7axezzWnZ2dnUVZ8uadnZ2d@bt.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Thread: 104fd2,150f644e01c9c266 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Thread: fa874,150f644e01c9c266 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gide43d82042,gidaa617e85ca,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!news.kjsl.com!usenet.stanford.edu!siegman From: AES <siegman@stanford.edu> Newsgroups: alt.internet.wireless,ba.internet Subject: Re: FCC Broadband Proposal: too little, too late, too timid Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 08:53:51 -0700 Organization: Stanford University Lines: 23 Message-ID: <siegman-1F9176.08535118032010@sciid-srv02.med.tufts.edu> References: <o8tvp5d7h3tmeo0p52vr7rqh9qdfus6mt9@navasgroup.com> <hnousq$4b1$1@speranza.aioe.org> <e0dc14f4-7ab8-425a-8b0e-d8484667d285@s36g2000prh.googlegroups.com> <hnrec2$m5f$1@news.eternal-september.org> <Xns9D3EC322CDCE6thisnthatroadrunnern@216.196.97.131> <higgy-72F5F2.19580717032010@news.announcetech.com> <7ZadnYpgfvHYJzzWnZ2dnUVZ_t6dnZ2d@posted.southvalleyinternet> <higgy-4B9801.23133217032010@news.announcetech.com> <bPidncrTJ7axezzWnZ2dnUVZ8uadnZ2d@bt.com> X-Trace: usenet.stanford.edu 1268927632 13826 127.0.0.1 (18 Mar 2010 15:53:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: action@cs.stanford.edu Mail-Copies-To: nobody User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.2 (Intel Mac OS X)