Eric Wieling wrote: > In the past the ISP simply needed a nice big ATM pipe to the > ILEC for DSL service. The ILEC provided a PVC from the > customer endpoint to the ISP. As understand it this is no > longer the case, but only because of non-technical issues.
The non-technical issue is *COST*!!!!! No one considered to use so expensive ATM as L2 for DSL unbundling, at least in Japan, which made DSL in Japan quite inexpensive. > We currently use XO, Covad, etc to connect to the customer > We get a fiber connection to them and the provide use L2 > connectivity to the custom endpoint using an Ethernet VLAN, > Frame Relay PVC, etc complete with QoS. I assume XO, > etc use UNE access to the local loop. There is no reason > a Muni can't do something similar. Muni can. However, there is no reason Muni can't offer L1 unbundling. Masataka Ohta