Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Masataka Ohta]

Mike Hammett wrote:

In no way is what I said wrong. Incumbent operators (coax or copper 
pairs) screw things up constantly (whether technically or in the 
business side of things), prompting a sea of independent operators

to overbuild them (or fill in where they haven't).


See below:

: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incumbent_local_exchange_carrier
: Various regional independents also held incumbent monopolies
: in their respective regions.

to know many independent operators are incumbent operators.


I don't mean non-RBOC ILECs. I mean WISPs, regional fiber operators,


I'm afraid "non-RBOC" is a synonym of "independent".

Anyway, ILECs including both RBOCs and thousands of non-RBOC ones
should be the regional fiber operators, as I already wrote:

: Many ILECs enjoying regional monopoly should be 100+ years old:

: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_telephone_company
: By 1903 while the Bell system had 1,278,000 subscribers on
: 1,514 main exchanges, the independents, excluding non-profit
: rural cooperatives, claimed about 2 million subscribers on
: 6,150 exchanges.[1]
: The size ranged from small mom and pop companies run by a
: husband and wife team, to large independent companies,

: many of which should now be PON operators still enjoying regional
: monopoly.

> Bob from down the street that retired and built a fiber company to
> serve his small town. I mean companies with less than 10,000
> customers and are younger than 20 years. There are literally
> thousands of them in the US and they're only getting more formidable
> in the face of lousy incumbents.

See above:

: The size ranged from small mom and pop companies run by a
: husband and wife team

Thousands of Bobs from down the street retired and built telephone
companies, now recognized as non-RBOC ILECs, to serve their small
towns 100+ years ago.

Newly coming Bobs can survive as regional fiber operators
only in regions not served by ILECs as PON providers.

Masataka Ohta

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Josh Luthman]

Micro trenching...in suburban or rural deployments?

On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 7:59 PM Kevin Shymkiw  wrote:

> Clayton,
>
> Did you leverage things like micro trenching for this project?  I may be
> mislead, but I thought micro trenching these days has helped drive the cost
> of doing this down fairly significantly.
>
> Kevin
>
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 17:56 Clayton Zekelman  wrote:
>
>>
>> The cost is not low.  Trust me on that.  I've been involved in a pretty
>> massive suburban fibre deployment for the past decade... I expect we'll
>> make money sometime in the 2030's... in time for me to retire.
>>
>> At 12:13 PM 02/02/2023, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:
>>
>> The cost to build physical layer in much of the suburban and somewhat
>> rural US is low enough anymore that lots of smaller, independent, ISPs are
>> overbuilding the incumbent with fiber and taking a big chunk of their
>> customer base because they are local and care.  And making money while
>> doing it.Â
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Clayton Zekelman
>> Managed Network Systems Inc. (MNSi)
>> 3363 Tecumseh Rd. E
>> Windsor, Ontario
>> N8W 1H4
>>
>> tel. 519-985-8410
>> fax. 519-985-8409
>>
>

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List (Patrick Garner)

[Josh Luthman]

Orange is so you can a) see it and b) orange = telecom

Blue = clean water
Green = sewer
Yellow = gas
Red = high voltage


On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 12:20 PM Keith Stokes  wrote:

> I think the bright orange is so you don't run over it with your lawn
> mower, especially since it's going to be there for 3 years.
>
> You'd think in the 3 years in the US South it would be grown over and
> buried itself. 
>
> --
> *From:* NANOG  on behalf of
> Patrick Garner 
> *Sent:* Friday, February 3, 2023 10:16 AM
> *To:* nanog@nanog.org 
> *Subject:* Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List
> (Patrick Garner)
>
> We have the same issue here in suburban Atlanta but with Comcast. The
> Comcast ped in my front yard has no cover... it's exposed to the elements.
> There's a bright orange cable running from there to my neighbor's house,
> it's been there for at least 3 years. At the least, it doesn't touch my
> property. There's other spots in my neighborhood where Comcast's bright
> orange coax just runs on the ground, along the road, in the gutter. Not
> saying AT is the greatest but at the very least their peds(they are so
> old they still say Bellsouth) have covers and they come within 3 days of
> install to bury DSL lines. I don't understand why Comcast has to choose the
> absolute ugliest bright orange cables to leave everywhere. If you're going
> to leave it, at least use a black cable.
>
> Yay duopoly!
> --
> Patrick Garner
> Owner
> Cherokee Communications LLC
> 404-406-9864
> patrick@cherokee.network
>

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Mike Hammett]

In no way is what I said wrong. Incumbent operators (coax or copper pairs) 
screw things up constantly (whether technically or in the business side of 
things), prompting a sea of independent operators to overbuild them (or fill in 
where they haven't). I was responding specifically to what Eric said, "I wish 
that the people running the networks at residential last mile operators with 
many hundreds of thousands up to dozens of millions of CPEs would push back 
against efforts from executives/management to participate in this race to the 
bottom of cost and network quality." 


I don't mean non-RBOC ILECs. I mean WISPs, regional fiber operators, Bob from 
down the street that retired and built a fiber company to serve his small town. 
I mean companies with less than 10,000 customers and are younger than 20 years. 
There are literally thousands of them in the US and they're only getting more 
formidable in the face of lousy incumbents. 


Oh, and I just noticed that spell check moved me away from condescension, 
rather than closer to it. Oops. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

- Original Message -

From: "Masataka Ohta"  
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Monday, February 6, 2023 8:27:07 AM 
Subject: Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List 

Mike Hammett wrote: 

> Where did you think that condensation was going to get you in 
> this conversation? 

I was involved in this thread because of your totally wrong 
statement of: 

: I selfishly hope they don't because that's where independent 
: operators will succeed. ;-) 

First of all, "Spectrum (legacy TWC)" is not a small company. 

Moreover, as is stated in wikipedia that: 

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incumbent_local_exchange_carrier 
> Various regional independents also held incumbent monopolies 
> in their respective regions. 

many independent operators are keep succeeding for 100+ years 
not because they unreasonably cut maintenance cost but because 
they have archived regional monopoly. 

Masataka Ohta 

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Masataka Ohta]

Mike Hammett wrote:


Where did you think that condensation was going to get you in
this conversation?


I was involved in this thread because of your totally wrong
statement of:

: I selfishly hope they don't because that's where independent
: operators will succeed. ;-)

First of all, "Spectrum (legacy TWC)" is not a small company.

Moreover, as is stated in wikipedia that:

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incumbent_local_exchange_carrier
>Various regional independents also held incumbent monopolies
>in their respective regions.

many independent operators are keep succeeding for 100+ years
not because they unreasonably cut maintenance cost but because
they have archived regional monopoly.

Masataka Ohta

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Mike Hammett]

Where did you think that condensation was going to get you in this conversation?



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com

Midwest-IX
http://www.midwest-ix.com

- Original Message -
From: Masataka Ohta 
To: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Sun, 05 Feb 2023 20:24:08 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

Mike Hammett wrote:

> Except there are literally thousands of independent ISPs in the US,
 > many 10+ years old that aren't likely to be going anywhere and
 > they are moving to constructing their own wireline.

Many ILECs enjoying regional monopoly should be 100+ years old:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incumbent_local_exchange_carrier
Various regional independents also held incumbent monopolies
in their respective regions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_telephone_company
By 1903 while the Bell system had 1,278,000 subscribers on
1,514 main exchanges, the independents, excluding non-profit
rural cooperatives, claimed about 2 million subscribers on
6,150 exchanges.[1]
The size ranged from small mom and pop companies run by a
husband and wife team, to large independent companies,

many of which should now be PON operators still enjoying regional
monopoly.

So?

Masataka Ohta

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Mike Hammett]

Where did you think that condensation was going to get you in this conversation?



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com

Midwest-IX
http://www.midwest-ix.com

- Original Message -
From: Masataka Ohta 
To: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Sun, 05 Feb 2023 20:24:08 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

Mike Hammett wrote:

> Except there are literally thousands of independent ISPs in the US,
 > many 10+ years old that aren't likely to be going anywhere and
 > they are moving to constructing their own wireline.

Many ILECs enjoying regional monopoly should be 100+ years old:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incumbent_local_exchange_carrier
Various regional independents also held incumbent monopolies
in their respective regions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_telephone_company
By 1903 while the Bell system had 1,278,000 subscribers on
1,514 main exchanges, the independents, excluding non-profit
rural cooperatives, claimed about 2 million subscribers on
6,150 exchanges.[1]
The size ranged from small mom and pop companies run by a
husband and wife team, to large independent companies,

many of which should now be PON operators still enjoying regional
monopoly.

So?

Masataka Ohta

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Masataka Ohta]

Mike Hammett wrote:


Except there are literally thousands of independent ISPs in the US,

> many 10+ years old that aren't likely to be going anywhere and
> they are moving to constructing their own wireline.

Many ILECs enjoying regional monopoly should be 100+ years old:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incumbent_local_exchange_carrier
Various regional independents also held incumbent monopolies
in their respective regions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_telephone_company
By 1903 while the Bell system had 1,278,000 subscribers on
1,514 main exchanges, the independents, excluding non-profit
rural cooperatives, claimed about 2 million subscribers on
6,150 exchanges.[1]
The size ranged from small mom and pop companies run by a
husband and wife team, to large independent companies,

many of which should now be PON operators still enjoying regional
monopoly.

So?

Masataka Ohta

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Mike Hammett]

Except there are literally thousands of independent ISPs in the US, many 10+ 
years old that aren't likely to be going anywhere and they are moving to 
constructing their own wireline. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

- Original Message -

From: "Masataka Ohta"  
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Sunday, February 5, 2023 6:56:02 PM 
Subject: Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List 

Mike Hammett wrote: 

> Maybe it's not as hard as everyone says? 

That's exactly the way of thinking by investors during 
bubble. 

It should be noted that corona virus not only caused 
depression against which QE policy was chosen but also 
forced people stay at home. 

As such, investing on internet access seemed promising 
and some money was also invested on high speed inexpensive 
satellite internet, even though satellite internet must 
be low speed or expensive. 

Masataka Ohta 

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Masataka Ohta]

Mike Hammett wrote:


Maybe it's not as hard as everyone says?


That's exactly the way of thinking by investors during
bubble.

It should be noted that corona virus not only caused
depression against which QE policy was chosen but also
forced people stay at home.

As such, investing on internet access seemed promising
and some money was also invested on high speed inexpensive
satellite internet, even though satellite internet must
be low speed or expensive.

Masataka Ohta

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Mike Hammett]

Maybe, maybe not.

Maybe it's not as hard as everyone says?

Maybe people have different goals in mind?

Maybe there are enough people enough upset with the status quo that they'll 
spend their money elsewhere?

-Mike HammettIntelligent Computing SolutionsMidwest Internet ExchangeThe 
Brothers WISP

- Original Message -
From: Masataka Ohta 
To: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Sat, 04 Feb 2023 02:14:30 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

Mike Hammett wrote:

> Yet the independents are doing it anyway.

Petit bubble caused by quantitative easing, perhaps.

Masataka Ohta
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange
> 
> The Brothers WISP
> 
> - Original Message -
> 
> From: "Eric Kuhnke" 
> To: "Forrest Christian (List Account)" 
> Cc: "nanog list" 
> Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 6:46:01 PM
> Subject: Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List
> 
> 
> 
> It might look low cost until you look at a post-1980s suburb in the USA or 
> Canada where 100% of the utilities are underground. There may be no fiber or 
> duct routes. Just old coax used for DOCSIS3 owned/run by the local cable 
> incumbent and copper POTS wiring belonging to the ILEC. The cost to retrofit 
> such a neighborhood and reach every house with a fiber architecture can be 
> quite high in construction and labor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 9:14 AM Forrest Christian (List Account) < 
> li...@packetflux.com > wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> The cost to build physical layer in much of the suburban and somewhat rural 
> US is low enough anymore that lots of smaller, independent, ISPs are 
> overbuilding the incumbent with fiber and taking a big chunk of their 
> customer base because they are local and care. And making money while doing 
> it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2023, 8:22 AM Masataka Ohta < mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp 
> > wrote:
> 
> 
> Mike Hammett wrote:
> 
>> I selfishly hope they don't because that's where independent
>> operators will succeed. ;-)
> 
> Because of natural regional monopoly at physical layer (cabling
> cost for a certain region is same between competitors but their
> revenues are proportional to their regional market shares), they
> can't succeed unless the physical layer is regulated to be
> unbundled, which is hard with PON.
> 
> But, in US where regional telephone network has been operated
> by, unlike Europe/Japan, a private company enjoying natural
> regional monopoly, economic situation today should be no worse
> than that at that time.
> 
> Masataka Ohta
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Masataka Ohta]

Mike Hammett wrote:


Yet the independents are doing it anyway.


Petit bubble caused by quantitative easing, perhaps.

Masataka Ohta





-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions

Midwest Internet Exchange

The Brothers WISP

- Original Message -

From: "Eric Kuhnke" 
To: "Forrest Christian (List Account)" 
Cc: "nanog list" 
Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 6:46:01 PM
Subject: Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List



It might look low cost until you look at a post-1980s suburb in the USA or 
Canada where 100% of the utilities are underground. There may be no fiber or 
duct routes. Just old coax used for DOCSIS3 owned/run by the local cable 
incumbent and copper POTS wiring belonging to the ILEC. The cost to retrofit 
such a neighborhood and reach every house with a fiber architecture can be 
quite high in construction and labor.







On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 9:14 AM Forrest Christian (List Account) < 
li...@packetflux.com > wrote:



The cost to build physical layer in much of the suburban and somewhat rural US 
is low enough anymore that lots of smaller, independent, ISPs are overbuilding 
the incumbent with fiber and taking a big chunk of their customer base because 
they are local and care. And making money while doing it.




On Thu, Feb 2, 2023, 8:22 AM Masataka Ohta < mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp > 
wrote:


Mike Hammett wrote:


I selfishly hope they don't because that's where independent
operators will succeed. ;-)


Because of natural regional monopoly at physical layer (cabling
cost for a certain region is same between competitors but their
revenues are proportional to their regional market shares), they
can't succeed unless the physical layer is regulated to be
unbundled, which is hard with PON.

But, in US where regional telephone network has been operated
by, unlike Europe/Japan, a private company enjoying natural
regional monopoly, economic situation today should be no worse
than that at that time.

Masataka Ohta

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List (Patrick Garner)

[Keith Stokes]

I think the bright orange is so you don't run over it with your lawn mower, 
especially since it's going to be there for 3 years.

You'd think in the 3 years in the US South it would be grown over and buried 
itself. 


From: NANOG  on behalf of Patrick 
Garner 
Sent: Friday, February 3, 2023 10:16 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Subject: Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List (Patrick 
Garner)

We have the same issue here in suburban Atlanta but with Comcast. The Comcast 
ped in my front yard has no cover... it's exposed to the elements. There's a 
bright orange cable running from there to my neighbor's house, it's been there 
for at least 3 years. At the least, it doesn't touch my property. There's other 
spots in my neighborhood where Comcast's bright orange coax just runs on the 
ground, along the road, in the gutter. Not saying AT is the greatest but at 
the very least their peds(they are so old they still say Bellsouth) have covers 
and they come within 3 days of install to bury DSL lines. I don't understand 
why Comcast has to choose the absolute ugliest bright orange cables to leave 
everywhere. If you're going to leave it, at least use a black cable.

Yay duopoly!
--
Patrick Garner
Owner
Cherokee Communications LLC
404-406-9864
patrick@cherokee.network

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List (Patrick Garner)

[Patrick Garner]

We have the same issue here in suburban Atlanta but with Comcast. The
Comcast ped in my front yard has no cover... it's exposed to the elements.
There's a bright orange cable running from there to my neighbor's house,
it's been there for at least 3 years. At the least, it doesn't touch my
property. There's other spots in my neighborhood where Comcast's bright
orange coax just runs on the ground, along the road, in the gutter. Not
saying AT is the greatest but at the very least their peds(they are so
old they still say Bellsouth) have covers and they come within 3 days of
install to bury DSL lines. I don't understand why Comcast has to choose the
absolute ugliest bright orange cables to leave everywhere. If you're going
to leave it, at least use a black cable.

Yay duopoly!
-- 
Patrick Garner
Owner
Cherokee Communications LLC
404-406-9864
patrick@cherokee.network

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Mike Hammett]

Yet the independents are doing it anyway. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

- Original Message -

From: "Eric Kuhnke"  
To: "Forrest Christian (List Account)"  
Cc: "nanog list"  
Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 6:46:01 PM 
Subject: Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List 



It might look low cost until you look at a post-1980s suburb in the USA or 
Canada where 100% of the utilities are underground. There may be no fiber or 
duct routes. Just old coax used for DOCSIS3 owned/run by the local cable 
incumbent and copper POTS wiring belonging to the ILEC. The cost to retrofit 
such a neighborhood and reach every house with a fiber architecture can be 
quite high in construction and labor. 







On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 9:14 AM Forrest Christian (List Account) < 
li...@packetflux.com > wrote: 



The cost to build physical layer in much of the suburban and somewhat rural US 
is low enough anymore that lots of smaller, independent, ISPs are overbuilding 
the incumbent with fiber and taking a big chunk of their customer base because 
they are local and care. And making money while doing it. 




On Thu, Feb 2, 2023, 8:22 AM Masataka Ohta < mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp > 
wrote: 


Mike Hammett wrote: 

> I selfishly hope they don't because that's where independent 
> operators will succeed. ;-) 

Because of natural regional monopoly at physical layer (cabling 
cost for a certain region is same between competitors but their 
revenues are proportional to their regional market shares), they 
can't succeed unless the physical layer is regulated to be 
unbundled, which is hard with PON. 

But, in US where regional telephone network has been operated 
by, unlike Europe/Japan, a private company enjoying natural 
regional monopoly, economic situation today should be no worse 
than that at that time. 

Masataka Ohta 

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Clayton Zekelman]

At 08:43 PM 02/02/2023, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
There is "microtrenching" and then there is 
microtrenching. Very different things are 
sometimes described by the same name. Some of 
what Google tried to go was exceedingly shallow, 
like 4 inches down. Cheap microtrenching done 
too quick and too shallow has given the concept a bad name.


The local ILEC is doing that here - they use a 
spade to make a little slot in the customer's 
lawn and shove the cable in.  If they have to 
cross a driveway or sidewalk, they dig out the 
expansion joint, shove the cable in and dump some 
cold patch in the gap.  If they have to run 
multiple cables, they use a concrete saw to make the gap a bit wider.


There is microtrenched fiber in Vancouver BC 
that is close to 20 years old now throughout the 
downtown core that is nearly problem-free. The 
difference is that it is 12+ inches down and was 
installed using large, noisy, water cooled 
diamond-grit concrete saws cutting deep slits 
into the joints between streets and curbs, or 
concrete curbs and sidewalks,  duct inserted, 
then backfilled with grouting. It's deep enough 
where it crosses roads that re-paving the road 
by first grinding off the top several inches of 
surface is extremely unlikely to disturb the duct.


I'm familiar with the slightly more robust 
technique deployed by companies like 
Teraspan.  I'm sure it works much better in the 
milder climate in BC.   There are microtrench/VIF 
networks in Toronto and Ottawa as well.  A few 
years ago, they were re-building one of the roads 
in the downtown core in Toronto, and the entire 
microtrenched network (mini handholes and all) 
had been lifted out of the street area and laid 
on the sidewalk, and protected with barriers and 
safety cones, etc.I just shook my head...




--

Clayton Zekelman
Managed Network Systems Inc. (MNSi)
3363 Tecumseh Rd. E
Windsor, Ontario
N8W 1H4

tel. 519-985-8410
fax. 519-985-8409

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Eric Kuhnke]

There is "microtrenching" and then there is microtrenching. Very different
things are sometimes described by the same name. Some of what Google tried
to go was exceedingly shallow, like 4 inches down. Cheap microtrenching
done too quick and too shallow has given the concept a bad name.

There is microtrenched fiber in Vancouver BC that is close to 20 years old
now throughout the downtown core that is nearly problem-free. The
difference is that it is 12+ inches down and was installed using large,
noisy, water cooled diamond-grit concrete saws cutting deep slits into the
joints between streets and curbs, or concrete curbs and sidewalks,  duct
inserted, then backfilled with grouting. It's deep enough where it crosses
roads that re-paving the road by first grinding off the top several inches
of surface is extremely unlikely to disturb the duct.

On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 5:17 PM Clayton Zekelman  wrote:

>
> It may.  We don't use it.  Too many freeze/thaw cycles each winter around
> here.  It would get destroyed in a few years.
>
> Google tried to cheap out in Louisville... didn't quite work out
> https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/7/18215743/google-fiber-leaving-louisville-service-ending
> - although that was even more sketchy than traditional microtrenching.
>
> As for rural, the business case becomes even more difficult when you're
> measuring kilometers per home passed instead of homes passed per
> kilometer...
>
> At 07:58 PM 02/02/2023, Kevin Shymkiw wrote:
>
> Clayton,
>
> Did you leverage things like micro trenching for this project?  I may be
> mislead, but I thought micro trenching these days has helped drive the cost
> of doing this down fairly significantly.
>
> Kevin
>
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 17:56 Clayton Zekelman  wrote:
>
> The cost is not low.  Trust me on that.  I've been involved in a pretty
> massive suburban fibre deployment for the past decade... I expect we'll
> make money sometime in the 2030's... in time for me to retire.
>
> At 12:13 PM 02/02/2023, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:
>
> The cost to build physical layer in much of the suburban and somewhat
> rural US is low enough anymore that lots of smaller, independent, ISPs are
> overbuilding the incumbent with fiber and taking a big chunk of their
> customer base because they are local and care.  And making money while
> doing it.Â
>
>
> --
>
> Clayton Zekelman
> Managed Network Systems Inc. (MNSi)
> 3363 Tecumseh Rd. E
> Windsor, Ontario
> N8W 1H4
>
> tel. 519-985-8410
> fax. 519-985-8409
>

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Sabri Berisha]

- On Feb 2, 2023, at 4:55 PM, Clayton Zekelman clay...@mnsi.net wrote:

> The cost is not low. Trust me on that. I've been involved in a pretty massive
> suburban fibre deployment for the past decade... 

My neighborhood is currently serviced by coax only. A contractor for Frontier is
digging, as I write this, in front of my home. They use a large Vermeer drill to
pull a conduit underneath the sidewalks. We have existing conduits from the 
street to the homes. 

I talked to the foreman (who is the son of the owner), and he told me that they
get around $100 per foot. That's for the conduit only, not a single fiber 
pulled.

A city inspector comes every day to check up on their work.

Thanks,

Sabri

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Clayton Zekelman]

It may.  We don't use it.  Too many freeze/thaw 
cycles each winter around here.  It would get destroyed in a few years.


Google tried to cheap out in Louisville... didn't 
quite work out 
https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/7/18215743/google-fiber-leaving-louisville-service-ending 
- although that was even more sketchy than traditional microtrenching.


As for rural, the business case becomes even more 
difficult when you're measuring kilometers per 
home passed instead of homes passed per kilometer...


At 07:58 PM 02/02/2023, Kevin Shymkiw wrote:

Clayton,

Did you leverage things like micro trenching for 
this project?  I may be mislead, but I thought 
micro trenching these days has helped drive the 
cost of doing this down fairly significantly.


Kevin

On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 17:56 Clayton Zekelman 
<clay...@mnsi.net> wrote:


The cost is not low.  Trust me on that.  I've 
been involved in a pretty massive suburban fibre 
deployment for the past decade... I expect we'll 
make money sometime in the 2030's... in time for me to retire.


At 12:13 PM 02/02/2023, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:
The cost to build physical layer in much of the 
suburban and somewhat rural US is low enough 
anymore that lots of smaller, independent, ISPs 
are overbuilding the incumbent with fiber and 
taking a big chunk of their customer base 
because they are local and care.  And making money while doing it.Â






--

Clayton Zekelman
Managed Network Systems Inc. (MNSi)
3363 Tecumseh Rd. E
Windsor, Ontario
N8W 1H4

tel. 519-985-8410
fax. 519-985-8409

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Kevin Shymkiw]

Clayton,

Did you leverage things like micro trenching for this project?  I may be
mislead, but I thought micro trenching these days has helped drive the cost
of doing this down fairly significantly.

Kevin

On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 17:56 Clayton Zekelman  wrote:

>
> The cost is not low.  Trust me on that.  I've been involved in a pretty
> massive suburban fibre deployment for the past decade... I expect we'll
> make money sometime in the 2030's... in time for me to retire.
>
> At 12:13 PM 02/02/2023, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:
>
> The cost to build physical layer in much of the suburban and somewhat
> rural US is low enough anymore that lots of smaller, independent, ISPs are
> overbuilding the incumbent with fiber and taking a big chunk of their
> customer base because they are local and care.  And making money while
> doing it.Â
>
>
> --
>
> Clayton Zekelman
> Managed Network Systems Inc. (MNSi)
> 3363 Tecumseh Rd. E
> Windsor, Ontario
> N8W 1H4
>
> tel. 519-985-8410
> fax. 519-985-8409
>

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Clayton Zekelman]

The cost is not low.  Trust me on that.  I've 
been involved in a pretty massive suburban fibre 
deployment for the past decade... I expect we'll 
make money sometime in the 2030's... in time for me to retire.


At 12:13 PM 02/02/2023, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:
The cost to build physical layer in much of the 
suburban and somewhat rural US is low enough 
anymore that lots of smaller, independent, ISPs 
are overbuilding the incumbent with fiber and 
taking a big chunk of their customer base 
because they are local and care.  And making money while doing it.Â





--

Clayton Zekelman
Managed Network Systems Inc. (MNSi)
3363 Tecumseh Rd. E
Windsor, Ontario
N8W 1H4

tel. 519-985-8410
fax. 519-985-8409

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Eric Kuhnke]

It might look low cost until you look at a post-1980s suburb in the USA or
Canada where 100% of the utilities are underground. There may be no fiber
or duct routes. Just old coax used for DOCSIS3 owned/run by the local cable
incumbent and copper POTS wiring belonging to the ILEC. The cost to
retrofit such a neighborhood and reach every house with a fiber
architecture can be quite high in construction and labor.



On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 9:14 AM Forrest Christian (List Account) <
li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

> The cost to build physical layer in much of the suburban and somewhat
> rural US is low enough anymore that lots of smaller, independent, ISPs are
> overbuilding the incumbent with fiber and taking a big chunk of their
> customer base because they are local and care.  And making money while
> doing it.
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2023, 8:22 AM Masataka Ohta <
> mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote:
>
>> Mike Hammett wrote:
>>
>> > I selfishly hope they don't because that's where independent
>> > operators will succeed. ;-)
>>
>> Because of natural regional monopoly at physical layer (cabling
>> cost for a certain region is same between competitors but their
>> revenues are proportional to their regional market shares), they
>> can't succeed unless the physical layer is regulated to be
>> unbundled, which is hard with PON.
>>
>> But, in US where regional telephone network has been operated
>> by, unlike Europe/Japan, a private company enjoying natural
>> regional monopoly, economic situation today should be no worse
>> than that at that time.
>>
>> Masataka Ohta
>>
>

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Forrest Christian (List Account)]

The cost to build physical layer in much of the suburban and somewhat rural
US is low enough anymore that lots of smaller, independent, ISPs are
overbuilding the incumbent with fiber and taking a big chunk of their
customer base because they are local and care.  And making money while
doing it.


On Thu, Feb 2, 2023, 8:22 AM Masataka Ohta 
wrote:

> Mike Hammett wrote:
>
> > I selfishly hope they don't because that's where independent
> > operators will succeed. ;-)
>
> Because of natural regional monopoly at physical layer (cabling
> cost for a certain region is same between competitors but their
> revenues are proportional to their regional market shares), they
> can't succeed unless the physical layer is regulated to be
> unbundled, which is hard with PON.
>
> But, in US where regional telephone network has been operated
> by, unlike Europe/Japan, a private company enjoying natural
> regional monopoly, economic situation today should be no worse
> than that at that time.
>
> Masataka Ohta
>

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Masataka Ohta]

Mike Hammett wrote:


I selfishly hope they don't because that's where independent
operators will succeed. ;-)


Because of natural regional monopoly at physical layer (cabling
cost for a certain region is same between competitors but their
revenues are proportional to their regional market shares), they
can't succeed unless the physical layer is regulated to be
unbundled, which is hard with PON.

But, in US where regional telephone network has been operated
by, unlike Europe/Japan, a private company enjoying natural
regional monopoly, economic situation today should be no worse
than that at that time.

Masataka Ohta

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Mike Hammett]

I selfishly hope they don't because that's where independent operators will 
succeed. ;-) 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

- Original Message -

From: "Eric Kuhnke"  
To: "Gabriel Kuri"  
Cc: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Wednesday, February 1, 2023 4:18:46 PM 
Subject: Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List 



I think that this really says more about the race to the bottom in last mile 
residential operations. 


It seems inevitable that once a last mile residential broadband operator grows 
to a certain gargantuan size, the quality of the network suffers and nobody 
really cares to take ownership of specific local problems. 


I've seen it many times looking at infrastructure of probably a dozen different 
last mile operators in many different states and provinces. 



And do you know what's commonly found in the same places as stuff like garbage 
bag wrapped pedestals and coax temp-run between cans for months or years at a 
time? Employees who feel pressured to do cheap/shoddy/fast work and move on to 
the next ticket. Or workers doing these tasks who aren't employees at all but 
piece work 1099 workers under a subcontract or a subcontractor-of-a-contractor. 
It's not a good situation for the rank and file workers either. Go find the 
worker who eventually fixes that temp-run coax job and see if he's really happy 
with his job. 



I wish that the people running the networks at residential last mile operators 
with many hundreds of thousands up to dozens of millions of CPEs would push 
back against efforts from executives/management to participate in this race to 
the bottom of cost and network quality. It's too easy to hand wave away the 
problem and be like "oh, but the middle mile fiber aggregation router and core 
links in and out of this market look fine, that's somebody else's problem to 
deal with the field work...". 










On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 1:36 PM Gabriel Kuri via NANOG < nanog@nanog.org > 
wrote: 





Could someone from Spectrum who deals with the HFC infrastructure in Southern 
California, specifically the legacy Time Warner Cable area, contact me off list 
? 


Apparently the local infrastructure crew thinks it's OK to leave cable running 
between two cans in a residential neighborhood since at least July 2022. But 
it's OK, because they've cautioned them off with orange cones, right ? 



Multiple calls to regular customer service fall on deaf ears about a coax trunk 
cable run above ground on a street and sidewalk in the middle of a residential 
neighborhood. 



Customer service says, "We don't know what you're talking about, we don't have 
cables running on the street". Can't seem to get a hold of the right people to 
come out and get it buried and get rid of the eyesore and safety hazard ... 



image1.jpg



image2.jpg


Thanks, 
Gabe 

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Eric Kuhnke]

I think that this really says more about the race to the bottom in last
mile residential operations.

It seems inevitable that once a last mile residential broadband operator
grows to a certain gargantuan size, the quality of the network suffers and
nobody really cares to take ownership of specific local problems.

I've seen it many times looking at infrastructure of probably a dozen
different last mile operators in many different states and provinces.

And do you know what's commonly found in the same places as stuff like
garbage bag wrapped pedestals and coax temp-run between cans for months or
years at a time?  Employees who feel pressured to do cheap/shoddy/fast work
and move on to the next ticket. Or workers doing these tasks who aren't
employees at all but piece work 1099 workers under a subcontract or a
subcontractor-of-a-contractor.  It's not a good situation for the rank and
file workers either. Go find the worker who eventually fixes that temp-run
coax job and see if he's really happy with his job.

I wish that the people running the networks at residential last mile
operators with many hundreds of thousands up to dozens of millions of CPEs
would push back against efforts from executives/management to participate
in this race to the bottom of cost and network quality. It's too easy to
hand wave away the problem and be like "oh, but the middle mile fiber
aggregation router and core links in and out of this market look fine,
that's somebody else's problem to deal with the field work...".





On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 1:36 PM Gabriel Kuri via NANOG 
wrote:

> Could someone from Spectrum who deals with the HFC infrastructure in
> Southern California, specifically the legacy Time Warner Cable area,
> contact me off list ?
>
> Apparently the local infrastructure crew thinks it's OK to leave cable
> running between two cans in a residential neighborhood since at least July
> 2022. But it's OK, because they've cautioned them off with orange cones,
> right ?
>
> Multiple calls to regular customer service fall on deaf ears about a coax
> trunk cable run above ground on a street and sidewalk in the middle of a
> residential neighborhood.
>
> Customer service says, "We don't know what you're talking about, we don't
> have cables running on the street". Can't seem to get a hold of the right
> people to come out and get it buried and get rid of the eyesore and safety
> hazard ...
>
> [image: image1.jpg]
>
> [image: image2.jpg]
>
> Thanks,
> Gabe
>

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Shawn L via NANOG]

All i can say is good luck.  We see the 'trash-bag mod' on a lot of AT aerial 
boots and PEDs, as well as Charter/Spectrum/TWC gear.  A lot of times, they 
don't even get that.  Unless you know how to get in contact with a local tech, 
they will most likely not respond until the customer complains about their 
service being out.  In which case, the same tech that ran the 'low-level' drop 
between PEDs will likely come back and do it again.
 


-Original Message-
From: "Andy Brezinsky" 
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2023 5:27pm
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List



Access to the right-of-way in most areas is granted through a CATV Franchise 
agreement with your municipality.  This agreement will include a contact for 
disputes.  As another avenue, contact the local government and ask them to deal 
with the safety issue in the public right of way and let them escalate with 
their contacts.
 
On 1/31/23 15:33, Gabriel Kuri via NANOG wrote:

Could someone from Spectrum who deals with the HFC infrastructure in Southern 
California, specifically the legacy Time Warner Cable area, contact me off list 
?
Apparently the local infrastructure crew thinks it's OK to leave cable running 
between two cans in a residential neighborhood since at least July 2022. But 
it's OK, because they've cautioned them off with orange cones, right ?
Multiple calls to regular customer service fall on deaf ears about a coax trunk 
cable run above ground on a street and sidewalk in the middle of a residential 
neighborhood.
Customer service says, "We don't know what you're talking about, we don't have 
cables running on the street". Can't seem to get a hold of the right people to 
come out and get it buried and get rid of the eyesore and safety hazard ...


Thanks,
Gabe

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Andy Brezinsky]

Access to the right-of-way in most areas is granted through a CATV 
Franchise agreement with your municipality.  This agreement will include 
a contact for disputes.  As another avenue, contact the local government 
and ask them to deal with the safety issue in the public right of way 
and let them escalate with their contacts.



On 1/31/23 15:33, Gabriel Kuri via NANOG wrote:
Could someone from Spectrum who deals with the HFC infrastructure in 
Southern California, specifically the legacy Time Warner Cable area, 
contact me off list ?


Apparently the local infrastructure crew thinks it's OK to leave cable 
running between two cans in a residential neighborhood since at least 
July 2022. But it's OK, because they've cautioned them off with orange 
cones, right ?


Multiple calls to regular customer service fall on deaf ears about a 
coax trunk cable run above ground on a street and sidewalk in the 
middle of a residential neighborhood.


Customer service says, "We don't know what you're talking about, we 
don't have cables running on the street". Can't seem to get a hold of 
the right people to come out and get it buried and get rid of the 
eyesore and safety hazard ...


image1.jpg

image2.jpg

Thanks,
Gabe

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Grant Taylor via NANOG]

On 1/31/23 2:33 PM, Gabriel Kuri via NANOG wrote:
Apparently the local infrastructure crew thinks it's OK to leave cable 
running between two cans in a residential neighborhood since at least 
July 2022. But it's OK, because they've cautioned them off with orange 
cones, right ?


Multiple calls to regular customer service fall on deaf ears about a 
coax trunk cable run above ground on a street and sidewalk in the middle 
of a residential neighborhood.


Customer service says, "We don't know what you're talking about, we 
don't have cables running on the street". Can't seem to get a hold of 
the right people to come out and get it buried and get rid of the 
eyesore and safety hazard ...


That all sounds familiar.

I used to work with a guy who kept accidentally cutting a temporary 
cable from a pedestal in his yard running to his neighbor's house every 
couple of weeks for a year and a half.  Both he and the neighbor were 
mad at the cable company and were trying to make the cable company fix 
things.


The cable company would come fix / re-run the supposedly temporary cable 
within 36 hours of it being cut.


This went on from late spring one year until mid summer the next year.

FINALLY the cable company came out and buried (yet another) new cable.

I think that it's really sad that it took that long for the cable 
company to do what they said they would do in less than two weeks from 
the original repair.




--
Grant. . . .
unix || die



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Gabriel Kuri via NANOG]

Could someone from Spectrum who deals with the HFC infrastructure in
Southern California, specifically the legacy Time Warner Cable area,
contact me off list ?

Apparently the local infrastructure crew thinks it's OK to leave cable
running between two cans in a residential neighborhood since at least July
2022. But it's OK, because they've cautioned them off with orange cones,
right ?

Multiple calls to regular customer service fall on deaf ears about a coax
trunk cable run above ground on a street and sidewalk in the middle of a
residential neighborhood.

Customer service says, "We don't know what you're talking about, we don't
have cables running on the street". Can't seem to get a hold of the right
people to come out and get it buried and get rid of the eyesore and safety
hazard ...

[image: image1.jpg]

[image: image2.jpg]

Thanks,
Gabe