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
- 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,
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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:
9 matches
Mail list logo
