Re: Muni broadband sucks (was: New minimum speed for US broadband connections)

[Masataka Ohta <mohta () necom830 hpcl titech ac jp>]

Jim Troutman wrote:

> > However, with PON, only the provider with the largest share can
> > win the initial competition, after which there is monopoly.

> No.  Most of the municipal proposals I see are open access, even with
> a PON design.

Private fiber operators are strongly motivated to deploy PON
because PON is designed to make competitions impossible even
if regulators forces the operators to do so, which is why
PON is so popular.

Muni fiber operators deploying PON because it is so pupular
are just dumb stupid.

> If the network is not a "one fiber per customer" design, then the
> muni network will own the entire GPON/XGS-PON infrastructure (fiber,
> splitters and lit electronics).

What if the muni infrastructure is plain PON with 1G ether
switches?

Where is the competition to improve the infrastructure, even
though it is already "broadband"?

Or, even if it is GPON with 10G switches, how can it be
upgraded to 10GPON with 100G switches?

> The ISP is just providing bits,
> customer service, billing, and maybe the inside install and CPE.

You miss "bps", which is essential to be "broadband".

                                                Masataka Ohta