nanog mailing list archives

Re: Muni Fiber and Politics


From: "Constantine A. Murenin" <mureninc () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 21:31:24 -0700

On 21 July 2014 18:25, Miles Fidelman <mfidelman () meetinghouse net> wrote:
goemon () anime net wrote:

On Mon, 21 Jul 2014, Miles Fidelman wrote:

- the anti-muni laws hurt small localities the most, where none of the
big players have any intent of deploying anything


This is exacatly why ashland fiber network came to be. Because no provider
was willing to step up and provide service. So the city did it.

If there were laws against it there, then ashland would still have no
service at all to this day.


Is that Ashland, Oregon?  I did some consulting on that project. The way it
started was:
- They needed to run a pair of fibers from City Hall to an out-building
- US West (I think) quoted $5k/month/fiber, at which point,
- the Mayor asked the director of the muni electric utility "what would it
cost to run some fiber"
- after some head scratching and some research, it came down to $100,000,
one time - mostly for the tooling and some training (they had the poles,
bucket trucks, linesman who were rated to work near live electric wires who
were sitting around waiting for the next storm to hit)
- after that, it was a no-brainer to start expanding the network

The cool thing about the project:
- Ashland has a bunch of places that do Hollywood post-production - they eat
up tons of bandwidth shipping stuff around - really great for that segment

Cheers,

Miles

Cool story, however,

  http://www.ashlandfiber.net/productcenter.aspx#residential

... is nothing to brag home about.  5Mbps uploads max?  Meh, I get
more with mobile phone, plus my data is actually unlimited.

C.


Current thread: