[1st-mile-nm] Mea Culpa and Comment

[John J Martinez]

My paranoia has been resolved so I want to add to Carroll's masterfully written posting. 
 
Qwest and the independent telecoms are placing fiber...not enough and not enough to resolve the 1st mile problem of connectivity. They are replacing core infrastructure that has been failing for decades with a better solution (fiber) but that really doesn't get the end user any closer to having the kind of affordable high speed connection they desire.
 
So when we hear the telecoms preach about the amount of fiber miles they have placed, remember the half truths. They are correct, many schools, libraries, fire & police departments have fiber. Many sub divisions across the country have FTTH. The real problem is that they need speeds greater than DSL. With the current price schedules the telecom's have in place, only the wealthiest of US companies can afford the gig plus type connection many "third world" countries already enjoy. 
 
Having said that, here's my disclaimer. The phone companies are doing what they have to do to stay competitive. There are many things that need to change. One is the business model the companies operate under. Unless that changes we will not be able to afford to utilize FTTH even if we convince the ILEC's to build it. 
 
My two cents for now.John J. Martinez
Recovering Telecom Professional


From: carroll at cagleandassociates.comTo: 1st-mile-nm at mailman.dcn.orgDate: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 16:55:46 -0700Subject: Re: [1st-mile-nm] Mea Culpa and Comment








Folks, I have found the dialogue interesting and helpful, and I appreciate the time and thought given.
 
For now, I would like to add only one observation  -- and that has to do with Marianne’s note below.
 
As far as I understand it, I do believe the so-called ILECs (independent rural companies) deploy a lot more fiber than the much-bigger Qwest   -- but what is missing in both cases is fiber-to-the-premise (or darned little, in any event).
 
That huge omission is particularly relevant to this list-serve  -- 1st-mile – because, indeed, the “first mile” (from a customer’s point of view) is sadly lacking.   This “weakest link” feature renders, if not null and void, at least far less important, the fiber elsewhere.
 
What I am ardently working on – along with others on this list --  are ways to help enable that problem to be addressed, so that many New Mexicans (both at their residences and places of employment – including schools and health-care facilities, etc) are able to reap the huge advantages of optical fiber as a transmission mode.
 
Certainly, having fiber-to-the-premise (FTTP), alone, does not cut it!  Obviously even “first mile” fiber has to then link with neighborhood fiber and city fiber rings, and thence to inter-city fiber etc.   But if this state were to be “lighted up” with fiber, then many other beneficial results would be lighted up as well  --   the right kind of quality-oriented economic development, distance learning, telemedicine, etc.
 
I particularly liked and resonate with this partial posting earlier today from Mr. MacCabe:
 
            “Making place irrelevant so that place can matter.
One of the things that defines New Mexico is that people tend to have a strong (social) connection to place.  However, economic considerations frequently make it difficult to maintain this connection (economies of scale tend to favor metropolitan areas).  The goal of connectivity is to reduce the negative economic impact for rural -- making place irrelevant.  Flattening the cost of connectivity is the first step.”
 
Well stated.
 
Last point (for now) --  achieving the virtuous outcome that Mr. MacCabe refers to can be helped by a comprehensive strategy of tax incentives, direct appropriations into backbone infrastructure, and enabling cost-effective “open” (multi-service provider) infrastructures in local communities (FTTP).
 
Regards,
Carroll Cagle  
 
 
 
 
 
 




From: 1st-mile-nm-bounces at mailman.dcn.org [mailto:1st-mile-nm-bounces at mailman.dcn.org] On Behalf Of Marianne GranoffSent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 10:45 AMTo: Arthur Maccabe; peterCc: 1st-Mile-NMSubject: Re: [1st-mile-nm] Mea Culpa and Comment
 
I agree with almost everything that you have said about NLR and I2,but I have to take exception to this last paragraph.  A great many of the rural areas of our state have more than adequate fiberdeployment because the rural phone providers in this state have invested in fiber deployment for over 20 years.  For the most part, these rural LECs put their customers first.  On the other hand, some phone companies with dense population centers in NM put their money in 1) other states, 2) paying attorneys to fight regulation, 3) paying SEC fines for past bad behavior, 4) paying their high-priced executives' defense attorneys in criminal lawsuits, 5) paying for expensive media advertising saying how much better they are, 6) paying lobbyists to overturn consumer-oriented regulation at the State and Federal level, and 7) paying attorneys to fight with their customers.The challenge is not to "push" network services to the edge.  The challenge is to understand that the same services can be had in rural areas of NM today, but that such services will cost much more because the cost per person is more in rural areas.  I would offer that the solutions can be found by inviting the rural LECs to partner in some innovative ways instead of paying out-of-state consultants mega-bucks to find out what exists. I have never had a rural LEC in NM tell me I could not order a T1/DS1or a T3/DS3 (usually provisioned on fiber).  Our urban phone company has responded that they cannot provide even a DS1 on more than one occasion, unless I want to pay "construction costs". My two cents.Marianne GranoffNM Internet Professionals Association  At 08:34 AM 2/12/2008 -0700, Arthur Maccabe wrote:
In the end, it's critical that New Mexico move forward in building  adequate communication infrastructure.  This is far more important in  New Mexico than in our neighboring states like Arizona or Utah where  population is much more centralized and they tend to ignore the rural  parts of the state.  I like to think  of our challenge as the need to  push (network) services to the edge.  As we go through this process,  there will be false starts.  We can spend our time complaining about  the problems that we have run into, or we can try to learn from  failures and move on -- there's clearly a lot more to do.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/1st-mile-nm/attachments/20080213/d92855bf/attachment.html>