thanks for the numbers and reference. I tend to "seat of the pants" these things too much,
and from that perspective the $1800/connect number seems a bit low if it includes SW/HW as
well. I think the basic prices to hook in a private LAN must include a router/firewall as well as
the fiber transceiver and switched hub. If you're only buying 1 set, then its going to be >$3k
just for those. But anyway, take a $4k number over 60 months and you're still below $50/mo.
I was a bit surprised that only PCEI could say that even at $50/mo they would do it. I expected
Tony (of cactus) to figure into it too? Anyway, WWPF guys will be here in 45min and we'll see
where it goes.
I think the old model of the co-op community phone service is likely the best way for small
communities (of which Moscow is on the large side) is the right model, but it takes along time
to set something like that up. The EASY thing to do is to wait for an external agent, like WWPF or
GTE, to get around to providing services and then pay the higher price. That's what we've done
over the past 3 years......
johnt
-----Original Message-----
From: Gens Johnson [SMTP:gens@moscow.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 1997 6:27 AM
To: John Teeter; vision2020@uidaho.edu
Subject: Re: wwp "offer" to put fiber into the community
I think providing some input and support for ideas like this that have the
potential to significantly enhance the infrasturcture of the community, and
provide an impetus for our local telephone company to respond with better
service and prices to everyone, is incredibly worthy of our attention.
One day to respond isn't much time to gather a groundswell, though.
The cost per connection (un-lit) is, I agree, way too high. Estimates from
the National Academy of Science/National Institute of Engineering reported
in their book _The Unpredictable Certainty_ are that no matter what the
network topology (a la cable tv company: Hybrid Fiber Coax plans; a la
telephone company: Fiber to the Curb plans) the cost of providing this
connection is around $1800. Given 60 months to pay it off, we're down to a
little more than $30/month...and this figure includes the hardware/software
to light it.
In the _Unpredictable Certainty_ there is much discussion about the
different business cases that could lead to far more capable National
Information Infrastucture. There is high risk associated with any of those
business cases...whether the player is the cable TV co, the local telephone
co, the long-distance telephone co., the broadcast industry, the power
utility, or Microsoft... In fact the risk is so high, that it is quite
possible that the high bandwidth infrastructure just won't make it to the
end-user in places like Moscow for decades (if at all).
One of the possibilities in this kind of situation is for the individual
business or person who is going to benefit from the infrastructure
enhancement to bear more of the risk. The WWP offer follows this model;
but again, the $300/month is a very high "interest rate" for the capital to
make this risky investment.
Another possibility in this kind of situation is for the community to do
something like communities do to build other kinds of speculative
infrastructure (business parks?)...So we shouldn't feel that if we don't
bite at the WWP offer, there are no other alternatives.
It is so crystal clear to me that better quality (than POTS that is, Plain
Old Telephone Service) and cheaper (than current ISDN or ADSL priced)
connections to the Internet can only enhance the quality of life, the
ability to participate as citizens, and the potential to bring money into
the community; I haven't spent much time on this aspect of the
discussion...sorry.
Gens Johnson
>Well,
>
>WWP Fiber (WWPF), a wholly owned sub of WWP, showed up here last Thursday
>afternoon
>with an offer to put "unlit" fiber optic cable into the Moscow
>community.....for a price. This offer
>is one of many being made throughout the WWPF coverage area (@500,000 people
>in 4 states.
>
>I quickly called folks at the city, county, school district, and hospital, who
>I've spoken with
>before, and had a brief meeting Friday afternoon to lay out the facts of the
>offer as I know them.
>A second meeting will happen at 10am Tuesday (tomorrow) at our offices with
>WWPF people
>to handle primarily technical questions.
>
>Here's a brief outline of the offer:
>
>1 - the community identifies points on the city map where people can "commit"
>to wanting
> "points of demarcation", or connections, to the fiber.
>2 - WWPF takes the map away and engineers the layout of the fiber coverage.
>3 - WWPF comes back with the layout and the monthly connection rate which they
> will require of those who wish to connect to the fiber.
>4 - those connecting will be asked to sign a 5 year "lease to use" the fiber.
>5 - WWPF will install (over a period of 3-6 weeks) the fiber.
>
>Sounds simple. Estimated cost/month of the un-lit fiber access ----
>@$300-$600/connection/month
>depending on the amount of fiber run to connect the people who commit.
>
>Sounds expensive to me. I'd prefer somewhere in the <$50/mo range. The cost
>is a factor of the
>amount of fiber and the number of connections. The denser the map, the lower
>the cost.
>Using the WSU Greek row connections done last year as a model, the 40
>connections there
>are costing $300/mo. Of the folks that met last Friday
>(city/county/hospital/schools), there were
>17 connections - and all thought that $300/mo was way too expensive - for
>example the city had
>@5 connections, which would be a total of $1500/mo. The school district can't
>commit to 5 years at
>that price b/c of the pending federal support to wire them. (I would suggest
>no one should commit to
>such a long time in this rapidly changing world).
>
>So I suggest that we attempt to bring the density up by a factor of at least
>10 (i.e.: @200-400 connections)
>and try to bring the price down to a target of <$50/mo. Not sure how best to
>do this, but it will take a
>community effort to pull it off. Any one out there that wants to have their
>"dots" put on the map, Tuesday
>at 10am is the first deadline. The map is in my office.
>
>johnt
>
>(p.s.. "un-lit" fiber gives a 10mb connection to the point of demarcation.
>What WWPF is suggesting
>is to build a Moscow "local area network", or in the market parlance, a Moscow
>"intra-net". WWPF is
>providing only the un-lit fiber. What it takes to connect services to it is
>$3000-$10,000 of additional HW/SW. Services can be data, voice, and/or video,
>depending on what you want. Services cost additional monthly
>money in some cases. I missed the discussion on the fiber topology, so that
>will be covered on Tuesday.
>In some cases, services provided over this communication medium might offset
>costs currently going to
>other places. The voice capability of the fiber is the best example of this.
>Basically, a local alternative
>to GTE phone service could be put in place. Other examples of services which
>might be interesting are:
>
>1 - voice/video/data communications b/t the sheriff and city police
>dispatchers.
>2 - school-district voice integrated into the local phone grid
>3 - hospital<-->local physician voice/data/video connections
>4 - internet connections for those that want them (through who-ever wants to
>provide them)
>5 - community wide e-mail services
>
>WWPF is not doing ANY of the service provisioning for the project (thus the
>$3000-$10000 additional
>HW/SW cost). FSR can help with some of this, firewalls, hubs, switches etc.
>
>Additionally, we are working with wireless technologies which (although lower
>bandwidth) provide
>a lower monthly recurring fee structure. An integration of the two worlds
>might provide interesting
>capabilities as well.
>
>Anyway, that's an overview of what's happening. If you want more info, come
>to the meeting tomorrow.
>I think WWPF's first offer (high monthly cost) is way out of line, but maybe
>we can work with them
>to bring it down. It would be very nice to have full density coverage (i.e.
>fiber to everyone who
>wants it) at a below $50/mo price point if that can be achieved.
>
>till later,
>
>johnt