Sonic.net

Sonic's deployment of fiber and service delivery relies on critical components of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, which created the unbundled network elements (copper, and inter-city fiber) platform for competitive telecom in the US. Now, AT&T and their large-carrier peers have asked the FCC to dismantle that critical framework.

For more on the topic, please read the LA Times article at: http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik ... story.html

Then, we would really appreciate it if you would file a letter with the FCC, speaking out for competitive access and deployment. For those served on our Fusion services, discuss how those are better for you than the alternatives, and express what you've observed about our growing fiber deployment, and that you'd like to continue to have access to our copper services while that deployment is underway.

And for those now on fiber who used to be on a copper service, please tell that story - the unbundled copper as a path to deployment is our business model, and those of you who experienced that are the proof. The FCC needs to hear from you! (And also note that the backhaul fiber from your CO point of presence is also something AT&T is trying to remove from competitive use, so speak out for that issue if you're on fiber too.)

To learn more and file your letter asking the FCC not to grant US Telecom & AT&T's petition, visit: https://www.bridge2broadband.org/

Thank you for your support of Sonic's mission!

Seems important enough -- could you put an alert inside the monthly bill of customers?
A footnote on their fiber appointment emails?

Yes, we’ve got an email campaign to all customers coming soon.

Sent my letter.

How long do you think it will take for the FCC to declare they are being DDoS again due to public commenting?

FCC mail sent, thank you Dane for the links



Possibly relevant news:
===================================

+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Just How Rigged is America's Broadband World? A Deep Dive Into One US City Reveals All |
| from the dept. |
| posted by chromas on Friday August 24, @15:41 (Techonomics) |
| https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=18/08/24/1010201 |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
In a [1]report [PDF] put together by the Institute for Local
Self-Reliance, investigators looked at real-world internet offerings
within a 30-mile radius of Rochester in Minnesota.

Rochester provides a useful contrast in that it has a heavily
built-up center with a spread-out urban space surrounding it. It also
claims to have no less than 19 companies that provide residents with
broadband internet access – something that its local council has
boasted about – and exists in a state whose leaders have set some
ambitious broadband goals: 25Mbps for everyone by 2022; and 100Mbps
by 2026.

However, as the investigation [2]revealed this month, competition is
something available only to a minority of people who live in the most
dense areas, and access to fast internet access above federal
minimums remains a virtual monopoly.

"We have 19 local broadband providers and, of those, we have two
cable providers, six DSL providers, four fiber providers, three fixed
wireless providers and four mobile providers," the report quotes City
Council member Ed Hruska as saying.

Source: [3]https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/08/2 ... broadband/

------------------------------------------------------------------------

[4]Original Submission

Discuss this story at:
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid ... 24/1010201

Links:
0. https://soylentnews.org/~MrPlow/
1. https://muninetworks.org/sites/www.muni ... f-2018.pdf
2. https://ilsr.org/broadband-competition-rochester/
3. https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/08/2 ... broadband/
4. https://soylentnews.org/submit.pl?op=vi ... ubid=28593

+------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Dane,

I'll write a petition to the FCC, and how about you finally come clean about what's going on with 18th between Valencia and Guerrero. Fiber on the next block, no fiber there, can't get a straight answer from your support people about if/when there will be Sonic fiber here or what it would take to make that happen.

Please be as transparent as you want others to be.

Near Dolores Park wrote:Hi Dane,

I'll write a petition to the FCC, and how about you finally come clean about what's going on with 18th between Valencia and Guerrero. Fiber on the next block, no fiber there, can't get a straight answer from your support people about if/when there will be Sonic fiber here or what it would take to make that happen.

Please be as transparent as you want others to be.

We're building every section of SF that we can. But with the City's disallowing all new trenchless utility construction, and with many overloaded utility poles that require reinforcement or replacement, there are lots of gaps in coverage.

In regards to your specific situation, there is an overloaded pole at the corner of 18th and Valencia (this one: https://goo.gl/maps/xigxPEcGSzK2) and another at the corner of 18th and Mission (this one: https://goo.gl/maps/bzKU83CAwvz) that has issues. Until those issues are resolved, we are unable to deploy down 18th St.





In regards to the US Telecom petition and the FCC, these sort of construction issues are a key reason that we need to retain access to unbundled copper loops. While we are working to deploy everywhere, there are deployment issues that create barriers or cause delay, so it is important to retain access to copper for the foreseeable future.

overloaded utility poles that require reinforcement or replacement

Who has responsibility for taking care of that? 20-plus years ago I found our local phone company digging around the base of phone poles to treat them with pesticide so they would not be hollowed out by termites and rot, to extend their service life "another decade or two" said the guy; time's about up.

Is there a strategy/game aspect to identifying poles that can be "occupied" to fill them up to capacity and so keep other companies from using them?

ankh wrote:

overloaded utility poles that require reinforcement or replacement

Who has responsibility for taking care of that? 20-plus years ago I found our local phone company digging around the base of phone poles to treat them with pesticide so they would not be hollowed out by termites and rot, to extend their service life "another decade or two" said the guy; time's about up.

PG&E is the primary pole owner and they dispatch the contractor that does the reinforcements. I'd expect that given the massive number of poles that need to be reinforced or replaced, this will take a long time. We have requested permission to hire the contractor to do reinforcements where we need them to allow deployment of fiber on our schedule, but have not received permission to do that.

Is there a strategy/game aspect to identifying poles that can be "occupied" to fill them up to capacity and so keep other companies from using them?

No, I don't think so, but we do see other providers (one of whom is also a joint pole owner along with PG&E) adding fiber to poles that they likely shouldn't, given that the poles overloaded and tagged. That creates a competitive asymmetry which is a real concern for us.