4 ms·
I've got no problem with government owning and funding the Last Mile. The problem arises when government demands they specify the network design because of tha
by stevenjgarner 6y ago
I've got no problem with government owning and funding the Last Mile. The problem arises when government demands they specify the network design because of that ownership and funding. They are not qualified to make that decision, and usually senior telecommunications engineers are not qualified either. There is simply too much controversy over what is optimal. If the government could simply specify that a network needs to deliver 10Gbps per customer, then that would work, but when they specify HOW those packets need to be delivered then that is when things become non-competitive. There is a huge difference in cost between trenching from a central office to every home in a star topology vs trenching from a municipal network (already paid for by schools, hospitals, large business etc) to homes in a fast spanning tree ring. At least an order of magnitude difference in cost.
- mulmen 6y agoAre there examples of municipalities where the government made the "how" demand? Or is this a hypothetical? Honest question, I don't know the answer.
- tw04 6y agoIn my (limited) experience, that fear is unfounded. I work with about a dozen local government entities and every last one of them reaches out to consultants when making architecture decisions. I've never once run across one that pulls the "it has to be this way because we say so" in the tech realm. They'll absolutely provide requirements, but they won't dictate how those requirements are met. I guess I would be shocked to find out there is any significant number of local governments out there that demand to dictate architecture of something they have no expertise in. If ANYTHING, the times I see them get out over their ski's is when they trust a vendor consultant TOO much. See: every Oracle implementation ever.