fiberrun

4 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by fiberrun 11y ago

   Email sent.
2. 2.▲
   by fiberrun 11y ago

   > However, while I was considering the mistake I made, it also seems that burying the fiber isn't a good use of capital for almost the same reason. I would bet that these rural areas have power and phone (maybe even cable, too) prov
3. 3.▲
   by fiberrun 11y ago

   Found your email, I'll hit you up a bit later.
4. 4.▲
   by fiberrun 11y ago

   > If your crossing pavement, it makes since to add conduit. Yes, of course. I'm not advocating direct burial in all circumstances, just that it should be considered on it's own merits in rural deployments. Likewise one should n
5. 5.▲
   by fiberrun 11y ago

   > But nobody wants to have to subsidize anyone else when they > do work, so they fight regulations around burying > extra/empty conduit tooth and nail. The funny thing is that sharing dig costs would not result in a subsidy
6. 6.▲
   by fiberrun 11y ago

   Replacing all equipment every three years is way too aggressive. No network operator spends $1000 per subscriber for new equipment every three years. A more realistic and conservative replacement schedule would be seven years.
7. 7.▲
   by fiberrun 11y ago

   Installing conduit and pulling the fiber is about three times more expensive than just doing direct burial fiber. In rural areas it can be more cost effective to just do direct burial fiber. Fiber strands are also quite cheap. It is often f