We have some wireless sites in "rural alabama" using ospf rings. The middle,
occasionally, gets the short straw and we've had to make sure there is enough
bandwidth across the ring to make sure the middle doesn't suffer a speed loss.
Is there enough bandwidth on your ring to prevent this problem?
----- Original Message -----
From: Gino Villarini
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 12:27 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google Fiber is no more
Ken, we have been doing MDUs in PR and FL for about 18 months now. WE are
using AF24 units to each bldg in a ring format with no more of 10 blds in
the ring. Endpoints are fiber pops. WE sell up to 500 Mbps, usage is in
resitential ins avg 25-30 mbs, we only see 500 mbps whrn they go to the
speed tests sites.
On 10/27/16, 12:47 PM, "Af on behalf of Ken Hohhof" <af-boun...@afmug.com
Gino Villarini
President
Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
on behalf of af...@kwisp.com> wrote:
>The way I read their change in direction is they are focusing now on high
>rise apartment and office buildings where they can beam bandwidth to the
>rooftop. No more gigabit to individual homes. Not a Vivint play. Maybe
>I'm wrong.
>
>As far as 250 people all expecting a gig, not sure what they are planning.
>Maybe they figure there's enough spectrum in millimeter wave to do
>whatever
>they need to do. Maybe creative marketing. Let's face it, most big ISPs
>now sell best effort speeds. Well, to residential. Businesses may still
>expect to actually get what they were promised and maybe even to actually
>use it.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
>Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 11:32 AM
>To: af@afmug.com
>Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google Fiber is no more
>
>But how about microwave to the home? That is what people expect when they
>hear Google is coming to town. GigE to the home. I think the MTU market
>may eventually struggle with getting enough BW via microwave as well.
>With
>an apartment building with 250 people all expecting a gig, hard to do with
>microwave.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ken Hohhof
>Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 10:27 AM
>To: af@afmug.com
>Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google Fiber is no more
>
>Microwave to MTU/MDU rooftop. Proven business model. Ask Teligent,
>Winstar, Nextlink. In fairness, now almost 20 years later, there is more
>demand for what they are selling. But also more competition.
>
>And it's not like nobody is doing this already. Like in Chicago SilverIP
>comes to mind.
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
>Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 11:05 AM
>To: af@afmug.com
>Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google Fiber is no more
>
>I predict the PhD syndrome is going to also affect the wireless end.
>Vivant
>tried and failed.
>
>30 somethings that slept through physics are going to run up against the
>hard limits of trees, hills and rain.
>
>Doesn't matter how crazy the radio is, they will learn as everyone that
>tries RF distribution learns.
>
>5 years they will be back to fiber. Or deciding not to be part of the
>transport solution.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Robert
>Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 7:49 AM
>To: af@afmug.com
>Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google Fiber is no more
>
>Phd syndrome... Getting an advanced degree at a big Uni gives you
>almost zero experience in the trenches... The move to wireless means
>that they can buy their way into the FCC and move down from there...
>
>On 10/27/16 6:40 AM, Brian Webster wrote:
>> I worked directly on the San Jose and Sand Diego projects. I was
>> brought in by one of the main contractors to help reduce costs and
>> increase efficiency. Google had way too many ï¿1Ž230 somethingsï¿1Ž2 who
>> failed to listen to experienced telecom professionals. That was one of
>> their biggest faults. It was insane to try and build a network in San
>> Jose that was going to have to be built mostly underground. That
>> market already had new AT&T U-verse fiber and Time Warner with a very
>> strong network. Heck I could get 100 meg speeds on Wi-Fi at the hotel
>> I stayed in. Their Ego to build in their own backyard was pushing the
>> build more than anything.
>>
>>
>>
>> The concept of cherry picking neighborhoods actually drove costs up.
>> When they wanted a citywide network design, that is what they were
>> delivered, but then try and build out only neighborhoods they wanted
>> while still trying to figure out how much of their backbones, huts and
>> neighborhood distribution system needed to be put in place to service
>> the piecemeal buildout approach, when you were already having to open
>> ditches, while having to be a mostly underground build? Yea that was a
>> nightmare too! Then letï¿1Ž2s talk about how they had no clue how hard
>> the MDU market is to secure. They gave no real consideration to
>> existing deals in the buildings, or the cost of having to wire on
>> their own because the building owner did not actually own the existing
>> cable plant and such. These projects were not just a simple math
>> problem
>to solve.
>>
>>
>>
>> They naively thought every city was going to welcome them with open
>> arms like Kansas City did. They believed the political hype the
>> politicians told them to lure them to their cities, then when actual
>> laws both of physics and real came in to play, the numbers looked a
>> whole
>lot uglier.
>> Underground building in established cities is a nightmare in both
>> costs, regulations, logistics and amount of work required. Just simple
>> things like trying to gather data on all the existing underground
>> infrastructure (that has no central source of documentation) was
>> painful and costly. You canï¿1Ž2t get drawings approved without first
>> showing you will not be interfering with existing utilities already
>> underground. In many cases you have to manually locate this stuff and
>> then map it and then do your design around that information. Other
>> issues to overhead builds were poles that would not pass loading
>> calculations, pole owners who were less than cooperative or that
>> pulled out new loading rules that they themselves donï¿1Ž2t follow and
>> you can see where it was not a simple process. The employee count to
>> deal with all of this on a large scale at the pace they wanted to move
>> was
>not small by any stretch.
>>
>>
>>
>> This was not new news. They pulled the plug on all of this stuff back
>> at the beginning of July.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank You,
>>
>> Brian Webster
>>
>> www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>
>>
>> www.Broadband-Mapping.com
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett
>> *Sent:* Thursday, October 27, 2016 7:32 AM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google Fiber is no more
>>
>>
>>
>> As they should. Don't build where people who can't pay or don't want
>> your service.
>>
>>
>>
>> -----
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/>
>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL><https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentC
>> omputingSolutionsDeKalb><https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-
>> computing-solutions><https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
>> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
>> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix><https://www.linkedin.com/company/m
>> idwest-internet-exchange><https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
>> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
>> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp>
>>
>>
>> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> --
>>
>> *From: *"Rory Conaway" <r...@triadwireless.net
>> <mailto:r...@triadwireless.net>>
>> *To: *af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
>> *Sent: *Wednesday, October 26, 2016 11:28:52 PM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Google Fiber is no more
>>
>> In other cities, they cherry picked.
>>
>>
>>
>> Rory
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Sterling
>> Jacobson
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 26, 2016 7:00 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google Fiber is no more
>>
>>
>>
>> From the director of one of the Google Fiber builds (in Provo) that is
>> not the case.
>>
>>
>>
>> He said they overspent on contractors MAJORLY.
>>
>> And that was just to expand the existing network to all homes in that
>> area.
>>
>>
>>
>> He argued with his bosses about he extravagant added fees on
>> construction but they just said to pay them, no questions asked.
>>
>>
>>
>> I had some of those figures from him at that conversation and some
>> costs were over 80x what it should have been.
>>
>>
>>
>> My best guess is that all the fiber build in certain areas increased
>> the contract cost of build into the stratosphere.
>>
>>
>>
>> And now they are reigning it in and going wireless to attempt to
>> defray the costs.
>>
>>
>>
>> At least with Provo they were not allowed to cherry pick, it was build
>> everyone.
>>
>> And it seems like they picked up a large portion of the communities,
>> but I didnï¿1Ž2t get overall take rate.
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Rory Conaway
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 26, 2016 12:56 AM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google Fiber is no more
>>
>>
>>
>> Absolutely they cherry picked. Then they went into MDUï¿1Ž2s for
>> pennies and lost their shirts.
>>
>>
>>
>> Rory
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Reynolds
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 25, 2016 9:34 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google Fiber is no more
>>
>>
>>
>> I'd love to see their overall take rates. I have heard numbers of
>> 75-85% in more affluent areas. They cherry picked neighborhoods for
>> sure
>though.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Oct 25, 2016 10:15 PM, "Rory Conaway" <r...@triadwireless.net
>> <mailto:r...@triadwireless.net>> wrote:
>>
>> Big surprise there. They built it and no one came.
>>
>>
>>
>> Rory
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com <mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>]
>> *On Behalf Of *Tushar Patel
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 25, 2016 7:14 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google Fiber is no more
>>
>>
>>
>> Their contractor are still hiring installer in Austin.
>>
>>
>>
>> Need to probably understand why those cities not others?
>>
>> Tushar
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Oct 25, 2016, at 9:06 PM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com
>> <mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com>> wrote:
>>
>> New ones. They're still deploying existing networks. They just
>> opened up a few new areas in Kansas City recently.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Oct 25, 2016 9:03 PM, "Jaime Solorza" <losguyswirel...@gmail.com
>> <mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Moving folks to wireless.... Aye Dios
>>
>>
>>
>> On Oct 25, 2016 7:56 PM, "Gino Villarini" <ginovi...@gmail.com
>> <mailto:ginovi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> https://gizmodo.com/google-fiber-halts-operations-in-ten-cities-178821
>> 4992?rev=1477443092657&utm_campaign=socialflow_gizmodo_facebook&utm_so
>> urce=gizmodo_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
