> -----Original Message----- > From: Josh Paetzel [mailto:josh at tcbug.org] > Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 12:47 AM > > And if you think fiber isn't proprietary you ought to take a look at > what companies like Verizon are doing with FIOS...including their > company policy of pulling out the copper to your house after > installing FIOS, of not allowing you to roll back service to copper, > and oh fiber isn't covered by the same laws as copper, they are under > no compulsion to allow anyone else to provide you service. > > There are no panaceas. ??? Your comment is a non-sequitur, and I said nothing at all about panaceas or absence of proprietary differences. I only said that different carriers use fibers, not that all security layers were identical. My comment about both phone companies and cable companies using fiber, and planning to-the-house fiber connections is like saying "most TCLUGers can drive cars". You previously stated that cable service and DSL service would not use fiber media, and that seemed kinda naive to me. Your comment is technically off-base. The fiber media is standard (though there are several types, like several types of coax). The carrier and modulation schemes in the fibers are probably standard as well (different standards most likely), just like T1, etc, of the phone system no matter what media it is transported in. At some point the protocols and encryptions would become proprietary but can be media-independent. This digression had little significance for the municipal wireless issues, and you made no comment for my concern on the likely impact of municipal wireless on free hotspots. I think the municipal wireless will require geographicly specific subscriptions like Chaska does, and that would become a severe restriction to individual roaming freedom. If that is the case, then I think municipal wireless is a very, very bad thing. Chuck