1. CANARIE “Community Broadband Networks” The Customer Empowered Networking Revolution” http://www.canarie.ca http://www.canet3.net Background Papers on Gigabit to The Home and Optical Internet Architecture Design Available Optical Internet News list: Send e-mail to Bill@Canarie.ca Bill.St.Arnaud@canarie.ca Tel: +1.613.785.0426

2. “A proposed strategy to make Canada the most networked country in the world and the first to have low cost Gigabit Internet infrastructure available to virtually all schools, hospitals, libraries and businesses by 2005”

3.  Mission: To facilitate the development of Canada’s communications infrastructure and stimulate next generation products, applications and services  Canadian equivalent to Internet 2 and NGI  private-sector led, not-for-profit consortium  consortium formed 1993  federal funding of $300m (1993-99)  total project costs estimated over $600 M  currently over 140 members; 21 Board members CANARIE Inc

4. Canada & the Optical Age  World leader in optical networking - JDS Fitel, Nortel, Cambrian, Positron Fiber Systems, CISCO Canada, PMC Sierra, QNX  Over 75% of the world’s Internet traffic is carried on equipment made in Canada  Nortel Optical Transport made in Montreal  Newbridge ATM switches made in Ottawa  JDS Fitel optical components made in Ottawa  CISCO GSR12000 made in Ottawa, Toronto and Vancouver  Many exciting new startups – Tropic, Edgeflow, Nudesign, NuWave, etc etc  CA*net 3 - A network for basic research unparalleled anywhere in the world  Canada could be poised to be a world leader in the “optical age”  Silicon Valley was the capital of the “silicon age”  Britain was the capital of the “industrial age”  Canada has the critical industrial base for the optical age

5. GigaPOP CA*net 3 National Optical Internet Vancouver Calgary Regina Winnipeg Ottawa Montreal Toronto Halifax St. John’s Fredericton Charlottetown ORAN BCnet Netera SRnet MRnet ONet RISQ ACORN Chicago STAR TAP CA*net 3 Primary Route Seattle New York CA*net 3 Diverse Route Deploying a 4 channel CWDM Gigabit Ethernet network – 400 km Deploying a 4 channel Gigabit Ethernet transparent optical DWDM– 1500 km Multiple Customer Owned Dark Fiber Networks connecting universities and schools 16 channel DWDM -8 wavelengths @OC-192 reserved for CANARIE -8 wavelengths for carrier and other customers Consortium Partners: Bell Nexxia Nortel Cisco JDS Uniphase Newbridge Condo Dark Fiber Networks connecting universities and schools Condo Fiber Network linking all universities and hospital

6. Customer Empowered Networks  School boards and municipalities throughout North America are deploying their own dark fiber networks in partnership with next generation carrier  Individual institutions – the customers – own and control their own strands of fiber  Fiber are configured in point to point private networks; or  Connect to local ISP or carrier hotel  Low cost LAN architectures and optics are used to light the fiber  Control and management of the optics and wavelengths is under the domain of the LAN customer at the edge, as opposed to the traditional carrier in the center  These new concepts in customer empowered networking are starting in the same place as the Internet started – the university and research community.  Customers will start with dark fiber but will eventually extend further outwards with customer control and ownership of wavelengths  Extending the Internet model of autonomous peering networks to the telecom world

7. What is happening elsewhere?  California DCP project plans to connect up all schools to research and education backbone – CALren-2  Cost $US 32 million per year next 3 years  Holland plans to connect up 12,000 schools with dark fiber  Schools will be connected to national research and education backbone – SURFnet 5  Alberta has a major RFP to connect up 3800 public institutions in the province  Sweden plans $US 2-3 billion for connecting municipalities and rural areas  Iceland is building fiber network to all their schools which private sector will take to the home  Finland and Norway have similar plans

8. Examples of CEN Customer Empowered Networks  Universities in Quebec are building their own 3500km “condominium” fiber network in partnership with 6 next gen carriers- $US 2million  Will deploy and manage their own optics and long haul transmission gear  Universities in Alberta are deploying their own 400 km 4xGbe dark fiber network - $US 200K  Deploy and manage their own optics and long haul transmission gear  Chicago is building a fiber networking linking all public sector institutions - $US 250m  City of Montreal is second most fibered city in the world because of municipal owned open access conduit  In Ottawa is deploying a 85km- 144 strand “condominium” network connecting 26 institutions – cost $1m US  Peel County – Missassuaga & Brampton has built a 200km public sector fiber network - $US 5m  Many other cities including Ashland OR, Halifax, Toronto are looking at similar initiatives

9. Market Drivers  First - low cost  Up to 1000% reduction over current telecom prices. 6-12 month payback  Second - LAN invades the WAN – no complex SONET or ATM required in network  Network Restoral & Protection can be done by customer using a variety of techniques such as wireless backup, or relocating servers to a multi-homed site, etc  Third - Enables new applications and services not possible with traditional telecom service providers  Relocation of servers and extending LAN to central site  Out sourcing LAN and web servers to a 3 rd party because no performance impact  IP telephony in the wide area (Spokane)  HDTV video  Fourth – Allows access to new competitive low cost telecom and IT companies at carrier neutral meet me points  Much easier to out source servers, e-commerce etc to a 3 rd party at a carrier neutral collocation facility

10. What is condominium fiber?  A number of organizations such as schools, hospitals, businesses and universities get together to fund and build a fiber network  Carrier partners are also invited to be part of condominium project  Several next generation carriers and fiber brokers are now arranging condominium fiber builds  IMS, QuebecTel, Videotron, Cogeco, Dixon Cable, GT Telecom, etc etc  Fiber is installed, owned and maintained by 3 rd party professional fiber contractors – usually the same contractors used by the carriers for their fiber builds  Each institution gets its own set of fibers, at cost, on a 20 year IRU (Indefeasible Right of Use)  One time up front cost, plus annual maintenance and right of way cost approx 5% of the capital cost  Institution lights up their own strands with whatever technology they want – Gigabit Ethernet, ATM, PBX, etc  New long range laser will reach 120 km  Ideal solution for point to point links for large fixed institutions  Payback is usually less than 18 months

11. À venir Bande passante louée Projet démarré Construit Observatoire Mont-Mégantic Val d’Or/Rouyn MAN de Montréal MAN de Québec MAN de Sherbrooke MAN d’Ottawa/Hull Quebec University Condo Network

12. St-Laurent/Vanier Lanaudière Maisonneuve Marie-Victorin Champlain Rosemont Sorel-Tracy Montmorency Édouard-Montpetit Vieux-Montréal Bois-de-Boulogne Ahuntsic Lionel-Groulx Vers Québec Gérald-Godin John-Abbott André-Laurendeau Dawson À venir Bande passante louée Projet démarré Construit Montreal Public Sector Condominium Networks

13. Schoolboard Condominium Builds

14. List of Schoolboard Fiber Builds

15. Typical Capital Costs  Fixed One Time Capital Costs Include  Management, engineering and construction costs  Negotiating support structure agreements  Fiber optic cables  Fusing of fibers  OTDR sweeps, Premise termination, etc.  Average total cost between $7 and $15 per meter as follows:  Engineering and Design:  $1 - $3 per meter for engineering, design, supervision, splicing  Plus Installation:  $7 to $10 per meter for install in existing conduit; or  $3 to $6 per meter for install on existing poles  Plus Premise termination:  Average $5k each  Plus cost of fiber:  15¢ per strand per meter for 36 strands or less  12¢ per strand per meter for 96 strands or less  10¢ per strand per meter 192 strands or less  5¢ per strand per meter over 192 strands

16. Examples of Dark Fiber costs  University network Urban Fiber Builds  Varennes: 50 km - $406K (maintenance $26K/year)  Montreal East: 14 km - $120K (maintenance $9K/year)  Laval: 33km - $213K (maintenance $15K/year)  University network Rural Fiber Builds  Sorel: 54km - $266K (maintenance $19K/year)  Megantic: 40km -$273K (maintenance $14K/year)  Schoolboards  Victoriaville school board -Average price for fiber(s) $2 - $7 per meter  Spokane School District - $US 800/mo for first 5 years then $US 400/mo  Over 50 schools  Stockholm - $1200/mo – over 100 schools  Las Vegas School district – 240 schools – Telcordia (Bellcore) prime contractor  Many, many others in the works  Companies like Telcordia (Bellcore), IBM, etc are now leading development of dark fiber networks for schools

17. Condo Fiber Build Examples  Des affluents: Total cost $1,500,00 ($750,00 for schools)  70 schools  12 municipal buildings  204 km fiber  $1,500,000 total cost  average cost per building - $18,000 per building  Mille-Isles: Total cost $2,100,000 ($1,500,000 for schools)  80 schools  18 municipal buildings  223km  $21,428 per building  Laval: Total cost $1,800,000 ($1,000,000 for schools)  111 schools  45 municipal buildings  165 km  $11,500 per building  Peel county: Total cost $5m – 100 buildings  Cost per building $50,000

18. Peel County Municipal Fiber Network  Mississauga, Brampton, Pell  200 km of Fibre  96 strand backbone  “Enough for small country”  12-60 strands elsewhere  12,000 strand-kilometers  Laid end-to-end = Victoria to St. John’s …...and back again

19. Ottawa Fiber Condominium  Consortium consists of 16 members from various sectors including businesses, hospitals, schools, universities, research institutes  26 sites  Point-to-point topology  144 fibre pairs  Route diversity requirement for one member  85 km run  $11k - $50K per site  Total project cost $CDN 1.25 million  Cost per strand less than $.50 per strand per meter  80% aerial  Due to overwhelming response to first build – planning for second build under way

21. Ottawa Original Estimates  Original Engineering Estimates  Original estimates turned out to be 10% higher than RFP responses  Estimated cost to connect 22 institutions with 6 fibers to each institution in a star configuration  Total cost $615,000 or approximately $30,000 per institution “on average”  Actual costs range from $5K to $60K depending on how far institution is from center of star in downtown Ottawa  If condo fiber contractor were to double capacity of network (i.e.12 strands to each customer) cost of project would only increase by 10%  Or doubling number of participants would increase cost by only 10% (plus cost of laterals for additional institutions)  By doubling number of participants average cost would be less than $20,000 per institution  Ultimately fiber costs could get as low as $1000 per institution if every building in the city was connected with fiber

22. Newbridge CRC CISCO OCRI Nortel O-C School Board Algonquin O-C Catholic Carleton O Heart Civic Oconnor CO 55 Metcalfe Ottawa U Ottawa Carleton Region Conseil Des Ecoles NRC Telesat Ottawa General March Carling Baseline Greenbank Merivale Bronson Laurier Rideau St. Laurent Smythe Blair Rd 20 19 18b 18a 17 16 15 14 13 12 11a 11b 9b 10 9a 6 5a 5b 3 8 7a 4 2 1b1c 1a 1d 7b Section 1a – 96 strands Section 1b – 12 strands Secion 1c – 12 strands Section 1d – 96 strands Section 1e – 12 strands Section 2 – 36 strands Section 3 – 12 starnds Section 4 – 24 strands Section 5a – 24 strands Section 5b – 12 strands Section 6 – 12 strands Section 7a- 12 strands Section 7b – 12 strands Section 8 – 12 strands Section 9a – 96 strands Section 9b – 72 strands Section 10 – 12 strands Section 11a – 12 strands Section 11b – 60 strands Section 12 – 12 strands Section 13 – 48 strands Section 14 – 12 strands Section 15 – 48 strands Section 16 – 12 strands Section 17 – 36 strands Section 18a – 36 strands Section 18b – 24 strands Section 19- 12 strands Section 20- 12 strands 1e Main Splice Box for Cross Connection Of Fibers Between Participating Institutions Splice Box Note: This a reference installation. Final Configuration will vary depending on number of participants and additional point to point fiber requirements.

23. Section Cost Detail

24. Logical Layout of Topology Newbridge CRC OCRI CISCO Nortel Carleton Ottawa U NRC Telsat In reference model each institution has been assigned 6 strands to terminate on, or about 55 Metcalfe St Example: Carleton U has 6 strands 2 would cross connect to NRC/ONet 2 strands would connect directly to OttawaU 2 strands would connect directly to CRC (At NRC Carleton could interconnect at layer 3 with other organizations

25. Typical Payback for school (Real example – des affluents – north of Montreal)  Over 3 years total expenditure of $1,440,000 for DSL service  Total cost of dark fiber network for 100 schools $1,350,000  Additional condominium participants were brought in to lower cost to school board to $750,000  School board can now centralize routers and network servers at each school  Estimated savings in travel and software upgrades $800,000  Payback typically 8 –16 months  Independent Study by Group Secor available upon request

26. Before After fiber fiber Antennas780 Novell Servers821 SQL Servers133 Lotus Notes Servers 21 Tape Backup Servers124 Ethernet switches/hubs1098 Routers1083 Cache/proxy (Linux)120 Fire walls (Linux) 11 Reduction in the number of servers

27. Advantage of CEN for Business  Significant reduction in price for local loop costs  No increase in local loop costs as bandwidth demands increase  Ability to outsource LAN and web servers to distant location as LAN speeds and performance can be maintained over dark fiber  Access to lower cost competitive service providers at carrier neutral hotels  New entrants cannot afford high cost of building out their own fiber networks  Even small businesses with less than 20 employees can realize significant savings and benefits

28. Advantage of CEN to business Central Office Central Office Today: Customer pays 2 telcos for SONET connections Carrier managed SONET ring Customer Owned Dark Fiber Long reach lasers SONET Mux and ADM ISP Tomorrow: Multiple Customer owned dark fiber links to ISPs $50K one time Unlimited Bandwidth $50K one time Unlimited bandwidth Monthly cost Fixed Bandwidth

29. CEN versus SONET  Customer Owned Dark Fiber  Low equipment costs – mostly fused fiber, rarely any active devices  Low labour costs – only fiber maintenance  Fiber technology does not change  Costs can be amortized over 20 years  Most costs are capital vs operational  The only true future proof technology  Reliability obtained through purchase of 2 separate dark fiber route or wireless link, etc  Can take advantage of economies of scale with large fiber builds  Simple extension of LAN network  Unlimited bandwidth  “Good enough” is adequate for single entity  Carrier SONET network  High equipment cost – SONET muxes, etc  High labour costs for SONET muxes, CPE equipment etc  Equipment changes every 5 years  Costs must be amortized in 5 years  SONET soon may be replaced by GbE, DPT  Requires SONET ring to deliver 99.999 reliability  Limited economies of scale with larger SONET OC-192  Customer can not “capitalize” carrier service  CPE equipment required from LAN to WAN  Common carrier needs “perfect” network

30. Advantage of CEN for high rise office buildings  Building risers increasingly becoming congested because so many new entrant carriers want access to building  Building owners are now insisting they will install fiber in risers from basement to tenants  Some building owners are extending fiber all the way to 2 or more collocation facilities  Tenants get to lease 2 or more strands in the fiber bundle to the collocation facilities  Tenants can then make independent deals to connect to the service provider of their choice  Tenants can then out source their web, network servers to 3 rd party

31. Advantage for CEN for cities  In downtown core minimizes digging up streets  If N carriers are trying to deploy service then number of times roads has to be torn up is N squared  However with condominium fiber road only has to be torn up once  Produces a competitive market place and level playing field  New competitive carrier can meet customers at carrier neutral collocation facilities  Eliminates market advantage of incumbents  In suburban areas eliminates duopoly of cable and TV companies  The first company to install fiber into suburban neighborhoods will likely have a natural monopoly  In Stockholm home owners have a choice of 4 cable companies  Makes cities a much more attractive place for new high tech businesses and service  Opportunity for new revenue stream for city  New entrant fiber companies are willing to pay city percentage of revenue for access to right of way

32. Critical role for governments  Customer Empowered Networks increases facilities based competition, levels the playing field and provides greater choice to the consumer  One of government’s key mandates  Governments might be able to encourage by CEN by giving preferential access to ROW to those fiber installers who will sell condominium fiber at an agreed upon price  E.g Dublin OH  Stockholm  Governments can also encourage building carrier neutral collocation facilities  In downtown cores will likely be done by private sector  In suburbs will probably have to be municipal facility like school board office, etc

33. The issue of ROW  Is ROW a unlimited public resource or a limited scarce resource?  When there were only one monopoly ROW was seen as unlimited public resource that was needed to provide a universal service  But with many new carriers wanting to install facilities it is becoming a scarce resource  Cities are mandating moratorium on tearing up roads  5 years on major roadwork  3 years on re-surfacing  Private railway and road bridges are charging enormous fees for ROW  The Federal Government is auctioning off wireless spectrum to the highest bidder  Cannot cities auction off spectrum in the ground?  The spectrum in the ground is scarcer than air  Should preference be given to bidders who provide CODF?

34. 2 Different Views Traditional Telco Network “Ring of Rings” 99.999% reliability only in the SONET Ideal for carriage of legacy traffic “Highest” common denominator technology and pricing Driver is bandwidth efficiency ISP A ISP B ISP C CO Customer Empowered Network “Warp and Woof” Separate dark fiber networks built by different competing organizations Customer responsible for building rings and establishing reliability Ideal for LAN and Internet traffic Driver is congestion avoidance SONET ring 3 separate dark fiber builds ACME Dark Fiber Inc Fiber R Us Inc Non Profit Fiber Inc ISP B ISP C

35. The biggest challenge of all… To foster and accelerate broadband Internet to the home

36.  There is a clear trend in all formerly monopoly services to move to unbundled competitive services  Roads and highway systems vs railways: infrastructure was largely “public”, but the services (e.g. trucking) were private and competitive  Electrical distribution systems: regulated monopolies (unbundling is on horizon)  Gas distribution systems: regulated monopolies (unbundling is well underway)  Legacy telecommunications systems: moving to unbundled fiber and facilities based competition Historical Reference Points

37. Facilities based competition in the residential neighborhood?  Facilities based competition is alive and well in downtown core  The biggest challenge for governments is manage and coordinate the digging up of streets  Outside of downtown in big cities  Usually only a monopoly telecom provider  At best a duopoly  How do we introduce facilities based competition into this market (or at least come as close as possible to true facilities based competition)?  As well how can we assure scalable high speed Internet services to the home that eventually will support Gigabit speeds or higher?

38. Gigabit to the home  The need for Gigabit Internet to the home is coming much sooner than people realize  The Internet forecasts have a history of significantly underestimating demand  Universities and schools are being overwhelmed by Napster and iMesh  Thousands of uploads and downloads of 1- 10 Mbyte MP3  Thousands of uploads and downloads of 1 – 10 Gbps MPEG1 movies  Students are coming home from universities and schools used to high speed Internet access I.e. > 10 Mbps  Napster – iMesh expected to shortly overwhelm cable modems and DSL  In the very near future will be able to download 10-30 MP3 files into a SONY memory stick and plug in the car or your Walkman  Consumer will want to download those MP3 files almost instantaneously  The solution – Gigabit Internet to the Home

39. Example: A music CD contains 660 Mbytes of data. How long would it take to send this from Palo Alto to San Francisco? Method 56 Kilobits/second PC Modem 1.5 Mb/s Commercial T1 Service 500 Kb/s Cable Modem 10 Mb/s Fiber To The Home 100 Mb/s Fiber Optic Service Transfer Time 26.2 Hours 2.93 Hours 59 Minutes 8.8 Minutes 53 Seconds 50 Minutes55 MPH Automobile What that bandwidth?

40. Gigabit to the Home applications  The same applications that necessitate high bandwidth for businesses and schools  NOT average bandwidth, but peak bandwidth for  LAN performance and speeds to quickly download and upload data, video and audio files  The Internet is like the sewer system  A sewer system capacity has to be designed for peak load and not average load  E-mail or FTP movies and videos  PCs will soon have 30 Gbyte drives  No need to stream video and require QoS  DVD or HDTV video - r equires 100- 400 Mbytes compressed  Home Cache on Home LAN network  Pre-cache or predictive cache TV shows, movies, shopping catalogs

41. A possible framework for the last mile  The R&E community leadership in customer empowered networks is pointing to a possible solution for the last mile to the home  An architecture concept also based on open access customer owned dark fiber using well known LAN architectures  Many competitive service providers share in the cost of condominium fiber  Ensures facilities based competition  Telcos are unlikely to build FTTH in existing neighborhoods because of the huge capital investment and ROI needed on that investment  Solutions for high speed Internet to the home may not come from the carriers but from the R&E community

42. The basic assumptions  The good, the bad and the ugly..  Monopolies are bad  Duopolies are ugly  Facilities based competition is good  The private sector, in an open competitive market, is far more effective at responding to consumer’s needs and introducing new services at lower prices than any kind of government regulation  But government has a responsibility to foster competition and ensure a level playing field  Where a natural monopoly exists government has a responsibility to regulate that monopoly, but only as a last resort  First it should make every attempt to develop mechanisms for introducing private sector competition rather than depending on legislative fiat  Regulation should be seen as a last resort

43. Preliminary Analysis  Early Fiber to the Home (FTTH) was too expensive because it assumed all services would be converged – date, voice and video  expensive terminal equipment required to segregate voice, data and video services at the home  but voice traffic is going wireless  and broadcast is going by satellite  Lifeline voice can significantly increase costs  DC battery power, 911 services  The big driver for residential broadband is not voice or video  It is the Internet  Very soon Internet will carry video and second line voice  So instead of building a converged network such as FSAN, HFC, etc build an Internet network only  Divergence rather than Convergence may be the key to low cost FTTH

44. Gigabit Internet to the Home  With condominium fiber builds multiple carriers share in the cost of fiber build out to network nodes serving approximately 250 homes  Governments can help accelerate the process by funding public institutions like schools and libraries to acquire customer owned fiber  Build an architecture that guarantees competitive equal access to every neighborhood node  It is impractical to have multiple carriers own individual strands to each and every home:  Therefore let the customer have title to individual fiber from the residence to the neighborhood node  The customer connects to the service provider of their choice at the neighborhood node  The result is third commercial network running in parallel to telephone and cable for high speed Internet only  Avoids regulatory and technical issues of 911, number portability, etc  Encourages SMEs and entrepreneurs to build the infrastructure  Customer premise device is very simple and cheap

45. Typical Pole to Home Wiring Home installation is similar to cable modem but uses fiber.

46. Gigabit to the Home R&E network ISP B ISP C University School Splice Box Municipal or Private Sector Open Access Fiber Trunk Up to 15 km Customer owns fiber strand all the way to ISP X X X 864 strands ISP D ISP E Colo Colo Facility

47. Possible Architecture -1  A community consortia would put together a plan to fiber up all public sector buildings in their community  A community can be a province, a municipality, village, etc  A fiber splice box that terminates the fiber at the street side nearby each public sector building such as school, hospital, library is called a “Node”  The fiber build consortia must insure that potential facilities exist near the for private sector equipment to connect up future home owners – colo facility  Small colo facility in basement of school or separate jiffy boxes for each vendor, etc  Private sector responsible for costs of such a facility  Public sector buildings will have dedicated fiber strands that connect to a “Supernode” which is a fiber splice box on the street beside outside of major public sector central facility such as school board office, city hall, university, etc  The fiber build consortia must insure that facilities exist nearby the Supernode for the private sector to install equipment to service home owners and businesses – colo facility  At least one carrier neutral collocation facility plus central offices and head end  Private sector responsible for costs of such facilities

48. Possible Architecture - 2  Additional fibers are made available from the Supernode to all Nodes such that competitive service providers can purchase such fiber to the node  Service provider can extend fiber to individual home owners or businesses at a later date if title and ownership of the fiber belongs to the customer; or  Service provider can offer wireless connectivity from node  Service provider can offer traditional “open access” HFC, PON or VDSL connectivity  A satellite network or provincial research and education network would connect the Supernodes to the closest CA*net 4 GigaPOP.  The CA*net 4 network would be provide national and international connectivity for all public sector traffic  Application grids of “e-commerce”, forestry, high performance computing  The additional strands that would be used by private sector to provide services to home would be technology “neutral”  service provider could deploy any technology they want – FSAN, HFC, GbE, wireless, etc

49. Networked Nation CA*net 4 Provincial research and education network Usually one GigaPOP per province Usually one access facility in every major town and city School board office City Hall University School Hospital Library School Colo Option B: Home owners are aggregated at node by service provider of their choice Option A: Home owners and businesses have fused connections all the way to service provider at supernode SuperNodes Nodes Colo Splice Box Homes Splice Box Commercial Internet Commercial Internet

50. Possible architecture for large town School School board office School Telco Central Office Central Office For Wireless Company VDSL, HFC or Fiber Provisioned by service provider Condominium Fiber with separate strands owned by school and by service providers Carrier Owned Fiber Cable head end Average Fiber Penetration to 250-500 homes Colo Facility

51. Possible architecture for small town School Town Hall School Condominium Fiber with separate strands owned by school/town hall and by service providers Receiver for Skycache Average Fiber Penetration to 250-500 homes Colo Facility Receiver for Satellite Streaming Cache boxes and servers Operated by satellite company

52. Benefits to Industry  For cablecos and telcos it help them accelerate the deployment of high speed internet services into the community  Currently deployment of DSL and cable modem deployment is hampered by high cost of deploying fiber into the neighbourhoods  Cable companies need fiber to every 250 homes for cable modem service, but currently only have fiber on average to every 5000 homes  Telephone companies need to get fiber to every 250 homes to support VDSL or FSAN technologies  Wireless companies need to get fiber to every 250 homes for new high bandwidth wireless services and mobile Internet  It will provide opportunities for small innovative service providers to offer service to public institutions as well as homes  For e-commerce and web hosting companies it will generate new business in out sourcing and web hosting  For Canadian optical manufacturing companies it will provide new opportunities for sales of optical technology and components

53. PEI Fiber Network Possible Topology Supernode Node

54. PEI model  Assume all supernodes (school board offices, city halls, etc) are along arterial highway (500 km) and interconnected with 48 strands @ $13/m  Cost of provincial research and education backbone - $6.5m  This cost would be provincial responsibility  Assume all nodes (schools, libraries, hospitals) are along collector highways (850 km) and interconnected with 24 strand @ $10/m  Cost of connecting nodes - $8.5m (half the fibers reserved for future connection to home owners) so only $4.25m is charged to public sector  Based on Alberta density of 3800 public sector buildings on population of 2m, then PEI there would 250 public sector buildings  Average cost to bring fiber to every node - $34,000  But half of fibers are to be used for connectivity to home, so average cost per public sector building then $17,000 which would be paid out of cost savings  Assume all other roads (3600 km) go by all homes and farms with 12 strand fiber @ $8/m  Cost of going by all homes and farms $28.8m  There are 47,000 dwellings in PEI, so cost to go by each home $612.  Cost to connect up home would be less than $20/mo with 4 year amortization

55. Examples  Canberra Tansact was to be city wide VDSL – now looking at GbE with fiber  $500 to go by each home  New housing developments are going with fiber and FastE or GigE  Brossard, FutureWay, Houston, Palo Alto etc  Many new startups in the GITH and GITB market  Worldwidepackets – www.worldwidepackets.com - $50/mo for Gbewww.worldwidepackets.com  Homefiber – www.homefiber.comwww.homefiber.com  Grant County, WA

56. Carriers are not the only decision maker in the last mile  Governments and consumers are becoming more active voice in determining the future of broadband to home  Do not assume that carrier best technical solution is the only approach  Open access is becoming a critical political issue  Consumers want more than duopoly of cable and telco  Facilities based competition the best  Municipalities object to their streets being torn up  Dig once – bury lots of fiber  Residents object to street furniture and antennae

57.  Governments promote the framework for GITH networks by funding schools, universities, libraries, hospitals and municipal buildings as first customers and early adopters of dark fiber and optical networks  Private sector leverages that investment by government to promote high speed Internet access to schools and universities to extend the fiber to the home  Electric utility companies, municipal governments, CLECs, SMEs, entrepreneurs, as well as traditional telcos and cablecos can participate as providers, provided they subscribe to the architecture of open access, facilities based competition through dark fiber (or wavelengths)  Emphasize the development and use of technology that specifically addresses the new architecture and the last mile, which must therefore be open, cheap and Internet-only An important Role for Government

58. CANARIE's 6th Advanced Networks Workshop "The Networked Nation" November 28 and 29, 2000 Palais des Congrès Montreal, Quebec - Canada  "The Networked Nation", will focus on application architectures ("grids") made up of customer owned dark fiber and next generation Internet networks like CA*net 3 that will ultimately lead to the development of the networked nation where eventually every school, home and business will have high bandwidth connection to the Internet.  Three tracks:  Customer owned dark fiber for schools, hospitals, businesses and homes.  Next generation optical Internet architectures that will be a natural and seamless extension of the customer owned dark fiber networks being built for schools, homes and businesses.  "application grids", which are a seamless integration of dark fiber and optical networks to support specific collaborative research and education applications.

59. Conclusion  Many governments have recognized the importance of access to low cost dark fiber as fundamental economic enabler  It will be the 21 st century equivalent to the roads and railways that were built in the 20 th century