Bill to Require Fiber Optic Cable Friendly Highway Construction

Re:Bill to Require Fiber Optic Cable Friendly Highway Constr... by jbooth on Tuesday July 26, 2011 @05:46PM (#2809612)

Is that actually true though? I assumed a lot of it had been lit up since then, and if you assume continued exponential or even linear growth in internet traffic (cable tv becoming a relic of the 20th century, etc), it stands to reason we'll need more backbone capacity as well as more last-mile connectivity.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bill to Require Fiber Optic Cable Friendly Highway Constr... by smhinsey on Tuesday July 26, 2011 @06:04PM (#2809667)

I'm not even going to get into whether they're being honest about it, but when I called to ask about transferring my service to a new apartment, Verizon told me that they'd stopped rolling out FIOS to new locations because they didn't have the fiber for it.

I kind of just assumed that it was the prelude to asking for more money, but it seems like there's likely some truth to it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bill to Require Fiber Optic Cable Friendly Highway Constr... by sgrossman on Tuesday July 26, 2011 @06:29PM (#2809746)

Backbone capacity is not nearly as big of an issue, despite traffic growth. Long haul DWDM systems get denser, higher bit rate transponders get built, etc to push more bits across the same fiber.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bill to Require Fiber Optic Cable Friendly Highway Constr... by Tuna-Fish on Tuesday July 26, 2011 @09:38PM (#2810316)

The growth of bits/second per fiber has also been exponential.

[ Parent | on HN ]