Slashdot Mirror


'Dig Once' Bill Could Bring Fiber Internet To Much of the US (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: If the U.S. adopts a "dig once" policy, construction workers would install conduits just about any time they build new roads and sidewalks or upgrade existing ones. These conduits are plastic pipes that can house fiber cables. The conduits might be empty when installed, but their presence makes it a lot cheaper and easier to install fiber later, after the road construction is finished. The idea is an old one. U.S. Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) has been proposing dig once legislation since 2009, and it has widespread support from broadband-focused consumer advocacy groups. It has never made it all the way through Congress, but it has bipartisan backing from lawmakers who often disagree on the most controversial broadband policy questions, such as net neutrality and municipal broadband. It even got a boost from Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), who has frequently clashed with Democrats and consumer advocacy groups over broadband -- her "Internet Freedom Act" would wipe out the Federal Communications Commission's net neutrality rules, and she supports state laws that restrict growth of municipal broadband. Blackburn, chair of the House Communications and Technology Subcommittee, put Eshoo's dig once legislation on the agenda for a hearing she held yesterday on broadband deployment and infrastructure. Blackburn's opening statement (PDF) said that dig once is among the policies she's considering to "facilitate the deployment of communications infrastructure." But her statement did not specifically endorse Eshoo's dig once proposal, which was presented only as a discussion draft with no vote scheduled. The subcommittee also considered a discussion draft that would "creat[e] an inventory of federal assets that can be used to attach or install broadband infrastructure." Dig once legislation received specific support from Commerce Committee Chairman Greg Walden (R-Ore.), who said that he is "glad to see Ms. Eshoo's 'Dig Once' bill has made a return this Congress. I think that this is smart policy and will help spur broadband deployment across the country."

6 of 174 comments (clear)

  1. Municipal/County Fiber by Strider- · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Or, you know, you could just eliminate the laws that prohibit/restrict Municipal and/or County fiber projects. Two counties I know have PUDs that have deployed fiber to pretty much every address also serviced by their power connection. Residents then have the option to choose Internet service from several different providers (Zayo and Level 3 will also do transit over it), and TV service from several providers, and it's all very reasonably priced and reliable.

    Of course, the big boys (Verizon et al) Hate it, because it dramatically lowers the bar to their competition.

    --
    ...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
  2. Why federal law? by Michael+Woodhams · · Score: 1, Interesting

    While I'm not terribly familiar with the responsibilities of levels of US government, this seems like something appropriate to being dealt with at the local body or possibly state level. Why is the federal government involved?

    --
    Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
    1. Re:Why federal law? by Razed+By+TV · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Speculation: because the local governments have already signed their souls over. If they can't install municipal broadband due to their current agreements, there is little incentive for them to install conduit that they can't use. And why run the conduit for Comcast or Verizon, who has possibly already been paid to do the job and neglected to do so?

  3. OK in Barstow, but ... by vtcodger · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Anyone around here here have any practical experience with long runs of conduit in rural areas? I'm all in favor of it if it works. But how do you keep the conduit from filling up with water ... at least in places where it rains now and then? And what happens when that water freezes and expands? And is there a problem with critters homesteading in the pipe? And sediment? And what happens where it crosses active slip-strike fault lines? In other words -- What could possibly go wrong?

    Also, shouldn't this be a state and local thing, not a federal government thing? I have no problem with the feds doing the R&D and laying out best practices. But if the Feds pay for this, they'll probably have the entire country including every swamp in Florida and dry lake in the Mojave conduited with mil-spec pipes and full time inspectors and mandatory 20 year replacement cycles. While it's probably a better investment than 22 goddamn aircraft carriers, Or the planned massive rollout of overpriced and underperforming F-35 aircraft, I'm not sure it should be that high on our list of national priorities.

    --
    You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    1. Re:OK in Barstow, but ... by rahvin112 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Any conduit not pulled and sealed within a year or two of laying will be worthless. You typically need a junction/pull box about every 1000'. At each of these access points each conduit needs to be sealed off but very rarely are because the guys pulling the conduits expect the guy pulling the cable through will do it. Even if you seal them up you've still got the issue that because you didn't pull a line through it right when you laid the conduit you don't know if the conduit's got to much variation that will prohibit a pull (you cannot lay this stuff perfectly level and straight, you end up with it going up and down and side to side and if it has too much of that you won't be able to pull a cable due to the friction).

      When you pull the cable during construction you can verify and fix the conduit before you install the asphalt and close it all up. If you wait you have no idea if the conduit is good until someone tries to pull a cable. Rat's or other rodents will build nests, they'll fill with water and sand, etc, etc, etc. After about 3 years without any cable being pulled you won't be able to get a cable through them and the conduit you installed is worthless. It's far better for cities/counties/states to plan these networks out and use them themselves for traffic operation. Locally our DOT puts in 4 or more conduits every time they lay them for their traffic network and the DOT typically only uses 1 or 2 of them. They then rent the extra conduits to companies. Because the DOT pulled a cable through the conduits during installation and the conduits are in a duct arrangement they know the other conduits are good. In addition because they pulled they also sealed up all the other conduits so critters and debris can't plug the conduit.

      I support what the congress critter wants to do but a blanket requirement to install conduits is just dumb, the locals need to be involved and supporting the installation. Forcing a DOT or city to install conduit they themselves won't use is just a plain waste of money,

  4. Nice Idea in theory by Going_Digital · · Score: 3, Interesting

    but who owns the ducts and what if the comms companies don't want to pay the price to use them and would rather lay their own. Are they forced to pay the monopoly rates?