Hi, Stuart. re: "Are you aware of any wireless local loop installations in the New York area?"
I've not come across very many instances of ILEC-installed wireless local loops in NY City. In more recent times they would have been more the province of certain multi-modal BLECs like Cypress Communications, while they were still ascending (are they still around?) and wireless CLECS like Winstar. I guess the now bankrupt Winstar's (and before them, LOCATE's) voice services could have been considered commercial grade WLLs.
I'm aware of WLLs that were used for their temporary set-up and tear-down utility during special events and times of emergency. Think: conventions, extended sporting events like the Olympics, and during the 1975 Second Avenue Central Office fire when 270,000 Manhattan phone lines were knocked out for up to six months, and the 1993 WTC bombing recovery, etc., and probably during the aftermath of 9-11. But I don't have any personal knowledge of that one, although many temporary trailers supporting cellular services were deployed at that time.
And WLL is also used in certain municipal agency applications. But for the most part, like you say, WLL is relegated to third-world, deep-rural and certain types of maritime situations, such as on oil drilling platforms in the Gulf of Mexico.
"Verizon ... won't install any additional phone lines into anybody's apartment via internal (inside the building) wiring. They claim to have a policy against running new phone cable around the inside of the building, and insist that the only way they will run additional phone lines is to run them from the punch-down block in the basement via the outside of the building, through a window, and into the apartment."
While there is probably an element of truth to what Petere has suggested, in more official terms this probably stems from recent rulings that require carriers to enter through what is called a "minimal point of entry" or MPOE. This stuff gets very sticky, especially in commercial settings. See a previous discussion on this subject at and around:
Message 17749282
But getting back to your residential apartment situation, if the telco comes in from the pole using a drop wire as you've suggested, then they can terminate their network interface unit (NID) within two feet of the window penetration. Such an arrangement is not necessarily convenient for the customer, because it still calls for the tenant to run their own inside wiring, but it's a liveable proposition. In any event, that's the rule, they can only mount their jack and protection unit (the NID) within two feet of the point of property penetration.
As an alternative to window or sidewall entry, they can also provide an NID for each user in the complex or apartment building that now serves as the demarcation point in the building telecom easement, near the cable entrance facility. This is usually, but not always, in the basement, and the regs state again: within two feet of the outside wall penetration (the point of entry, where cables come into the building). This arrangement may also be designated as an MPOE. This space also serves as the place where all other competing service providers must terminate their wires, as well, or where they might pick off unbundled elements from the ILEC and create their own demarc, alongside of the ILEC's.
In this latter case it's the responsibility of the end user (that's you) to bring their own wires down to the NID, or to have an agent do it for them. And the agent very often is the landlord, or the owner's management company, or some other designated contractor. Sometimes, in smaller structures, based on loosely structured local agreement, tenants are free to run their own.
One reason for this shift in the rules, ostensibly, is that it removes any advantage that the incumbent might have had due to their having "home run" cables run throughout the building directly to end users. It's argued that the incumbent introduces less hassle if they have these direct cables run, thus they would be the more likely choice by users, which would frustrate fair play in competition.
The new rule, therefore, is no more home run cable runs to the end user. And the new rules have not gone without their own problems, with litigation and challenges taking place all over the country. See, for example:
The Last Hundred Feet: More Crucial than Ever
Part II: Bricks v. Broadband: State Rules and Judicial Developments
Bricks v. Broadband
crblaw.com
An excerpt:
"California rules apply to residential and commercial multi-tenant environments (“MTEs”), prohibit carriers from inhibiting another carrier’s access to a building, and permit CLECs to require that ILECs relocate demarcation points to the minimum point of entry (“MPOE”), as well as permit CLECs to use vacant ILEC space in existing entrance facilities. While California requirements do not disturb existing agreements directly, they allow carriers to file formal complaints against any carrier benefiting from exclusive or discriminatory access to private property. If the Commission finds an agreement is unfairly discriminatory, it can require renegotiation or impose fines for continuing violations. CLECs may also apply for site-specific certificates of public convenience and necessity, which CLECs can use to support suits against local governments denying access."
And in Nebraska:
"Nebraska’s rules, like federal requirements, prohibit contracts that exclude other carriers from most buildings (excepting condominiums, cooperatives, and homeowners' associations). ILECs must relocate demarcation points to the MPOE upon CLEC or building owner request and provide CLECs with formal price quotes and construction schedules within 15 business days of their request to move an MPOE and meet within 30 days of a request to determine a mutually agreeable third party for maintenance or repair. CLECs can also move MPOEs for campus wiring to property borders, but must pay a portion of ILEC costs for wiring between the MPOE and the CLEC-served building."
I happened to have the following article bookmarked, which you might find of some use, as well.
xchangemag.com
Btw, do you have cable modem or DSL service installed in your apartment? I wonder how the ILEC would react if folks in your situation began using a SIP-based IP Phone made by Cisco that connects directly to your cable modem ;)
vonage.com
FAC |
