Recently I learned our new(ish) neighborhood has fiber to the home provided by CenturyLink. Since Ting is also in our town, I reached out to them to see if they can lease the last mile from CenturyLink. After some research, I learned this was called local-loop unbundling but [I wasn't sure](https://www.reddit.com/r/netneutrality/comments/78vc9k/does_title_ii_of_net_neutrality_have_anything_to/) if it was included in Net Neutrality. /r/Ting called me back and informed me that local-loop unbundling (at least for fiber) is not an option. Some research led me to this Wikipedia page about [Unbundled access](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unbundled_access): > In 2005, after much litigation concerning its original unbundling rules, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) made the decision to limit the number and types of unbundled elements that telecommunications carriers were required to offer competitors under the common carrier laws outlined in 47 U.S.C §§ 251.[2] **In particular the FCC removed the requirement for ILECs to unbundle Fiber-to-the–Home**, and abolished line sharing as an unbundled element. Additionally, the FCC prohibited access to UNEs for the exclusive service to mobile wireless services and long distance services, and removed unbundled switching from the list of UNEs. We (Americans) are struggling to keep net neutrality and we don't have local-loop unbundling. If you could keep only one, which would you choose? * Net neutrality treats all internet traffic as equal but does not address the cost of a new ISPs having to run their own fiber network to every house in every neighborhood in every city, thus delaying the rollout of fiber. * Local-loop unbundling provides a means for companies to share the last mile of infrastructure, for example from the neighborhood entrance to every house in that neighborhood. This is called a [natural monopoly](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_monopoly) and will reduce the cost and increase the speed of fiber deployment.