Optimising the Optic Fibre Deployment in Small Rural Communities: The Case of Mexico
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Please refer to the attached pdf file.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
See the attached file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors propose a method for minimizing the optic fibre network length when connecting a set of regions to the Internet. It consists of several stages where separate algorithms are applied. The decision maker can choose among three objectives according to which the network length is minimized. The methodology allows phased construction of the planned network.
The so proposed methodology is demonstrated on a case study for a set of small rural regions in Mexico.
The paper is well organized and written.
Remarks – typos:
line 2: if
line 130: In Section In §3?
Line 169: may be better “condition (1)”?
Line 204: ins
Fig. 5: may be better “… per Km of fibre”
Alg. 2. The Beginning: §??
Author Response
Apologies for the mistakes, we are sorry. We corrected them thoroughly.
Please see version 2 of the paper:
Remarks – typos:
line 2: if (line 2 in new version)
line 130: In Section In §3? (line 171 in new version)
Line 169: may be better “condition (1)”? (line 210 in new version)
Line 204: ins (line 262 in new version)
Fig. 5: may be better “… per Km of fibre” (page 12 Fig. 6 in new version)
Alg. 2. The Beginning: §?? (page 8 in new version)
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors of the paper propose an algorithm for building an optical Internet in rural areas. The authors apply three criteria to chose next connection: connect nearest community; connect most populated community; connect increased community . The idea is tested on data from Mexico. The paper is interesting and has real application, thus the subject is very actual.
I have following remarks:
1. section 2.3 is too short. The proposed algorithm is presented with pseudocode only. Please describe the algorithm and its application in details. If it is possible provide a short example.
2. References 10 and 21 are incomplete
Author Response
- section 2.3 is too short. The proposed algorithm is presented with pseudocode only. Please describe the algorithm and its application in details. If it is possible provide a short example.
ANSWER:
Sections 2.2 and 2.3 were re-written to better clarify the problem and the proposed approach, see 6 to 9. Moreover, we included Fig. 1 on page 3 to clarify the problem and the solution algorithm.
2. References 10 and 21 are incomplete
corrected. Reference 10 (line 553 - 554) and Reference 21 (line 574 - 575)
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The Authors have quite effectively addressed my comments and the overall quality and clarity have been improved. I thus recommend to consider the paper for acceptance.
However, there are still some minor modifications to be made. Specifically:
- it seems that the paper ”A Robust Optimization Approach for Designing FTTx Networks Integrating Free Space Optics under Weather Uncertainty”(Proc. 16th ACM Symposium on QoS and Security for Wireless and Mobile Networks - Q2SWinet 2020, 2020, DOI: 10.1145/3416013.3426448) has been included in the discussion (line 55-58 on page 2 - the Authors indeed discuss a network integrating optical fibre and cooper with Free Space Optic with tests made on the city of Milan), but non added the reference to the bibliography.
The missing bibliographic entry should be added and the reference number should be included in that part of the text;
- also the work "How does the Spanish regulation of NGN affect to final users? Effects on the deployment "of new FTTH infrastructures” (Telecommunica-tion Systems, 2017, DOI:10.1007/s11235-016-0172-4) seems to be missing, while I think it would be an important work to be included, due to its strong relation with the deployment of fiber-based networks and discussing remarkable regulation topics;
- last but no leatst, please proofread again the text, since there are still some minor typos (e.g., "Free Sapace Optic (FSO)" instead of "Free Space Optic (FSO)" in line 55.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your comments:
- The reference has been added in line 68 and included in our arguments in line 75.
- The work is included in lines 65 -68
- We apologise for those mistakes. We have revised the whole document.
