Laz, all of your points are very well taken, not the least of them having to do with the openness to the public, or lack thereof, of the standards groups, in particular, the ITU. I go round and round on this when it comes to matters Internet. I've listended to some of their arguments for why this is, and they are real.
[[Sidebar: But one could easily argue at the same time that these are the same arguments that would lend credibility to disolving them altogether, in the first place, given newer and more open models, such as the IETF, to supplant them (which they are entirley aware of). This is not a simple, or singular discussion, and there's a lot to be told on both sides of the aisle here. And the IETF itself now faces the same sorts of influences that have molded the ITU. This has been gradual up until only recently, but it is becoming increasingly so, ever since the 'net has gone dot com nutzo, and commercially successful, and the participation at the IETF is now being led to a great degree by the same vendors and PTTs (in the remote regions of the 'net) as those who have influenced the ITU. End Sidebar]]
I suspect that the post to which I am now replying was written prior to your seeing the next ones that I posted (and I hope that this last statement hasn't been nullified by further editing on your part as I type. smile). I clarified some of the points you replied to, already, in other words. But the greater part of your post still rings true, anyway. They were very well put.
The more the standards begin to apply here, the more the optical domain will begin to look like Gilder's Copper Cage, only orders of magnitude more capacious in scale. The same is happening in the VoIP space, as VoIP through emulation begins to resemble the same constructs which it was intended to replace. The PSTN and GSTN, and their attached databases, and links. But once again, I digress.
Regards, Frank Coluccio |
