TSF, your post highlights several truisms re bottlenecking. One such bottleneck exists due to the denial of access by landlords to all CLECs on an open access basis (for reasons that are IMO both valid and hooey), and the other by architectural constraints of a networking nature, such as you've alluded to. My point about the landlords is now a matter of public record with both the FCC and Congress taking their separate measures, each having hearings on the topic with no outcome in sight. An article which I failed to bookmark (can someone point to it?) was recently written and circulated throughout SI that speaks to these issues. The purely network-related reasons, however, are a different story, but on some level they are related to the restrictions on easement spaces in building basements and risers, where some carriers are concerned. I say this because the class of CLEC (BLECs) that I am referring to make it their market to service the other CLECs and ILECs, as well as the IXCs for in-building access to customer premises. But this, too, has its share of jurisdictional and SLA-related snags.
I don't have the time now to delve into each of these matters, and hope to return later. I'll need to look more closely at LookingGlass and Telseon. These, as well as Cogent and Yipes, came to mind the other day when I read several stories about some other Euro carriers and the problems that they were having. Although there is no similarity here, other than they all propose to bring an abundance of bandwidth to the customer's doorstep through some rather unconventional packaging schemes. Which, I happen to believe in doing, as long as there are ways to ensure robustness and link survivability.
[BTW, multimode fiber has not been used by any sizeable carrier in outside plant for the past fifteen or more years, except for special purposes related to limited offerings, and between some customer (campus) buildings for PBX tie cable purposes, etc. But the overwhelming bulk of outside fiber is SMF). |
