Hi Jim.
"WRT your posted link on Net Neutrality, it seems clear that the problem would largely disappear in the presence of sufficient capacity: I mean excess capacity."
It might appear that way, but I really don't think so. Supply has repeatedly created (fostered, unleashed, instigated) new demand, and we're still compressing the hell out of the limited number of apps (relative to what's waiting in the pipeline for when much larger pipes become available) that we're still using. I'd therefore be hard pressed to guess when a plateauing effect might occur that was caused by sated demand, as opposed to the usual plateaus we've seen resulting from hitting the proverbial brick wall. And the "excess" capacity to which you refer, by which I presume you are referring to the necessary "headroom" that allows near-real-time best effort apps to function properly, becomes quickly consumed, requiring replenishment.
"If an OC48 terminates unused in a given area at zero or minimal cost, how long would it take to develop a business plan for its use? How many ISPs would spring up, willing to extend their reach? "
I don't mean to nit more than is necessary, but the capital costs alone to install an OC-48, despite declining price points associated with optical ports, not to mention the level of circuit-order engineering involved, would surprise many here, I think. Also, on occasion I've waited nine months (sometimes longer when facilities re-sale by competitive carriers was involved) to have a single T3 line installed for the nation's largest banks, never mind an OC-48 (the equivalent of 48 T3s). But if we toss the latter issues aside, if these ISPs to which you refer would be willing to pay for placing traffic on this OC-48, then I'd have to assume that they'd have done so already. I guess I'm not seeing your point entirely here. It almost sounds like a cross between a free lunch and a build it and they will come experiment.
--
"We all know (now) that we won't soon see the reappearance of Andrew Odlyzko's scholarly research on whether Internet usage is growing. And despite the oft-repeated claim that the Internet is broken it can still support a huge increase in throughput. What's more, any future Internet will still use fibre."
Actually, Andrew is quoted several times today expressing such views in the NY Times article that follows (which I post here reluctantly due to its foolish heading):
Video Road Hogs Stir Fear of Internet Traffic Jam
By Steve Lohr | March 13, 2008 | NY Times
Cont.: nytimes.com
------ |
