I think you're right about the importance of the standards committee, Scott. Right place, right time, to make sure that LVLT is at the absolute front edge of the new "pipe architecture."
Re: MFS...ÿÿÿ"It has been rumored they were responsible for the telecommunications reform that took place when MFS was in existence."
I was an early MFS customer in '93-94, and had the opportunity to meet Royce Holland who was then MFS president under Crowe. He talked a lot about how many lawyers he was working with in D.C. and how much time he was spending down there trying to change telecom legislation.
The time MFS devoted to Washington was obviuosly well spent (and well represented in the '96 telecom act), and I expect the experience has given Crowe and his team at LVLT a good foundation for what is needed now.
While on the subject of MFS, I've seen some references on the thread to dificiences in MFS's quality of service, and related core business issues. I have to concur that MFS never really did live up to all its initial promises to business customers, at least to small ones like me, but I think, looking back, that this was possibly one of the reasons Crowe "unloaded" the company on Worldcom, to use perhaps an overly harsh phrase. I think it was precisely the intractable problems Crowe & co. observed at MFS the led to the vision of a clean slate company. MFS was patchwork, essentially. LVLT has the opportunity to be smooth, clean new work. Just MHO. |
