MikeM,
First, thanks for the kudos, but I had a little head start on this. About a year ago my firm designed a domestic integrated net of a hybrid sort, using SS7 and VoIP principles that included the use of a generic programmable switch with one of its "blades" intended to be a "slide in" by CSCO or BAY. The switches we evaluated at the time, in this order, were SUMA, XLSW, Harris, DSC, Sattel, Nortel, Sattel, and about a half dozen insignificant others. What the CSCO deal does, perhaps, is change the relationships between the "host" and the "blade," as I perceived it, although not necessarily as we may see the emergence of a new switch node class here, but the same principle applies.
>>So can Excel's programmable switches offer the same thing to another datanetworker or telecom equipment provider that Summa Four offered to Cisco?<<
It's my guess that both Excel and SUMA were on the same kind of evaluation chart for CSCO as they were for my firm. Excel can certainly fill the same bill.
>>Excel is not that bad of investment idea from it's fundamentals alone. Maybe if it's a takeover candidate, it makes it all the more attractive. I bet you only 1 out of a 100,000 tech investors knows that Excel may offer a product that may make VoIP an easier migration path for either a data networker or telecom equipment provider.<<
Absolutely. And like I said, XLSW already has a strategy in hand to achieve those VoIP and FoIP goals on its own. But I'm sure a little cozzying up from an LU or ASND or Alcatel or NT or the like would find ample acceptance from them at the right price. I do think that they are a very likely takeover.
>>What's an "ITSP?"I don't think I've run across that acronym before.<<
It stands for Internet Telephony Service Provider, to distinguish it from an ISP.
BTW, the article that Hiram referenced can be viewed in its entirety here on SI on the VoIP board, at:
Message 5336933
Best Regards, Frank C.
|
