Don, I, too, put a lot of weight in Crowe's court. As to the advantage LVLT has, or doesn't have with respect to QWST, I have mixed feelings here.
QWST's apparent lower costs per fiber mile of construction, and implementing what could be called traditional services at the physical level, seems to be their strength right now.
LVLT, on the other hand, is/was investing less heavily in these two areas at first, in favor of the intellectual side of infrastructure, honing existing IP constructs and developing new ones.
The danger here, as T found out in the Seventies when MCI used Bell Labs as a proving ground for their next generation development efforts, much to the chagrin of T, is that everything that LVLT develops and promotes through the IETF RFC process becomes, effectively, public domain.
To suggest otherwise would be to oppose the very tenets of the Internet Protocol process, to which LVLT aspires.
Therein lies a major Catch-22 which faces them. How does one protect such an investment in such a way as to both (1) use it to their competitive advantage, and (2) deny its free adoption by others through the RFC outlet.
This is a structural issue that speaks to the philosophical side of Internet practices which derive from a mentality which had its roots over thirty years ago, pre-dating the competitive considerations we have in place today, on the same platform.
Yes, LVLT is sharpening its tools to compete in an IP environment. But are they sharpening their rivals' tools at the same time?
I'd be interested in yours and others' thoughts on this.
Regards, Frank Coluccio |
