Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : LAST MILE TECHNOLOGIES - Let's Discuss Them Here -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DenverTechie who wrote (4954)	8/12/1999 4:57:00 PM
From: Kenneth E. De Paul	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12823

Nice response. There is also the lifeline power issue, too. It is a line to line comparison, however. Let's look at what the final outcome will be using the existing line comparison. A cable phone over different technology competing against a POTS line. In addition to competing, then add the service quotient cable companies are known for, and what do you get? A very negative start in your business case for a slow growing market. AT&T could give away cell phones to subscribers for a better return on investment!

To: DenverTechie who wrote (4954)	8/12/1999 6:25:00 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12823

That was a great reply, Denver, although you covered a lot of territory. It would be beneficial when discussing VoIP [or any other "optimized" variant of packetized voice] to set the ground rules and the main assumptions going in. In other words, where does the packetization process (in this case VoIP) begin and end? Are there, in fact, numerous router hops to contend with? Or, was the MSO simply attempting to stack as many voice calls onto the last mile as possible, leveraging the fact that VoIP economizes on bandwidth, and allows many more calls than G.711/DS0-based sessions for the same quantity of bandwidth. This, I believe, is an enticement for operators whose bandwidth is scarce due to older HFCs, or even those who have not upgraded to HFC. In the latter case, IP only exists between the residence gateway or cable modem device, and the first point (or some aggregation point prior to hitting the Class 5 switch) within the MSO's own access/edge networks. From there, it is converted to DS0 PSTN formats, and sent along as usual via PSNT/SS7. Here, the operator succeeds in stacking more calls than they ordinarily would be able to over the last mile if they were to use DS0s in the upstream, and they eliminate the problems associated with contention on a shared IP network for the long haul part. I'm not advocating this, rather I am only highlighting it as a possibility. Is the MSO employing differentiation (prioritization, by setting the appropriate priority bits on VoIP packets) or through the use of other QoS/CoS/ToS/RSVP/etc. features, or is everything best effort here? Is the VoIP session being established across a much wider reach than the MSO's own head end and backbone facilities? Is it end to end, or at least as extensible as a remote CO-based Gateway? Is there a private IP network serving as the WAN, or are you using the public Internet? And many more questions which get deeper into IP protocol issues. All of these play into the final assessment. On the whole, however, I think that the conclusions you've reached are well thought out, and well stated. Thanks. Frank