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 : Aware, Inc. - Hot or cold IPO? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KHS who wrote (8304)	3/29/2000 3:42:00 PM
From: Perry P.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9236

I got this off of the Last Mile thread. It is the FCC documents about colocation, etc. It is only a very small portion. The entire document from the FCC is over 200 pages. <<<<<<<FCC 99-238 SELECT EXCERPTS Page 14 Packet Switching. Incumbent LECs are not required to unbundle packet switching, except in a limited circumstance. Competitive LECs are actively deploying packet switches to serve high-volume customers, and are not impaired in their ability to offer service to such customers, without access to the incumbent LEC's facilities. Competitive LECs are impaired, however, in their ability to provide services to small-volume users without access to unbundled packet switching. Nonetheless, we consider the other goals of the Act in making our unbundling determination, and conclude that given the nascent nature of the advanced services market and the Act's goal to provide incentives to all carrier to invest and innovate, incumbent LECs are generally not requited to unbundle packet switching. 205. We find that lack of access to unbundled subloops materially diminishes a requesting carrier's ability to provide services that it seeks to offer. We also conclude that access to subloop elements is likely to be the catalyst that will allow competitors, over time, to deploy their own complementary subloop facilities, and eventually to develop competitive loops. Lack of access to subloops discourages competitive LECs from attempting to combine their own feeder plant with the incumbent?s distribution plant to minimize their reliance on the incumbent's facilities. We also find that lack of unbundled access to the incumbent's subloops would preclude competitors from offering some broadband services. Accordingly, we conclude that incumbent LECs must provide unbundled access to subloops nationwide, where technically feasible. 218. Third, competitors seeking to offer services using xDSL technology need to access the copper wire portion of the loop. In cases where the incumbent multiplexes its copper loops at a remote terminal to transport the traffic to the central office over fiber DLC facilities, a requesting carrier's ability to offer xDSL service to customers served over those facilities will be precluded, unless the competitor can gain access to the customer's copper loop before the traffic on that loop is multiplexed. Thus, we note that the remote terminal has, to a substantial degree, assumed the role and significance traditionally associated with the central office. In addition, in order to use its own facilities to provide xDSL service to a customer, a carrier must locate its DSLAM within a reasonable distance of the customer premises, usually less than 18,000 feet. In both of these situations, a requesting carrier needs access to copper wire relatively close to the subscriber in order to serve the incumbent's customer. 306. We decline at this time to unbundle the packet switching functionality, except in limited circumstances. Among other potential factors, we recognize that the presence of multiple requesting carriers providing service with their own packet switches is probative of whether they are impaired without access to unbundled packet switching. The record demonstrates that competitors are actively deploying facilities used to provide advanced services to serve certain segments of the market - namely, medium and large business - and hence they cannot be said to be impaired in their ability to offer service, at least to these segments without access to the incumbent's facilities. In other segments of the market, namely, residential and small business, we conclude that competitors may be impaired in their ability to offer service without access to incumbent LEC facilities due, in part, to the cost and delay of obtaining collocation in every central office where the requesting carrier provides service using unbundled loops. We conclude, however, that given the nascent nature of the advanced services marketplace, we will not order unbundling of the packet switching functionality as a general matter. >>>>>>> Comments? Anyone good with Lawyer Speak????? Perry