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: MikeM54321 who wrote (7390)	6/23/2000 10:49:00 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Respond to of 12823

Mike, I knew it must have been a slip. The high end of most vdsl deployments is made to slide right inside a SONET OC-1 at approximately 51.xx (52) Mb/s, when you strip away its overhead. Or, the STS-1 signal at the same rate, which is the electrical interface equivalent of the optical carrier (OC) rate. Someone else mentioned to me recently here when I made reference to this analogy concerning the OC-1, that it was exactly twice the rate of IBM's 25.xx Mb/s ATM, and therefore that was its derivation. Perhaps, but at the same time this is exactly one-half the rate of a SONET OC-1 rate..., or half of the T1s necessary to build a T3, or OC1. Coincidence? In any event, you ask: "... what are the telcos going to do with their VDSL networks? Assuming of course, they build them. Any guesses? Or do you feel TV over twisted pair just ain't going to happen? I think it will happen in many locations because it's a minimalist approach to service while preserving the spectre of bandwidth value. The ILECs simply don't want to open the spigots for what they perceive is a giveaway situation. What is also likely is that some ILECs, like BLS, might pursue an integrated fiber in the loop (IFITL) architecture, and get away from the ATM to the home model, opting instead to allow Fast Ethernet (of, forsooth, GbE at some point) to the home. The Fast Ethernet option (at 100 Mb/s) is already an option, where IFITL exists. Not saying how many folks have signed up for it, or how much it costs, but it is certainly a part of BLS's IFITL architecture. BTW, there are many different approaches, and just as many companies, who can do the analog to digital conversion at the CO, or even further upstream at a "Master Headend." I'd very much like to hear Denver Techie's take on this.