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.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: James F. Hopkins who wrote (128396)	10/10/2001 4:02:38 PM
From: pater tenebrarum	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

Jim, no, the way i understand it, the lit portion is designed to withstand short term demand peaks, and the spikes can be quite big. i've in the meantime lost the source of the data, but i'll see if i can dig it up....i believe it was the FT.

To: James F. Hopkins who wrote (128396)	10/10/2001 5:09:19 PM
From: yard_man	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

net congestion doesn't have to do with actual fiber capacity which is nowhere near being used up even when there is congestion. Switching is still limited by electronics ... and telcomm traffic is very, very "bursty." By bursty -- I mean very high peak with respect to average usage. Unlike electrical capacity -- you don't design above the actual peaks you expect for years. Fiber in place has capacity to admit growth for very many years into the future -- switching is what would have to change to accomodate more growth. To say that there is excess capacity doesn't mean that the net never gets congested in areas. Likewise, you can't look at the theoretical limits of what can be transmitted over fiber and say that is proof of excess capacity. To be really be able to say there is excess capacity you need to look at dollars expended versus revenues generated and revenues expected to be generated (what was used to justify the investment), IMO. What's a reasonable payback period? 2 years, 5 years, 20 years -- that's where the rub lies. Some of this crap is never, ever gonna pay for itself. Only an economic measure of over-capacity of some sort makes sense ...