To: Mary Cluney who wrote (36948 ) 11/20/1998 6:54:00 AM From: Ilaine Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 132070
Hi Mary, I am going to take a swing at this, if I am wrong, please explain how: >>>>>If they are talking about extending tcpip into the home<<<<< The following is a good definition of TCP/IP, copied from AltaVista: "TCP/IP <protocol> Transmission Control Protocol over Internet Protocol. The de facto standard Ethernet protocols incorporated into 4.2BSD Unix. TCP/IP was developed by DARPA for internetworking and encompasses both network layer and transport layer protocols. While TCP and IP specify two protocols at specific protocol layers, TCP/IP is often used to refer to the entire DoD protocol suite based upon these, including telnet, FTP, UDP and RDP." I think that by any meaningful use of the term, TCP/IP is already "extended into the home," otherwise you couldn't use the internet. "If they are talking about . . . replacing copper with fibre (sic)" Not likely any local provider is going to rip up existing copper and put down fiber, not directly to residences and businesses, anyway (so-called "last mile" technology). Qwest, et al. are laying down fiber coast-to-coast, city-to-city. Your local RBOC lays the connection to your house and so on. That's why AT&T wants to get into supplying internet over coaxial (TV) cable, that's why Intel wants to make set-top boxes, that's why Gates wants to get into supplying internet via satellite and microwave. Instead of ripping out the copper wires, the various telecom equiment manufacturers are working like demons to develop technology that maximizes use of existing wiring, for example, xDSL, or uses something other than POTS copper wiring. Fiber optics IS better, it is MUCH fatter pipe, but no telco would go to the expense without exclusive right to use it, guaranteeing return, and the FCC won't give it to them, because by law it can't. That's what I understand, anyway. CobaltBlue