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: WTC who wrote (2543)	12/13/1998 2:29:00 PM
From: Stephen B. Temple	Respond to of 12823

WTC: An a partime research anaylst, I needn't go further, thx EOM

To: WTC who wrote (2543)	12/13/1998 2:56:00 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Respond to of 12823

Bill, for some reason I missed your message # 2543 until Stephen's comment re-directed me to it. That was truly some great coverage and explanation on your part. Thanks. About a year ago we had similar discussions here with Tom Eames concerning Next Level's initiatives in this regard, and the explanations he offered for the SAC/SAI [serving area cross connect and the serving area interface] come to mind. BTW, does anyone know how the GI/Next Level rollouts went up in the Boston area? To review, they were bringing SONET/ATM rings to neighborhood in support of a full range of services [video, voice, high speed data, GR-303, etc.) from remote concentrators, and dropping off VDSL like coax and/or twisted pair to residences from the RT. I never did get that one straight, or perhaps they were using both TP and coax? This is an architecture similar to the Bellcore model of a Full Service Area Network [FSAN] architecture previously discussed here, and similar in make up, although much more exptensive in complexity, to what Stephen was inquiring about, I think, when he suggested driving fiber into the neighborhood and dropping it to a DSLAM, and then TP to the residence or office. The issues you raised concerning the administration and logistics of field provisions for multiple carriers in a pluralistic competitive atmosphere [where dozens of CLECs could be vying for attachment, conceivably] did not go unnoticed here, including your comments about jurisdiction and the need for performing cooperative [?] testing. These circumstances are very similar, if not identical, to the problems associated with administering "fairness" in the communications easements of skyscrapers in large cities, as well. A possible difference being, in the case of office buildings, the landlord usually has a $trong $ay in matter$. This is Wild West stuff in its purest form, to put it mildly. Regards, Frank C.