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: Bill Lin who wrote (2589)	12/15/1998 8:06:00 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12823

Hi Bill, happy to see you here. It is with particular interest that I read your message, for it falls two years to the week of another discussion we had here with some real heavy weights in this arena. You note: >There is a movement afoot to move the DSLAM out of the CO to the commercial building site. They connect via a T1, 3 T1 or a fractional T3. It doesn't matter what % higher the T lines cost, because then the CLEC, ISP or NSP delivers that bandwidth to the tenants via DSL using the building's wiring. Checkout the startup www.acucomm.com They are providing this remote POP capability.< Early on in my subscription here, while I was still getting my butt kicked around, and shown the ropes by Tom Eames [a founder of Next Level], George Hawley [a founder of Diamond Lane], Ray Jensen [a PacTel Sonet engineer doing last mile things at the time], and a host of others including WTC and Tim McCormick, I had a similar notion. As usual, it was uselessly and hopelessly ahead of its time then, but at least I gave it a try. I usually take solace that way, telling myself that at least I gave it a try ;-) Your ideas, at this time, however, are a lot more relevant, and indeed coming to fruition. -- The discussion that sticks out in my mind commenced in December of '96 when I inquired of George H. in: Message 509788 : "My latent fantasy is to light up the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center with a couple of OC-192's and spread VDSL to every desktop in the joint. Think you could lend a hand in this endeavor?" Frank George's reply at the time was: Message 513227 : "It would be a lot cheaper to use 25 Mb/s ATM transceivers than VDSL, I bet and would give more two-way options. I don't think you want asymmetry in business applications...I wonder what you're going to terminate the OC-192's on, especially at the server end? Long way from 110 volt ballistic tests from the LTD. Geeorge He doesn't post here much (if any), anymore, which probably means that he is very busy at Diamond Lane, a maker of ATM-based DSLAMs." If you follow the links from there, I think you will find your recommendation at around Message 516224 wherein I stated: "Something along these lines, i.e., in-building deployment of ADSL, is currently being done by Siemens-Nixdorf through the use of an integrator in NY City (I believe it is Pyramid Technologies) for high-rise apartment dwellers under the heading of FreeBeeTV. As far as I know they are using ADSL, and it's advertiser supported. And they are picking off a NYNEX-provided SONET feed in the basement. I'd like to see the return analysis on this one in two or three year's time. >I wonder what you're going to terminate the OC-192's on, especially at the server end? Long way from 110 volt ballistic tests< ADM'ed to four floors in a four-strand Bidirectional Line Switched Ring architecture, where each floor would take an OC-48. The floors would be 25 stories apart, allowing for the reduced distances required by VDSL. No end point, in this manner, would be more than 12 or 13 stories away from a DSLAM. IP over SONET and ATM interfaces would be available as required. At the server end? Probably OC-3 or OC-12 interfaces to the Internet Backbone and to various ISP and cable tv providers. Am I piquing your interest? Shall we continue?" Regards, Frank C That was back in December of 1996. If I didn't tell you that, I think the 25 Mb/s ATM alternative that George mentioned would have served as a form of historical time stamp, and been a dead giveaway, anyway. I'd like to reply to your post in more earnest later in the day, when I'm not quite so full of myself and feeling vindicated, and when I have more time. Gotta go make some bread now to put macaroni and meatballs on the table. Have a great day! Regards, Frank Coluccio

To: Bill Lin who wrote (2589)	12/15/1998 11:53:00 AM
From: WTC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12823

Re: DSLAMS in MDUs ... Multiple Dwelling Units usually seem to be a precursor for new consumer services, probably because of the early opportunity for scale economies. My question with your post goes to the purpose of any DSLAM/ATU-R/ATU-C equipment in the MDU serving topology you cite. It seems to me that the DSLAM, etc. is redundant in such a serving arrangement. If you bring T1s or better into a building by whatever means from whomever, and you want to share that bandwidth among clients in a building, why not just feed a router with the backhaul bandwidth and connect customers with ethernet, Tut, or whatever? If it's a really a big building, wouldn't you find a serving topology perhaps with multiple routers/ATM switches that is cheaper than a DSLAM/xDSL serving arrangement? Just like business serving arrangements today? I believe that ADSL is much more appropriate for serving dispersed residential customers than highly clustered ones, but that caveat only applies if the clustering occurs predictably and with quick high penetration. That could certainly be the case with a building that advertises and promotes its web-friendliness -- certainly many residential and business buildings do so today.