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: Daniel G. DeBusschere who wrote (3948)	5/31/1999 11:40:00 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Respond to of 12823

Hello Dan, I don't presume to understand all of the use policy issues. I'm merely echoing some of the issues that I've seen take place over the past six months. ATHM has done some back peddling on the severity of their restrictions. That is, they reversed their position. I think that was back in February or March, when their network was under the microscope for causing severe bottlenecking in several regions, they imposed some stiff guidelines, and then immediately rescinded them when user outcry dictated doing same. The policy issues, themselves, are arbitrary when you think about it. They are judgment calls, predicated on best effort assessments of what the impact will be over time. The MSOs and their ISPs still have some breathing room at this point, so they could afford to reverse their position for the time being. But the impact of work at homes is less arbitrary, and more predictable. Your point concerning downloading software is well taken. And I agree that the primary focus in current policies address residential web sites, and in some cases streaming video session durations. But web site hosting may actually pale in comparison to the kind of traffic that a corporate software developer would impose on the HFC last mile. Database rebuilds consisting of multi-gigabyte flows could tie up resources for long stretches of time, if telecommuting software developers were permitted to use the service. My reference to QoS was not intended to relate solely to voice services. In fact, voice was not even primary in my thinking when I posted. It was instead intended to address user response times, in general, including those applications which are demanding of immediacy, such as remote (virtual) call center screen searches, in addition to voice and video conferencing a la Net Meeting, etc. For end users working at home as remote call center agents (a growing field, facilitated by 800 redirects), this also means a need for fast screen pops in the sub-second to 2 second response time range, in order to be competitive with ISDN, and possibly DSL. --- I don't know about the number 4 machine. Have you heard that these will be used to any great extent, leveraging them for voice over cable, specifically? My guess would be that they would instead attempt to leverage smaller programmables, such as the Excel or a Summa4 type alternative. Or, maybe one of LU's or NT's recent entries into this space, where IN/AIN were needed, with multiprotocol extensibility. To me, it doesn't seem that the 4E would be the migration platform they would want to evolve their IP strategy. I could be wrong, however, and should also note that I have not heard anything on this that would suggest that I am right. Except for the recent announcement by T that they have begun purchasing NT composite type switches for their cable voice initiatives which contain Class 4 tandem functionality. One release that touches on this strategy I'm referring to can be found at: nortelnetworks.com Also, I think that T will leverage the many 5Es they now own, stemming from the TCG takeout, to the extent possible. Regards, Frank Coluccio