Thanks to reader Frank Coluccio who pointed me toward a recording of the Fiber Infrastructure Panel at Oppenheimer’s Technology, Media & Telecommunications conference that can be found on the website of abvt. The panel’s experts included Abovenet’s Bill LaPerch, Zayo’s Dan Caruso, Allied Fiber’s Hunter Newby, USMetroTel’s Frank Mambuca, and CityTel’s NiQ Lai. That group contains some of the greatest prophets of fiber and the dumb pipe out there right now, spanning a very wide variety of geographies and business models. The recording is worth a listen to anyone interested in fiber infrastructure – especially during the dog days of August which aren’t usually the biggest news period of the year.
If you haven't already, please take our Reader Survey! Just 3 questions to help us better understand who is reading Telecom Ramblings so we can serve you better!
Categories: Fiber optic cable · FTTH · Internet Backbones · Metro fiber
Join Our LinkedIn Group
What good doth fiber do, presentations or otherwise, that do not bring me “VIDEO”?
I want to “SEE” my “PROPHETS” utilizing “DUMP PIPES” wisely.
Until they consciously participate in such offerings, I must view them as “FALSE PROPHETS.” imo
Isn’t “dumb-pipe content” an oxymoron? I like the idea that the fiber guys continue separating the two, or continue maintaining a decoupled model.
Besides, they don’t need the network neutrality headaches that are likely to ensue in this area, where they haven’t already.
Incidentally, Bill St. Arnaud earlier today sent me a paper he was commissioned to write for the FCC that addresses some of the non-video aspects and uses of Information Content Architectures and Content Distribution Networks, for anyone interested.
The paper, written as a personal perspective by Bill, can be accessed at:
http://billstarnaud.blogspot.com/2010/02/personal-perspective-on-evolving.html
Frank
——
Content vs Connectivity again ?
I once stumbled over a presentation by Andrew Odlyzko with the title “Content is not king”, where he argued (imho 100% on target) that this obsession with content is missing the mark because the value of two-way networks grows faster with the number of nodes than the value of a content-delivery network, which of course only uses one-way – downstream.
And Andrew Odlyzko was pretty conservative, with his “value estimate” where he applied a correction to Metcalfe’s law. Instead of the quadratic function of n² for network value/utility given by Metcalfe’s law, he substituted the term n * log (n).
Should be noted this still grows faster than Sarnoff’s law, appraising the value of a content delivery as proportional to the number of viewers.
This is the reason why I think this obsession with the complementaries of an infrastructure (content etc.) is nice but missing the mark. Ask the subscribers of HKBN (City Telecom) in HongKong what are they doing with all their bandwidth. I bet video will be a part but so will other, more connectivity oriented and collaborative applications
rgrds
CROSSY
No fiber, no future… as simple as that. Not even Congress can vote to stop bandwidth demand as driven by the open market. Thus the focus on copper-loops and special access by CLECs remains a fools game and a waste of money except for the lawyers that argue for loops and special access.