IP: re Baby Bells Told To Expand High-speed Internet Service

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

> From: "Bob Frankston" <rmf2g2 () bobf Frankston com>
> To: "Dave Farber" <farber () cis upenn edu>
> Subject: FW: Baby Bells Told To Expand High-speed Internet Service
> Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 16:08:59 -0400
> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
> Importance: Normal
>
> While I can appreciate the goal of increasing the availability of "High
> Speed Internet Services", I fear the result will be to establish an upper
> bound on deployment rather creating a vibrant marketplace.
>
> Most of the Bells have focused their service on DSL, which is an accidental
> by-product of their effort to create an alternative to Cable TV for
> Interactive Television. The result has been a focus on providing service
> only where there just happens to be existing copper that is short enough to
> meet a DSL specification. There has no urgency to extending service beyond
> the ability to salvage existing copper. This isn't to say there is no
> incentive at all -- a DSL line costs an IAP $20/month while the same copper
> might be $1/month as an "alarm wire".
>
> Since DSL is simply a way to reuse existing copper, you have the strange
> situation in which you can't get digital service (Internet connectivity)
> because you have digital service (fiber or ISDN). Where is the understanding
> the DSL is just one possible means for providing Internet connectivity
> rather than a reason to limit its availability?
>
> It seems unfair to grant the existing player the compelling advantage of
> being able to use their wires which were installed under regulatory
> protection for an entirely different purpose. Others must invest risk
> capital for building entirely new infrastructure.
>
> Given that a full time megabit connection is $30 to $50/month (Cable Modem
> "to-the-residence" speed) while the option to use a 64K channel for just
> voice is $30 (more or less depending on the service), the availability of
> the "high speed" connection should obviate the need for a special voice
> path. It seems short-sighted to grant companies whose primary business is
> threatened by the "High Speed Internet" the ability to set the pace for
> deployment.
>
> Bob Frankston
> http://www.frankston.com
> (or, more to the point
> http://www.frankston.com/public/essays/disconnect.asp)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ip-sub-1 () admin listbox com
> [mailto:owner-ip-sub-1 () admin listbox com]On Behalf Of David Farber
> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 20:19
> To: ip-sub-1 () majordomo pobox com
> Subject: IP: Baby Bells Told To Expand High-speed Internet



For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/