Level 3 And Verizon Agree To Share Cost Of Network Upgrades

That is the way large networks and Internet domains always have interconnected. And it makes sense.

When networks exchange roughly equal amounts of traffic there is no structural problem. When traffic is unequal,  the sending network imposes costs on the receiving network. "Sending network pays" is how it works.

And how it should work, in fairness.

Level 3 And Verizon Sign Interconnect Agreement: Agree To Share Cost Of Network Upgrades http://m.seekingalpha.com/article/3106406?source=ansh $LVLT, $VZ

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Voice Usage and Texting Trends Headed in Opposite Directions

Image
You can see where this is going. Younger users text more than they talk, and though today's users 25 and above still talk more than they text, the usage pattern is uniform: younger age cohorts text more than older age cohorts.

So as each age cohort advances, one might predict that texting behavior will grow over time. How much it grows is the only real question.

Users 18 or younger actually"talk" about as much as users 55 to 64. One suspects an awful lot of "voice" activity is of the coordination and collaboration sort, so that younger and mid-life workers might be in work groups that require more coordination than workers 55 to 64.
Read more

Korea Telecom Sees New Value from Fixed Network

Korea Telecom, like Verizon, now sees different strategic value for the fixed network. AT&T likely agrees, up to a point.

The stated upside for Korea Telecom fixed transport network capacity upgrades is said to be “home video, mobile broadband, and VIP leased lines.”
Consumer video includes support for bandwidth-intensive 4K video formats, but telco upgrades to fiber-to-home or fiber-to-node long have been premised on incremental video entertainment revenues. That is not especially new.
Nor would anyone find trunking network support for business and enterprise customers too surprising.
What is different is the use of the fixed network as backhaul for mobile broadband. Again, while mobile backhaul always has been key revenue driver for cell tower connections, coming small cell requirements represent a qualitative change.
It is one thing to support networks of macrocells. That fiber-to-tower market has been important for many service providers for some years.
Up to this point, in the…
Read more

Someday 100 Mbps Will Not Qualify as "Broadband"

Image
easonable people will differ about the value of changing the definition of broadband from time to time. When definitions are changed, though, it becomes more difficult to track progress, even if higher minimum definitions are indirect proof that speeds are increasing, across the board.
Three decades ago, in the U.S. market, “broadband” was, by definition, any speed faster than 1.5 Mbps. A decade and a half ago, fiber to the home meant symmetrical 10 Mbps speeds. These days, anything below 25 Mbps is not even “broadband.”
Someday, even 100 Mbps might not be considered “broadband.” It just depends on adoption of speeds in the gigabit range, on both fixed and mobile networks.
source: Arris


source: Arris
Read more