Re: RE: [REPForum] REPforum get-together

Hello All ....

I have really enjoyed reading the email thread over the last couple of
days and I am glad to have made contact with the Forum.

Being the busy person that I am, I can only respond to email so often !

Anyway ...

MAE as NAP were originally conceived as away to provide
connectivity for Service Providers and to solve local QoS issues.
As a result of this history, there is a tendency to think
that REPs will provide the same primary service
to sustain their revenue model.

>From the STL REP perspective, we see this has totally changed.

REP's are about Metro Internet and Metro Internet is about content
and services which are truly regional. In turn Metro Internet is about
necessary IT infrastructure that all regions will need
to sustain competitive advantage in the IP packet industrial age.

So what is he talking about ???

REPs provide the basis for :

1). Survivability ( key architectural element for homeland security )

2). Regional disaster recovery and public archival storage

3). Video distribution for remote learning and regional teleconferencing

4). Regional virus and copy right protection ( other key architectural
element for homeland security )

5). Voice portal for all that VoIP traffic that has no Ethernet central
office to go to.

6). Regional economic development

7). others ...... ( like pick up my  SP connection from the REP too, one
stop shop )

Please note, this model is NOT about Service Providers, it is about everyone
else.
It is about, what services can a REP facilitate that are needed by the
Enterprise, local government and
Universities to accomplish items 1-7 ??

In addition, it is very very clear to the Enterprise, local government and
Universities that Service Providers cannot accomplish items 1-7 in an
reasonable timeframe or
at a reasonable cost.

The REP represents a phoenix rising from the ashes of the dot bomb.
This is what the STL REP study is about. www.stlrepstudy.org

Regards .....

Dave

From: "Pete Kruckenberg" <[email protected]>
To: <>
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 1:29 PM
Subject: Re: [REPforum] RE: [REPForum] REPforum get-together


> On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Jere Retzer wrote:
>
> > >>> [email protected] 03/01/03 06:08AM >>>
> >
> > wrote: ... See www.stlrepstudy.org ( a very new site )
> >
> > Sounds like an interesting and potentially valuable
> > study. One critical issue you need to address, and that
> > we all face to some degree is how to get the major
> > networks to participate in your regional exchange.
>
> I didn't realize how close St. Louis was to Atlanta (hey, I
> live in the West, I'm not required to know geography east of
> Denver).
>
> Seems like a regional exchange w/in 500 miles of one of a
> firmly-established national-level exchange has an uphill
> battle to prove its value to carriers. And the established
> one with much larger surrounding population to justify its
> location.
>
> Where new exchanges have been successful in the proximity of
> an incumbent is usually that they offer compelling value
> over the incumbent. There are plenty of examples of this at
> the national level (MAEs vs neutral locations, ATM vs GigE,
> public vs private peering).
>
> What are the compelling benefits regional exchanges can
> offer to bring the kinds of providers and subscribers you
> want to your exchange?
>
> Pete.
>
>
>
>
>