Third Quarter 2005

     I was thinking about the state of public communications networks when the brouhaha over what the school system should teach in biology in a neighboring county, evolution or what some of the parents call “Intelligent Design”, came to mind. You probably find that a little weird, but the thought chain had to do with the evolution of the network and how today it really represents Dumb Design, at least for tomorrow’s network. Unfettered survival of the fittest never happened in telecom. Instead, Government policies have created mutant giants from protected telecom monopolies.

     How should they be handled? Can reasonably fair market forces be brought to bear on telecom? While today’s regulatory environment (in the US) might have been appropriate for the low-innovation past, is it what we need tomorrow? Do we need more competition in the access network? Will the way numbers are assigned today be optimum for the next-generation network? What is the NGN, anyway, and how will its architecture be defined. Who will define it?

     One of the promises of the Internet is that of the “Stupid Network” (not Dumb Design). The hope is that intelligence will move out of the network to the edge…to the user, lowering the barriers to market entry for innovative services. It will be interesting to see whether the Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS, www.atis.org), which is comprised of all the ILECs as well as many others, comes up with standards that move intelligence from the edge into the network, increasing the control of the incumbents. I’m hopeful that ATIS and the 3GPP’s IMS will provide a standards foundation that allows wireline, wireless, and cable to converge by offering seamless access to a service core that presents a level playing field to all value-adding service providers. That’s the promise. Let’s see how it plays out.

     Of this I am sure: something has to happen. We will see the industry evolve into something quite different, since its current structure just won’t realize the network’s value potential. The current telecom environment is, for the most part, an artifact of the regulated past, and not suitable for telecom’s future. But what must happen to allow the forces of the market come to bear, while recognizing that some providers have a huge competitive advantage gained by over 100 years of regulation? Will we see intelligent or dumb design? And how quickly will it evolve, or will we see atavisms appear?

     The FCC does not appear up to the task. It seems that it fails to shape the network except through reactive decisions. There is little evidence that it is proactively shaping policy to address the fundamental issues facing the industry. Perhaps the judicial and legislative framework in which is works does not permit it to do so. Can it do a better job of understanding the competitive dynamic, defining competitive layers, and then exposing them to competition? I don’t think so. The FCC must operate within a legislative framework, and the courts are supposed to interpret the laws. So real fundamental change must come from congress. And it doesn’t appear to be interested.

     Nearly a year ago at my VON Fall 2004 presentation I said, “Just as the business of building roads is not the business of building trucks, and they are not the business of hauling goods. So too, the business of building networks is not the business of building network equipment, and these are not the same as the business of offering value-adding services. It works in transportation and it will work in telecom. The 1984 AT&T Consent Decree separated equipment from the mix, but networks and network services are still stubbornly entwined.” Obviously, this is true in wireline telephony, cable, and cellular.

     So, where would separation of transport and service get us? A level playing field for all, that’s where. Need a group of numbers? Go to NANPA and get them. Need a network? Build one or rent one. Get the access you need and launch that innovative service.

     For example: Suppose you want to deploy a messaging service: voice, fax, and e-mail. Using today’s technology and network design, you would build servers, at $80,000 apiece, secure colo space, and install and maintain this infrastructure. First year tab for Tier 1-and-2 coverage: over $9,000,000.