|
|
 |
 |
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
The Evolution of Integrated T1 Service
Friday June 05, 2009,
11:10 pm ET
APACHE ACRES, Indiana, Jun. 05 /Olamide Lieberman/ --
During the 2000 Internet bubble meltdown, the telecom industry learned the hard way that
wild spending on network infrastructure was not the best approach to attracting new business
and investment. Over the past 7 years the industry, particularly the CLECs (Competitive
Local Exchange Carriers) have been focusing on building products that offer more bang
for the buck in order to compete with the Bells in their own backyards. One product that
has become the flagship offering to small to medium size businesses is the dynamic integrated
T1 line, which combines all the usefulness of 24 regular phone lines into a singe T-1
capable of delivering high-speed broadband on the same connection.
Integrated T1s comes in two basic configurations: digital and analog trunks, with a trunk
being a 24-line (or channel) bundle. The newer, digital trunks, however, are able to
run both voice and data over the same channels. By assigning priority to the voice
traffic whenever it is present, a dynamic integrated trunk can provide the end-user
with a full 1.5 MBPS of data throughput if no phone calls are in progress. As more
voice lines are required, less data lines are available. Analog trunks are all
pre-assigned to either voice or data traffic, and do not reconfigure in the event
there is no voice traffic.
The irony of the new small business communications revolution is that it took so long
to gain traction. The whole idea of reclaiming inactive voice channels for data applications
is not new, and was introduced by many CLEC operators over five years ago. So why did
it take so long for SMB's to adopt the technology and make the change? One might argue
that the Internet bubble burst in 2000 shook many people's confidence in telecommunications,
one of the hardest hit industries. With so many telecoms going out of business, or merging
with other small players just to stay solvent, many customers took the "wait and see"
approach before making the decision to entrust their communications with a company not
associated with Ma Bell. Now that economic Darwinism has taken hold, the remaining companies
are attracting new customers who see the benefits of the new technology without the downside
risk of loosing service or not being able to get through to customer service in the pinch.
The adoption of any new telecommunications platform is never instantaneous. Many
technologies, like VoIP for example, have been in the works for years without
gaining much traction. Enterprises see communications as their life blood. Even
though many are becoming aware of newer, cheaper mediums by which they can conduct
business, the risk still outweighs the rewards in their minds. Couple the
'if it isn't broken, why fix it?' mind set with the telecom meltdown of the early
2000's and it isn't surprising that widespread adoption of new telecom services
has lagged. However, the new technologies of IP-based voice systems are finally
starting to gain an audience, and the chorus of satisfied customers continues to
grow. As this momentum pushes forward, so does general acceptance of it viability.
But how much longer will we continue to see improved technology, services, and prices?
It's all in the hands of the Federal Communications Commission, as they have the power
to sqwash the CLECs by proxy. No wonder AT&T and Verizon are the two biggest lobbying
powers in Washington. It makes you wonder what kind of services they would be able to
offer had they plowed that money into R&D instead of politics.
Change does not happen quickly in an industry as so heavily regulated as Telecommunications.
Recent industry consolidation has provided huge alternatives to the incumbents, who
are now under pressure to keep up with new technologies while charging better prices
to retain and attract new customer bases.
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
