On 11/03/2010, at 2:17 PM, Geoff Huston wrote:
On 11/03/2010, at 1:02 PM, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
Hi Tony,
I don't really agree - there's no need to purchase a full protect path from a single system.
In other words you are providing "protection" via IS-IS rather than the SDH frame K bits (or whatever they called the end-to-end integrity bits in SDH systems).
Actually if you know what you're doing and buy the right product you can do SDH protection across different systems. But you're right -> it's an IP/MPLS world now. The product of choice is the wavelength to which you can attach any type of encapsulation method you want. In the rest-of-the-world the LAN PHY 10GE product is the one of choice. Especially in a world where you've got, say, 30-40 circuits across the Atlantic and SDH ports are just too expensive.
If this is really a serious play to build another long haul ANZ - US undersea cable, and if it were my bank that was in the process underwriting yet another undersea cable project into an already over-supplied market that has a limited set of buyers, I'd be getting a tad concerned by now.
You're right - there is no actual issue with the ABILITY to supply, only the fact that the market price for these assets are being kept unreasonably high in comparison to the actual cost of the underlying asset - ie. demand is being depressed because of the cost. The cost of IRUs on Pacific systems appears to have zero relation to the original cost or the money spent on upgrades. So, I think there is a market for another system on this path and it's a viable proposition. MMC -- Matthew Moyle-Croft Peering Manager and Team Lead - Commercial and DSLAMs Internode /Agile