[RTC List] local hosts - Why are we held hostage?

[William Van Hefner]

Kevin,

Here's the problem with that equation... AT&T owns 99.999% of the capacity
going in/out of Humboldt County. If Internet/voice traffic (mostly) stays
local ISPs, long distance carriers, wireless providers, etc. won't need to
buy as much capacity from them to link to the outside world. So, they
would lose money. Additionally, it would cost them more money to beef-up
their local infrastructure to meet local demand. AT&T stands a lot more to
gain by selling megabits of dedicated fiber capacity to carriers and
Internet providers. It is also a lot cheaper for them to add long haul
capacity to their own network than it is for any of their competitors to
buy it from them.

It's a lot easier for AT&T to just bottleneck traffic going outside of the
area and give you less speed for your money than it is for them to divert
traffic locally through peering. That's why pricing on Internet service
will continue to increase and speeds will continue to decrease. AT&T has
expanded the availability of LOWER speed DSL services in our area this
past year, as opposed to offering faster speeds elsewhere. Basic AT&T DSL
service is now offered at LOWER speeds than have ever been available in
the past. At this pace, basic DSL service will be back down to dial-up
speeds before long. Short of the Supreme Court deciding to break up AT&T
all over again, I really do not see them doing anything to improve matters
on a local level anytime soon. Welcome to telecom politics!


-- 
William Van Hefner - President
Vantek Communications, Inc.
e-mail: vantek at humboldtonline.com