A Nightmare on Geek Street

While speaking at a recent conference, a fellow panelist suggested that carriers should be very concerned that several users (I believe he referred to them as “network abusers”) are downloading mongo bits of data. I paraphrase, but he said something to the effect, “A nightmare is in the wings for service providers and they need to control downloads.” His cynical claim brought back memories of my childhood in Queens, where I was a seventh grader who spent almost as much time fiddling around on a computer as playing kick the can. Okay, sure, call me a geek ... all the other kids did.

Now several years later, I would like to use my son as a perfect example, because he’s been surfing the Web since he was two and thoroughly enjoying his online gaming experience. Unlike my childhood, his multimedia experience is part of a radically different generation. Thanks to TiVo and over-the-top video, as two good examples, he has never had to change a TV channel in his life. That’s right ... never! So the question begs: Is my son also a geek (like father like son?), a “network abuser” in training, or a sign of our future?

During the late ‘90s, carriers and vendors alike were concerned about dealing with MP3 file transfers and downloads from Napster and the stress users were putting on the network. To quote Yankee Hall of Fame catcher Yogi Berra, “it’s déjà vu all over again.” This is because carriers today seek pragmatic solutions for the latest “network abusers” who love their battery-draining, bandwidth-hogging smartphones and video services like Netflix, YouTube and on-demand TV, which they can stream onto their PCs, mobile devices and TiVos. These media-rich, bandwidth-intensive services are putting an unprecedented strain on the network, which led me to thinking: if a decade ago the industry had ended up controlling, instead of harvesting, user demand, would we have amazing applications like streaming live multicasts of the upcoming World Cup soccer matches from South Africa, and, of course, iTunes?

Getting back to the “network abusers.” For carriers, spotting a trend when it is getting started can be a boon, and can give them an opportunity to prepare and differentiate. The obvious next question is, can they afford to get ready or should they wait for critical mass before investing? While prudence can be a valid option, I would argue they can’t afford to be unprepared. To quote another Hall of Famer, former UCLA Basketball Head Coach John Wooden, “failing to prepare, is preparing to fail.” Now that’s two sports references ... can I lose the “geek” tag now?

Do you remember Blockbuster? This popular franchise of video-rental stores was everywhere in the ‘90s and into the new millennium. They delivered good value (about $3 for a five-day video rental) and built a strong brand with well-established distribution that could complement an online model that reached into millions of homes. Well, Blockbuster showed prudence while their biggest competitor, Netflix, prepared. Netflix now has a market cap of about $3.5 billion, compared to Blockbusters’ current market cap of less than $100 million.

Going back to the so-called “network abusers,” there are several ways in which carriers can easily capitalize on their growth cost effectively. In the context of providing bandwidth to their customers, there are two areas where I see carriers making a difference: the first being in the “first mile,” or the connection between the end customer and the nearest aggregation point (be it a DSLAM or a mobile base-station). The next being the “middle mile,” or the connection from that aggregation point and the core network.

For the last-mile, legacy solutions no longer work. Although the examples above are consumer-centric, the lessons apply even more acutely in a business context. Corporate reliance on bandwidth-rich applications like TelePresence and collaboration is growing by leaps and bounds. I will not belabor the point on the last mile, since I blogged about “The Death of T1s and the Rise of EFM” and how carriers must provide customers with options for higher bandwidth. Fiber, as I have said before, is great, if you can justify the cost benefit. But I am not backing down from my assertion that “network abusers” are not the problem, rather an opportunity to be harnessed.

Remarkably, the same legacy (T1/E1) technology, which does not meet the needs of business customers in the first mile, is used as the predominant backhaul mechanism for the middle mile. The arguments to replace existing low-bandwidth options with the bandwidth required to meet real customer demand are, in fact, the same. Yes, fiber is still an option and should be used when it is not cost prohibitive, but all companies need to make fiscally sound decisions. This means being prepared for the ensuing demand by deploying fiber when justifiable and leveraging what they have today (i.e., existing copper as it can not only meet, but exceed customer demand, and provide room for growth).

Label them as you may, the reality is that these so-called “geeks” and “network abusers” are really the innovators and early adopters on the classic technology adoption curve. They are the drivers of innovation for applications and the underlying networks. So, you might as well embrace them because they are defining your future!

Eric Vallone, vice president of marketing at Actelis Networks, is responsible for setting the direction of the company’s product portfolio, as well introducing its products to the market. Prior to Actelis, he was with AT&T, ADTRAN, and Paradyne Networks. His areas of focus included DSLAMs, mobile backhaul, xDSL, VoIP and VoATM products, and network management solutions.