[153112] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NANOG Digest, Vol 52, Issue 74
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (carl gough [mobsource])
Tue May 29 23:30:29 2012
Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 13:29:24 +1000
From: "carl gough [mobsource]" <carl@mobsource.com>
To: <nanog@nanog.org>,
<jtk@cymru.com>,
<owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <mailman.14029.1338340605.46019.nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
>John, I think we have cross wires, without meaning to advertise or tout
>for business, the bandx solution and the enron solutions totally missed
>the mark in terms of timing.
Every revolution, wether electricity, steam, automotive or telecoms, goes
through a boom, then a bust, then a golden age period that emerges where
it matures, we are in a maturity period now of IT. The names above, came
at a time when the boom and subsequent bust occurred, they were not around
for the golden age - fast forward to now, over a decade later since bandx,
and you have the pieces of the puzzle that can be re assembled using the
right technology. We don=B9t differentiate using technology anymore, we get
creative with the way we use iT.
70% of the worlds capacity is unlit, untouched, and creating no value
whatsoever -=20
http://mobsource.tumblr.com/post/22890631023/bandwidth-trading-platform-liv
e
>Message: 7
>Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 19:46:08 -0500
>From: John Kristoff <jtk@cymru.com>
>To: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
>Cc: "carl gough \[mobsource\]" <carl@mobsource.com>, nanog@nanog.org
>Subject: Re: trading bandwidth
>Message-ID: <20120529194608.74e83eb6@localhost>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DUS-ASCII
>
>On Tue, 29 May 2012 15:10:04 -0700
>Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
>
>> IIRC, the concept was first introduced by MCI and Enron to great
>> fanfare and subsequent graphic demonstrations of the destructive
>> power of unregulated markets controlled by people of limited moral
>> fortitude.
>
>I thought those big organizations actually came in later. Here is an
>article discussing Band-X, which was one of at least two as I recall
>that predated some of some of those more well known, later entrants:
>
> http://www.technologyreview.com/communications/11772/
>
>John
>
>
