<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Re: Potential in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r20460576</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Sun, 06 Dec 2009 09:42:04 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Sun, 06 Dec 2009 09:42:04 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: Potential</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20460576</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/611909"><b>patcat88</b></A> : Consider Vonage a plus then. teehehehehe]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20460576</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 10 May 2008 08:02:57 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Potential</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20456938</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/843138"><b>Matt</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  dnoyeB <A HREF="/useremail/u/216197"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>I don't think trivial is the right word.  They would have to work out a true arrangement with Covad.  <br> </div>Place a couple high speed backhaul links from diverse Covad POPs to the Vonage datacenter, a couple simple routing rules and you're good to go.<br><br>It's not rocket science. This is first level CCNA stuff.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20456938</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 12:52:32 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Potential</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20456739</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1375008"><b>elister</b></A> : vonage will have to spend money on tech support as the "its your isp" resolution wont cut it anymore. worked fir a small cable company, often would people upgrade to our 10 meg service because vonage said their 6m down / 768k up service was too slow.  ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20456739</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 12:06:37 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Potential</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20456497</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/216197"><b>dnoyeB</b></A> : I don't think trivial is the right word.  They would have to work out a true arrangement with Covad.  The current arrangement of "reselling" something is just a marketing one.  What your talking about would require more engineering.  I don't think they can make that investment.<br><br>I don't see that the company itself has problems so much as their stock price has problems.  I don't know why anyone would go with the triple play which costs $33 a month on sale while Vonage costs $15 not on sale.  Comcast keeps trying to offer that to me each time I call in and I have to point out to them its nowhere near a savings for me...<br><small>--<br>dnoyeB<br>"Then said I, Wisdom [is] better than strength: nevertheless the poor man's wisdom [is] despised, and his words are not heard. " Ecclesiastes 9:16<br></small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20456497</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 11:21:25 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Potential</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20456258</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/843138"><b>Matt</b></A> : This has the potential to make their VoIP offering better for the customers who subscribe to Covad DSL and Vonage VoIP. It would be pretty trivial for them to eliminate the internet while backhauling their traffic via a dedicated Covad -> Vonage link ... thus vastly improving the quality of their VoIP product.<br><br>The question is, will they do it?]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20456258</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 10:47:11 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
