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

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

<channel>
<title>Re: Right on in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r14209857</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 04:58:17 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 04:58:17 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: Right on</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,14209857</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/749583"><b>justbits</b></A> : Take a step back and look at near past.<br>SBC's Project "Pronto" was supposed to deploy lots of Remote Terminals. It stopped when they were told they had to share the RTs with CLECs.<br><br>SBC's Project Lightspeed is basically a restart of Pronto after legislation passed saying ILECs didn't need to share RTs with CLECs. Besides that, even if they did have to share, there are so few CLECs in most markets today that they probably aren't as worried about CLECs anymore... especially now that they can charge CLECs as much as they want to share the RTs now.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,14209857</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 24 Aug 2005 14:07:56 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Right on</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,14209822</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/896245"><b>hoyleysox</b></A> : I'll bet the ILECs hope they don't have to share or this technology will never get off the ground. ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,14209822</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 24 Aug 2005 14:00:07 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
