Proponents observe that the new startup providers are at the mercy of the carriers' private backbones in offering end-to-end reliability and QoS, but can gain more control by placing GbE switches that encapsulate Eth- ernet packets in DWDM wavelengths in the backbone carriers' POPs. This Ethernet over DWDM implementation addresses reliability and QoS issues, but it comes with a higher price that customers may not be willing to pay. The use of next-generation SONET, on the other hand, can address many of these QoS and traffic-engineering issues. Again, as a backdrop, it is important to keep in mind that customers are not willing to migrate from a $300-a-month Frame Relay connection to a $3,000-a-month broadband connection if the quality, reliability, security, and availability leaves some- thing to be desired. Manufacturers of equipment are publishing white papers cheerleading or sable-rattling the ILECs with statements such as these: "Though the bulk of venture capital funding has declined optical networks continue to attract strong equity financing. Several metro providers utilizing optical Ethernet-based solutions have secured significant funding in 2001. Not only are these emerging carriers financed, they are focused, aggressive, and Next-Generation SONET and Optical Architectures operating in the top 20 U.S. metropolitan markets. It is recommended that the ILEC introduce optical Ethernet services initially at 100 Mbps and above to minimize the potential impacts of cannibalization on some existing data services such as T1 and T3. Service-offering and pricing strategies enable the introduction of optical Ethernet while minimizing impact on the current revenue base. Optical Ethernet services complement the ILEC ser- vice set by offering new revenue opportunities through the ability to offer scalable customer-tunable, high-speed data services, as well as a cost-effec- tive platform to deliver new value-added services, such as Voice over IP, Network Attached Storage, and Internet Data Centers These emerging Ethern