From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bobcat.rjmcmahon.com (bobcat.rjmcmahon.com [45.33.58.123]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB74A3CB39 for ; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 12:35:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.rjmcmahon.com (bobcat.rjmcmahon.com [45.33.58.123]) by bobcat.rjmcmahon.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id F29FC1B26F; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 09:35:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 bobcat.rjmcmahon.com F29FC1B26F DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rjmcmahon.com; s=bobcat; t=1697733321; bh=PApisC+VOMr90Lg8V0z4S7wKeehrcjNt9esVn3Bbo7U=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=jqliZ2JAmMuyYWPOu86COssWAGdQgSloUI8Zivh0zv4U0/zpwfoPXCilAz0YEnIhS xtTMaZu/SXPxgBnwQ947gao/VRzzeS/YW+r0AY6J4EzcncvfgIxR8wVK1hXv9X7SZw XQtQCOQVUwefKXtCAOq29SbSLuIm8A48KQh4J3BM= MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2023 09:35:20 -0700 From: rjmcmahon To: =?UTF-8?Q?Network_Neutrality_is_back!_Let=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_a?= =?UTF-8?Q?spects_heard_this_time!?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <269ca6a8cebeaecf9810731bad0b6045@rjmcmahon.com> X-Sender: rjmcmahon@rjmcmahon.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [NNagain] BEAD guidelines phase 2 X-BeenThere: nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: =?utf-8?q?Network_Neutrality_is_back!_Let=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_aspects_heard_this_time!?= List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2023 16:35:21 -0000 Hi Jason, Is there any public information that is accurate and breaks out the sustaining and opex costs of an ISP, along with the trend lines of each sub category? Bob > If you think the BEAD rules are a lot, of course just bear in mind the > follow-on compliance needs w/r/t Title-II. ;-) In any case, having > spoken at some recent BEAD events, my focus has been on trying to get > folks to think "beyond the build" so to speak. What I mean is that the > main focus has been on the initial physical build. That is of course > critical in these rural and other unserved locations, but is often the > easy part in a way. Sustaining ongoing network operations and all that > operating an ISP these days involves is a bigger deal and likely more > complex than many perceive. > > JL > > On 10/18/23, 16:34, "Nnagain on behalf of Dave Taht via Nnagain" > on behalf of > nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net > > wrote: > > > Prior to NN coming back into view, I was primarily trying to put some > sense into the BEAD processes and priorities. > I strongly approved of the idea of the central government handing the > issues for the states to try and handle, they are just as understaffed > and low on clue technologically, and I figured the odds were oh, 7 out > of 50 that might establish good programs for it. > > > I have now seen a few nice proposals funded, including one up in main > that connects to canada. But oh! the profusion of rules required, to > seek to do a build out, only covering CAPEX, in each state, is hard to > get through, and I think, like many here, we wish it would go away. > Hereś some if you wish to while away a lazy friday afternoon. Pick one > randomly. Let us know if you see anything good, or sane, or hilareous, > or horrible? > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.linkedin.com/posts/brooke-coleman-broadband_bead-grant-internetforall-activity-7120436030196903937-kP6O__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!BAVazn1pE2o686uDjeD0sin7cjod4hmQ9mLslfZxkqelltKeEnadv2oLeIcwZuN1uTqe7trI8GHuSOtxzmuapGF2SbKoVyY8$ > > > > PS the P99conf I am in this week is VERY good and clued, and 100% > online.