From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bosmailout07.eigbox.net (bosmailout07.eigbox.net [66.96.185.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 172E53B2A4 for ; Fri, 6 Oct 2023 11:56:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bosmailscan10.eigbox.net ([10.20.15.10]) by bosmailout07.eigbox.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1qonBs-0002M3-Cc for nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net; Fri, 06 Oct 2023 11:56:36 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alum.mit.edu; s=dkim; h=Sender:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date: Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Cc:To:From:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=01bRtSb7YUS0oVYZ9eEb5wz4+2fY+QTAKFiJwSEHl9c=; b=h6gu8R0gAiq0wH/d/qe0fycF34 zhtfmVFem/h6XVLaUNGFs1fzYAaalwsS3UprZ2axM+X/lL8UXbii+DEY69y78IQUPkzRhICHIGdHP XeBQY9Mmnbp7XvBFvUhiQTn7Nko5EQsH/nIlomqA/vxApjtVanO/uJndoqz8/w8XzOLCx+VGynbDD zLIKJGgmqfX5I4645jPbAM7+aq/hCV0LkiJIl9MD0NSd3Oiu9wc72r/1aJX2Vmotlujb8bOZnMnOD gfwYhQzJvpAr3QZ/3+0SAnIsfsu4OaEs37WhfPqGNTfqShBTVQiH+iP1g2TYGasmuOB0pbm4RM6Xd 3MGKsbYw==; Received: from [10.115.3.32] (helo=bosimpout12) by bosmailscan10.eigbox.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1qonBs-0006bd-4Z for nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net; Fri, 06 Oct 2023 11:56:36 -0400 Received: from bosauthsmtp07.yourhostingaccount.com ([10.20.18.7]) by bosimpout12 with id ufwZ2A001099BUA01fwcYy; Fri, 06 Oct 2023 11:56:36 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=d4VuNSrE c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=x8qw8EAkfcRkIpZA8Q87Bg==:117 a=tKttg/DTfI8zZz0UFxdR5w==:17 a=bhdUkHdE2iEA:10 a=r77TgQKjGQsHNAKrUKIA:9 a=pGLkceISAAAA:8 a=kurRqvosAAAA:8 a=kyQdI15JAAAA:8 a=CNcqWcMs284nbT72fr8A:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=SSmOFEACAAAA:8 a=9QnKoNiLqZtiE64x9JEA:9 a=x2kC6H52YkymAD6e:21 a=gKO2Hq4RSVkA:10 a=UiCQ7L4-1S4A:10 a=hTZeC7Yk6K0A:10 a=frz4AuCg-hUA:10 a=kbxRQ_lfPIoQnHsAj2-A:22 a=xUWSGK36Sp_PlVLcBhaP:22 Received: from c-73-158-253-41.hsd1.ca.comcast.net ([73.158.253.41]:64722 helo=SRA6) by bosauthsmtp07.eigbox.net with esmtpa (Exim) id 1qonBo-00077Y-EM; Fri, 06 Oct 2023 11:56:32 -0400 Reply-To: From: "Dick Roy" To: "'Dave Cohen'" , =?utf-8?Q?'Network_Neutrality_is_back!_Let?= =?utf-8?Q?=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_aspects_he?= =?utf-8?Q?ard_this_time!'?= Cc: "'Livingood, Jason'" References: <6ED94BF433874449A02EA959E7B95B54@SRA6> In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2023 08:56:28 -0700 Organization: SRA Message-ID: <6896987296844AA9A48D2B26A0D35D44@SRA6> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_05F6_01D9F833.01A4AC10" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: Adn33s0aljfNzMzIT9SH3bH3W1Ke2QADopFQ X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE X-EN-UserInfo: f809475445fb8041985048e338e1a001:931c98230c6409dcc37fa7e93b490c27 X-EN-AuthUser: dickroy@intellicommunications.com Sender: "Dick Roy" X-EN-OrigIP: 73.158.253.41 X-EN-OrigHost: c-73-158-253-41.hsd1.ca.comcast.net Subject: Re: [NNagain] On "Throttling" behaviors 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: Fri, 06 Oct 2023 15:56:37 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_05F6_01D9F833.01A4AC10 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 =20 _____ =20 From: Dave Cohen [mailto:craetdave@gmail.com]=20 Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2023 3:54 PM To: dickroy@alum.mit.edu; Network Neutrality is back! Let=C2=B4s make = the technical aspects heard this time! Cc: Livingood, Jason Subject: Re: [NNagain] On "Throttling" behaviors =20 I admittedly know little about the service from the radio out in FWA = deployments like this but have done a lot of work in the aggregation and = backhaul arenas in both environments. The advantage the FWA folks have = is that it is significantly more financially viable to not oversubscribe = (or oversubscribe less) when you deliver more users from a more = centralized next hop location. In other words, it=E2=80=99s easier and = cheaper to have 100 Gbps serving 1000 users from a single location than = it is to have 1 Gbps serving 10 users from 100 different locations. = Which is not to say that there aren=E2=80=99t other challenges in FWA = environments relative to FTTx environments, but system capacity (you can = always add more radios, with enough available spectrum, at least) = isn=E2=80=99t one of them. [RR] Well, yes and no. Turns out this is a convex optimization problem = (or at least can be converted in to one) that involves things like = amount of spectrum, density of let=E2=80=99s call them access points (or = APs), the capabilities of each AP in terms of tx power, number of = antennas, how sophisticated the signal processing is that can be = supported in those APs, and a few other things like adjacent channels = and their pollution and constraints placed on the APs because they are = secondary users of the band =E2=80=A6 OK, with that as background the question becomes at it=E2=80=99s = simplest (leaving out for the moment things like OPEX, property leases, = etc.): =E2=80=9CHow many customers can I serve with X amount of infrastructure = investment and Y amount of spectrum available to me (purchased or = otherwise). I am somewhat suspicious, though I have not done the = analysis yet which is why I asked the question actually, that to use = your example, supplying 100Gbps aggregate service to 1000 customers = using FWA is not within the feasible region of the optimization space = and therefore something has to give! :-) :-) :-) FTR, FWA has been = around for 3 decades or more (the company I started was selling such = units in the mid-90=E2=80=99s, albeit largely for voice services since = that what was wanted back then). The systems that are still operational = (and that=E2=80=99s a large number of them) have been upgraded to offer = data services, however the number of subscribers needs to be capped well = below that which ISPs using other newer technologies can support. This = is why I am interested to find out what the = =E2=80=9Cstate-of-ply=E2=80=9D is today! :-) :-) Cheers, RR Dave Cohen craetdave@gmail.com On Oct 5, 2023, at 6:17 PM, Dick Roy via Nnagain = wrote: =EF=BB=BF=20 Has anyone done an analysis of the capacity of FWA systems (in = bits/sec/Hz/km^3)???? I am suspicious that the capacity falls way short = of that which cable guys have at their disposal, and that as the FWA = networks get loaded, performance is going to degrade dramatically = ultimately resulting in churn back to the cable guys. It's very = expensive to compete with already sunk FTTH or even FTTC. =20 =20 RR =20 -----Original Message----- From: Nnagain [mailto:nnagain-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net] On Behalf = Of Livingood, Jason via Nnagain Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2023 1:25 PM To: Network Neutrality is back! Let=C2=B4s make the technical aspects = heard this time! Cc: Livingood, Jason Subject: Re: [NNagain] On "Throttling" behaviors =20 > On 10/4/23, 13:45, "Nnagain on behalf of David Lang via Nnagain" = on behalf of = nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net > = wrote: =20 > It's an unfortunate fact of reality that the enviornment in the US is = one where=20 there is very little competition in the ISP space=20 =20 The SEC 10-K filings of ISPs no longer support that. Most wireline ISPs = are losing subscribers (at material levels) to one of the three new = national 5G FWA ISPs (Verizon, T-Mobile, AT&T). In addition, we will in = a few years see the effects of $45B+ of grant money dedicated to = underwrite new broadband access network construction - that is also = pretty material.=20 =20 Per = https://telecoms.com/523519/growth-in-5g-fwa-kit-matches-operator-hype/ - " 5G FWA customer premises equipment shipments more than doubled to = 7.4 million last year and should reach 13.8 million =E2=80=93 = that=E2=80=99s 86% growth =E2=80=93 this year " - " The GSA survey shows overall FWA CPE shipments of 25.5 million units = last year, " - " Statistics shared by Leichtman Research Group recently showed that = T-Mobile and Verizon together recorded the best part of 900,000 5G FWA = net adds in the second quarter of this year, significantly more than the = virtually flat cable segment and ahead of the wireline broadband market, = which lost almost 62,000 customers in the three months. " =20 JL =20 _______________________________________________ Nnagain mailing list Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain _______________________________________________ Nnagain mailing list Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain ------=_NextPart_000_05F6_01D9F833.01A4AC10 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

 

 

From: Dave = Cohen [mailto:craetdave@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, October = 5, 2023 3:54 PM
To: dickroy@alum.mit.edu; Network Neutrality is back! Let=C2=B4s make the technical aspects heard = this time!
Cc: Livingood, Jason
Subject: Re: [NNagain] On "Throttling" behaviors

 

I admittedly = know little about the service from the radio out in FWA deployments like this but = have done a lot of work in the aggregation and backhaul arenas in both = environments. The advantage the FWA folks have is that it is significantly more = financially viable to not oversubscribe (or oversubscribe less) when you deliver = more users from a more centralized next hop location. In other words, it=E2=80=99s = easier and cheaper to have 100 Gbps serving 1000 users from a single location than = it is to have 1 Gbps serving 10 users from 100 different locations. Which is = not to say that there aren=E2=80=99t other challenges in FWA environments = relative to FTTx environments, but system capacity (you can always add more radios, with = enough available spectrum, at least) isn=E2=80=99t one of = them.

[RR] Well, yes and no.=C2=A0 Turns = out this is a convex optimization problem (or at least can be converted in to one) = that involves things like amount of spectrum, density of let=E2=80=99s call = them access points (or APs), the capabilities of each AP in terms of tx power, = number of antennas, how sophisticated the signal processing is that can be = supported in those APs, and a few other things like adjacent channels and their = pollution and constraints placed on the APs because they are secondary users of = the band =E2=80=A6

OK, with that as background=C2=A0 = the question becomes at it=E2=80=99s simplest (leaving out for the moment things like = OPEX, property leases, etc.):

=E2=80=9CHow many customers can I = serve with X amount of infrastructure investment and Y amount of spectrum available = to me (purchased or otherwise). =C2=A0I am somewhat suspicious, though I have = not done the analysis yet which is why I asked the question actually, that to use = your example, supplying 100Gbps aggregate service to 1000 customers using FWA = is not within the feasible region of the optimization space and therefore = something has to give! J = J<= /i> = J<= /i>=C2=A0 FTR, FWA has been = around for 3 decades or more (the company I started was selling such units in the = mid-90=E2=80=99s, albeit largely for voice services since that what was wanted back then). = =C2=A0The systems that are still operational (and that=E2=80=99s a large number of = them) have been upgraded to offer data services, however the number of subscribers = needs to be capped well below that which ISPs using other newer technologies = can support. =C2=A0This is why I am interested to find out what the = =E2=80=9Cstate-of-ply=E2=80=9D is today! J J= <= /i>

Cheers,<= /b>

RR

Dave Cohen

craetdave@gmail.com



On Oct 5, = 2023, at 6:17 PM, Dick Roy via Nnagain <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> = wrote:

=EF=BB=BF

Has anyone done an analysis of the capacity of FWA systems (in bits/sec/Hz/km^3)????  I am suspicious that the capacity falls way = short of that which cable guys have at their disposal, and that as the FWA = networks get loaded, performance is going to degrade dramatically ultimately = resulting in churn back to the cable guys.  It's very expensive to compete = with already sunk FTTH or even FTTC.  

 

RR

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Nnagain [mailto:nnagain-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net] On Behalf = Of Livingood, Jason via Nnagain
Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2023 1:25 PM
To: Network Neutrality is back! Let=C2=B4s make the technical aspects = heard this time!
Cc: Livingood, Jason
Subject: Re: [NNagain] On "Throttling" = behaviors

 

> On 10/4/23, 13:45, "Nnagain on behalf of David Lang = via Nnagain" <nnagain-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net <mailto:nnagain-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net> on behalf of nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net = <mailto:nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>> wrote:

 

> It's an unfortunate fact of reality that the enviornment in = the US is one where

there is very little competition in the ISP space =

 

The SEC 10-K filings of ISPs no longer support that. Most = wireline ISPs are losing subscribers (at material levels) to one of the three new = national 5G FWA ISPs (Verizon, T-Mobile, AT&T). In addition, we will in a few = years see the effects of $45B+ of grant money dedicated to underwrite new = broadband access network construction - that is also pretty material. =

 

Per https://telecoms.com/523519/growth-in-5g-fwa-kit-matches-operator-hype/

- " 5G FWA customer premises equipment shipments more than = doubled to 7.4 million last year and should reach 13.8 million =E2=80=93 = that=E2=80=99s 86% growth =E2=80=93 this year "

- " The GSA survey shows overall FWA CPE shipments of 25.5 = million units last year, "

- " Statistics shared by Leichtman Research Group recently = showed that T-Mobile and Verizon together recorded the best part of 900,000 5G = FWA net adds in the second quarter of this year, significantly more than the = virtually flat cable segment and ahead of the wireline broadband market, which = lost almost 62,000 customers in the three months. = "

 

JL

 

_______________________________________________=

Nnagain mailing list

Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net

https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain<= /o:p>

_______________________________________________
Nnagain mailing list
Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain

------=_NextPart_000_05F6_01D9F833.01A4AC10--