From: Robert McMahon
[mailto:rjmcmahon@rjmcmahon.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 9, 2024
12:58 PM
To:
Subject: Re: [NNagain] Verizon,
T-Mobile, Nokia get noisy on network slicing and net neutrality (LightReading)
What is DSRC?
[RR] Don’t get me started! LLL Very simply it is the optimal
technology for V2X comms (it is in over 11 billion devices on the planet today …
aka Wi-Fi at 5.9GHz … think 802.11a) that has been shelved here in the US
(temporarily if I have anything to say about it) in favor of an 8-year old technology
that does not work and on which a single company has a majority of the IPR. Surprise,
surprise, that company has invested 100’s of millions of dollars to execute
this con job, and unfortunately it’s working. DSRC products were available more
than 8 years ago and would have been on the roads today (and in handsets) in
large numbers saving lives, but that wasn’t good enough for that company
because they stand to get >10x in royalty fees if and when the FCC mandates
their technology. When the general public becomes aware of this con, and fully
understands the impact, they should be and will be outraged! Think “DOWNFALL:
The Case Against Boeing” … it’s exactly the same thing … just the names have
been changed. Watch it if you haven’t already!
Contact me if you want more details! I am
looking for any and ALL help I can get to expose this fraud.
Cheers,
RR
DSRC (Dedicated
Short-Range Communications) is a wireless communication technology that enables
vehicles to communicate with each other and other road users directly, without
involving cellular or other infrastructure. DSRC is based on WiFi technology
On Mar 9, 2024, at 12:42 PM, Dick Roy via Nnagain <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>
wrote:
…
As expected this technique is designed to allow exactly what NN was designed
to prohibit (treating packets differentially in the internet based on economic
considerations*)... this is IMHO why instead of calling a spade a spade mobile
carriers avoid describing this in a useful way, as it is exactly about
prioritisation... IMHO that will back fire, and a better avenue would be to be
open about what it enables and propose a method to restrict the potential
issues. E.g. (I am making this up on the fly, so it will likely not hold up to
any degree of scrutiny) by self limiting to never commit more than X% of a
cell's capacity to slicing, IFF the cell is used for normal end user service at
all. So admit that there is some trade-off here, limit the fall-out, and then
describe why we as a society should embrace that trade-off. I am a bit sceptical about the whole car 2 car
communication thing (that is cars talk to cars, not people n cars talk to
people on cars ;) ), but if a Carrier believes there is value in that for e.g.
accident avoidance, then tell how this requires the stricter network guarantees
that (only?) slicing can deliver.
[RR]
V2X communications for saving lives will NEVER go through ANY carrier’s network
in spite of what you hear. There is simply no way anyone is going to pay
to have BSMs broadcast 10 times a second to prevent accidents, and NO CARRIER
is going to give that capacity away for free, even if they had enough to carry
the traffic, which they do not by many orders of magnitude!!! More
importantly, the information being exchanged does NOT require a network to get
where it needs to go! The 5G hype you hear from various carriers and
equipment suppliers related to V2X communications is all powerpoint BS (to make
shareholders happy). And there is a ton of it out there! JJ
RR
Nnagain mailing list
Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain