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 876E53CB37 for ; Sun, 8 Oct 2023 15:27:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.rjmcmahon.com (bobcat.rjmcmahon.com [45.33.58.123]) by bobcat.rjmcmahon.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 95E521B258; Sun, 8 Oct 2023 12:27:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 bobcat.rjmcmahon.com 95E521B258 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rjmcmahon.com; s=bobcat; t=1696793278; bh=GXSr8Jmfwj7vKrMZG5r6u53oD/moEhUpsA2jCzgaF9E=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=Egh+vVpCOH6yw7gsacGoFmTE1JsMKwh69Sl4yl1VZQXOxLCszAnNA2CLCZJOR2xcs ojWFn8QemY5w35uYbces07ZxvPkG+sOp0yip4XpJN7lLkfHzL0q1IJ9ZJu/HYXf8RF G5imeAUK1xnlvX3Jaqww7b1Tpixds3m1f9CXRwaw= MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2023 12:27:58 -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: <8c3ecc6b-272a-414e-86b3-a56a029ec70c@rjmcmahon.com> References: <18b0c0fca5a.df21b356967361.3801960253537018542@phillywisper.net> <2EB085CD-44EB-4664-9436-6077A106151A@gmx.de> <8c3ecc6b-272a-414e-86b3-a56a029ec70c@rjmcmahon.com> Message-ID: <88139a6c8a4220851d25a9cfa1185159@rjmcmahon.com> X-Sender: rjmcmahon@rjmcmahon.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [NNagain] The non-death of DSL 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: Sun, 08 Oct 2023 19:27:59 -0000 Hi Sebastian, Here's a good link on Glasgow, KY likely the first U.S. muni network started around 1994. It looks like a one and done type investment. Their offering was competitive for maybe a decade and now seems to have fallen behind for the last few decades. https://www.glasgowepb.com/internet-packages/ https://communitynets.org/content/birth-community-broadband-video LUS is similar if this article is to be believed. https://thecurrentla.com/2023/column-lus-fiber-has-lost-its-edge/ The LUS NN site says there is no congestion on their fiber (GPON) so they don't need AQM or other congestion mgmt mechanisms which I find suspect. https://www.lusfiber.com/net-neutrality This may demonstrate that technology & new requirements are moving too quickly for municipal approaches. Bob > Hi Sebastian, > > The U.S. of late isn't very good with regulatory that motivates > investment into essential comm infrastructure. It seems to go the > other way, regulatory triggers under investment, a tragedy of the > commons. > > The RBOCs eventually did overbuild. They used wireless and went to > contract carriage, and special access rate regulation has been > removed. The cable cos did HFC and have always been contract carriage. > And they are upgrading today. > > The tech companies providing content & services are doing fine too and > have enough power to work things out with the ISPs directly. > > The undeserved areas do need support. The BEAD monies may help. I > think these areas shouldn't be relegated to DSL. > > Bob > On Oct 8, 2023, at 2:38 AM, Sebastian Moeller wrote: > >> Hi Bob, >> >> On 8 October 2023 00:13:07 CEST, rjmcmahon via Nnagain >> wrote: >>> Everybody abandoned my local loop. Twisted pair from multiple >>> decades ago into antiquated, windowless COs with punch blocks, >>> with no space nor latency advantage for colocated content & >>> compute, seems to have killed it off. >> >> [SM] Indeed, throughput for DSL is inversely proportional to loop >> length, so providing 'acceptable' capacity requires sufficiently >> short wire runs from DSLAM to CPE, and that in turn means moving >> DSLAMs closer to the end users... which in a densely populated area >> works well, but in a less densely populated area becomes costly >> fast. And doing so will only make sense if you get enough customers >> on such an 'outdoor DSLAM' so might work for the first to built out, >> but becomes prohibitively unattractive for other ISP later. However >> terminating the loops in the field clears up lots of spaces in the >> COs... not that anybody over here moved much compute into these... >> (there exist too many COs to make that an attractive proposition in >> spite of all the hype about moving compute to the edge). As is a few >> well connected data centers for compute seem to work well enough... >> >> I suspect in some towns one can buy out the local loop copper with >> just a promise of maintenance. >> >> [SM] A clear sign of regulatory failure to me, maintenance of the >> copper plant inherited from Bell should never have been left to the >> ISPs to decide about... >> >> The whole CLEC open the loop to competitive access seems to have >> failed per costs, antiquated technology, limited colocation, an >> outdated waveguide (otherwise things like CDDI would have won over >> Cat 5), and market reasons. The early ISPs didn't collocate, they >> bought T1s and E1s and connected the TDM to statistical multiplexing >> - no major investment there either. >> >>> The RBOCs, SBC (now AT&T) & and VZ went to contract carriage and >>> wireless largely because of the burdens of title II per regulators >>> not being able to create an investment into the OSPs. The 2000 >>> blow up was kinda real. >> >> [SM] Again, I see no fault in title 2 here, but in letting ISPs of >> the hook on maintaining their copper plant or replace it with >> FTTH... >> >>> She starts out by complaining about trying to place her WiFi in >>> the right place. That's like trying to share a flashlight. She has >>> access to the FCC technology group full of capable engineers. They >>> should have told her to install some structured wire, place more >>> APs, set the carrier and turn down the power. >> >> [SM] I rather read this more as an attempt to built a report with >> the audience over a shared experience and less as a problem report >> ;) >> >> My wife works in the garden now using the garden AP SSID with no >> issues. My daughter got her own carrier too per here Dad dedicating >> a front end module for her distance learning needs. I think her >> story to justify title II regulation is a bit made up. >> >> [SM] Hmm, while covid19 lockdown wasn't the strongest example, I >> agree, I see no good argument for keeping essential infrastructure >> like internet access in private hands without appropriate oversight. >> Especially given the numbers for braodband choice for customers, >> clearly the market is not going to solve the issues at hand. >> >>> Also, communications have been essential back before the rural >>> free delivery of mail in 1896. Nothing new here other than >>> hyperbole to justify a 5 member commission acting as the single >>> federal regulator over 140M households and 33M businesses, almost >>> none of which have any idea about the complexities of the >>> internet. >> >> [SM] But the access network is quite different than the internet's >> core, so not being experts on the core seems acceptable, no? And >> even 5 members is clearly superior to no oversight at all? >> >> I'm not buying it and don't want to hand the keys to the FCC who >> couldn't protect journalism nor privacy. Maybe start there, looking >> at what they didn't do versus blaming contract carriage for a >> distraction? >> >> [SM] I can speak to the FCC as regulatory agency, but over here IMHO >> the national regulatory agency does a decent job arbitrating between >> the interests of both sides. >> >> > https://about.usps.com/who/profile/history/rural-free-delivery.htm#:~:text=On%20October%201%2C%201896%2C%20rural,were%20operating%20in%2029%20states. >> >> Bob >> My understanding, though I am not 100% certain, is that the baby >> bells >> lobbied to have the CLEC equal access provisions revoked/gutted. >> Before this, the telephone companies were required to provide access >> to the "last mile" of the copper lines and the switches at wholesale >> costs. Once the equal access provisions were removed, the telephone >> companies started charging the small phone and DSL providers close >> to >> the retail price for access. The CLEC DSL providers could not stay >> in >> business when they charged a customer $35 / month for Internet >> service >> while the telephone company charged the DSL ISP $35 / month for >> access. >> >> ---- On Sat, 07 Oct 2023 17:22:10 -0400 Dave Taht via Nnagain wrote >> --- >> I have a lot to unpack from this: >> >> https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-397257A1.pdf >> >> the first two on my mind from 2005 are: "FCC adopted its first open >> internet policy" and "Competitiveness" As best as I recall, (and >> please correct me), this led essentially to the departure of all the >> 3rd party DSL providers from the field. I had found something >> referencing this interpretation that I cannot find right now, but I >> do >> clearly remember all the DSL services you could buy from in the >> early >> 00s, and how few you can buy from now. Obviously there are many >> other >> possible root causes. >> >> DSL continued to get better and evolve, but it definately suffers >> from >> many reports of degraded copper quality, but does an estimate exist >> for how much working DSL is left? >> >> Q0) How much DSL is in the EU? >> Q1) How much DSL is left in the USA? >> Q2) What form is it? (VDSL, etc?) >> >> Did competition in DSL vanish because of or not of an FCC related >> order? >> >> -- >> Oct 30: >> https://netdevconf.info/0x17/news/the-maestro-and-the-music-bof.html >> Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos >> >> ------------------------- >> >> 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 > > ------------------------- > > 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