Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects heard this time!
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
To: "Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects
	heard this time!" <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: [NNagain] some chatter about the fcc news
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 11:50:09 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAA93jw4cpJCAKvqwuBtWeJF09K1pSZcwhUTL8gkzTkQ86Z1GmA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)

from brett glass:

https://www.broadband.io/c/get-broadband-grant-alerts-news/it-s-on-fcc-officially-increases-its-broadband-speed-requirement-to-100-20-mbps#comment_wrapper_32464006

This decision is the equivalent of saying, “If you don’t have a
Cadillac, you don’t have a car.”

It also confuses “speed” (an ill-defined term) with capacity, latency,
jitter, and other factors which do matter, and ridiculously overstates
the amount of bandwidth needed for common Internet activities. Unless,
of course, the service is very bad, in which case you can compensate
somewhat - not completely - by throwing more bandwidth at the problem.

In short, it’s a bad decision, made by politicians who have most
likely been deceived by corporate lobbyists, rather than the sort of
rational decision that would be made if the FCC were an apolitical
expert agency. Or if the Commissioners had even consulted a
knowledgeable practicing network engineer. (Are there any engineers
left at the FCC? Or have most of them, like Julie Knapp, retired after
being frustratingly ignored?)

For my company, a WISP, it means deploying more expensive equipment
than I need to, when folks don’t need the capacity. (Our quality is so
good that most of our customers peak at 5-10 Mbps of capacity - the
data rate is still typically 200-500 Mbps - and don’t need to pay for
more, though some do.) This depletes capital, needlessly increases the
cost of broadband service and discourages uptake of service (we still
see a lot of folks who rely entirely on cell phones and tethering).
Yet another example of destructive overregulation and government
bureaucracy. Government should stay out of the broadband business and
quit meddling with it. It’s not competent and is doing a LOT more harm
than good.


-- 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0Tmvv5jJKs Epik Mellon Podcast
Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos

             reply	other threads:[~2024-03-19 15:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-19 15:50 Dave Taht [this message]
2024-03-19 16:02 ` David Lang
2024-03-19 16:06   ` Mark Steckel
2024-03-19 16:08     ` David Lang
2024-03-19 22:57       ` Livingood, Jason
2024-03-19 23:22         ` rjmcmahon
2024-03-19 18:27 ` Nathan Simington

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/nnagain.lists.bufferbloat.net/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAA93jw4cpJCAKvqwuBtWeJF09K1pSZcwhUTL8gkzTkQ86Z1GmA@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=dave.taht@gmail.com \
    --cc=nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox