[NNagain] nn back in the news

[NNagain] nn back in the news

[Dave Taht]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 156 bytes --]

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/08/isps-ask-supreme-court-to-kill-new-york-law-that-requires-15-broadband-plans/
-- 

Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 526 bytes --]

Re: [NNagain] nn back in the news

[Livingood, Jason]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1366 bytes --]

I would say it is not “back” in the news – it has continuously been in the news since the Loper Bright SCOTUS ruling that impacts “Chevron deference” as well the major questions doctrine issue raised in W VA vs EPA. As many people have long said, this will be tied up in the courts for several years.

Personal take – in the long-term it will be better to have legislation that codifies this (as well as a national cross-sector privacy law).

JL

From: Nnagain <nnagain-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net> on behalf of Dave Taht via Nnagain <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Reply-To: Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects heard this time! <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Date: Thursday, August 15, 2024 at 07:41
To: Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects heard this time! <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Cc: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
Subject: [NNagain] nn back in the news


https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/08/isps-ask-supreme-court-to-kill-new-york-law-that-requires-15-broadband-plans/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/08/isps-ask-supreme-court-to-kill-new-york-law-that-requires-15-broadband-plans/__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!FPiUKVoVIIjDuEAjFeVX-ISnAeSb8gI7-H-8Pg5UvZVEuC6YaYS0X8k4cHM4F-i7JjIAMB_2uKpV5QLmf8MbXIx1fORtlGxN$>
--

Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3937 bytes --]

Re: [NNagain] nn back in the news

[Dave Taht]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2790 bytes --]

Perhaps it would have been better to say that "one of the sites I read
regularly just put out an update on it." :)

I like to think that bufferbloat.net's NOI filing did a bit of good,
getting cited 16 times, but not changing the top level conclusions one
iota. Doing another one this year is on my mind in followup, but aside from
harping on our latency points, pointing to progress, and the need for more
IXPs, I don't know what top level items could be addressed, again? I'd have
to buckle down and re-read what resonated, and what didn't.

Perhaps something might come out of the DNC?

I have been enjoying Carr's negative posts on BEAD, but there must be some
bright news in that program somewhere by now?

I am perhaps reading too much into it, but with a potentially younger crowd
moving into office, perhaps more technical clue is arriving? I'm very happy
to see mudge make CIO at darpa. The white house got a cto yet? The FCC?

PS  Ms Shotwell did a great fireside chat at Mountain Connect:
https://www.broadband.io/c/broadband-community-events/shotwell


On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 6:27 AM Livingood, Jason <
jason_livingood@comcast.com> wrote:

> I would say it is not “back” in the news – it has continuously been in the
> news since the Loper Bright SCOTUS ruling that impacts “Chevron deference”
> as well the major questions doctrine issue raised in W VA vs EPA. As many
> people have long said, this will be tied up in the courts for several
> years.
>
> Personal take – in the long-term it will be better to have legislation
> that codifies this (as well as a national cross-sector privacy law).
>
>
>
> JL
>
>
>
> *From: *Nnagain <nnagain-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net> on behalf of Dave
> Taht via Nnagain <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>
> *Reply-To: *Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects
> heard this time! <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>
> *Date: *Thursday, August 15, 2024 at 07:41
> *To: *Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects heard
> this time! <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>
> *Cc: *Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
> *Subject: *[NNagain] nn back in the news
>
>
>
>
>
> https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/08/isps-ask-supreme-court-to-kill-new-york-law-that-requires-15-broadband-plans/
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/08/isps-ask-supreme-court-to-kill-new-york-law-that-requires-15-broadband-plans/__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!FPiUKVoVIIjDuEAjFeVX-ISnAeSb8gI7-H-8Pg5UvZVEuC6YaYS0X8k4cHM4F-i7JjIAMB_2uKpV5QLmf8MbXIx1fORtlGxN$>
>
> --
>
>
>
> Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos
>


-- 
Artists/Musician Campout Aug 9-11
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/healing-arts-event-tickets-928910826287
Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5252 bytes --]

Re: [NNagain] nn back in the news

[Dave Cohen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3818 bytes --]

I wish I shared that forward optimism, but in my experience "network
cluefulness" is not abundant even among otherwise technically forward
individuals, and "ISP network cluefulness" even less so (FWIW, I believe
this applies to employees at ISPs as well). I'm also inclined to believe
that most of the "smart regulation is better than no regulation" folks are
also generally "regulation suggested/desired by those who stand to profit
is bad regulation" folks, which makes real progress challenging when
subject matter expertise almost exclusively resides with those in the
industry.

On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 10:17 AM Dave Taht via Nnagain <
nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

> Perhaps it would have been better to say that "one of the sites I read
> regularly just put out an update on it." :)
>
> I like to think that bufferbloat.net's NOI filing did a bit of good,
> getting cited 16 times, but not changing the top level conclusions one
> iota. Doing another one this year is on my mind in followup, but aside from
> harping on our latency points, pointing to progress, and the need for more
> IXPs, I don't know what top level items could be addressed, again? I'd have
> to buckle down and re-read what resonated, and what didn't.
>
> Perhaps something might come out of the DNC?
>
> I have been enjoying Carr's negative posts on BEAD, but there must be some
> bright news in that program somewhere by now?
>
> I am perhaps reading too much into it, but with a potentially younger
> crowd moving into office, perhaps more technical clue is arriving? I'm very
> happy to see mudge make CIO at darpa. The white house got a cto yet? The
> FCC?
>
> PS  Ms Shotwell did a great fireside chat at Mountain Connect:
> https://www.broadband.io/c/broadband-community-events/shotwell
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 6:27 AM Livingood, Jason <
> jason_livingood@comcast.com> wrote:
>
>> I would say it is not “back” in the news – it has continuously been in
>> the news since the Loper Bright SCOTUS ruling that impacts “Chevron
>> deference” as well the major questions doctrine issue raised in W VA vs
>> EPA. As many people have long said, this will be tied up in the courts for
>> several years.
>>
>> Personal take – in the long-term it will be better to have legislation
>> that codifies this (as well as a national cross-sector privacy law).
>>
>>
>>
>> JL
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *Nnagain <nnagain-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net> on behalf of
>> Dave Taht via Nnagain <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>
>> *Reply-To: *Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects
>> heard this time! <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>
>> *Date: *Thursday, August 15, 2024 at 07:41
>> *To: *Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects heard
>> this time! <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>
>> *Cc: *Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
>> *Subject: *[NNagain] nn back in the news
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/08/isps-ask-supreme-court-to-kill-new-york-law-that-requires-15-broadband-plans/
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/08/isps-ask-supreme-court-to-kill-new-york-law-that-requires-15-broadband-plans/__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!FPiUKVoVIIjDuEAjFeVX-ISnAeSb8gI7-H-8Pg5UvZVEuC6YaYS0X8k4cHM4F-i7JjIAMB_2uKpV5QLmf8MbXIx1fORtlGxN$>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>> Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos
>>
>
>
> --
> Artists/Musician Campout Aug 9-11
> https://www.eventbrite.com/e/healing-arts-event-tickets-928910826287
> Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos
> _______________________________________________
> Nnagain mailing list
> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain
>


-- 
- Dave Cohen
craetdave@gmail.com
@dCoSays
www.venicesunlight.com

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 6797 bytes --]

Re: [NNagain] nn back in the news

[Sebastian Moeller]

Hi Dave,

On 15 August 2024 16:16:52 CEST, Dave Taht via Nnagain <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>Perhaps it would have been better to say that "one of the sites I read
>regularly just put out an update on it." :)
>
>I like to think that bufferbloat.net's NOI filing did a bit of good,
>getting cited 16 times, but not changing the top level conclusions one
>iota. Doing another one this year is on my mind in followup, but aside from
>harping on our latency points, 

[SM] So I believe/think that we need (or rather I need to convince my National Regulatory Agency that mandating a OWD to a national reference point <150ms, so an RTT <= 300ms) some clear study showing the effect of loaded latency/jitter on some measurable variable of obvious relevance. That is, I think we should make a scientifically backed claim that shitty latency causes shitty productivity. We as a group IMHO intuitively seem to accept that as a given (based on some evidence), but to convince regulators we need better examples then e.g. L4S' on-line switching between different live camera feeds, or showing that page completion time scales linearly with latency...
Stuart's, remote desktop example might serve as good starting point, if we can show that productivity suffers significantly as a function of latency and jitter. I mention abstract productivity simply because I believe making remote work more efficient would be a case in the public's interest and hence might catch the regulator's attention.
So if anybody on this list has an idea for an experiment or better yet an already existing paper describing such an experiment, that would be great.



pointing to progress, and the need for more
>IXPs, I don't know what top level items could be addressed, again? I'd have
>to buckle down and re-read what resonated, and what didn't.
>
>Perhaps something might come out of the DNC?
>
>I have been enjoying Carr's negative posts on BEAD, but there must be some
>bright news in that program somewhere by now?
>
>I am perhaps reading too much into it, but with a potentially younger crowd
>moving into office, perhaps more technical clue is arriving? I'm very happy
>to see mudge make CIO at darpa. The white house got a cto yet? The FCC?
>
>PS  Ms Shotwell did a great fireside chat at Mountain Connect:
>https://www.broadband.io/c/broadband-community-events/shotwell
>
>
>On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 6:27 AM Livingood, Jason <
>jason_livingood@comcast.com> wrote:
>
>> I would say it is not “back” in the news – it has continuously been in the
>> news since the Loper Bright SCOTUS ruling that impacts “Chevron deference”
>> as well the major questions doctrine issue raised in W VA vs EPA. As many
>> people have long said, this will be tied up in the courts for several
>> years.
>>
>> Personal take – in the long-term it will be better to have legislation
>> that codifies this (as well as a national cross-sector privacy law).
>>
>>
>>
>> JL
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *Nnagain <nnagain-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net> on behalf of Dave
>> Taht via Nnagain <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>
>> *Reply-To: *Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects
>> heard this time! <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>
>> *Date: *Thursday, August 15, 2024 at 07:41
>> *To: *Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects heard
>> this time! <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>
>> *Cc: *Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
>> *Subject: *[NNagain] nn back in the news
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/08/isps-ask-supreme-court-to-kill-new-york-law-that-requires-15-broadband-plans/
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/08/isps-ask-supreme-court-to-kill-new-york-law-that-requires-15-broadband-plans/__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!FPiUKVoVIIjDuEAjFeVX-ISnAeSb8gI7-H-8Pg5UvZVEuC6YaYS0X8k4cHM4F-i7JjIAMB_2uKpV5QLmf8MbXIx1fORtlGxN$>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>> Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos
>>
>
>

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

Re: [NNagain] nn back in the news

[Dave Taht]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4875 bytes --]

and in other news today:
https://www.theregister.com/2024/08/15/google_monopoly_fix/

I kind of wish would-be regulators to try and block google IPs and see how
good their web experience is - everything from fonts to css leads back to
goog. I am reminded of the bell telephone breakup where folk still didn't
have touchtone...

On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 8:58 AM Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:

> Hi Dave,
>
> On 15 August 2024 16:16:52 CEST, Dave Taht via Nnagain <
> nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
> >Perhaps it would have been better to say that "one of the sites I read
> >regularly just put out an update on it." :)
> >
> >I like to think that bufferbloat.net's NOI filing did a bit of good,
> >getting cited 16 times, but not changing the top level conclusions one
> >iota. Doing another one this year is on my mind in followup, but aside
> from
> >harping on our latency points,
>
> [SM] So I believe/think that we need (or rather I need to convince my
> National Regulatory Agency that mandating a OWD to a national reference
> point <150ms, so an RTT <= 300ms) some clear study showing the effect of
> loaded latency/jitter on some measurable variable of obvious relevance.
> That is, I think we should make a scientifically backed claim that shitty
> latency causes shitty productivity. We as a group IMHO intuitively seem to
> accept that as a given (based on some evidence), but to convince regulators
> we need better examples then e.g. L4S' on-line switching between different
> live camera feeds, or showing that page completion time scales linearly
> with latency...
> Stuart's, remote desktop example might serve as good starting point, if we
> can show that productivity suffers significantly as a function of latency
> and jitter. I mention abstract productivity simply because I believe making
> remote work more efficient would be a case in the public's interest and
> hence might catch the regulator's attention.
> So if anybody on this list has an idea for an experiment or better yet an
> already existing paper describing such an experiment, that would be great.
>
>
>
> pointing to progress, and the need for more
> >IXPs, I don't know what top level items could be addressed, again? I'd
> have
> >to buckle down and re-read what resonated, and what didn't.
> >
> >Perhaps something might come out of the DNC?
> >
> >I have been enjoying Carr's negative posts on BEAD, but there must be some
> >bright news in that program somewhere by now?
> >
> >I am perhaps reading too much into it, but with a potentially younger
> crowd
> >moving into office, perhaps more technical clue is arriving? I'm very
> happy
> >to see mudge make CIO at darpa. The white house got a cto yet? The FCC?
> >
> >PS  Ms Shotwell did a great fireside chat at Mountain Connect:
> >https://www.broadband.io/c/broadband-community-events/shotwell
> >
> >
> >On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 6:27 AM Livingood, Jason <
> >jason_livingood@comcast.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I would say it is not “back” in the news – it has continuously been in
> the
> >> news since the Loper Bright SCOTUS ruling that impacts “Chevron
> deference”
> >> as well the major questions doctrine issue raised in W VA vs EPA. As
> many
> >> people have long said, this will be tied up in the courts for several
> >> years.
> >>
> >> Personal take – in the long-term it will be better to have legislation
> >> that codifies this (as well as a national cross-sector privacy law).
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> JL
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> *From: *Nnagain <nnagain-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net> on behalf of
> Dave
> >> Taht via Nnagain <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>
> >> *Reply-To: *Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects
> >> heard this time! <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>
> >> *Date: *Thursday, August 15, 2024 at 07:41
> >> *To: *Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects heard
> >> this time! <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>
> >> *Cc: *Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
> >> *Subject: *[NNagain] nn back in the news
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/08/isps-ask-supreme-court-to-kill-new-york-law-that-requires-15-broadband-plans/
> >> <
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/08/isps-ask-supreme-court-to-kill-new-york-law-that-requires-15-broadband-plans/__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!FPiUKVoVIIjDuEAjFeVX-ISnAeSb8gI7-H-8Pg5UvZVEuC6YaYS0X8k4cHM4F-i7JjIAMB_2uKpV5QLmf8MbXIx1fORtlGxN$
> >
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos
> >>
> >
> >
>
> --
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>


-- 
Artists/Musician Campout Aug 9-11
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/healing-arts-event-tickets-928910826287
Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 7182 bytes --]

Re: [NNagain] nn back in the news

[Jack Haverty]

[-- Attachment #1.1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3081 bytes --]

IMHO, educating politicians and regulators is difficult but necessary.   
Latency is an important and overlooked component of "broadband service", 
not included in the definition of such "service".  But there are others 
that might also catch their attention.

I live in an area in California where wildfires are an issue.  My 
location officially has broadband service, according to the FCC 
databases.  I get IP through cable, provided by Comcast.   The IP{ 
service is fast and latency hasn't been an issue for me.

The government (state, local, and federal) have all spent a lot of money 
and effort to put technology in place to  mitigate the risks of wildfire 
and other such natural risks, to help keep the public safe.  That's 
their job.  We have sensors and cameras that spot smoke columns or 
seismic events.  We have apps and communications channels that spread 
the word fast, so that people can get out of harm's way.  The Internet 
has made quite a difference by providing the infrastructure to make such 
safety mechanisms possible.  (See app.watchduty.org for an example)

The local electric utility has also implemented mechanisms to avoid 
causing wildfires.  When it's dry and windy, and therefore the risks of 
a falling tree limb starting a fire are high, they simply shut off the 
power to the area.  When the risk is over, they turn power back on.  It 
might be a day or two, but while the risks are high, a fire won't be 
started by the electric grid.  Many people have installed generators to 
keep essential things going in their homes.   The electric utility is 
even offering subsidies for people to buy such equipment.

However...

Comcast relies on the electric grid for power.  Some areas have 
equipment with backup battery power, but that only works for an hour or 
two.  After that, communications shuts down - in my neighborhood that 
means telephone, TV, and Internet all cease to work.   All of the 
information from those sensors, cameras, and emergency service agencies 
doesn't get to us, the public it's supposed to help.

Despite that behavior, officially the database says we have broadband 
service available.  It of course is available, most of the time.  It 
turns off when you need it the most.

Thinking techologically for a bit, the problem is a lot like Latency.  
Latency is not specified in the definition of "broadband service".   
Neither is "Reliability".

I've filed a "challenge" to my own database entry, pointing out that we 
don't actually have reliable broadband service.  Even if, over a month 
or so, the service is 99.xxx% "up", that's not much help if it's down 
when you actually need it the most.   The definition of "reliable" needs 
to be revised.

I don't expect any action from my challenge as just a lone voice in the 
crowd.

Perhaps educating the politicians and regulators about reliability would 
grab some attention.  It might be a bit easier to understand than just 
"latency".

Jack Haverty
Nevada City, CA


[-- Attachment #1.1.1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 3554 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #1.1.2: OpenPGP public key --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 2469 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 665 bytes --]

Re: [NNagain] nn back in the news

[Frantisek Borsik]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5872 bytes --]

I think that top level items you have mentioned, Dave, for kicking-off a
follow-up NOI filling: "harping on our latency points, pointing to
progress, and the need for more IXPs" are MORE than enough for starters.
There are some improvements on the latency front (notably Starlink's
implemenation of FQ-CoDel) so it's a good set of points to start with, IMO.
______________

I have returned from Africa yesterday, where I was attending MwNOG-1 and
SAFNOG-9 <https://safnog.org> in Lilongwe, Malawi. Imagine a country of
almost 22 million people, having opened up ONLY its 2nd IXP, a few days
ago: https://lionex.org. Literally anyone and their mother, with any means
at our hands, should offer them some kind of help. There was a nice
development during the event - a pledge by MACRA: Malawi Communications
Regulator Authority, to open up the 3rd IXP in Malawi, this time in the
city of Mzuzu, their third biggest city, with an important university:
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7229821715822899200/

I don't want to hijack this thread, but if there is someone here from IXP
world, willing to explore ways how to help Malawi, please - contact me
privately here or on LinkedIn and I will connect you with Brian Munyao
Longwe <https://www.linkedin.com/in/brian-munyao-longwe-25432/> - he and
quite a lot of amazing people around him, are getting things done down
there in Malawi and I'm so thankful for a chance to see that. By any means,
feel free to contact him directly if you want to: brian@ctnmw.net

_______________

Getting back on track: I recall Paul Vixie mentioning PAIX somewhere on
LinkedIn this week - couldn't find it today, so I was just searching the
Internet and found this:
https://www.enog.org/presentations/enog-2/12-2011-11-28-paix-history.pdf

Isn't  there a time to try it again? Or something similar, for that matter?
Lots of things has changed - a global level of understanding of IXP
importance, for example...
I mean, even with a current uptake in installation we can see at
https://libreqos.io, with what Preseem, Cambium Networks QoE, Paraqum and
Bequant are doing with QoE middle-boxes as  force multipliers to fix
latency, IXP component is badly needed.


All the best,

Frank

Frantisek (Frank) Borsik



https://www.linkedin.com/in/frantisekborsik

Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp: +421919416714

iMessage, mobile: +420775230885

Skype: casioa5302ca

frantisek.borsik@gmail.com


On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 8:06 PM Jack Haverty via Nnagain <
nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

> IMHO, educating politicians and regulators is difficult but necessary.
> Latency is an important and overlooked component of "broadband service",
> not included in the definition of such "service".  But there are others
> that might also catch their attention.
>
> I live in an area in California where wildfires are an issue.  My location
> officially has broadband service, according to the FCC databases.  I get IP
> through cable, provided by Comcast.   The IP{ service is fast and latency
> hasn't been an issue for me.
>
> The government (state, local, and federal) have all spent a lot of money
> and effort to put technology in place to  mitigate the risks of wildfire
> and other such natural risks, to help keep the public safe.  That's their
> job.  We have sensors and cameras that spot smoke columns or seismic
> events.  We have apps and communications channels that spread the word
> fast, so that people can get out of harm's way.  The Internet has made
> quite a difference by providing the infrastructure to make such safety
> mechanisms possible.  (See app.watchduty.org for an example)
>
> The local electric utility has also implemented mechanisms to avoid
> causing wildfires.  When it's dry and windy, and therefore the risks of a
> falling tree limb starting a fire are high, they simply shut off the power
> to the area.  When the risk is over, they turn power back on.  It might be
> a day or two, but while the risks are high, a fire won't be started by the
> electric grid.  Many people have installed generators to keep essential
> things going in their homes.   The electric utility is even offering
> subsidies for people to buy such equipment.
>
> However...
>
> Comcast relies on the electric grid for power.  Some areas have equipment
> with backup battery power, but that only works for an hour or two.  After
> that, communications shuts down - in my neighborhood that means telephone,
> TV, and Internet all cease to work.   All of the information from those
> sensors, cameras, and emergency service agencies doesn't get to us, the
> public it's supposed to help.
>
> Despite that behavior, officially the database says we have broadband
> service available.  It of course is available, most of the time.  It turns
> off when you need it the most.
>
> Thinking techologically for a bit, the problem is a lot like Latency.
> Latency is not specified in the definition of "broadband service".
> Neither is "Reliability".
>
> I've filed a "challenge" to my own database entry, pointing out that we
> don't actually have reliable broadband service.  Even if, over a month or
> so, the service is 99.xxx% "up", that's not much help if it's down when you
> actually need it the most.   The definition of "reliable" needs to be
> revised.
>
> I don't expect any action from my challenge as just a lone voice in the
> crowd.
>
> Perhaps educating the politicians and regulators about reliability would
> grab some attention.  It might be a bit easier to understand than just
> "latency".
>
> Jack Haverty
> Nevada City, CA
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nnagain mailing list
> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 8449 bytes --]

Re: [NNagain] nn back in the news

[Livingood, Jason]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4415 bytes --]

My personal theory (IANAL am guessing at this based on reading a lot on the subject).

We are here: Lawsuit to stop Title-I reclassification proceeds (on Loper Bright / Chevron and MQD issues) over the next months/years.

IF SCOTUS upholds the reclassification, THEN end of story.

IF SCOTUS overturns the reclassification, THEN existing or new state regs take precedence.
THEN, people on both sides decry the lack of national rules.
THEN, the will to create a legislative solution MAY develop (or MAY NOT).

IF SCOTUS overturns only part of the reclassification or returns it to the agency with some TBD direction, THEN who knows…

;-)

JL

From: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
Date: Thursday, August 15, 2024 at 10:17
To: Jason Livingood <jason_livingood@comcast.com>
Cc: Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects heard this time! <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [NNagain] nn back in the news

Perhaps it would have been better to say that "one of the sites I read regularly just put out an update on it." :)

I like to think that bufferbloat.net<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/bufferbloat.net__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!GfEu5eBEYPiXujccckauGtSMMDXcKa6s7aNuJbEW7Cr2RBJVYShKwABi7oxqNgjeflOqydn-Z1L8Kd3KzneaYBl9$>'s NOI filing did a bit of good, getting cited 16 times, but not changing the top level conclusions one iota. Doing another one this year is on my mind in followup, but aside from harping on our latency points, pointing to progress, and the need for more IXPs, I don't know what top level items could be addressed, again? I'd have to buckle down and re-read what resonated, and what didn't.

Perhaps something might come out of the DNC?

I have been enjoying Carr's negative posts on BEAD, but there must be some bright news in that program somewhere by now?

I am perhaps reading too much into it, but with a potentially younger crowd moving into office, perhaps more technical clue is arriving? I'm very happy to see mudge make CIO at darpa. The white house got a cto yet? The FCC?

PS  Ms Shotwell did a great fireside chat at Mountain Connect: https://www.broadband.io/c/broadband-community-events/shotwell<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.broadband.io/c/broadband-community-events/shotwell__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!GfEu5eBEYPiXujccckauGtSMMDXcKa6s7aNuJbEW7Cr2RBJVYShKwABi7oxqNgjeflOqydn-Z1L8Kd3KzmawuPvX$>


On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 6:27 AM Livingood, Jason <jason_livingood@comcast.com<mailto:jason_livingood@comcast.com>> wrote:
I would say it is not “back” in the news – it has continuously been in the news since the Loper Bright SCOTUS ruling that impacts “Chevron deference” as well the major questions doctrine issue raised in W VA vs EPA. As many people have long said, this will be tied up in the courts for several years.

Personal take – in the long-term it will be better to have legislation that codifies this (as well as a national cross-sector privacy law).

JL

From: Nnagain <nnagain-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net<mailto:nnagain-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net>> on behalf of Dave Taht via Nnagain <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net<mailto:nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>>
Reply-To: Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects heard this time! <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net<mailto:nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>>
Date: Thursday, August 15, 2024 at 07:41
To: Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects heard this time! <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net<mailto:nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>>
Cc: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com<mailto:dave.taht@gmail.com>>
Subject: [NNagain] nn back in the news


https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/08/isps-ask-supreme-court-to-kill-new-york-law-that-requires-15-broadband-plans/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/08/isps-ask-supreme-court-to-kill-new-york-law-that-requires-15-broadband-plans/__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!FPiUKVoVIIjDuEAjFeVX-ISnAeSb8gI7-H-8Pg5UvZVEuC6YaYS0X8k4cHM4F-i7JjIAMB_2uKpV5QLmf8MbXIx1fORtlGxN$>
--

Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos


--
Artists/Musician Campout Aug 9-11
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/healing-arts-event-tickets-928910826287<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.eventbrite.com/e/healing-arts-event-tickets-928910826287__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!GfEu5eBEYPiXujccckauGtSMMDXcKa6s7aNuJbEW7Cr2RBJVYShKwABi7oxqNgjeflOqydn-Z1L8Kd3Kzn4oY8V6$>
Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 12380 bytes --]