From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lj1-x22f.google.com (mail-lj1-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 64BB13CB40; Thu, 14 Dec 2023 13:51:21 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-lj1-x22f.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2c9f72176cfso108108711fa.2; Thu, 14 Dec 2023 10:51:21 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1702579880; x=1703184680; darn=lists.bufferbloat.net; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=6EhWj/UwF47TROyH3Yqk2lf0RsyDylpjyU2x2rI172k=; b=ZbVELGmq/IG5VadLSttFXlOBygYE1zCoa3i9/Ev0JDkfhm0Ekrtbe5HrNKBM6WYbdi BGmFAnkblhAAr+BytwqtWsDDQUeE17PuQbZr2DSTQVMc9+7xOOF9ls10UtaHExAVNJ4f ZtZ0N7X4MDjOYgOhXhzjrBwbvtIKQHQS7WIEMyKNj2Lmr9n2S2spDiBc8Vfczy85KE9G /R7HBA2OX6kxsEektvZys0ANWtY4Fy90dtziO6krjmEJKs5zd0yFD7LJmItO8JoTid4r u7EMc+LxjkeKaKZXp+QNbTN8p9qUbxfKt4SYfkiG4h0qAHyaTWz4UgzHDhzmKYUDobfy 5cGA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1702579880; x=1703184680; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=6EhWj/UwF47TROyH3Yqk2lf0RsyDylpjyU2x2rI172k=; b=CcQltZ5YxKOpHNiG6RXecB/4rk74ygT89nVD+LbnbOgwiI+kfl3jekgsPuG3ImESyr MVZuSZ3Ab9cZkDTUlYBLnMpxwSZj5aCSA/CvXKb9dML3V+OaN7v5yVQbe65mb9LBDvES FRvBzDSDBVQsGWsl4/KyQDEiUIaWU6huicA21IZ3M2Lbq6xtHs/zVQNZYi4GyZkt5ORQ KIXmsQtBMuGMi+8m6QApme2C1mOKxe2ODi1yYmrYFwvOp5nPmo3DgH/AsJP7l+uNNGfq dHfvGe56dElj+WN65Gy1kKKKlmUyuVKo2svo7Shyf4n8KgEGZta+E8DArwIRYIf2uLZj T91A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yx8nvQ3JSW67RFMEw0ukRtjAVNFtSbxd2rMIslWNGYNVCA6ev3+ Vmgj2XeTizSa3OBbYCWBaM3d5QC22He/QrgqNTXcVD4/rWc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHfRb+YpJJIADtQD/vE1UxXO/NQNLGqOPH8uNueijotWrrfhiNnyvvDtmUPVRb3MFzjdx8mciwLNLrKuMdx72c= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:bd89:0:b0:2cc:2082:a5f0 with SMTP id o9-20020a2ebd89000000b002cc2082a5f0mr3099524ljq.34.1702579879261; Thu, 14 Dec 2023 10:51:19 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <55037f9a-bc2c-4bbb-a4bb-47ad30f16190@rjmcmahon.com> In-Reply-To: From: Nathan Simington Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2023 13:51:07 -0500 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?Q?Network_Neutrality_is_back=21_Let=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_asp?= =?UTF-8?Q?ects_heard_this_time=21?= Cc: "David Bray, PhD" , Dave Taht via Starlink Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e7ba20060c7cc418" Subject: Re: [NNagain] [Starlink] FCC Upholds Denial of Starlink's RDOF Application 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: Thu, 14 Dec 2023 18:51:21 -0000 --000000000000e7ba20060c7cc418 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi folks, (Apologies in advance to non-Americans or anyone who doesn't care about American home broadband policy! Please feel free to immediately delete!) I don't want to get overly political on this mailing list, but my statement on this topic is a matter of public record: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-23-105A3.pdf. As this item is now closed, there is no risk of any impermissible side-barring ("ex partes" that would have to be filed on the record, in regulatory jargon) if anyone wants to discuss this. The FCC is funded through regulatory fees which, traditionally, fell predominantly on broadcasters and monopoly-era AT&T. This mechanism, or at least how we calculate it, is increasingly inapposite for a world in which so much video and voice traffic takes place via unregulated services. That's one reason the agency is shrinking even as the communications industry is growing. Another is that many of our necessary functions, such as RF emissions enforcement, are on a non-fee basis and thus short-term painless to cut (even if that means that we're abandoning oversight of a rising noise floor, or of a device world where post-licensure quality fade on emissions control is normal business practice.) I'm on the record as saying that the FCC should reallocate resources and seek additional money with the goal of hiring 500 more engineers and field enforcement staff. That number is probably too small, but it would be a good start ;-) I was horrified to learn recently, while researching my Title II statement, that the FCC essentially has no internal experts left on peering and transit. How in blazes was this allowed to happen? (I hired one of the handful left as my chief of staff, but that just makes her unavailable to the career staff, so...) On this specific issue, I think a reasonable person could look at current federal broadband programs and see a significant bias in favor of fiber to the home. Someone drawing that conclusion might point, in addition to StarLink's situation, to the specific exclusion of unlicensed-frequency fixed wireless from the BEAD program, in defiance of the current tech trends. Anyone finding bias there might further note that the federal government talks incessantly about line speed but never about traffic management or router firmware and conclude that technically shallow federal politicians have no better ideas than to resort to the same metric that ISPs use in their advertising. I don't always see eye to eye with TechFreedom, which is why I so appreciated their filing on the same NOI that some in this group were involved with filing on. Their filing noted that line speed is a misleading and inappropriate proxy for customer experience quality, though not in the detail of the engineering filers, and also pointed out (among other points) that selling broadband to the public on the basis of telehealth and education is belied by the traffic numbers, which show that entertainment uses predominate. Not that I have anything against entertainment, but the feds haven't been candid (and perhaps the public has allowed itself to be deceived as well) about the reality of how its enormous fiber infrastructure subsidy commitments will be used in practice. If we can provide good service to people without the huge lift of a universal fiber to the home build, then the United States is headed in the wrong direction and will be wasting a lot of public money. And, unlike StarLink, we still won't have connected Dave's boat :-) All best, Nathan On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 12:49=E2=80=AFPM David Bray, PhD via Nnagain < nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > FCC's staff continues to shrink. 1420-or-so employees in 2022, 1755-or-so > in 2012, 1952-or-so in 2004. So about a 25% reduction over the last twent= y > years. There are several good people there among the staff, however they > also face an increasing number of tasks and demands with less resources. > Public service depends on folks being willing to step up and be of servic= e. > > Also, ultimately it is the decision of the Commissioners. Staff can brief > the Commissioners and present evidence, the Commissioners are there to ma= ke > the policy decisions. Remember Commissioners are Presidentially-appointed= , > Senate-confirmed which selects for certain things in keeping with our > Constitution. For the staff, this means accepting that politics may > supersede even the best technical briefing. > > Such is how representative governments work. And if you circle back to > Plato's The Republic, the conclusion is such is how humanity wants it - w= e > don't want a perfectly wise, benevolent, philosopher king. Each of us wan= ts > compromises - the difference being those specific compromises. Plato > (through the voice of Socrates) also concludes humanity would probably ki= ll > a perfectly wise, benevolent, philosopher king if we were to ever have on= e > - again because despite everyone saying they want this, they really only > want such a person if that person agrees with them fully. Or as Tears for > Fears aptly put it: "Everybody Wants to Rule the World" =3D > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DawoFZaSuko4 > > > > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 1:00=E2=80=AFAM Frantisek Borsik via Nnagain < > nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > >> Thanks, Robert. Exactly what I meant. Therefore I added NN list, because >> Nathan was engaging with us there, and with Dave (me and some others, to= my >> knowledge) either directly or via his staffers and he really wanted to >> catch up on tech things that are the culprits of Net Neutrality >> (bufferbloat.) >> >> So instead of assuming that Nathan Simington and Brendan Carr are >> =E2=80=9Cbought=E2=80=9D as someone did, I can the FCC itself as an enti= ty can be >> understaffed at worse. >> >> But still, I appreciate efforts to learn about what=E2=80=99s going in h= ere and >> getting it right. >> >> 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, 14 Dec 2023 at 3:46 AM, Robert McMahon >> wrote: >> >>> I think this common in that appointment of commissioners go through a >>> political process. The FCC has a technology group, too. When I worked w= ith >>> them about 8 years ago, they had skilled researchers on staff and a hig= hly >>> skilled director. They asked good questions about engineering decisions= , >>> like what is limiting the number of mimo streams on devices. >>> >>> Their physical facility is a bit dated, and they don't get stock grants= . >>> I respect the engineers I worked with for what they did. >>> >>> Bob >>> On Dec 13, 2023, at 2:38 PM, Frantisek Borsik via Nnagain < >>> nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: >>> >>>> I would love for Nathan to be here with us, and comment on that :-) so >>>> I will add NN list as well. >>>> >>>> >>>> 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 Wed, 13 Dec 2023 at 11:21 PM, Richard Roy >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>> *From:* Starlink [mailto:starlink-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net] *On >>>>> Behalf Of *Frantisek Borsik via Starlink >>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 13, 2023 1:26 PM >>>>> *To:* Dave Taht via Starlink >>>>> *Subject:* [Starlink] FCC Upholds Denial of Starlink=E2=80=99s RDOF >>>>> Application >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> =E2=80=9C*Elon Musk*=E2=80=99s Starlink was not the only major compan= y to inflate its >>>>> capabilities >>>>> in >>>>> RDOF bids. Nearly 100 bidders have defaulted since the auction, leavi= ng in >>>>> limbo an estimated $2.8 billion >>>>> of >>>>> the $9.2 billion originally awarded. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The FCC upheld another denial >>>>> >>>>> on Monday in the case of LTD Broadband, which appealed the >>>>> commission=E2=80=99s finding that it could not reasonably serve the m= ore than >>>>> 500,000 locations to which it had committed. The commission also hit = LTD >>>>> with a $21.7 million fine for its default. >>>>> >>>>> The commission=E2=80=99s two Republicans dissented to Starlink=E2=80= =99s denial, >>>>> claiming they saw a path for the company to improve its speeds before= the >>>>> first deployment deadline in 2025.=E2=80=9D >>>>> >>>>> *[RR] The reason two lawyers =E2=80=9Csaw a path=E2=80=9D is because = they were >>>>> bribed/conned into to see it. In my nearly 50years of experience deal= ing >>>>> with the FCC, extremely rarely are the people at the top in the commi= ssion >>>>> tech savvy. In general, they have NO CLUE when it comes to technolog= y =E2=80=A6 >>>>> period! **JJ* >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> https://broadbandbreakfast.com/2023/12/fcc-upholds-denial-of-starlink= s-rdof-application/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> >>>> 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 > --=20 Nathan Simington cell: 305-793-6899 --000000000000e7ba20060c7cc418 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi folks,

(Apologies in adva= nce to non-Americans or anyone who doesn't care about American home bro= adband policy! Please feel free to immediately delete!)

I don't want to get overly political on this mailing list, but my= statement on this topic is a matter of public record:=C2=A0https://docs.fcc.gov/= public/attachments/FCC-23-105A3.pdf. As this item is now closed, there = is no risk of any impermissible side-barring ("ex partes" that wo= uld have to be filed on the record, in regulatory jargon) if anyone wants t= o discuss this.

The FCC is funded through regulato= ry fees which, traditionally, fell predominantly on broadcasters and monopo= ly-era AT&T. This mechanism, or at least how we calculate it, is increa= singly inapposite for a world in which so much video and voice traffic take= s place via unregulated services. That's one reason the agency is shrin= king even as the communications industry is growing. Another is that many o= f our necessary functions, such as RF emissions enforcement, are on a non-f= ee basis and thus short-term painless to cut (even if that means that we= 9;re abandoning oversight of a rising noise floor, or of a device world whe= re post-licensure quality fade on emissions control is normal business prac= tice.)

I'm on the record as saying that the FC= C should reallocate resources and seek additional money with the goal of hi= ring 500 more engineers and field enforcement staff. That number is probabl= y too small, but it would be a good start ;-) I was horrified to learn rece= ntly, while researching my Title II statement, that the FCC essentially has= no internal experts left on peering and transit. How in blazes was this al= lowed to happen? (I hired one of the handful left as my chief of staff, but= that just makes her unavailable to the career staff, so...)

=
On this specific issue, I think a reasonable person could look a= t current federal broadband programs and see a significant bias in favor of= fiber to the home. Someone drawing that conclusion might point, in additio= n to StarLink's situation, to the specific exclusion of unlicensed-freq= uency fixed wireless from the BEAD program, in defiance of the current tech= trends. Anyone finding bias there might further note that the federal gove= rnment talks incessantly about line speed but never about traffic managemen= t or router firmware and conclude that technically shallow federal politici= ans have no better ideas than to resort to the same metric that ISPs use in= their advertising.

I don't always see eye to = eye with TechFreedom, which is why I so appreciated their filing on the sam= e NOI that some in this group were involved with filing on. Their filing no= ted that line speed is a misleading and inappropriate proxy for customer ex= perience quality, though not in the detail of the engineering filers, and a= lso pointed out (among other points) that selling broadband to the public o= n the basis of telehealth and education is belied by the traffic numbers, w= hich show that entertainment uses predominate. Not that I have anything aga= inst entertainment, but the feds haven't been candid (and perhaps the p= ublic has allowed itself to be deceived as well) about the reality of how i= ts enormous fiber infrastructure subsidy commitments will be used in practi= ce.

If we can provide good service to people witho= ut the huge lift of a universal=C2=A0fiber to the home build, then the Unit= ed States is headed in the wrong direction and will be wasting a lot of pub= lic money. And, unlike StarLink, we still won't have connected Dave'= ;s boat :-)

All best,
Nathan

On Thu, Dec = 14, 2023 at 12:49=E2=80=AFPM David Bray, PhD via Nnagain <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wr= ote:
FCC's staff contin= ues to shrink. 1420-or-so employees in 2022, 1755-or-so in 2012, 1952-or-so= in 2004. So about a 25% reduction over the last twenty years. There are se= veral good people there among the staff, however they also face an increasi= ng number of tasks and demands with less resources. Public service depends = on folks being willing to step up and be of service.

Also, ultimately it is the decision of the Commissioners. Staff can= brief the Commissioners and present evidence, the Commissioners are there = to make the policy decisions. Remember Commissioners are Presidentially-app= ointed, Senate-confirmed which selects for certain things in keeping with o= ur Constitution. For the staff, this means accepting that politics may supe= rsede even the best technical briefing.

Such = is how representative governments work. And if you circle back to Plato'= ;s The Republic, the conclusion is such is how humanity wants it - we don&#= 39;t want a perfectly wise, benevolent, philosopher king. Each of us wants = compromises - the difference being those specific compromises. Plato (throu= gh the voice of Socrates) also concludes humanity would probably kill a per= fectly wise, benevolent, philosopher king if we were to ever have one - aga= in because despite everyone saying they want this, they really only want su= ch a person if that person agrees with them fully. Or as Tears for Fears ap= tly put it: "Everybody Wants to Rule the World" =3D https://www.= youtube.com/watch?v=3DawoFZaSuko4




On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 1:00=E2=80=AFAM Frantisek Borsik via N= nagain <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
=
Thanks, Robert. Exactly what I meant. Therefore I added N= N list, because Nathan was engaging with us there, and with Dave (me and so= me others, to my knowledge) either directly or via his staffers and he real= ly wanted to catch up on tech things that are the culprits of Net Neutralit= y (bufferbloat.)

So inst= ead of assuming that Nathan Simington and Brendan Carr are =E2=80=9Cbought= =E2=80=9D as someone did, I can the FCC itself as an entity can be understa= ffed at worse.

But still= , I appreciate efforts to learn about what=E2=80=99s going in here and gett= ing it right.

All the best,

Frank
Frantisek = (Frank) Borsik

https://www.linkedin.com/in/frantisekborsik
Sig= nal, Telegram, WhatsApp:=C2=A0+421919416714=C2=A0
iMessage, mobile:=C2= =A0+420775230885
Skype: casioa5302ca
frantisek.borsik@gmail.com


On Thu, 14 Dec 2023 at 3:46 AM, Robert McMahon <<= a href=3D"mailto:rjmcmahon@rjmcmahon.com" target=3D"_blank">rjmcmahon@rjmcm= ahon.com> wrote:
I = think this common in that appointment of commissioners go through a politic= al process. The FCC has a technology group, too. When I worked with them ab= out 8 years ago, they had skilled researchers on staff and a highly skilled= director. They asked good questions about engineering decisions, like what= is limiting the number of mimo streams on devices.

Their physical facility is a bit dated, and they don'= t get stock grants. I respect the engineers I worked with for what they did= .

Bob
On D= ec 13, 2023, at 2:38 PM, Frantisek Borsik via Nnagain <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat= .net> wrote:
I would love for Nathan to be here with us, and comment o= n that :-) so I will add NN list as well.


All the best,

Frank
Frantisek (Frank) Borsik

= h= ttps://www.linkedin.com/in/frantisekborsik
Signal, Telegram, WhatsAp= p:=C2=A0+421919416714=C2=A0
iMessage, mobile:=C2=A0+420775230885
Skyp= e: casioa5302ca
frantisek.borsik@gmail.com

=

O= n Wed, 13 Dec 2023 at 11:21 PM, Richard Roy <dickroy3777@comcast.net> wrote:

=C2=A0

=C2=A0

From: Starlink [mailto:starlink-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.ne= t] On Behalf Of Frantisek Borsik via Starlink
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2023 1:26 PM
To: Dave Taht via Starlink
Subject: [Starlink] FCC Upholds Denial of Starlink=E2=80=99s RDOF Application

=C2=A0

=E2=80=9CElon Musk=E2=80=99s Starlink was not the only major company to=C2=A0= inflate its capabilities=C2=A0in RDOF bids. Nearly 100 bidders have defaulted since the auction, leaving in limbo an=C2=A0<= /font>estimated $2.8 billion=C2=A0of the $9.2 billion originally awarded.=C2=A0

=C2=A0

The FCC= =C2=A0upheld anothe= r denial=C2=A0on Monday= in the case of LTD Broadband, which appealed the commission=E2=80=99s finding that it could not reasonably serve the more th= an 500,000 locations to which it had committed. The commission also hit LTD with a $21= .7 million fine for its default.

The com= mission=E2=80=99s two Republicans dissented to Starlink=E2=80=99s denial, claiming they saw a path for the company to improve its speeds before the f= irst deployment deadline in 2025.=E2=80=9D

[RR] The reason two lawyers =E2=80=9Csaw a path=E2=80=9D is because they were bribed/conned into to see it. In my ne= arly 50years of experience dealing with the FCC, extremely rarely are the people at the = top in the commission tech savvy.=C2=A0 In general, they have NO CLUE when it c= omes to technology =E2=80=A6 period! JJ

=C2=A0




All the best,

Frank
Frantisek (Frank) Borsik

https://www.linkedin.com/i= n/frantisekborsik
Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp:=C2=A0+421919416714=C2=A0
iMessage, mobile:=C2=A0+420775230885
Skype: casioa5302ca
frantisek.borsik@gmail.com

=
_______________________________________________
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


--
Nathan Simington
cell:=C2=A0305-793-6899
--000000000000e7ba20060c7cc418--