From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.lang.hm (045-059-245-186.biz.spectrum.com [45.59.245.186]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DAB393B2A4 for ; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 12:08:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dlang-mobile (unknown [10.2.3.133]) by mail.lang.hm (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1B0C1C914D; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 09:08:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 09:08:34 -0700 (PDT) From: David Lang To: Mark Steckel cc: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Network_Neutrality_is_back!_Let=B4s_make_th?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?e_technical_aspects_heard_this_time!=22?=" , David Lang In-Reply-To: <18e57769e46.ffd8cea91326788.8020925830558388306@phillywisper.net> Message-ID: References: <823sr28n-sq14-ro91-029r-p9o622o7nnrs@ynat.uz> <18e57769e46.ffd8cea91326788.8020925830558388306@phillywisper.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="228850167-1581328152-1710864514=:4543" Subject: Re: [NNagain] some chatter about the fcc news 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: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 16:08:36 -0000 This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --228850167-1581328152-1710864514=:4543 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Tue, 19 Mar 2024, Mark Steckel wrote: > ---- On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 12:02:34 -0400 David Lang via Nnagain wrote --- > > they are trying to make it so WISP and especially Starlink don't qualify as > > 'broadband' > > Does this really matter to consumers? More specifically, do or will consumers care to check and base decisions on whether their Internet provider's sevice that meets FCC "broadband" definition? > > Or is it a way to restrict federal funding to the big ISPs? it's a funding gate, and it's also "X number of people in the country can't get broadband, we need to do SOMETHING" as well as being a funding gate, you are not likely to get approval to deploy systems that don't qualify as 'broadband', even if you are asking for no funds. David Lang > > David Lang > > > > On Tue, 19 Mar 2024, Dave Taht via Nnagain wrote: > > > > > 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > --228850167-1581328152-1710864514=:4543--