From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.lang.hm (unknown [66.167.227.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A944F3CB43 for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2022 16:28:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dlang-mobile (unknown [10.2.2.70]) by mail.lang.hm (Postfix) with ESMTP id 993711439F1; Mon, 22 Aug 2022 13:28:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 13:28:27 -0700 (PDT) From: David Lang To: Daniel AJ Sokolov cc: Benjamin Henrion via Starlink In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="228850167-1422852332-1661200107=:3055" Subject: Re: [Starlink] No RDOF-Funds for Starlink X-BeenThere: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Starlink has bufferbloat. Bad." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 20:28:28 -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. --228850167-1422852332-1661200107=:3055 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT I thought I had read that they were upset over the $500 up front cost of starlink more than anything else. David Lang On Mon, 22 Aug 2022, Daniel AJ Sokolov via Starlink wrote: > Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 12:47:33 -0700 > From: Daniel AJ Sokolov via Starlink > Reply-To: Daniel AJ Sokolov > To: Benjamin Henrion via Starlink > Subject: [Starlink] No RDOF-Funds for Starlink > > Hello, > > Starlink was posed to receive 900 million USD from the FCC's Rural > Digital Opportunity Fund to bring broadband internet to unserviced areas > of the United States - until it wasn't. > > Earlier this month, the FCC decided NOT to give Starlink any of the 900 > million dollars after all. > https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-22-848A1.pdf > > "The Bureau has determined that, based on the totality of the long-form > applications, the expansive service areas reflected in their winning > bids, and their inadequate responses to the Bureau’s follow-up > questions, LTD and Starlink are not reasonably capable of complying with > the Commission’s requirements. The Commission has an obligation to > protect our limited Universal Service Funds and to avoid extensive > delays in providing needed service to rural areas, including by avoiding > subsidizing risky proposals that promise faster speeds than they can > deliver, and/or propose deployment plans that are not realistic or that > are predicated on aggressive assumptions and predictions. We observe > that Ookla data reported as of July 31, 2022 indicate that Starlink’s > speeds have been declining from the last quarter of 2021 to the second > quarter of 2022, including upload speeds that are falling well below 20 > Mbps. Accordingly, we deny LTD’s and Starlink’s long-form applications, > and both are in default on all winning bids (...)" > > (For purposes of Starlink, you can ignore the parts about LTD Broadband.) > > Also note this 2021 study showing Starlink's impending capacity crunch: > > We forecast a capacity shortfall in 2028: > - 56% of RDOF subscribers are congested in a forecasted > low demand scenario > - More locations will be impacted if RDOF usage is higher, > or SpaceX launches fewer satellites by 2028 > . RDOF service could be significantly worse if Starlink > capacity is allocated to non-RDOF use cases > > https://www.ntca.org/sites/default/files/documents/2021-02/FBA_LEO_RDOF_Assessment_Final_Report_20210208.pdf > > > FYI > Daniel > _______________________________________________ > Starlink mailing list > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink > --228850167-1422852332-1661200107=:3055--