FCCs RFC for the Definition of Broadband

jim deleskie deleskie at gmail.com
Wed Aug 26 17:57:10 UTC 2009


I agree we should all be telling the FCC that broadband is fiber to
the home.  If we spend all kinds of $$ to build a 1.5M/s connection to
homes, it's outdated before we even finish.



On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Fred Baker<fred at cisco.com> wrote:
> If it's about stimulus money, I'm in favor of saying that broadband implies
> fiber to the home. That would provide all sorts of stimuli to the economy -
> infrastructure, equipment sales, jobs digging ditches, and so on. I could
> pretty quickly argue myself into suggesting special favors for deployment of
> DNSSEC, multicast, and IPv6. As in, use the stimulus money to propel a leap
> forward, not just waste it.
>
> On Aug 26, 2009, at 9:44 AM, Carlos Alcantar wrote:
>
>> I think the big push to get the fcc to define broadband is highly based
>> on the rus/ntia setting definitions of what broadband is.  If any anyone
>> has been fallowing the rus/ntia they are the one handing out all the
>> stimulus infrastructure grant loan money.  So there are a lot of
>> political reasons to make the definition of broadband a bit slower than
>> one would think.  I guess it doesn't hurt that the larger lec's with the
>> older infrastructure are shelling out the money to lobby to make sure
>> the definition stays as low as can be.  They don't want to see the gov
>> funding there competition.  Just my 2 cents.
>>
>> -carlos
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ted Fischer [mailto:ted at fred.net]
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 8:50 AM
>> To: nanog at nanog.org
>> Subject: Re: FCCs RFC for the Definition of Broadband
>>
>>
>>
>> Paul Timmins wrote:
>>>
>>> Fred Baker wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 24, 2009, at 9:17 AM, Luke Marrott wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> What are your thoughts on what the definition of Broadband should be
>>
>>>>> going
>>>>> forward? I would assume this will be the standard definition for a
>>>>> number of
>>>>> years to come.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Historically, narrowband was circuit switched (ISDN etc) and
>>
>> broadband
>>>>
>>>> was packet switched. Narrowband was therefore tied to the digital
>>>> signaling hierarchy and was in some way a multiple of 64 KBPS. As the
>>
>>>> term was used then, broadband delivery options of course included
>>>> virtual circuits bearing packets, like Frame Relay and ATM.
>>>
>>> of or relating to or being a communications network in which the
>>> bandwidth can be divided and shared by multiple simultaneous signals
>>
>> (as
>>>
>>> for voice or data or video)
>>>
>>> That's my humble opinion. Let them use a new term, like "High Speed
>>> Internet".
>>>
>>>
>> Seconded
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>




More information about the NANOG mailing list