FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers

Mon Jun 6 17:40:31 UTC 2022

Is it?  I mean, as an industry, we already recognize that the average user
downloads approx. 5 times more than they upload.  In fact, we use it to
bash users who want a synchronous speed... tell them that's unreasonable.

I get your point, that if you try to use the outliers corner cases as your
"measure", that's a problem.  And I agree that game companies might get
lazier in terms of efficiency and distribution methods.  I'm just saying we
need to be careful to have the conversations, and be open to them.  We need
to provide good, well-thought-out reasons, and justify our reluctance to
hit "low profit" areas.  Especially when we work in a sector that's being
provided billions of dollars a year to do that very thing.  Short quips
like "Downloading is a really bad thing to use as a reason" overly simplify
the (real) problems and needs down to insulting sound bytes when talking to
the public.

I realize you're talking to an in-group here, and might not have said the
same publicly, so I'm not being overly critical, it's just an observation
to clarify my own point

Sincerely,
Casey Russell
Network Engineer
<http://www.kanren.net>
785-856-9809
2029 Becker Drive, Suite 282
Lawrence, Kansas 66047
XSEDE Campus Champion
Certified Software Carpentry Instructor
need support? <support at kanren.net>

On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 12:12 PM Michael Thomas <mike at mtcc.com> wrote:

>
> On 6/6/22 7:56 AM, Casey Russell via NANOG wrote:
>
>
>> For a long time now...
>>
>> I have had the opinion that we have reached the age of "peak
>> bandwidth", that nearly nobody's 4 person home needs more than 50Mbit
>> with good queue management. Certainly increasing upload
>> speeds dramatically (and making static IP addressing and saner
>> firewalling feasible) might shift some resources from the cloud, which
>> I'd like (anyone using tailscale here?), but despite
>> 8k video (which nobody can discern), it's really hard to use up >
>> 50Mbit for more than a second or three with current applications.
>>
>>
> One single digital game download to a console (xbox, playstation, etc.)
> can be over 80Gb of data.  That's half of your Saturday just waiting to
> play a game.  That assumes you'r'e getting the full 50Mbit (your provider
> isn't oversubscribing) to yourself in the home.  It also assumes your
> console (and all the games on it) is fully updated when you fired it up to
> download that new game. Hope you didn't want a couple of new games (after
> Christmas or a birthday).  I admit, it's not a daily activity, and it might
> not look like much in a monthly average.  But I'd argue there are plenty of
> applications where 50Mbit equals HOURS of download wait for "average
> families" already today, not seconds.
>
> And gig everywhere would just encourage them to make 8000GB downloads.
> Downloading is a really bad thing to use as a reason.
>
> Mike
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20220606/5e3b1bdb/attachment.html>