Broadband initiatives - impact to your network?

Eric Brunner-Williams brunner at
Tue Jun 29 00:42:43 UTC 2010

I wrote a first round BTOP application.

No, the program doesn't quite promise to change, by orders of 
magnitude, the pipe that's available to most folks, and even if it 
did, that isn't a very strong promise.

"Most folks" live in urban areas, adequately served by physics, if not 
the private, and the surviving public infrastructure. "Most folks" who 
reside in BTOP eligible area codes are not adequately served by 
physics, and BTOP is, IMHO, limited solutions to the physics problem, 
with possibly sustainable public incentive funding.

The "orders of magnitude" claim, and the plural in "orders" is key, is 
both over blown and misses what is, IMHO, the most interesting aspect 
of revisiting the physics assumptions about the edge of service. Is 
unidirectional transport (monitized video streams) the rural service 
most absent and most valued, or are other characteristics of networks 
competitive with, or superior to, that service model?

The sneaker net meme is worth holding on to, among others. Some of 
this was grist for the PILC WG.

I went with Plan B, but then again, my application got zero funding, 
and folks that follow this may appreciate the relevance of the mapping 
portion of the BTOP/BIP package to selection, and the role of state 
government in selection.

I suggest coverage of the lobbying of BTOP/BIP grants is at least as 
interesting as the problems various applicants attempt to state and 
provide solutions for.

Held until after 5pm PDT, mostly so I could take a walk.


More information about the NANOG mailing list