New minimum speed for US broadband connections

Tue Jun 1 18:19:03 UTC 2021

Sometimes, yes. Sometimes the maintenance of the infrastructure required to deliver those speeds exceeds what you'd get, IE: no return. 

What's wrong with right-sizing the infrastructure? 

----- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

Midwest-IX 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 

----- Original Message -----

From: "james cutler" <james.cutler at consultant.com> 
To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog at ics-il.net> 
Cc: "Christopher Morrow" <morrowc.lists at gmail.com>, "nanog list" <nanog at nanog.org> 
Sent: Tuesday, June 1, 2021 1:13:36 PM 
Subject: Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections 

On Jun 1, 2021, at 1:33 PM, Mike Hammett < nanog at ics-il.net > wrote: 

"Why is 100/100 seen as problematic to the industry players?" 

In rural settings, it's low density, so you're spending a bunch of money with a low probability of getting any return. Also, a low probability that the customer cares. 

Of course, this is because the “industry” is driven short term profits and can not vision the eventual dispersion of remote workers begun in earnest about a year and which could result in longer term return on investment. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20210601/e89fdf10/attachment.html>