New minimum speed for US broadband connections

Mark Tinka mark at
Mon May 31 14:56:02 UTC 2021

On 5/31/21 11:49, Daniel Karrenberg wrote:

> I do not live in the US and I do not pay US taxes. So I have no 
> opinion on the original question. Let me offer an observation:
> I live in NL and I have two strands of glass plus coax into my house 
> in a rural village in the ‘far south’. I do not live at the end of a 
> 50 mile dirt road but for NL it is quite rural. The fibre has been 
> installed and paid for by a company called Reggefiber, founded and 
> backed by not-for-profit real estate developers. They do not provide 
> the Internet service. I have a choice of ISPs using the Reggefiber 
> glass. I buy 500/500 from one of those at EUR 69.50, ~ USD 85 per 
> month; this includes a data-only SIM with 1GB/month on 4G whether I 
> want it or not. I actually get 500/500 to the office, we peer with the 
> ISP.  I get at least 450/450 to my family server hosted in DE (RTT 
> ~15ms); so I have to bandwidth limit the back-ups I pull *to* my house 
> from DE lest I inconvenience the rest of the family. I canceled the 
> cable broadband which I initially kept for redundancy after a year 
> because the glass is more than reliable enough.
> I am a happy customer!
> The reasons this got installed were not subsidies from public/tax 
> money. They were:
>     1) Reggefiber was not connected to one of the incumbents with 
> existing plant.
>     2) Reggefiber was run by people who understood long term, low 
> return investments.
>         2a) They got their money from the part of the banks that 
> understand such investments.
>     3) The government did not provide subsidies but regulations that 
> made this viable for Reggefiber and the ISPs.
>         3a) Afaik the government provided a subsidy for a small number 
> (1?) of proof-of-concept deployments.
> I guess you see it coming from the past tense already. KPN, the major 
> incumbent acquired Reggefiber through some pretty impressive lobbying 
> effort that made it impossible for the founders to keep it. The 
> company still exists but deployment rates have gone down. On the 
> bright side: the model has proven to work and there are quite some 
> smaller localised efforts. I guess that these are similar to the US 
> co-op idea that was mentioned here.
> Just my own observations. Think globally, act locally.

The Stokab model, in Stockholm, still continues to impress me.

Your story reminded me of them.


More information about the NANOG mailing list