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

Forrest Christian (List Account) lists at packetflux.com
Tue May 24 14:57:17 UTC 2022

These people are fictional at this point.

Starlink has changed the equation such that there are basically no places
in the continental US that can't get service which is usable for most
internet needs.  I have starlink for backup purposes and don't notice any
meaningful practical difference between this and my main connection which
is about the same raw speed as starlink.   I use it for typical work from
home purposes including streaming, voip, and web usage.

If the government is going to fund anything at all anymore, it needs to be
fiber all the way to the home which is built and managed in a way that any
provider can use it.   This probably means a single strand from each home
to some concentration point no more than 10km from the home and then a
backbone/middle mile supporting several carriers from that point.   The
position of this concentration point to be determined by the density in the

On Tue, May 24, 2022, 8:21 AM Josh Luthman <josh at imaginenetworksllc.com>

> CAF nor RDOF required IPv6.  BEAD doesn't say anything about IPv6.  I
> seriously doubt v6 gets included into the conversation because even NANOG
> can't agree it is needed.  The bigger concern are the people that have no
> connectivity at all (no 1 mbps, no 25/3, no 100/20, no gigabit, etc).
> On Tue, May 24, 2022 at 9:41 AM j k <jsklein at gmail.com> wrote:
>> With this funding, does the FCC require IPv6 and/or dual stack?  If not,
>> it could cause a new IPv6 digital divide.
>> Joe Klein
>> On Tue, May 24, 2022, 9:21 AM Max Tulyev <maxtul at netassist.ua> wrote:
>>> Do they help with a local government ("we do not need your cables, go
>>> avway")?
>>> 23.05.22 21:56, Sean Donelan пише:
>>> >
>>> > Money, money, money.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, 23 May 2022, Aaron Wendel wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> The Fiber Broadband Association estimates that the average US
>>> >> household will need more than a gig within 5 years.  Why not just
>>> jump
>>> >> it to a gig or more?
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On 5/23/2022 1:40 PM, Sean Donelan wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-proposes-higher-speed-goals-small-rural-broadband-providers-0
>>> >>>
>>> >>> The Federal Communications Commission voted [May 19, 2022] to seek
>>> >>> comment on a proposal to provide additional universal service
>>> support
>>> >>> to certain rural carriers in exchange for increasing deployment to
>>> >>> more locations at higher speeds. The proposal would make changes to
>>> >>> the Alternative Connect America Cost Model (A-CAM) program, with the
>>> >>> goal of achieving widespread deployment of faster 100/20 Mbps
>>> >>> broadband service throughout the rural areas served by rural
>>> carriers
>>> >>> currently receiving A-CAM support.
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20220524/78ab9348/attachment.html>

More information about the NANOG mailing list