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

Brian Turnbow b.turnbow at twt.it
Tue May 24 13:35:09 UTC 2022

Here in Italy there have been a lot of investments to get better broadband.
Such as government sponsored bundles for areas with no return on investments, for schools etc with a lot of focus on reaching gigabit speeds
The results have been mainly positive even though there are delays.
On the end user side in 2020 one of the largest ISPs started offering 2.5Gbps service
Adds all over and users started asking for it, even though they don’t have a 2.5 nic or router,  so now all of the major providers are rolling it out.
Illiad one uped them a couple of months ago pushing  a 5Gbps service and now I get people asking me if we offer 5Gbps fiber lines.. pure marketing…
I have a 1Gbps/100Mbps line and it is plenty enough for the family rarely do we even get near the limits.
It’s kind of like when I ask for an Italian espresso in the states and get a cup full of coffee, no I just want a very small italian style espresso..
The response is Why? you are paying for it take it all
Bigger is better, even if you don’t need it, reigns supreme.

The real problem most users experience isn’t that they have a gig, or even 100Mb of available download bandwidth…it’s that they infrequently are able to use that full bandwidth due to massive over subscription .

The other issue is the minimal upload speed.  It’s fairly easy to consume the 10Mb that you’re typically getting as a residential customer.  Even “business class” broadband service has a pretty poor upload bandwidth limit.

We are a pretty high usage family, and 100/10 has been adequate, but there’s been times when we are pegged at the 10 Mb upload limit, and we start to see issues.

I’d say 25/5 is a minimum for a single person.

Would 1 gig be nice…yeah as long as the upload speed is dramatically increased as part of that.  We would rarely use it, but that would likely be sufficient for a long time.  I wouldn’t pay for the extra at this point though.

On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 8:20 PM Sean Donelan <sean at donelan.com<mailto:sean at donelan.com>> wrote:

Remember, this rulemaking is for 1.1 million locations with the "worst"
return on investment. The end of the tail of the long tail.  Rural and
tribal locations which aren't profitable to provide higher speed

These locations have very low customer density, and difficult to serve.

After the Sandwich Isles Communications scandal, gold-plated proposals
will be viewed with skepticism.  While a proposal may have a lower total
cost of ownership over decades, the business case is the cheapest for
the first 10 years of subsidies.  [massive over-simplification]

Historically, these projects have lack of timely completion (abandoned,
incomplete), and bad (overly optimistic?) budgeting.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20220524/d61f6b54/attachment.html>

More information about the NANOG mailing list