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

Sean Donelan sean at donelan.com
Mon May 30 21:52:33 UTC 2022

> I would say, if you’re looking to build or expand your networks, focus 
> on how you can get the fiber out there, there’s a lot of money available 
> if you’re willing to take it.  It might mean taking the USF money and 
> the obligations that go with that in reporting, compliance, etc.. but 
> those costs don’t have to be onerous if you are mindful of how the 
> programs work and have the right integration/reporting.

Yep.  No one is forcing carriers to take USF money.  They can 
essentially build whatever they want without USF money.

However, if they do take the USF money, what should be the absolute 
minimum delivery requirements?  They can always build above the minimum.

Its essentially a reverse auction.  If the government sets the 
requirements too high, the carriers claim they will walk away and the 
long-tail of broadband doesn't happen.  If the government sets the 
requirements too low, the carriers take the money and build less.

The historical problem is carriers promise whatever it takes to win, take 
the money and don't deliver (or demand more money to finish).

More information about the NANOG mailing list