nanog mailing list archives
Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers
From: Kord Martin <kord () firstnationscable com>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2022 16:10:06 -0400
I don’t think game manufacturers expand their games based on available download bandwidth. I think that games have gotten richer and the graphics environments and capabilities have improved and content more expansive to a point where yes, games are several BluRays worth of download now instead of being shipped on multiple discs.When I was a rural DSL customer, my problem wasn't necessarily with the size of the games, but rather that you'd have to re-download the entire game every week. It would take almost an entire week to download a game, then by time it's finally updated they've updated a tree texture and you need to download the whole game again. I understand why this happens but customers who didn't have access to broadband just got the shaft.
I still have a lot of friends who don't have access to broadband and simply can't play modern games because of the always-online requirement and constant, huge updates.
If the target is a non-fiber service, then 100/20 might make sense. If Fiber is being installed, then it’s hard to find a rationale for 1Gbps being more expensive than any lower capacity.The question I have for other operators: if you have a group of customers that subscribe to a 100Mb service, and all of them suddenly switched to a 1Gb service, would you expect an increase in overall bandwidth usage?
I've been looking around for some other comments on bandwidth trends but I don't know how much of that would/should be confidential based on privacy or trade secret.
Current thread:
- Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers, (continued)
- Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers Thomas Nadeau (May 23)
- Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers Michael Thomas (May 23)
- Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers David Bass (May 23)
- Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers Michael Thomas (May 23)
- Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers Thomas Nadeau (May 23)
- Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers Owen DeLong via NANOG (May 23)
- Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers Michael Thomas (May 23)
- Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers Owen DeLong via NANOG (May 23)
- Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers Michael Thomas (May 23)
- Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers Owen DeLong via NANOG (May 24)
- Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers Kord Martin (May 25)
- Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers Mike Hammett (May 31)
- Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers Livingood, Jason via NANOG (May 26)
- Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers Andrew Odlyzko via NANOG (May 26)
- Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers babydr DBA James W. Laferriere (May 26)
- Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers Dave Taht (May 27)
- Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers Jared Mauch (May 29)
- Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers Sean Donelan (May 30)
- Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers Josh Luthman (May 31)
- Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers Mike Hammett (May 31)
- Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers james.cutler () consultant com (May 23)