Re: sigs wanted for a response to the fcc's NOI for faster broadband speeds

[Daniel Marks via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>]

Yea I’d like to see mandated IPv6 if ISPs want government money, around here an IPv4 only ISP won a government contract 
a while back for res fiber deployment and the last I heard from an acquaintance I spoke to over there they are planning 
to stuff the entire city behind a /24 with no upcoming plans to enable v6 (but of course you can get your own IP if you 
pay more).

I’m not a conspiracy theorist but sometimes it feels like some smaller ISPs are intentionally not deploying v6 so they 
can get customers to upgrade to more expensive plans for the luxury of *checks notes* not getting rate limited. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 1, 2023, at 15:41, William Herrin <bill () herrin us> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 4:55 PM Dave Taht <dave.taht () gmail com> wrote:
> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/19ADByjakzQXCj9Re_pUvrb5Qe5OK-QmhlYRLMBY4vH4/edit
> >
> > Comments (and cites) welcomed also! The text is still somewhat in flux...
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> You start off with a decent thesis - beyond 100mbps there really isn't
> any difference in capability, not for residential use. Just a
> difference in how quickly some tasks complete. It's not like the
> difference between 768kbps and 10 mbps where one does streaming video
> and conferencing while the other does not.
>
> But then you get lost in latency. Latency is important but it's only
> one in a laundry list of things that make the difference between
> quality and trash in Internet services.
>
> * Packet loss.
>
> * Service outages. I have a buddy whose phone line has been out for
> days four times this year. His ILEC neither wants to maintain the
> copper lines nor install fiber that deep in the woods, so they keep
> doing mediocre repairs to the infrastructure that don't hold up.
>
> * Incomplete connectivity (e.g. Cogent and IPv6).
>
> Personally, I'd love to see rulemaking to the effect that only folks
> with -open- peering policies are eligible for government funds and
> contracts. But that's my pet peeve, like latency is yours. And if I
> pitch that, it'll rightly be seen as a pet issue.
>
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
>
>
>
> --
> William Herrin
> bill () herrin us
> https://bill.herrin.us/