Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

[Mike Lyon <mike.lyon () gmail com>]

I get about 23/6 Mbps for $50/month here in Silicon Valley from my ATT DSL line.

> On May 27, 2021, at 18:11, Matt Brennan <brennanma () gmail com> wrote:
>
> 
> I'd love to see 100/100, but I don't see it happening anytime soon ... especially for $50. 
>
> I pay $150/month for 300/8 at home and that's the best upload I can get where I live ... in a major city. 
>
> > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 8:41 PM Eric Dugas via NANOG <nanog () nanog org> wrote:
> > I'm not in the US but in Canada it's been 50/10 since 2016 and we're just "almost" there yet. IMO the target should 
> > have been more like 100/30 or even 50 of upload.
> >
> > 100/100 might be a bit short sighted considering it'll take years to accomplish the necessary last-mile/distribution 
> > upgrades in rural areas.
> >
> > > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 8:31 PM Sean Donelan <sean () donelan com> wrote:
> > >
> > > What should be the new minimum speed for "broadband" in the U.S.?
> > >
> > >
> > > This is the list of past minimum broadband speed definitions by year
> > >
> > > year  speed
> > >
> > > 1999  200 kbps in both directions (this was chosen as faster than 
> > > dialup/ISDN speeds)
> > >
> > > 2000  200 kbps in at least one direction (changed because too many service 
> > > providers had 128 kbps upload)
> > >
> > > 2010   4 mbps down / 1 mbps up
> > >
> > > 2015   25 Mbps down / 3 Mbps up (wired)
> > >          5 Mbps down / 1 Mbps up (wireless)
> > >
> > > 2021   ??? / ??? (some Senators propose 100/100 mbps)
> > >
> > > Not only in major cities, but also rural areas
> > >
> > > Note, the official broadband definition only means service providers can't 
> > > advertise it as "broadband" or qualify for subsidies; not that they must 
> > > deliver better service.