Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

[Owen DeLong via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>]

> On Jun 2, 2021, at 02:10 , Mark Tinka <mark@tinka.africa> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 6/2/21 11:04, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
> > I disagree… If it could be forced into a standardized format using a standardized approach to data acquisition and 
> > reliable comparable results across providers, it could be a very useful adjunct to real competition.
>
> If we can't even agree on what "minimum speed for U.S. broadband connections" actually means, fat chance having a 
> "nutritional facts" at the back of the "Internet in a tea cup" dropped off at your door step.
>
> I'm not saying it's not useful, I'm just saying that easily goes down the "what color should we use for the bike 
> shed" territory, while people in rural America still have no or poor Internet access.
>
> Mark.

ROFLMAO…

People in Rural America seem to be doing just fine. Most of the ones I know at least have GPON or better.

Meanwhile, here in San Jose, a city that bills itself as “The Capital of Silicon Valley”, the best I can get is Comcast 
(which does finally purport to be Gig down), but rarely delivers that.

Yes, anything involving the federal government will get the full bike shed treatment no matter what we do.

There are plenty of urban and suburban areas in America that are far worse off from a broadband perspective than “rural 
America”.

Owen