Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

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

Parts of San Jose are another example… The so-called “Capital of Silicon Valley” has many neighborhoods where
fiber is less than 100 yards away and yet fiber services are unavailable. In many of those locations, DSL is limited
to about 1.5M/384k (and that on good days).

This is true of many other bay area cities and several other mezzo-urban and sub-urban areas in California.

Owen


> On Feb 11, 2022, at 05:41 , Tom Beecher <beecher () beecher cc> wrote:
>
> Can you provide examples?
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twe6uTwOyJo&ab_channel=NANOG 
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twe6uTwOyJo&ab_channel=NANOG>
>
> Our good friend Jared could only get 1.5M DSL living just outside Ann Arbor, MI, so he had to start his own CLEC. 
>
> I have friends in significantly more rural areas than he lives in ( Niagara and Orleans county NYS , between Niagara 
> Falls and Rochester ) who have the same 400Mb package from Spectrum that I do, living in the City of Niagara Falls. 
>
> This is not to say that rural America is a mecca of connectivity; there is a long way to go all the way around 
> regardless. But it is a direct example as you asked for. 
>
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 3:57 PM Josh Luthman <josh () imaginenetworksllc com <mailto:josh () imaginenetworksllc com>> 
> wrote:
> > There are plenty of urban and suburban areas in America that are far worse off from a broadband perspective than 
> > “rural America”.
>
> Can you provide examples?
>
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 3:51 PM Owen DeLong via NANOG <nanog () nanog org <mailto:nanog () nanog org>> wrote:
>
>
> > 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