Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

[Michael Thomas <mike () mtcc com>]

On 2/16/22 1:13 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
> I'll once again please ask for specific examples as I continue to see 
> the generic "it isn't in some parts of San Jose".
>
> On the note of the generic area of San Jose, I'm all but certain this 
> has a lot to do with California and its extraordinarily complicated 
> and near impossible accessibility to obtain CLEC status.  This makes 
> competition pretty much impossible and makes the costs of operating 
> one extraordinarily high.  I'm obviously not going to be one that 
> claims that government is good or bad, just pointing out a certain 
> correlation which could potentially be causation.

Sonic has been installing fiber in San Francisco and other areas, but 
they are really small. Comcast can't be bothered that I've ever heard. 
The only other real alternative is things like Monkeybrains which is a 
WISP. It's really an embarrassment.

Mike

> On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 12:52 PM Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >     On Feb 11, 2022, at 13:14 , Josh Luthman
> >     <josh () imaginenetworksllc com> wrote:
> >
> >     Because literally every case I've seen along these lines is
> >     someone complaining about the coax connection is "only 100 meg
> >     when I pay for 200 meg".  Comcast was the most hated company and
> >     yet they factually had better speeds (possibly in part to their
> >     subjectively terrible customer service) for years.
> >
> >     >An apartment building could have cheap 1G fiber and the houses
> >     across the street have no option but slow DSL.
> >
> >     Where is this example?  Or is this strictly hypothetical?
>
>     There are literally dozens (if not thousands) of such examples in
>     silicon valley alone.
>
> >     I am not seeing any examples, anywhere, with accurate data, where
> >     it's what most consider to be in town/urban and poor speeds.  The
> >     only one that was close was Jared and I'm pretty sure when I saw
> >     the map I wouldn't consider that in town (could be wrong) but
> >     again, there's gig fiber there now.  I don't remember if he
> >     actually got his CLEC, or why that matters, but there's fiber
> >     there now.
>
>     Pretty sure you would have a hard time calling San Jose “not in
>     town”. It’s literally #11 in the largest 200 cities in the US with
>     a population of 1,003,120 (954,940 in the 2010 census) and a
>     population density of 5,642 people/sq. mile (compare to #4
>     Houston, TX at 3,632/Sq. Mi.).
>
>     Similar conditions exist in parts of Los Angeles, #2 on the same
>     list at 3,985,516 (3,795,512 in 2010 census) and 8,499/Sq. Mi.
>
>     I speak of California because it’s where I have the most
>     information. I’m sure this situation exists in other states as
>     well, but I don’t have actual data.
>
>     The simple reality is that there are three sets of incentives that
>     utilities tend to chase and neither of them provides for the
>     mezzo-urban and sub-urban parts of America…
>     1.USF — Mostly supports rural deployments.
>     2.Extreme High Density — High-Rise apartments in dense arrays, Not
>     areas of town houses, smaller apartment complexes, or single
>     family dwellings.
>     3.Neighborhoods full of McMansions — Mostly built very recently
>     and where the developers would literally pay the utilities to
>     pre-deploy in order to boost sales prices.
>
>     Outside of those incentives, there’s very little actual deployment
>     of broadband improvements, leaving vast quantities of average
>     Americans underserved.
>
>     Owen
>
>
>
> >     On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 4:05 PM Brandon Svec via NANOG
> >     <nanog () nanog org> wrote:
> >
> >         What is the point of these anecdotes? Surely anyone on this
> >         list with even a passing knowledge of the broadband landscape
> >         in the United States knows how hit or miss it can be.  An
> >         apartment building could have cheap 1G fiber and the houses
> >         across the street have no option but slow DSL.  Houses could
> >         have reliable high speed cable internet, but the office park
> >         across the field has no such choice because the buildout cost
> >         is prohibitively high to get fiber, etc.
> >
> >         There are plenty of places with only one or two choices of
> >         provider too.  Of course, this is literally changing by the
> >         minute as new services are continually being added and upgraded.
> >         *Brandon Svec*
> >
> >
> >
> >         On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 12:36 PM Josh Luthman
> >         <josh () imaginenetworksllc com> wrote:
> >
> >             OK the one example you provided has gigabit fiber though.
> >
> >             On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 8:41 AM 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> 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> 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