RE: What say you, nanog re: Starlink vs 5G?

[Chris Wright <chris.wright () commnetbroadband com>]

The term "5G" among technical circles started vague, became better defined over the course of several years, and is 
becoming vague again. This nuance was never well understood in the public eye, nor by mass publications like CNN. This 
is a battle for 12GHz, not 5G.

Chris


-----Original Message-----
From: NANOG <nanog-bounces+chris.wright=commnetbroadband.com () nanog org> On Behalf Of John Levine
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2022 9:45 PM
To: nanog () nanog org
Subject: Re: What say you, nanog re: Starlink vs 5G?

It appears that Eric Kuhnke <eric.kuhnke () gmail com> said:
> Adding a terrestrial transmitter source mounted on towers and with CPEs 
> that stomps on the same frequencies as the last 20 years of existing 
> two way VSAT terminals throughout the US seems like a bad idea. Even if 
> you ignore the existence of Starlink, there's a myriad of low bandwidth 
> but critical SCADA systems out there and remote locations on ku-band 
> two way geostationary terminals right now.

I think the original thought was that the satellite service would be used in rural areas and 5G in cities so there'd be 
geographic separation, but Starlink is selling service all over the place.