New definition of broadband

[caspar347]

http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/29/7932653/fcc-changed-definition-broadband-25mbps

 

The FCC has changed the definition of broadband to 25 down and 3 up.

 

Thoughts?

 

Personally, I wish that they had put the minimum upload speed at 5.

 

Also, technically my 24/4 connection from Windstream is no longer broadband.

[S4GRU]

http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/29/7932653/fcc-changed-definition-broadband-25mbps

 

The FCC has changed the definition of broadband to 25 down and 3 up.

 

Thoughts?

 

Personally, I wish that they had put the minimum upload speed at 5.

 

Also, technically my 24/4 connection from Windstream is no longer broadband.

 

Now it means that most DSL is no longer broadband.  Hopefully it will spur more broadband development.  And more FTTH.  I am for the change in definition, if it is used to add teeth and legs to Government Broadband initiatives.  I see this as a bargaining point that cities and states have with local ILEC's who are providing very slow broadband options.  Because they can point out that ILEC "X" doesn't even offer broadband to its citizens.

 

In my city, since our cable operator Midcontinent is adding fiber to the home with 1 Gig speeds, CenturyLink is finally jumping on board too.  They are adding FTTH in all new housing neighborhoods.  This is great news.  If not for the competition with Midcontinent here, they would have run their antiquated DSL network forever, trying to monetize that thing as long as possible.

 

Viva la broadband revolucion!

[swintec]

 

Also, technically my 24/4 connection from Windstream is no longer broadband.

 

Actually, *technically* it is.  You could have a cable modem capped at dial up speeds and the technology behind it is still broadband (essentially, running over multiple channels).

 

Also, a lot of ISPs stopped selling "broadband" several years ago.  They sell high speed internet.  Which is why I dont understand why anyone gets all worked up over this ruling by the FCC.  The ISPs will just continue as they were.

[caspar347]

Now it means that most DSL is no longer broadband.

Yep. Remaining DSL providers are now forced to do some kind of fiber (or coax, but I can't think of a logical reason for them to use it) rollout. Either FTTNode and a short local loop on VDSL2 (the cheaper, easier way and what Windstream is doing here with existing neighborhoods) or full on FTTH (the more expensive but basically completely future proof way and what Windstream is doing here in new developments).

[S4GRU]

Actually, *technically* it is.  You could have a cable modem capped at dial up speeds and the technology behind it is still broadband (essentially, running over multiple channels).

 

Also, a lot of ISPs stopped selling "broadband" several years ago.  They sell high speed internet.  Which is why I dont understand why anyone gets all worked up over this ruling by the FCC.  The ISPs will just continue as they were.

 

I don't know about 'worked up.'  With the new definitions, it allows cities, counties and states to look at their contracts, policies and statutes regarding ISP's and more importantly ILEC's.  CenturyLink in particular touts its high speed internet availability to its customers.  Now local policy makers can say, "Hold on Jack, according to the FCC, you only provide broadband to 10% of your customers."

 

It gives government agencies and to some extent consumers, a measuring stick and a leverage point in discussion for system upgrades and improvements.  It says to everyone involved 1.5-3Mbps is not going to cut it anymore.  It says the bar has been raised.  If you are not providing 25Mbps, then you are providing subpar internet services to your customers.  And you are now on the radar.

 

Many of the small governments buy the ILEC's story spinning that they provide broadband.  Or high speed internet.  And now they have something they can cite that says otherwise.

 

Does this ruling change anything right away?  No.  And it won't make local governments do anything.  But it gives them a measuring stick to see how ISP's are doing in their area.  And maybe CenturyLink and others will now hear more often that 1.5Mbps is not high speed, broadband or otherwise.  It's insufficient.

 

And maybe this will help stop state legislatures from blocking local governments from adding broadband in their town's when the local ISP's refuse to upgrade.  Because the measuring stick can be applied and show how the sub 1Mbps they are currently receiving is not anywhere near the minimum 25Mbps that the FCC calls broadband.

 

This helps.  But it in itself is no solution.

[S4GRU]

Yep. Remaining DSL providers are now forced to do some kind of fiber (or coax, but I can't think of a logical reason for them to use it) rollout. Either FTTNode and a short local loop on VDSL2 (the cheaper, easier way and what Windstream is doing here with existing neighborhoods) or full on FTTH (the more expensive but basically completely future proof way and what Windstream is doing here in new developments).

 

Fiber is actually getting less expensive to install now than copper, all the way to the home.  So expect most new developments to include FTTH if fiber is already available near the property line.  CenturyLink has switched to FTTH in new developments in our market.  According to the Regional Engineer here for CenturyLink, that should change that way in all their markets in the next year or so.

 

The big issue is that most existing homes are fed by copper, and upgrading existing copper to fiber is expensive.  It may be equal or less than installing new copper, but these places already have existing copper.  And those systems are paid for.  And they want to milk that for as long as possible.  They have no incentive to upgrade existing unless competition makes them do so.

 

I recently discussed some thoughts on fiber to the home here in a Premier Sponsor thread:  http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/4474-le-glorious-premier-sponsor-lounge-thread/?p=398738

[swintec]

I don't know about 'worked up.'  With the new definitions, it allows cities, counties and states to look at their contracts, policies and statutes regarding ISP's and more importantly ILEC's.  CenturyLink in particular touts its high speed internet availability to its customers.  Now local policy makers can say, "hold on jack, according to the FCC, you only provide broadband to 10% of your customers."

 

To city buildings, schools, libraries, etc that might be so.  In regards to cable at least, franchise agreements do not deal with internet / telephone services...they address cable television service only.  Naturally, the cable company is going to provide voice and data as well as that is the money maker but franchise agreements do not touch on those services at all, let alone speed thresholds then again, mnost cable companies now have higher speed tiers, at a much higher price for those that want them so they can at least say they "offer" them.

 

For the telcos, I believe only phone service (POTS) is regulated.  Sure that can change in the years ahead but with the way the landline phone companies are letting the networks rot (looking at you Verizon and AT&T) because they want users on wireless..I dont foresee any big, positive developments.

[centermedic]

 

The big issue is that most existing homes are fed by copper, and upgrading existing copper to fiber is expensive.  It may be equal or less than installing new copper, but these places already have existing copper.  And those systems are paid for.  And they want to milk that for as long as possible.  They have no incentive to upgrade existing unless competition makes them do so.

 

I recently discussed some thoughts on fiber to the home here in a Premier Sponsor thread:  http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/4474-le-glorious-premier-sponsor-lounge-thread/?p=398738

 It has been 6-8 months IIRC since Google placed the Raleigh area on its short list of Google fiber candidates. I find it very interesting that Century link called me about 5 days before Raleigh was confirmed to get google fiber to let me know that Prism was available in my area. Coincidence? Hmmmmm.

[centermedic]

To city buildings, schools, libraries, etc that might be so.  In regards to cable at least, franchise agreements do not deal with internet / telephone services...they address cable television service only.  Naturally, the cable company is going to provide voice and data as well as that is the money maker but franchise agreements do not touch on those services at all, let alone speed thresholds then again, mnost cable companies now have higher speed tiers, at a much higher price for those that want them so they can at least say they "offer" them.

 

 

Thats not exactly true. It really depends on the state. I know all of those services are on the state government radar in North Carolina in reference to franchise agreements.

[S4GRU]

To city buildings, schools, libraries, etc that might be so.  In regards to cable at least, franchise agreements do not deal with internet / telephone services...they address cable television service only.  Naturally, the cable company is going to provide voice and data as well as that is the money maker but franchise agreements do not touch on those services at all, let alone speed thresholds then again, mnost cable companies now have higher speed tiers, at a much higher price for those that want them so they can at least say they "offer" them.

 

For the telcos, I believe only phone service (POTS) is regulated.  Sure that can change in the years ahead but with the way the landline phone companies are letting the networks rot (looking at you Verizon and AT&T) because they want users on wireless..I dont foresee any big, positive developments.

 

Good points.  But internet performance is a big discussion these days in public meetings.  And ILEC's love to tout their high speed internet coverage.  And they often lobby governments for protections from competition, especially from other subordinate governments.

 

There are a lot of municipalities and counties (and other utility companies) in this country who want to provide high speed internet service and/or fiber that get shot down by their state.  In some very notable instances, state governments shut down cities/counties from doing this through existing laws or in some instances state legislatures create new laws to prevent these local governments from starting competing ISP's to the the ILECs and cable companies.

 

It will be better for these local governments to make their case of how insufficient their local ISP's are at providing high speed internet if they can cite official FCC Broadband standards.  When the local ILEC says they offer high speed internet, the municipality can show how the ILEC provides performance that is as bad as 1/20th of the stated minimum broadband speed as defined by the FCC.  And all this benefits consumers.

 

The existing ISP's are going to fight and whine.  No doubt.  They will do anything and everything they can to try to make the new definition irrelevant.  But the first step to change is by raising the bar.  And now the FCC did that.  And now with the goal posts moved, the discussions can be started.

[swintec]

Thats not exactly true. It really depends on the state. I know all of those services are on the state government radar in North Carolina in reference to franchise agreements.

 

TW makes their franchise agreements available on their website.  Do any of them show broadband details hashed out for your area?  Last I saw for my area, some franchise agreements mentioned internet but simply that the cable company may or may not offer it if they see fit.

 

This link should open for your division but if not you would have to go in through your divisions local site.

 

http://www.timewarnercable.com/en/about-us/legal/regulatory-notices/programming-legal-notices/franchise-agreements.html

[Fraydog]

A lot of the plans of my cable provider have also been rendered as not broadband: 

 

http://www.newwavecom.com/internet/

[joshnys8913]

http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/29/7932653/fcc-changed-definition-broadband-25mbps

 

The FCC has changed the definition of broadband to 25 down and 3 up.

 

Thoughts?

 

Personally, I wish that they had put the minimum upload speed at 5.

 

Also, technically my 24/4 connection from Windstream is no longer broadband.

This will put Frontier out of business they cant even offer 25mps up in Rochester, NY (its HOME location!!) Maybe not out of business but they have low speeds. TWC is better off at least up here in the Rochester, NY area. We have Fiber but they only offer it to businesses here. 

[plato2876]

Personally, I'm just a little miffed they kept the 3mbps definition on the upstream. Heaven forbid someone want to upload video, let alone high quality, and do anything else at the same time. And that's not even starting on the plethora of cloud-based backups that could be used with better bandwidth.

[MacinJosh]

What the FCC did today was just give my local electric company the open door they need to make sure that we will get HSI from them. Not sure what their plans were for lowest tier Internet, but now they have to at least offer that. Both AT&T and Digis just got kicked out of the broadband class of Internet service providers, but that's ok. Just means when the electric company starts Internet service, the other ISP's will have to step up their game.

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk 3.1.1

[lilotimz]

Att is probably loving it as the top package for uverse barely gets 20 / 2.5

[swintec]

What the FCC did today was just give my local electric company the open door they need to make sure that we will get HSI from them. Not sure what their plans were for lowest tier Internet, but now they have to at least offer that.

 

Why do they HAVE to offer it?  Are they taking big time subsidies from the feds?  They werent going to deploy internet without this ruling?

[MacinJosh]

Why do they HAVE to offer it? Are they taking big time subsidies from the feds? They werent going to deploy internet without this ruling?

They were getting some subsidy, but the plan to offer it was announced already a couple months ago. As of now, they are still in planning stages and I think I remember the article saying 2016 for deployment, but i don't remember.

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk 3.1.1

[marioc21]

Now it means that most DSL is no longer broadband.  Hopefully it will spur more broadband development.  And more FTTH.  I am for the change in definition, if it is used to add teeth and legs to Government Broadband initiatives.  I see this as a bargaining point that cities and states have with local ILEC's who are providing very slow broadband options.  Because they can point out that ILEC "X" doesn't even offer broadband to its citizens.

 

In my city, since our cable operator Midcontinent is adding fiber to the home with 1 Gig speeds, CenturyLink is finally jumping on board too.  They are adding FTTH in all new housing neighborhoods.  This is great news.  If not for the competition with Midcontinent here, they would have run their antiquated DSL network forever, trying to monetize that thing as long as possible.

 

Viva la broadband revolucion!

 

It's good when you have a smaller competitor that's really willing to push the incumbent. Where I live we have Verizon fiber and Comcast cable.  When Verizon started FIOS around here I expected them to really push Comcast with super fast speeds.  However, over time they both seemed to get into their grooves and just split the market in two.  Neither one is interested in pushing the other.  I don't expect either one will make any major upgrades until a third player like Google decides to show up.

[Conan Kudo]

A lot of laws barring new broadband deployment projects were written to reference the FCC's definition of broadband. The interesting aspect of that is with the redefinition, some places can now build public/private partnerships to build new fiber or cable networks to support broadband where there is no longer any.

[lou99/maximus1987]

A lot of laws barring new broadband deployment projects were written to reference the FCC's definition of broadband. The interesting aspect of that is with the redefinition, some places can now build public/private partnerships to build new fiber or cable networks to support broadband where there is no longer any.

Wouldn't last mile unbundling, like Europe, be more effective in increasing speeds?

[JossMan]

I called my municipal FTTH provider this morning and they are already aware of the FCC increasing the speed requirements to be considered broadband and starting Feb. 2nd they are increasing the baseline internet package to 25/5Mbps.

[jeffcarp]

Not being able to call most DSL broadband is a great political justification for municipal broadband efforts. The argument would simply be that no company is stepping up to provide it.

[centermedic]

TW makes their franchise agreements available on their website.  Do any of them show broadband details hashed out for your area?  Last I saw for my area, some franchise agreements mentioned internet but simply that the cable company may or may not offer it if they see fit.

 

This link should open for your division but if not you would have to go in through your divisions local site.

 

http://www.timewarnercable.com/en/about-us/legal/regulatory-notices/programming-legal-notices/franchise-agreements.html

When I get a chance I will look for it and post but a couple of years ago the State of North Carolina scrapped local franchise agreements and instituted statewide franchise agreements  with the goal of increasing internet availability, service and competition.

[Conan Kudo]

When I get a chance I will look for it and post but a couple of years ago the State of North Carolina scrapped local franchise agreements and instituted statewide franchise agreements  with the goal of increasing internet availability, service and competition.

That'll be interesting if it's true, because Google would have just signed one of those in order to provide service in Raleigh.