The problem is the word "Broadband". What does it mean? It's a word that
lack sufficient specificity to define policy. It simply makes the semantic
baggage of the distant past the framing.

 

I see "broadband" as a term for a business model in which you fund
infrastructure by selling services. If people get enough bits they can do
their own services and you lose service revenue but you don't make it up in
bit revenue because, as with milk, with too many bits price drops below
cost. And bits aren't even consumed.

 

It's very simple. Broadband is the problem not the solution.

 

Engineering expertise is necessary but not sufficient because it's the
definition of the problem that's at issue. Once you've accepted the idea of
broadband the game is over. As I've noted on this list, when I was at
Microsoft I decoupled the home network from the telecom business model by
making it DIY and thwarting practices such as a monthly fee each device. In
doing so I played a key role in making "broadband" what it is today. Can I
get a chance to explain to the group how and why it worked it turned out so
well and why today's broadband is at odds with "more Internet?

 

We must remember that the Internet was, in part, designed to work around the
restrictions of telecom. I worry that we are treating these work-arounds as
necessary architecture and missing the point of the Internet. 

 

No need to repeat what I've said in:

.         http://rmf.vc/?n=BroadbandInternet - the problem with "broadband"
as a framing.

.         http://rmf.vc/?N=Unbaked - understanding why we shouldn't bake in
current assumptions and management practices. That seems to be what's
happening with the incumbents (and Google, as a CDN <http://rmf.vc/?m=NNCDN>
, is an incumbent) are doing.

.         http://rmf.vc/?N=NNManagementNot -problems with handing our future
to network managers.

.         http://rmf.vc/?n=AssuringScarcity - why the current business model
(in this particular case cellular) must limit the capacity in order to
sustain the business model.

.         http://rmf.vc/?n=UAC - Ambient Connectivity as a new paradigm

 

Etc.

 

Where do we get the great engineering that challenges the statement of the
problem rather than meekly taking orders?

 

-----Original Message-----
From: David Farber [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 14:26
To: ip
Subject: [IP] VZ Google Announcementworth reading --

 

 

 

Begin forwarded message:

 

From: "Hoewing, C. L." <[email protected]>

Date: August 16, 2010 1:41:50 PM EDT

To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>, ip <[email protected]>

Subject: RE: [IP] Re: VZ Google Announcementworth reading --

 

Good points and for the record, I agree that there is a very strong need for
engineering input.  That is why, as Dave and others know, we have been
working for some time to create the Broadband Internet Technology Advisory
Group, a group of engineers - not lawyers or policy folks - from across the
Internet ecosystem including software, hardware, applications and network
companies as well as academics and advocates who will join together to
review and examine technology and engineering issues that affect way the
Internet works.   It is not supposed to be a standards body but rather a
means for Internet technologists and engineers to get together regularly to
examine emerging issues concerning the Internet's operations, especially
issues affecting how it delivers content, how congestion issues are handled
and so on.  It will be very transparent in what it does, will provide
regular reports on its meetings and studies, and will also provide advice on
best practices.  In addition, it will provide a place for regulators and
policy leaders to go in order to get advice on technology issues that all
too often can blow up into policy disputes needlessly.  This press release
recently released provides more information.

 

LINK

 
<http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/initial-plans-for-broadband-interne
t-technical-advisory-group-announced-95950709.html>
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/initial-plans-for-broadband-internet
-technical-advisory-group-announced-95950709.html

Link Hoewing

Vice President

Internet and Technology Policy

Verizon

1300 I Street, NW

Washington, DC 20005

202-515-2420

Reply via email to