Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

On 5/31/21 7:14 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: Yes, WFH (or e-learning) is much more likely to have simultaneous uses. Yes, I agree that 3 megs is getting thin for three video streams. Not impossible, but definitely a lot more hairy. So then what about moving the upload definition to 5 megs? 10 megs

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

On 6/1/21 02:19, Eric Kuhnke wrote: d) may be using badly configured wifi things that stomp on each other, sometimes provided by the ISP Many times provided by the ISP. Between turning up new customers everyday, and fixing problems with pre-existing ones, ISP's tend to do the absolute m

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

On 6/1/21 01:54, Tim Burke wrote: With that said, if there needs to be regulation on minimum broadband speeds, should there be regulation to require home ISPs to provide high-end 802.11ax-capable network gear, so the average clueless home user with a 1gbps FTTP connection can actually use th

Re: MPLS/MEF Switches and NIDs

On 5/31/21 19:44, Adam Thompson wrote: But for 4x10G the MX104 is a very nice box - if you can afford it. If you don't need a full BGP table, sure :-). Mark.

Re: QUIC, Connection IDs and NAT

the 5tuple includes protocol so increased adoption of QUIC alongside TCP bound services effectively does increase the potential size of the NAT binding table but if we're really a single-browser model and all going to QUIC enabled webs, the effective outcome is to burn the port space in UDP, not in

Re: QUIC, Connection IDs and NAT

It appears that Robert Brockway said: >Does the existence of Connection IDs separate from IP mean that >the host/IP contention ratio in CGNAT can be higher? IE, can a single >CGNAT device provide Internet access for a greater number of end-users? No, QUIC runs over UDP which runs over IP. QUI

QUIC, Connection IDs and NAT

QUIC has Connection IDs independent from IP. This was done to make it easier to move from one IP network to another while keeping connections active, as most here will know. Does the existence of Connection IDs separate from IP mean that the host/IP contention ratio in CGNAT can be higher? I

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

I hit enter by mistake. Also, stiff penalties, including being forbidden from taking any future government funding by missing deadlines. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com - Original Message - From:

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

I'd support that. Full transparency, but no requirements on anything broadband. Stiff penalties for lack of transparency. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com - Original Message - From: "Eric Kuhnke"

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

Agreed. My in-laws live in an area where there's so much wireless interference from neighbors that they can't even use the entirety of their 200/20 (or whatever it is) cable service. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

How many simultaneous telehealth calls can you be in at a time? In my close family (15 - 20 people), do you know how rare it is to have a medical appointment in the same week as someone else, much less the same exact time, much less the same exact time *and* in the same household? That's the

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

Perhaps there should be some sort of harsher penalty for ILECs and other large near-monopoly last mile local carriers that outright lie on their form 477 data or take significant subsidy funds and then fail to build what they promised. Numerous states' attorney generals have gone after them on this

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

No one's paying me anything except 15 years of practical experience building last mile networks for myself and my clients. I'd imagine that while a larger percentage than most venues, a minority of the people on this list build last mile networks. Even fewer do so with their own money. I have

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

I think it has been true for many years that: a) a vast majority of residential gigabit/symmetric customers, or gigabit asymmetric (docsis3 500-1000 down, 16-50 up) no longer have a device in their home with a 1000BaseT port on it, or don't know if they do. in some cases literally the only cat5e c

RE: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

This is a good point as well… you can have the largest pipe in the world, but in many cases, in-home service issues are caused by crappy CPE. Example… my neighborhood has 1000/50 GPON (rather silly to offer such poor upload speed, but that’s irrelevant in this case) provided by a local outfit,

Re: MPLS/MEF Switches and NIDs

It's not 100 percent about cost, but cost is a big concern. My minimum requirement is a box that has 4 10G ports, and supports G.8032. MPLS / Segment routing would be nice, but not required. So far, I have yet to find anything comparable to Ciena' 3924. It's got 4 10G SFP+, and then 4 1G SFP's. H

Re: MPLS/MEF Switches and NIDs

EXOS is a perfectly good OS that bears absolutely no resemblance to anything else you've ever used in your career. If you start from scratch without training courses, you're looking at wasting 6 months (maybe more) just learning the OS well enough to figure out how to configure your desired dep

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

Perhaps you may be unfamiliar with the business model of cities, counties or local PUDs running the fiber last mile network (at OSI layer 1) and providing ethernet transport/VLAN handoffs, installing the OLTs and ONTs, and third party ISPs using that network to provide IP, support, billing and over

Re: MPLS/MEF Switches and NIDs

Adam. When you say "Beware using any EXOS-based product (anything that starts with "X") unless you're already familiar with EXOS!" Are you saying stay away from this line completely, or what do you mean by this statement. I have heard good things about Extreme for deploying service provider G.8032

Re: MPLS/MEF Switches and NIDs

Patrick, Yes, I would say that was quite some time ago. From my most recent quotes from Ciena, they have version 6, version 8, and version 10 products now. I wonder if they have improved (I would hope) over the years. On Sun, May 30, 2021 at 10:12 PM Patrick Cole wrote: > Colton, > > This was 6

Re: Call for academic researchers (Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections)

If one installs smokeping on a raspberry pi using a wired ethernet interface to a home router, on a DOCSIS3 residential last mile segment, and copies over a well chosen targets file for things to test, and sets it to a 60s interval, all other settings at default... It's quite rare to find a networ

Re: Call for academic researchers (Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections)

> On May 31, 2021, at 2:00 PM, Josh Luthman > wrote: > > I think the latency and bps is going to be the best way to measure broadband > everyone can agree on. Is there a better way, sure, but how can you quantify > it? See https://www.waveform.com/tools/buf

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

On May 31, 2021, at 1:54 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: > > Was that the fault of the broadband provider or was that the fault of the > indoor WiFi? Is it possible the router has so much interference from all of > the neighbors and everyones using 2.4 GHz? What if that example had a cable > connect

Re: Call for academic researchers (Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections)

It can't be zero. In 1000BaseT specs, BER, 1 in 1*10^10 bits error is considered acceptable on each link. So it should be defined same way, as acceptable BER. And until which point? How to measure? Same for bandwidth, port rate can be 1Gbit, ISP speedtest too, but most websites 100Kbit. On 20

Re: Call for academic researchers (Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections)

I would add packet loss rate. Should be zero, and if it isn’t, it points to an underlying problem. Sent from my iPad > On May 31, 2021, at 11:01 AM, Josh Luthman > wrote: > >  > I think the latency and bps is going to be the best way to measure broadband > everyone can agree on. Is there a

Re: Call for academic researchers (Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections)

I think the latency and bps is going to be the best way to measure broadband everyone can agree on. Is there a better way, sure, but how can you quantify it? Josh Luthman 24/7 Help Desk: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Sun, May 30, 2021 at 7:16 AM Mi

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

I think it's hilarious when a governmental entity funded by the taxpayers thinks they have an answer to broadband. If you're collecting funds from customers, why do you need the City of Sherwood to support your network? Josh Luthman 24/7 Help Desk: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

Was that the fault of the broadband provider or was that the fault of the indoor WiFi? Is it possible the router has so much interference from all of the neighbors and everyones using 2.4 GHz? What if that example had a cable connection with 960/40 mbps and they're limited to 5 mbps up because of

Re: MPLS/MEF Switches and NIDs

Extreme has excellent MEF implementations. I've never used their MPLS implementations, but it's definitely there on, I think, all their products. I only have the X620 model in my network, which may or may not work for you. Beware using any EXOS-based product (anything that starts with "X") un

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

On 5/31/21 16:17, Andy Ringsmuth wrote: Where there is a will, there is a way. The big boys don’t have the will to do it. Case after case after case after case after case demonstrates that fiber to the home can be done and can be done for a very reasonable cost. We read about smaller compa

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

On 5/31/21 11:49, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: I do not live in the US and I do not pay US taxes. So I have no opinion on the original question. Let me offer an observation: I live in NL and I have two strands of glass plus coax into my house in a rural village in the ‘far south’. I do not l

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

On 5/31/21 11:32, Baldur Norddahl wrote: But why would the goal be fiber to every household? There are other ways to deliver good internet. In fact all of the major platforms can do so: fiber, coax, DSL, fixed wireless, 4G / 5G. The fiber platform will do so naturally, the others may requ

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

As much as I enjoy the generally cordial nature of this list, I’m going to go out on a limb and say that Mr. Hammett’s mentality on this topic is precisely the problem. Arguing against every reasonable proposition we are making to increase home broadband speeds. I’m assuming he’ll disagree. And

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

I agree that what is being subsidizes needs to be re-evaluated. USF is one of the largest slush funds we have. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com - Original Message - From: "Blake Dunlap" To: "Baldur

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

Why is any of that a reasonable position to have? What you're proposing is reckless without real, compelling evidence. People want X. Why? When making policy changes and spending hundreds of billions of dollars, you need to have a good reason. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

Nobody needs more than 64k of RAM. On Sun 30 May 2021 at 14:28, Mike Hammett wrote: That doesn't really serve any value and 99.99% of people would not pay any more than $50 for the ability, so your ability to execute such a system is limited. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Comp

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

My USF dollars at work… You’re welcome. I’d also appreciate it if we didn’t structure the subsidies such that it doesn’t make any economic sense to provide services to the middle-density market. Owen > On May 30, 2021, at 13:56 , Blake Dunlap wrote: > > The co op electric serving my familie

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

> On May 28, 2021, at 06:56 , Mike Hammett wrote: > > "Bad connection" measures way more than throughput. > > What about WFH or telehealth doesn't work on 25/3? Pretty much everything if you have, say, 3+ people in your house trying to do it at once… A decent Zoom call requires ~750Kbps of

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

I do not live in the US and I do not pay US taxes. So I have no opinion on the original question. Let me offer an observation: I live in NL and I have two strands of glass plus coax into my house in a rural village in the ‘far south’. I do not live at the end of a 50 mile dirt road but for

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

On 31.05.2021 06.52, Mark Tinka wrote: On 5/29/21 00:38, Lady Benjamin Cannon of Glencoe, ASCE wrote: 8 billion fiber drops for 8 billion people. Technically speaking, 8 billion people is not 8 billion households :-). But the bigger problem is getting fibre to every family in the world