In today's notice, the FCC said it was also fielding comments on whether wireless is a "functional equivalent" for fixed broadband, and whether it should include usage caps when comparing offerings from different carriers.
As Verizon looks to hang up on users with copper, the cap is a critical point. I really don't care if data is delivered to me by copper, fiber, or wireless as long as it performs well. It must:
1) Meet or exceed my current speed offering in upload / download ("mbps")
2) Be reasonably close (within 30ms) of the previous service's gateway ping time
3) Meet or exceed my current data allotment. A service capped at 10GB is not a proper substitute for unlimited ADSL service.
4) Must not be subject to throttling or "network management" that would not be otherwise exerted on a typical wireline customer. Unlimited wireline should not be substituted with unlimited wireless that throttles down to 128kbps after 10GB.
5) Meet or exceed performance in terms of uptime and peak hour congestion.
For voice service:
1) Must be able to make a data connection for faxes, TiVos, alarms, satellite receivers.
2) Must have clear, garble-free voice communication
3) Must operate in an emergency.
As for increasing the speeds that define "broadband", what difference does it make? To make people who can't get 10mbps feel worse about it? None of the providers seem to be being held to that standard, so I'm not sure what the point is. But sure, increase it to 10/2.