republican-creole
Search:  

 
 
   News
newer
story category FCC Finally Realizes 200kbps is Not Broadband
Votes to reform long-flawed broadband data collection, albeit after-the-fact
04:02PM Wednesday Mar 19 2008 by Karl Bode
tags: fcc · Oddities
We've been complaining about the way the FCC tracks broadband penetration in this country for years. The agency has long considered 200kbps to be a broadband connection, and believes that if one person in a zip code has broadband, that entire zip-code is wired for service. That's a fairly big deal, given they've made massive, sweeping changes to the industry over the last decade based on completely inaccurate data.

Given that more accurate data would highlight a lack of competition and coverage in many markets, the largest broadband providers have fought tooth and nail to prevent any change in this fairly convenient political scenario. While the FCC did release another rose-colored-glasses analysis (pdf) of the nation's broadband infrastructure today, they also voted to finally change the way they track broadband after a decade of criticism.

The FCC has finally shifted the definition of broadband from 200kbps to 768kbps, probably not as high as it should be, but a vast improvement. The agency says they'll also start tracking both downstream and upstream speeds and will scrap the zip code tracking methodology for more substantive census-track level reporting. Carriers still won't be required to release data on the prices they charge for different speeds.

Consumer Group Public Knowledge says the FCC is sending a "mixed message" to the public. "It is a mystery why the Commission chose to issue this report when, mere moments later, the Commission admitted the inadequacy of the information by starting the process to update the data collection on broadband," says PK founder Gigi B. Sohn.

While the change actually arrived, it arrived after industry lobbyists convinced the Congress and the FCC to engage in sweeping deregulation of the industry, using flawed FCC data as a cornerstone. Perhaps the next time the FCC makes a decision on the market, they might actually know something about it.

Related:
  1. FCC Crackdown on Comcast Doesn’t Even Include Fine
  2. FTC Ethics Questioned Over DTV News Release
  3. Universal Service Fund Still Poorly Managed Money Pit
  4. Broadweave Buys Remnants of Eagle Broadband
  5. Don't Fear The Bandwidth Apocalypse
  6. XM/Sirius Merger Held Up In Face Of New Requirements
  7. FCC May Require Telcos to Speed Up LNP
  8. Is Broadband A Civil Right?
Forums » FCC Finally Realizes 200kbps is Not Broadband
view: topics flat text 
Post a:

iLive4Apple
Hybrid power
Premium
join:2006-07-13
Hoover, AL
·AT&T Southeast
·ViaTalk

Oh Darn!

So when at my lake house, the sole connection I have to the internet as an alternative to dialup, GSM EDGE data from AT&T is not Broadband?

And so even though my zip code covers a 40 mile radius and someone can get broadband, they know I might can't get it? What a suprise.
--
I get 29 MPG in my Toyota Highlander Hybrid!

TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast


edit:
March 19th, @03:42PM

No credit Karl?

Submitted this link and news item. But no tip credit?

Details of new methodology:
The FCC, as is typical, won't release the full text of the changes it adopted for a few weeks, but here's a rundown of major components described at Wednesday's meeting:

• 200Kbps speeds are no longer considered "broadband." Until this point, the FCC has considered any service that produces 200Kbps speeds in the upload or download direction to be "high speed." With Wednesday's vote, that methodology is no more. Now, 768Kbps, which is the entry-level speed offered by major DSL providers like Verizon, will be considered the low end of "basic broadband," a range that extends to under 1.5Mbps.
• Broadband service speeds will have to be reported both for uploads and downloads. Previously the FCC had six big categories of broadband speeds, and they effectively only tracked download speeds. Now the agency says it will require reporting on upload speeds. Pro-regulatory advocacy groups like Free Press say that's a necessary step in part because of particularly in light of Comcast's admitted throttling of peer-to-peer filesharing uploads.
• Upload and download speeds will have to be reported in a more specific way. At the moment, the broadband speeds most commonly offered by cable and telephone companies are lumped into two major categories: those between 200Kbps and 2.5Mbps, and those between 2.5 and 10Mbps. The FCC's new rules would require them to be broken down further, in an attempt to address charges that the current buckets have the potential to overstate the number of high-end subscriptions and understate the number of low-end subscriptions. Those new tiers will be: 1) 200 to 768Kbps ("first generation data"), 2) 768Kbps to 1.5Mbps ("basic broadband"), 3) 1.5-3Mbps, 4) 3-6Mbps, and 5) 6Mbps and above.
• ISPs will be required to report numbers of subscribers, and at the census-block level. Under the current methodology, ISPs report only the number of zip codes in which they have at least one subscriber, and they report numbers of lines nationwide. Now they'll have to report the number of subscribers in each census tract they serve, broken down by speed tier. The FCC decided to use census tracts because researchers may be able to use other demographic statistics collected by the U.S. Census, such as age and income level, to gain insight about what drives broadband penetration rates.
• ISPs will not have to report the prices they charge....yet. Democratic commissioners and liberal consumer advocacy groups had argued such a step is necessary in order to give consumers an idea of the value they're getting for their money--and to compare U.S. prices to those for comparable services abroad. Democratic Commissioner Michael Copps said on Wednesday that he continues to believe it's a "mistake" to omit that requirement, and Adelstein also voiced concern. But a majority of the commissioners opted to push that decision off until another time and gather more comments.
DV0407

join:2007-02-10
Orlando, FL

Satellite

Well i guess the 256 tiers offered by Satellite isnt broadband anymore LMAO!!

TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast

Re: Satellite

said by DV0407 See Profile :

Well i guess the 256 tiers offered by Satellite isnt broadband anymore LMAO!!
Also what hasn't changed is that the tiers are still based on download speeds.

Meaning 768/128 would be considered in the broadband tier.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page

synic

join:2002-03-30
Reno, NV

Re: Satellite

said by TK Junk Mail See Profile :

Also what hasn't changed is that the tiers are still based on download speeds.

Meaning 768/128 would be considered in the broadband tier.
That's seriously unfortunate. They need to rate upload speeds, as it's the only way to get anyone to pay attention to them.
openbox9

join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL

Re: Satellite

Upload offerings will be tracked and the only way anyone will pay attention to them, is when enough consumers (not DSLR posters) start asking for increased upload capacity.

dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ

Re: Satellite

said by openbox9 See Profile :

Upload offerings will be tracked and the only way anyone will pay attention to them, is when enough consumers (not DSLR posters) start asking for increased upload capacity.
START??? We've been asking for more upload for 10+ years, only the providers aren't listening!
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth
openbox9

join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL
·Mediacom

Re: Satellite

You may have, but the majority (and don't kid yourself, the majority matters in marketing) didn't even know what upload meant 10 years ago. In fact, I'm willing to lay odds that a majority of people today truly don't have a concept of what upload means. Do not confuse the typical ISP customer (the ones that ISPs want as their customers) for the types that hang out in forums like this.

wilbilt
Pronto Resurrected
Premium
join:2004-01-11
Oroville, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC


edit:
March 20th, @07:56AM

Re: No credit Karl?

"ISPs will be required to report numbers of subscribers, and at the census-block level. Under the current methodology, ISPs report only the number of zip codes in which they have at least one subscriber, and they report numbers of lines nationwide. Now they'll have to report the number of subscribers in each census tract they serve, broken down by speed tier. The FCC decided to use census tracts because researchers may be able to use other demographic statistics collected by the U.S. Census, such as age and income level, to gain insight about what drives broadband penetration rates."

Great...so now an ISP will report that it has zero subscribers in an area (because they don't offer service there), and the FCC will announce that nobody subscribes in that area because they can't afford it.

The FCC should send out a simple questionnaire to every address in the country if they really want to find out the extent of broadband deployment.

Of course, they really don't want to know, so it will never happen.
--
We were taking a vote when the ground came up and hit us.

Steve
SAS-70 is extortion
Consultant
join:2001-03-10
Tustin, CA

said by TK Junk Mail See Profile :

Submitted this link and news item. But no tip credit?
Do you submit news because you want to be helpful, or because you want to be credited?

digitalfreak
Frodo failed. Bush has the ring

join:2005-12-09
Blacklick, OH

Re: No credit Karl?

said by Steve See Profile :

said by TK Junk Mail See Profile :

Submitted this link and news item. But no tip credit?
Do you submit news because you want to be helpful, or because you want to be credited?
He craves attention.

Steve
SAS-70 is extortion
Consultant
join:2001-03-10
Tustin, CA

Re: No credit Karl?

said by digitalfreak See Profile :

He craves attention.
Good thing you pointed that out or I might have missed this

Raptor
Not a Dumptruck

join:2001-10-21
London, ON
·Rogers Hi-Speed
·Bell Sympatico

A start....

Should've been at least 1.5Mbit, but it's a start. Sadly, this standard will probably last a long while.

I'd be interested to see the new penetration rates based on this new standard. I'll bet they're a weeeee bit lower.

"I'm happy we're starting to change our benchmarks," he said, "but my goodness, how late in the day it is."
My goodness, how much of an understatement that is
--
....where's my fiber?

OSUGoose

join:2007-12-27
Columbus, OH
clubs:

Re: A start....

Hey at least they are taking baby steps into the right direction. Thisis the US Gov't, it never moves fast unless its in their best intrest (read:political supporters and special intrest groups). Never when it would actually benefit its citizens.
nokiatech

join:2000-10-18
Jensen Beach, FL

768 is fair

Most "DSL Lite" packages are 768. I think that's what most would call minimum broadband speed. It's a night and day diffrence faster then dialup.
Sammer

join:2005-12-22
Pittsburgh, PA

Re: 768 is fair

768 may be just OK for the minimum (although it should have been 768/256) but 6 Mbps is obscenely low for a premium tier.

nklb
Premium
join:2000-11-17
Ypsilanti, MI
clubs:

said by nokiatech See Profile :

Most "DSL Lite" packages are 768. I think that's what most would call minimum broadband speed. It's a night and day diffrence faster then dialup.
My first broadband connection was 768k SDSL. To this date, that was my favorite connection ever. Lowest latency, most consistent performing.

Sure, now I am on something that is technically faster, and it is in raw throughput, but it still just isn't the same. Particularly when running large numbers of connections across it.
--
for all your Linux questions
nasadude

join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast

confusion and lack of information...

...is the incumbents friend.

another incumbent friend (well, maybe not so much for cable) is Kevin Martin.

and Kevin has been helping his incumbent friends by doing his best to see that accurate broadband statistics are not available.

as soon as we have accurate numbers on broadband speeds and deployment in this country, the charade will be over.

nothing will be done about it, but no longer will rosy pictures of broadband in the U.S. be painted.

RadioDoc
Sortofadog
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
Chicago, IL
·AT&T Midwest

Re: confusion and lack of information...

said by nasadude See Profile :

as soon as we have accurate numbers on broadband speeds and deployment in this country, the charade will be over.
You funny boy.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange.
Smith6612
Premium
join:2008-02-01
united state
·Verizon Online DSL
·FrontierNet Intern..


edit:
March 19th, @04:15PM

hehe...

So my 768k DSL line from Verizon is "First-Generation/ Basic Broadband." Wait until I upgrade to 3Mbps/FiOS

But what's the upload for broadband, I never saw anything in the article.
EPS

join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA

Re: hehe...

No upload requirements as far as I know, which would mean even those old DOCSIS 1.0 systems where your upload was via a separate dial-up connection would still be broadband if they could get their download speeds to the requisite points.
Smith6612
Premium
join:2008-02-01
united state
·Verizon Online DSL
·FrontierNet Intern..

Re: hehe...

That stinks then. The FCC should set upload speeds to be set for "broadband" as well, as not only does more download come with broadband, more upload comes with them as well as I'm sure we all know. The only thing is, some providers as I know provide very little upload compared to the download, so I'm sure that if the upload speeds are included as well in this FCC thing, I'm sure that broadband providers would probably boost their upload speeds for the slower plans. That's my guess...

Its madness

@saix.net

USA lagging in speeds, big time!

How come the US hasn't got 24Mbps DSL? The UK has had 24 Mbps DSL for two years already, with 1Mbps upload. Uncapped of course. How come the US is lagging? What's up with the providers??? The US has more dark fibre laying around than most other countries put together, why not put it to good use?
We all know China, Japan, Korea etc have 100Mbps+, but if it wasn't for FIOS the US would look pretty backward? Even South Africa has 4Mbps!
openbox9

join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL

Re: USA lagging in speeds, big time!

What is that 24/1 DSL being used for? Or a better question, is the 24/1 being used routinely for something that the US' "piddly" 6/768 DSL doesn't satisfy?
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Re: USA lagging in speeds, big time!

Are you serious?

So what does 6/768 satisfy that 768/128 doesnt?

Why does my company run 100mb and 1gb to the desktop when the user's can accomplish the same thing with a 1mb token ring system?
openbox9

join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL

Re: USA lagging in speeds, big time!

Because 100 Mbps is cheaper than token ring and has become the defacto standard in a LAN. IMO, 6/768 doesn't satisfy much more than 768/128 for a lot of users. You didn't answer my question btw.
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO


edit:
March 21st, @03:32PM

Re: USA lagging in speeds, big time!

Companies will migrate to the products and services that make their user's the most productive which is 100% the reason why ethernet is the defacto. Cost will have a factor, but factored into cost is the return on productivity.

Everything is faster with a faster connection. The more information that can be fed in a shorter amount of time whether it is email, webpages, P2P sharing, or FTP the more a person is able to do. PERIOD.
openbox9

join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL

Re: USA lagging in speeds, big time!

I understand what you are saying, but my point is that you can do almost everything with a 6/768 connection that you can with a 24/1 connection. And a vast majority of consumers won't care or notice...especially if costs are a concern.
EPS

join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA
AT&T U-Verse is 24Mbps (often higher) VDSL- the thing is, a big chunk of that is dedicated to IPTV. I believe Qwest and Embarq are also looking into ADSL2+ technologies that are capable of similar speeds.

Kfedka
Premium
join:2005-05-06
Spokane, WA

Old school...

Yesterday's dialup is today's 200kbps.

shoe1

join:2007-09-28
Colfax, CA


edit:
March 19th, @05:23PM

SHEESE.

Sheese, Im still on dial up, well WB(512k too...so thats NOT broadband anyway) but it's almost the same thing...I live in a town with 2,000(within 5 miles of town) other people why don't I have DSL? ugh, 20kbps sucks so much....makes me want to cry. What can I do Verizon just will not provide it. WTF!! AT&T provides dsl 5 miles away and that has less people.
moven

join:2008-02-25
Huntsville, TX

Must be nice

Well, I am not the one in the zip code, they are just down the road. Heck, I would be more than happy at 200 vs the lousy 3 AT&T manages to provide !!
wahoospa

join:2006-03-23
Charleston, SC

That leaves me out

AT&T set me at 762 (not 768)for the $10 dsl so I guess I'm still on slow speed.

OC LINES

@sbcglobal.net

OC-768 / STM-256x

Let's just put a federal bill in to establish a network built on OC-768 / STM-256x networks.

We have the technology, and it's already been in physical testing periods. Let's finish it off and establish this great new technology. At this point, with every technological advancement we've made, we need to provide the means to support it.

I believe the basic broadband rate should be 100mbit

That's just me, but I think more will fall along this course as technology advances, and technology brings us to a full front, where space and speed is necessary to be part of this evolution.

As of December 2007, AT&T has deployed 50,000 wavelength-miles of OC-768 in its Internet/MPLS backbone network [1]. OC-768 SONET interfaces have been available with short-reach optical interfaces from Cisco since as early as 2006. Infinera made a field trial demonstration data transmission on a live production network involving the service transmission of a 40Gb/s OC-768/STM-256 service over a 1,969 km terrestrial network spanning Europe and the U.S.

bubba123

@uiuc.edu

Re: OC-768 / STM-256x

I agree 100%. I'd clarify that it should be 100Mb *symmetrical* and have complete network neutrality. IE, I can run whatever I want - email server, web server, game server etc. Also be provided with 4-6 static IP addresses (IPV6 is fine).

Dark Fiber
Premium
join:2005-01-23
Boise, ID
·Clearwire
·Qwest.net


edit:
March 23rd, @08:24PM

Why stop there?

Why not OC-3072?

»www.dfs.org/digital.html

There are companies using Infinera gear on their backbones right now, although 10 Gbps cards are more likely the standard.

Assuming your 40 Gbps example, let's do the math:

Let's presume you live in the bandwidth saturated city of Megopolis where *everyone* has a 100 Mbps Internet connection to his home. How many customers will saturate a 40 Gbps backbone?

40 Gbps = 4000 Mbps
40000 Mbps / 100 Mbps = 400 customers

Do you see where I am going?

You aren't going to be seeing true 100 Mbps Internet anytime soon. Even if you had a 100 Mbps link to your house from your ISP, how much do you think you could ever actually use, even on an OC-3072 backbone based Internet?

Yes, you could build provide higher line rates on an over-subscription based model. Would it be better than what we have now? I don't know if it would be, and I certainly am not against the experiment, but you can never really utilize any bandwidth that exceeds the narrowest choke point.

Could you better offer broadcast services such as TV over IP? Probably, but only because you would rely on high bandwidth private lines to get the aggregate content to local distribution points and sustain individual connections from there, or use multicast (which I will be the first to admit that I know nothing about).

As the venerable Mr. Scott was famed to say: "Ye cannae change the laws of physics!"
nnaarrnn

join:2004-09-30
Nitro, WV

the 768k IS upload

it's for 768 both ways right? wasnt the 200k for both ways?
CWO333

join:2005-02-24
Chicago, IL

Re: the 768k IS upload

No, it was previously 200k in one direction (pretty much always download only).
qworster

join:2001-11-25
Los Angeles, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·Vonage
·DSL EXTREME
·EarthLink

128K upload is virtually useless...

I mean, you can't even run decent VOIP with that slow an upload. For the life of me, I don't understand why they ever adopted that speed! 768/256 is reasonable for entry level Internet-128 should go the way of the dinosaur (which it is!), yet the major ILECS still offer it as entry level broadband. Another example of how little they actually care about their customers.

Bell103

@rr.com

Broadband Flag Waving

Well, I was thrilled to get 256K DSL with 64K upload, after fighting GTE for a decade trying to get ISDN deployed, for less than $100 a month. The alternative at the time was buying a 64K frame relay circuit, for about $500 a month.

Today, with 768K/128K for about $15+tax and cable internet for $30, I'm not sure what the fuss is about. The higher bit-rates only seem to matter for trading copyrighted materials, working around re-regulating cable TV, or pretending to provide phone service.

If your main complaint is that VOIP doesn't work on 128K upload, well, maybe you need to re-think VOIP - after all, voice has run on 3K for over 100 years.

What is the "advantage" that Korea, Japan, et al have with their super-broadband? Tangible evidence, please.
macdude22

join:2005-09-08
Kellogg, IA

Bump me up, buttercup

Hurrah, perhaps this will force my provider to bump up speeds a bit. Our current offerings are.

512/256 - 39.99
1.0/256 - 49.99
1.5/512 - 69.99

Plus the useless phone I don't use, I want to see them require naked DSL. My bill is $102 a month for the 1.5 package and the required phone line. Seems as though thats highway robbery but they are the only game in town.
haplo2112

join:2003-05-12
Charlton, MA

New DEF is still pathetic

Why do they refuse to set the standards at something reasonable given the available technology.

It should have been more like 1/1 mbps or perhaps even higher.

Dark Fiber
Premium
join:2005-01-23
Boise, ID
·Clearwire
·Qwest.net

Strange, but I can dig it

I always considered narrowband to mean <= DS0 or 64 kbps (aka 56 kbps aka 'speeds may not exceed 53 kbps due to FCC regulations').

Wideband has always meant a DS3 to me. (That's a bit under 45Mbps or 28 x 24 x 64 kbps. Don't ask where the extra bandwidth comes from. I don't wanna look that up for you.*)

Broadband covered the range in between narrowband and wideband (64 kbps >< 1.544 Mbps), which would still include 200 Kbps.

So what is the new term for DS0 >< DS1:

Not-so-narrowband or Not-quite-broadband?

* See »www.dfs.org/digital.html for a sweet chart on the digital hierarchy.

Another definition of broadband:
»searchtelecom.techtarget.com/sDe···,00.html
Forums » FCC Finally Realizes 200kbps is Not Broadband

Friday, 25-Jul
15:45:50
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
8th year online! © 1999-2008 dslreports.com.