dslreports logo
 story category
Levin: Your Broadband Comments Weren't Helpful
Broadband plan leader complains of sloppy, vague suggestions...

Blair Levin, the man in charge of the FCC's national broadband plan, wasn't impressed with the first round of requested comments on how best to achieve our national broadband goals. According to Levin, "sloppiness" and the "lack of seriousness and purpose" in most comments weren't useful to the agency in formulating a plan. "There's actually very little in the 8,500-something pages that moves the ball forward," Levin said.


Consumer group Free Press quickly piled on, complaining that the dull and useless comments were mostly the work of incumbent carriers who like things the way they are. While carriers certainly want taxpayer money, notes the group, they don't want regulation -- and aren't particularly eager to admit broadband competitive and deployment shortcomings.

"Incumbents have the largest pool of resources and broadband data at their fingertips, but their comments offer nothing more than the same old tired pro-deregulation arguments," says Derek Turner at Free Press. "It is clear from their recommendations that the phone and cable companies want the national broadband plan to simply be a ‘do-nothing’ plan -- a strategy that has already proven to be an epic failure for consumers.

It's interesting to see Levin complain about broadband comments that contain vague consensus but offer no specific detail, since as we noted yesterday, that can also be said of recent media interviews by new FCC boss Julius Genachowski. Levin has until February to craft a plan, and not too surprisingly, he's finding that empty rhetoric about the miracles of innovation aren't helpful.
view:
topics flat nest 
sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH

sonicmerlin

Member

Good

I'm glad that he wants specifics. He won't be satisfied with the vague, inconsequential "plans" lawyers of big business are so fond of espousing.

S_engineer
Premium Member
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL

S_engineer

Premium Member

Re: Good

he may want specifics, but he certainly doesn't articulate any. There an a number of ways to look at providers shortcomings. All he has to do is browse this thing called the Internet to look for a few ideas. [/sigh]

DarkLogix
Texan and Proud
Premium Member
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX

1 edit

1 recommendation

DarkLogix to sonicmerlin

Premium Member

to sonicmerlin
Heres a plan for him (very specific too)
run 1,000 10G fiber ethernet cables to every town (setup into a nationwide mesh topology with regional transit sites

setup a CRS-1 in each town to make use of the 10TB/sec of data

run 1G fiber to every home

then offer 100/100 internet service with local-to-local of 1G

then I think your'd have a good start

next make the locations of the CRS-1's into IXP's and split the 1,000 fibers between multiple CRS-1's

setup Peering agreements with ISP's that have a local presence

now you have super amazing fast internet service that everyone (except the incumbents) will be happy about

next add internet needed services
ie a cluster of DNS servers (start with one per region then expand)

next provide a set of standards for QOS (based on DSCP) in such a way that it would only help and that taking advantage of it would be pointless
axiomatic
join:2006-08-23
Tomball, TX

1 recommendation

axiomatic

Member

Re: Good

These are actually good suggestions. However, it would leave nothing for any ISP to complain about for a great number of years, that's why this would never be accepted.

We all fail to realize that providing a good service is not what these companies are in business to do. What they ARE unfortunately in business to do is provide the highest return on company stock prices to the investors by using the cheapest means and the lowest upkeep.
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX

iansltx to DarkLogix

Member

to DarkLogix
But that'd be expensive. Like, almost 10% of what they spent bailing out the banks!!!1!
lesopp
join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL

lesopp

Member

Re: Good

Do you really think the cost of anything will deter this administration from giving more money for political payback, claiming it will prevent the country from going bankrupt.

NOCMan
MadMacHatter
Premium Member
join:2004-09-30
Colorado Springs, CO

1 recommendation

NOCMan

Premium Member

Re: Good

So you would of let Chrysler and GM go bankrupt?

If that happened you'd bee looking at 20-30% unemployment across the board, no to mention if our dollar tanks and the oil countries decide to use the Euro as the new standard, we would be doubly screwed.

Last I checked my 401k is actually back into the black, no thanks to Bush or any other RepubliCONS.

Just love to see the other side complain on how he's having to clean up their mess. It's like a kid who spilled the milk telling his mother how to mop.

At_Work
@pacbell.net

At_Work

Anon

Re: Good

...GM did go bankrupt, and they're already back in business.

SpaethCo
Digital Plumber
MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN

SpaethCo to DarkLogix

MVM

to DarkLogix
said by DarkLogix:

run 1,000 10G fiber ethernet cables to every town (setup into a nationwide mesh topology with regional transit sites
This already exists -- they're called backbone carriers. Only it's not 10G, it's multiple of 40G/100G.
said by DarkLogix:

setup a CRS-1 in each town to make use of the 10TB/sec of data
• The CRS is a platform designed for aggregation of high capacity / channelized circuits. The queuing structure on the platform is designed for carrier MPLS services and core routing functionality. It doesn't have the port capacity even in a separated multi-chassis configuration with the intermediate S2 stage fiber shelf to tackle even 1% of the edge attachment you describe.
• The CRS is a power hungry platform that generates insane amounts of heat. If we didn't have an energy crisis before, deploying an army of these will help us down that path as we struggle to find ways to both power and cool the infrastructure.
• Each CRS shelf rolls in at low 7 figures when fully configured.

It's not even close to being the right hardware for the job. It would be like assembling a football team of only quaterbacks, or fighting a war with no army, no navy, and no air force except an entire fleet of B2 bombers.

On the plus side, this has all the things we love about government programs: it would be ridiculously expensive, would fail to meet its overall objectives by being the wrong solution to the problem, and would create a long-term burden for maintaining the infrastructure once you've locked yourself into this design.
qworster
join:2001-11-25
Bryn Mawr, PA

4 edits

qworster

Member

So far the FCC has spent almost 10 years TRASHING broadband!

Under the Bush/Powell/Martin FCC, broadband was trashed in this country! First they gutted the 1996 Communcations Act, then they 'de regulated' DSL-elminating ALL the required 'last mile' wholesale line sharing in the 1996 act. They they declared cable Internet an 'Information service'-virtually ELIMINATING competition over cable lines. Yet, DSL, wireless, dial up, etc. remains a 'communications service'!

INTERNET IS INTERNET-how can how it arrives to the home make it two completely different services?

Right now, in Hollywood, CA-one of the most populated cities in the USA, there are basically TWO ways to get Internet-the cable company or the phone company. Neither offers reasonably priced static IP service. TW uses Sandvine to throttle torrents-and Speedboost to make you THINK you're getting decent speeds when you're not. My friend just called-he told me that he was downloading a 2 gb torrent (a legit radio show) and he watched the speed of the torrent abruptly drop from 700 kbps to 14 kpbs on his TW connection (so don't tell me you aren't throttling, TW!). It's still slow an hour later...

With DSL you have a couple of independent choices-but who determines the speeds they can sell you? The telephone company! They control the provisioning.

So, FCC, if you want to help us, then you have to get us to TRUST YOU! So far I haven't seen you lift a finger to make anything better (not even a token amount)-and we're NOT going to take you on faith. Indeed, If I had my way, I'd disband you and start over with an organization run by engineers, not lawyers!
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX

iansltx

Member

Re: So far the FCC has spent almost 10 years TRASHING broadband!

On te DSL side, you can theoretically colocate your own equipment etc. and push our your own CLEC DSL service. It's just rather expensive.

Case in point: Sonic.net offers up to 18 Mbps down, 1 Mbps up DSL on their home turf.

However you're right; a DSL ISP can pick from a predetermined mix of speed tiers to sell to their customers if their equipment isn't n the CO. Which, for most providers (DSLExtreme, name-your-DSL-ISP-here, anyone running on Qwest's DSL ISP program), is the case.

mrkevin
Knowledge comes, but wisdom lingers.
Premium Member
join:2007-08-07
Aurora, ME

mrkevin

Premium Member

Re: So far the FCC has spent almost 10 years TRASHING broadband!

you can theoretically colocate your own equipment etc. and push our your own CLEC DSL service. It's just rather expensive.
Yup, that's true.
So anyone out there who is unhappy with their service can start their own.
You could run your own FTTH network right out of your basement. It doesn't take up much room, and start selling it to your neighbors and branch out from there.
qworster
join:2001-11-25
Bryn Mawr, PA

1 edit

qworster

Member

Re: So far the FCC has spent almost 10 years TRASHING broadband!

What many of you don't realize is that the telcos readily agreed to allow wholesale rental of the last mile of their circuits to competitors. The reason was because in return they got to enter the long distance business.

AT&T and Verizon would not exist otherwise!!

Do I have to repeat what I just stated?

BUT when it came time for the telcos to keep THEIR part of the bargain, instead they lobbied (read: BRIBED) the (then Republican controlled ) FCC to 'de regulate' DSL-and in the process wipe this half of the agreement off the face of the earth!

In simpler terms, the telcos DEALT IN BAD FAITH and got away with it!

Perhaps its time for the FCC to undo this travesty and then watch DSL prices drop and speeds increase as a result!

Or maybe they should again disallow them from the LD business-so AT&T and Verizon can go back to the way they were...

mrkevin
Knowledge comes, but wisdom lingers.
Premium Member
join:2007-08-07
Aurora, ME

mrkevin

Premium Member

Re: So far the FCC has spent almost 10 years TRASHING broadband!

Perhaps its time for the FCC to undo this travesty and then watch DSL prices drop and speeds increase as a result!
It always works when government gets involved... Prices would most undoubtedly increase as the Fed saw another opportunity to separate you from your $$$

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium Member
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Netgear WNDR3700v2
Zoom 5341J

KrK to iansltx

Premium Member

to iansltx
said by iansltx:

On te DSL side, you can theoretically colocate your own equipment etc. and push our your own CLEC DSL service. It's just rather expensive.
And just how many people are in range of the copper coming out of the CO? All those people behind fiber RT's are off limits.

This access has become a joke.
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX

iansltx

Member

Re: So far the FCC has spent almost 10 years TRASHING broadband!

True dat.

POB
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium Member
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA

POB

Premium Member

Meet the new boss, Same as the old one but dumber

Considering Genchowski's hot air and now Levin's comments, it's nothing but a veritable reach around between these two clowns. The former appointees were sock puppets who echoed the will of their corporate cable/telco masters, and, these two chuckleheads are in the same league as heckuva job, Brownie.

Harddrive
Proud American and Infidel since 1968.
Premium Member
join:2000-09-20
Fort Worth, TX

Harddrive

Premium Member

what does he think would get posted?

he said "sloppiness" and the "lack of seriousness and purpose" in most comments weren't useful to the agency in formulating a plan.

well its hard to post serious and purposeful comments to the FCC that has been the laughing stock of all the Government Agencies for their lack of insight and willingness to listen to the people and not the telco corporations. the FCC is a joke and should be dissolved. create a new agency with new people that don't have the cable companies/telcos on the speed dial list of their phones.

mrkevin
Knowledge comes, but wisdom lingers.
Premium Member
join:2007-08-07
Aurora, ME

mrkevin

Premium Member

Re: what does he think would get posted?

Like they didn't open themselves up for this one. What did they expect?

Well the FCC won't let me be me, they tried to shut me down on MTV
{Emiem}

S_engineer
Premium Member
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL

1 edit

S_engineer

Premium Member

Dear Mr Levin...

Why did you dismiss the suggestions from google, both as a corp. and through the moderator site. The rants are to be expected after a dismal oversight failure in recent years. There are, however, some very good basic ideas. This is something thats also been lacking in recent years.
The fundamental protection for the consumer coinciding with the incentives for the advancement of technologies. These are not luxeries, these are basic ideas that should be in the mission statement of the FCC.

GlobalMind
Domino Dude, POWER Systems Guy
Premium Member
join:2001-10-29
Indianapolis, IN

GlobalMind

Premium Member

Carriers don't want regulation?

Sure they do....when it's beneficial to them, maintains their power, kills muni broadband etc. ; )

PapaMidnight
join:2009-01-13
Baltimore, MD

1 edit

PapaMidnight

Member

Well....

Lack of seriousness?

I was wholly serious when I wrote that litany of a list of tenants back on the google moderator page.

By the way, I did actually SUBMIT that list.

fifty nine
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ

fifty nine

Member

Where do we post comments?

I don't see anywhere in the ECFS. What's the docket number?

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5

Premium Member

Re: Where do we post comments?

said by fifty nine:

I don't see anywhere in the ECFS. What's the docket number?
»esupport.fcc.gov/askfcca ··· id=bband

SLD
Premium Member
join:2002-04-17
San Francisco, CA

SLD

Premium Member

Do my job for me!

Why should I have the knowledge and competence to handle this? Send me ideas on how to do my job - but make them useful.

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

1 edit

FFH5

Premium Member

Levin criticizing non-profits & gov't too; not just industry

From the story it appears that Levin was just criticizing telcos and cable for unhelpful ideas. And that isn't the case. He was criticizing all the comments across the board:

»online.wsj.com/article/B ··· 462.html
Federal Communications Commission on Monday warned businesses and communities weighing in on the agency's national high-speed Internet plan to avoid "intellectual sloppiness" and "get-mine-first" statements in their proposals.

Proposals offered by telecom companies and nonprofit organizations aren't "analyzing what the trade-offs are" to various ideas for encouraging more Internet buildout or boosting subscribership.
So the Free Press group shouldn't be so smug. They are as unhelpful as everyone else.
tdouglas22
join:2001-09-25
Memphis, TN

tdouglas22

Member

Re: Levin criticizing non-profits & gov't too; not just industry

So it looks like we've got a golden opportunity here to get some more ideas into the hat. The fact that he's willing to listen and actually took the time to READ what was submitted to him is a plus in my book.
jdjbuffalo
join:2004-01-17
Denver, CO

jdjbuffalo

Member

Re: Levin criticizing non-profits & gov't too; not just industry

We should put together a plan her at BBR and submit it to the FCC. We got lots of resources available if we all pool our talents. We got lots of broadband enthusiasts, network engineers, and even LiamJunket.

We're always complaining about the terrible state of broadband in the country. Let's do something to fix it!

Bill Dollarz
@cwa-union.org

Bill Dollarz to FFH5

Anon

to FFH5
Uh, you know there were more than just one non-profit who filed in this proceeding. Levin's critique likely was aimed at some of the more lazy ones. But of all of them, the critique certainly cannot apply to Free Press' filing, which was much more comprehensive than anything else anyone filed. I don't agree with some of their conclusions, but it was a very informative read.

»gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/e ··· 20219926
sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH

sonicmerlin to FFH5

Member

to FFH5
Free Press's filing was amazing.

I don't doubt the incumbents tried to muddy the waters with their own submissions.
SuperWISP
join:2007-04-17
Laramie, WY

1 recommendation

SuperWISP

Member

Re: Levin criticizing non-profits & gov't too; not just industry

said by sonicmerlin:

Free Press's filing was amazing.
Only in one respect: that Free Press thought that their half baked, recycled, falsehood-laden, and plainly Google-funded lobbying agenda was credible in any respect. Such gall and hubris are, indeed, amazing.

••••••••••
rdmiller
join:2005-09-23
Richmond, VA

rdmiller

Member

Fantastic comments

Once again, I am really impressed with the quality of the comments here on BBR. Keep up the good work.
qworster
join:2001-11-25
Bryn Mawr, PA

4 edits

qworster

Member

An open letter to Blair Levin

Dear Mr. Levin:

Attached is a five dollar bill, which I have included so you can go out and buy a clue-as you clearly have none.

You say you want to 'fix' the Internet. Ironic, as many to most of the problems the USA Internet has were actively caused by the FCC. See, whan the FCC gutted the 1996 Communications Act, they effectively killed ALL Internet competition, which insured the monopolistic stagnation we have today.

The biggest thing that the FCC could to is allow for competition among Internet Service providers. See, competition makes for more choices, both lowering prices and improving service.

This might well be impossible in the case of cable TV, as the FCC got SCOTUS to go along with them in the BrandX case. It IS possible in the case of DSL simply by telling the ILECS that the time has come for them to begin abiding by the agreement to which THEY signed allowing for wholesale leasing of their last mile circuits.

Another thing the FCC can do is make sure they they don't 'bend over' to the NAB and broadcasters where white space spectrum sharing is concerned. This space can be used well by wireless ISPs for medium (1-10 mile) paths.

There also needs to be a decently sized swath of UHF spectrum where ISPs can employ reasonably priced equipment to operate wireless broadband networks that actually can offer decent speeds to customers. This should be freely open to all, as opposed to being auctioned off to the richest, largest companies. They have enough spectrum, don't you think? This wireless option would also work to allow broadband to be extended to rural areas. The FCC should also work to pre-empt state and local laws with regards to reasonable height transmission towers and receive antennas & dishes for customers. Only by doing everything above can wireless broadband ever hope to live up to what it is capable of.

I'm not going into any great technical detail here-instead I'm painting a big picture that is small enough in size that you can read it over your Caesar salad lunch. You should leave the technical details to your FCC engineers. By the way, you do realize that the FCC has less then HALF the engineers that it needs to run effectively, don't you? Fire half the lawyers and bureaucrats there and replace them with engineers! After all, it's SCIENCE you are regulating, not art or intellectual property.

Seriously though, the trouble with Internet in the USA is that the FCC has stifled competition. They have given it over to the 'big boys' who have responded by throttling speeds and metering bandwidth, rather then installing newer, faster, better networks. Kind of sounds like the telephone companies pre divestiture doesn't it? Or am I the only one that remembers mechanical phone exchanges, expensive long distance rates, dial telephones rented from the phone company and paying extra for 'touch tone' service?

I hope (yet remain skeptical) that you, the Obama Administration and Congress are serious about making things better Internet wise in this country. The fact that the United States (INVENTOR of the Internet) is barely in the top 20 speed and deployment wise is truly pathetic.

Regards,

Dana Puopolo

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium Member
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK

KrK

Premium Member

This translates: "You are REJECTED."

What this means is unless your proposal was a Big Telco or Cable Company legalspeak, you have been rejected.

Slow speeds, low caps, higher overages. Welcome to the future.

USA, internet backwater of the world.
33358088 (banned)
join:2008-09-23

33358088 (banned)

Member

time ot do a national turn it off month

whats that amount to if we had 50% of north america say screw you im not paying for a month.

TRUST me it would work.

••••
jthomas12
join:2005-10-15
Fernley, NV

jthomas12

Member

Another idea

Break the telcos and the cable companies into 2 parts- 1 the cable plant, and 2 the services division.

One fundamental problem now is that companies that have the desire to provide innovative services don't have access to the cable plant. If you go to »fiberinternetcenter.com/ you can see that these guys dig up the ground and put the fiber in. there prices aren't cheap, but then they don't have the help that subsidized services provide like the phone company does. If your neighborhood ISP could get access, he could make things happen. Hurricane Electric offers 100 megabit Internet access available for about $800 a month in Fremont- BOTH WAYS. If fiber was available to your neighborhood, then this could apply to you. Think about it for a minute, if you took 2 blocks, say 20 houses and split that up, that would be $40 a month. The problem is getting it to and from the neighborhood.

John