FCC Done With ISPs Making Excuses For Not Upgrading Their Networks

[Guest]

FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler gave a speech today to explain the FCC's position on the growth of broadband networks, showing a much more aggressive stance when it comes to upholding broadband regulations.

FCC Done With ISPs Making Excuses For Not Upgrading Their Networks : Read more

 

[rawoysters]

If I have ever pre judged somebody and been completely wrong, it is with Tom Wheeler. This guy is doing what needs to be done and I have respect for him now.

 

[skit75]

I think I'm in the same boat as you although.... when you set the bar so low, tripping over it can feel like an accomplishment. He is saying all the right things. Its as if Big Cable already told him, "There is no revolving door, for you".

 

[clonazepam]

I'm just really tired of only having one choice for broadband.

 

[jonathan1683]

I love this guy

 

[turkey3_scratch]

I agree, I want faster speeds. Speeds have not gone up much in the past years. I particularly want faster upload speeds. I'm tired of them limiting the upload speeds to like 1/8 of the download speeds. Upload should not be throttled down, with lots of people who want to stream nowadays. The FCC actually seems to be doing a lot of great stuff rather than just talking about it.

 

[drwho1]

I want Faster Internet, both download and upload and be a lot cheaper than it has been for the last 20 years or so.

 

[uglyduckling81]

In Australia we were just starting to roll out a National Broadband Network. Fibre to every home in the cities and high speed wireless to everyone in the country areas. Then our arsehole right wing party got elected that are controlled by their major sponsor, Murdoch that owns Pay TV is Australia and they cancelled it. He doesn't want Australians having access to fast Internet or they might start streaming content from the Internet instead of buying his over priced pay TV.
All future works were cancelled and only those that had already been paid for were to be finished.
Sounds like USA needs something similar to what we were going to get.

 

[jasonelmore]

Windstream and other smaller regional ISP's are the absolute worst at not upgrading their network..

For the past 15 years, Windstream DSL in my area has not seen a speed increase. Not only that, but windstream has seen a huge speed decrease, as well as high latency.

In my city, if comcast is not in your area, you have to buy windstream. If you dont like windstream, then you get 0 Internet. There are no other competitors. This lack of competition is the single most reason windstream has not upgraded anything.

It's so bad now, that all new customers are placed on a madatory 1 Mbps line, even if you signed up for 3 Mbps. If you complain about the false advertising, they simply credit you $5 a month. We are paying $59.99 for 1 Mbps DSL with no other choice in internet.

Central Kentucky btw.

Comcast is faster, but its soooo hard to convince them to expand. The only way you can convince comcast to run cable, is by going door to door to all the neighbors in your location, and get them to sign a petition. EVEN THEN, comcast will want about 10K cash upfront (from people who arent even customers yet) to run the cable.

And i live on a main highway, imagine if i lived a mile or two from the highway, sheww,, it'd be impossible.

TLDR: windstream needs to get bought out, or cities need to start kicking them out, because they wont spend any money.

 

[uglyduckling81]

I can't edit for some reason: Govt then owns the infrastructure and ISP's are merely retailers. What an awesome system that would of been.

 

[jasonelmore]

our DSL boxes are still using T1's btw.. Windstream does not want to offer speeds faster than 3 Mbps because that would cannibalize their T1 sales. T1 3 Mbps for example is $600 a month. 6 Mbps T1 $899 a month.

Business's in the city that can get cable, drop their t1's, because they can get 20X the speed at 100X LESS the cost.

 

[John Wittenberg]

our DSL boxes are still using T1's btw.. Windstream does not want to offer speeds faster than 3 Mbps because that would cannibalize their T1 sales. T1 3 Mbps for example is $600 a month. 6 Mbps T1 $899 a month.

Business's in the city that can get cable, drop their t1's, because they can get 20X the speed at 100X LESS the cost.

A T1 (also known as DS1) is 1.544 Mbps, not 3. A DS1C is an intermediate T-carrier in between a T1 and T3, and is 3.152 Mbps - was that what you meant?

 

[jessedb]

Is it just me that's thinking that having government take over internet is a bad idea? There are issues now about privacy, what happens when government (local municipal or otherwise) starts running it? I think DMV online. Customer service from government is horrendous, because there is zero accountability. Heck, google's fiber optics would have been in my city if it weren't for the crazy regulations that made it impossible to implement it. PG&E is a monopoly, where you are forced to deal with their overpriced services, and they are constantly fighting the growth of better options, such as solar. Beware what you ask for, people. The grass is greener on the other side. The pigs all convinced the rest of the farm animals that things would have been better without the humans around...

 

[alextheblue]

I'm just really tired of only having one choice for broadband.

This doesn't change that situation. It's more FCC/Wheeler bluster. Maybe they'll fine the ISPs again and pocket some more money, but they're not opening up competition!

Is it just me that's thinking that having government take over internet is a bad idea? There are issues now about privacy, what happens when government (local municipal or otherwise) starts running it? I think DMV online. Customer service from government is horrendous, because there is zero accountability. Heck, google's fiber optics would have been in my city if it weren't for the crazy regulations that made it impossible to implement it. PG&E is a monopoly, where you are forced to deal with their overpriced services, and they are constantly fighting the growth of better options, such as solar. Beware what you ask for, people.

Bingo. The real culprit is the local monopolies. The FCC is all for forcing ISPs to treat email packets the same as gaming packets, but they're not doing anything about actual choice. Wheeler is all talk, this won't change jack until they convince local governments (gasp, the real source of the problem) to open up competition.

 

[Afess5]

I hope there is a noticeable improvement in competition, speed, coverage, and reliability of networks everywhere across the country within the next few years thanks to the FCC actually trying to get things done. The state of America's networks and the ISPs that run them is pathetic as it stands. This coming from someone who only has one option (Verizon DSL) besides Comcast as a provider and who gets throttled daily on what is already a terrible $40 3-megabit connection.

 

[Achoo22]

When I have 20%+ packet loss nights and weekends on my $70/mo 1mb/s Windstream DSL connection and I ask my ISP how bad they are going to let things get before they add more t-spans to the copper-fed backbone, they are happy to answer that they have no plans for upgrades in the foreseeable future. It's disheartening, because their immediate response - without having to check with anyone, even - should be, "DSL should never perform worse than dial-up. That's not good enough, and we're going to make it better with or without government funding." But that's not the way Windstream operates.

 

[Achoo22]

our DSL boxes are still using T1's btw.. Windstream does not want to offer speeds faster than 3 Mbps because that would cannibalize their T1 sales. T1 3 Mbps for example is $600 a month. 6 Mbps T1 $899 a month.

Business's in the city that can get cable, drop their t1's, because they can get 20X the speed at 100X LESS the cost.

As a fellow Windstream customer, I wholeheartedly agree with most of what you've said in your other posts. It's true, however, that Windstream will likely sell you a pair of T1s (they market it as "ethernet direct") for a 3Mb/s connection at about $280/mo. They'll connect even the most rural of locations with this service if you're OK w/ paying $4k / year.

Also, your claim that businesses are dropping t-spans in favor of cable isn't really accurate. A lot of companies have investments in telecom equipment - phones, telephony, voice-mail, Internet services - that is built around connecting and sharing t-spans. It takes more than saving a few dollars a month to obsolete tens of thousands of dollars worth of equipment and a very good SLA.

 

[jessedb]

When I have 20%+ packet loss nights and weekends on my $70/mo 1mb/s Windstream DSL connection and I ask my ISP how bad they are going to let things get before they add more t-spans to the copper-fed backbone, they are happy to answer that they have no plans for upgrades in the foreseeable future. It's disheartening, because their immediate response - without having to check with anyone, even - should be, "DSL should never perform worse than dial-up. That's not good enough, and we're going to make it better with or without government funding." But that's not the way Windstream operates.

Here's the problem with that. If your ISP fails to deliver, your government will take over. In order to improve your connection, it will require not paying customers. Why? Because if that were the case, the company that will be taken over would have already been able to invest in improving its infrastructure...But it can't. So it will shut down, and the service will become public (ran by your local government). Much like the public school system, everyone will have to pitch in to pay for just the setup which will then allow you -on top of the additional taxation for the service- to then purchase a service from them, if you want better than basic library speeds.

I could be wrong. How do other people see this working?

 

[Otis Presley]

our DSL boxes are still using T1's btw.. Windstream does not want to offer speeds faster than 3 Mbps because that would cannibalize their T1 sales. T1 3 Mbps for example is $600 a month. 6 Mbps T1 $899 a month.

Business's in the city that can get cable, drop their t1's, because they can get 20X the speed at 100X LESS the cost.

A T1 (also known as DS1) is 1.544 Mbps, not 3. A DS1C is an intermediate T-carrier in between a T1 and T3, and is 3.152 Mbps - was that what you meant?

our DSL boxes are still using T1's btw.. Windstream does not want to offer speeds faster than 3 Mbps because that would cannibalize their T1 sales. T1 3 Mbps for example is $600 a month. 6 Mbps T1 $899 a month.

Business's in the city that can get cable, drop their t1's, because they can get 20X the speed at 100X LESS the cost.

A T1 (also known as DS1) is 1.544 Mbps, not 3. A DS1C is an intermediate T-carrier in between a T1 and T3, and is 3.152 Mbps - was that what you meant?

our DSL boxes are still using T1's btw.. Windstream does not want to offer speeds faster than 3 Mbps because that would cannibalize their T1 sales. T1 3 Mbps for example is $600 a month. 6 Mbps T1 $899 a month.

Business's in the city that can get cable, drop their t1's, because they can get 20X the speed at 100X LESS the cost.

A T1 (also known as DS1) is 1.544 Mbps, not 3. A DS1C is an intermediate T-carrier in between a T1 and T3, and is 3.152 Mbps - was that what you meant?

our DSL boxes are still using T1's btw.. Windstream does not want to offer speeds faster than 3 Mbps because that would cannibalize their T1 sales. T1 3 Mbps for example is $600 a month. 6 Mbps T1 $899 a month.

Business's in the city that can get cable, drop their t1's, because they can get 20X the speed at 100X LESS the cost.

A T1 (also known as DS1) is 1.544 Mbps, not 3. A DS1C is an intermediate T-carrier in between a T1 and T3, and is 3.152 Mbps - was that what you meant?

He is correct. You can use T1 Multiplexors to Mux up to 8 T1's together and requires one at each end of the leased line(s), and I bet the ISP's also either sell or lease the Multiplexors to the customer.

 

[jasonelmore]

our DSL boxes are still using T1's btw.. Windstream does not want to offer speeds faster than 3 Mbps because that would cannibalize their T1 sales. T1 3 Mbps for example is $600 a month. 6 Mbps T1 $899 a month.

Business's in the city that can get cable, drop their t1's, because they can get 20X the speed at 100X LESS the cost.

As a fellow Windstream customer, I wholeheartedly agree with most of what you've said in your other posts. It's true, however, that Windstream will likely sell you a pair of T1s (they market it as "ethernet direct") for a 3Mb/s connection at about $280/mo. They'll connect even the most rural of locations with this service if you're OK w/ paying $4k / year.

Also, your claim that businesses are dropping t-spans in favor of cable isn't really accurate. A lot of companies have investments in telecom equipment - phones, telephony, voice-mail, Internet services - that is built around connecting and sharing t-spans. It takes more than saving a few dollars a month to obsolete tens of thousands of dollars worth of equipment and a very good SLA.

ok let me get this out front.. I'm a technology consultant for 10 business's in my area. You mention all those thousands of dollars of equipment they have for Tspan networks.

Let me ask you this, What if they had a good solid cable connection, and went to IP Telephony? Avaya, cisco, etc... The only equipment needed for IP Telephony is a Cisco or Avaya Switch, that goes into the broadband trunk.

Lets Compare:

Analog System: on average $1000 a month for service (6 Mbps Sym) + $2000 one time equipment setup

Digital IP system: Cable Business class Internet at $100 a month (50 mbps/20 Up for service, + $1000 one time switch purchased.

Year over Year savings by going digital: $10,800 per year savings with Much much better service and SLA.

PLUS, 10 sq foot more room in your server room because you dont need blocks.

Almost all business i service have moved over to IP Telephony (Conway Trucking, Krogers, Walmarts, IGA Foods). The only ones who haven't are the ones that can't get cable internet. And all those T1 cards, 66 blocks, are getting shipped back to Windstream.

3 Mbps via 2 T1 lines to Mux is higher than 250 a month.

Also to the guys who fear privacy concerns with goverment take over.. I

There is a very simple and cheap solution to your concerns. A VPN. you can get a VPN for $40 a year with unlimited bandwidth (and they dont keep logs) So everything is encrypted.. See private internet access.

If the government can bring us faster speeds and more choices, i can live with privacy concerns, because privacy on the net is a much easier problem to solve than getting ISP's to upgrade their equipment, backbones, and speeds.

It's gotten so bad here, i've heard talk of people saying they are gonna vandalize the windstream boxes with guns, trucks, fire, etc.... to make them replace it with newer stuff. I know it sounds crazy, but people are sick and tired paying a lot for very little..

Next time you see one of those box's and notice a ton of little dents in it, That's because someone tried to take it out with a shotgun. You wouldn't believe some of the stories i've heard from a Linesman i know.

 

[Achoo22]

Why? Because if that were the case, the company that will be taken over would have already been able to invest in improving its infrastructure...But it can't.

Can't and won't are separated by an ocean of intent. Windstream has been paying out a dollar a share like clockwork for a decade. They just got approved to spin off their maintenance interests using a tax-free real estate investment trust that will allow them to skip out on billions of dollars in taxes. They receive huge amounts of public money, then often go and lobby to have their end of the bargain changed after the fact (see CAF2 funding and their lobbying for exemption from the customers served to dollars received ratio). Add in easements, tax breaks, grants, etc., and we're talking about a private network built with public dollars. I'm 100% OK w/ government choosing to roll up its sleeves and ensure Americans have access to the Internet - just like they've done with mail, roads, highways, power, etc. ISPs have had every opportunity and they've failed.

 

[Achoo22]

Windstream will likely sell you a pair of T1s (they market it as "ethernet direct") for a 3Mb/s connection at about $280/mo. They'll connect even the most rural of locations with this service if you're OK w/ paying $4k / year.

3 Mbps via 2 T1 lines to Mux is higher than 250 a month.

Next time you see one of those box's and notice a ton of little dents in it, That's because someone tried to take it out with a shotgun. You wouldn't believe some of the stories i've heard from a Linesman i know.

The figures I quoted came from a regional Windstream sales representative just four days ago. It may not, in fact, be identical to a pair of T1s, but that is absolutely the way he explicitly described it. This, after he retracted his 3mb/s DSL offer (evidently, this is something they only offer to people not already customers - it's easier to make impossible promises this way).

WRT bad-looking equipment, you're doing telecom a favor by dismissing it as vandalism. There are plenty of twist-ties and garbage bags (or worse) in plain view on telecom equipment in my neighborhood and elsewhere in the country. Unless it's bad enough to prevent a dial-tone, telecoms don't invest in line maintenance.

 

[jasonelmore]

Why? Because if that were the case, the company that will be taken over would have already been able to invest in improving its infrastructure...But it can't.

Can't and won't are separated by an ocean of intent. Windstream has been paying out a dollar a share like clockwork for a decade. They just got approved to spin off their maintenance interests using a tax-free real estate investment trust that will allow them to skip out on billions of dollars in taxes. They receive huge amounts of public money, then often go and lobby to have their end of the bargain changed after the fact (see CAF2 funding and their lobbying for exemption from the customers served to dollars received ratio). Add in easements, tax breaks, grants, etc., and we're talking about a private network built with public dollars. I'm 100% OK w/ government choosing to roll up its sleeves and ensure Americans have access to the Internet - just like they've done with mail, roads, highways, power, etc. ISPs have had every opportunity and they've failed.

Thank you for pointing this out.. at this point, i think a investigation needs to be done on windstream. Who would we contact about these practices?

Looking at CAF2 funding which requires Windstream to provide at LEAST 10/1 Mbps to everyone, Windstream is throwing a fit and telling the FCC that they would have to Triple their network deployment and upgrades strategy. Triple of nothing is still a lot of nothing, so i dont see what there problem is.

At every turn, they ask for exemption after exemption on these public tax dollar requirements.

They wont spend any of their money at all. the only time they upgrade is if tax payers pay for it.

See this:
http://www.fiercetelecom.com/story/centurylink-windstream-say-fccs-caf-ii-timeline-too-restrictive/2014-12-15

 

[poxenium]

In Romania we had 128Kbps on cable modem for 130Lei/month (32 USD) in 2003. Today (since 2014) the same company offers 500Mbps for just 62Lei/month (15 USD).
Prices may rise slightly now, thanks to new (stupid) laws, that forbid the use of the poles of the electric company (in cities). Instead, telecom companies have to bury all cables, adding extra cost to expansion and maintenance. My city looks much nicer with no hanging wires at all, but the cost of the whole operation may not be justified for a poor country like Romania.

 

[falchard]

This has been a lot of stupidity all around. So... they are correcting a problem they created. The Internet as we know it exploded in the '90s because of actions taken at the time by the FCC in making broadband carriers not subject to Title 2 Regulations. Now in order to correct the problems of municipal governments purposely creating monopolies, they reimpose draconian title 2 regulations. Now those same monopolies created by municipal governments that are not upgrading their networks because they are now under title 2 regulations are being forced to upgrade at a loss by the very group that imposed the draconian laws on them in the first place.
I am sorry this is dumb. Its a dumb discussion and a loss for all of us.

Also this is not CPU hardware. There is a reason Moore's Law works. There is not a bureaucrat telling Intel that it needs to support ATA-133 connection because the government is using 10 year old HDDs.