[1st-mile-nm] IEEE: 5G is in Danger of Being Oversold

Fri Mar 2 13:31:08 PST 2018

A couple of notes in response to comments long scrolled by:

Watching from a relatively close distance (but not having intimate
knowledge):

Google Fiber probably wasn't hobbled by lack of big buck returns, exactly.
I think they were naive about the target market -- everyone wants triple
play and not having content is a big liability for an internet provider
(witness ATT going after Time Warner and Verizon spinning off FIOS in a
bunch of markets). Old people don't want to cut cords. So, I believe that
sales were harder than expected.

One of their expected wins was using new trenching technology that could
quickly lay fiber in shallow trenches. I haven't ever validated this but I
think there may have been a little California bias there and later, once
they started going places that froze, being able to get up on poles became
a priority. And that's a mess.

As noted, just getting gig speeds is of limited use for most people. GF was
started before Cloud computing had really taken off in a big way. Since
it's taken off, running a little datacenter in your home doesn't make much
sense. Owning a PC barely makes sense for most people at this point,
really. Which reinforces the whole "entertainment drives everything" model.
Industrial parks, hospitals, and tech neighborhoods will probably be the
only active consumers of high speed networking in a few years. (My version
of "the world will only ever need 5 computers" statement :)

GF was intended to change the world. Most of this world is focused on
watching TV (or using services on it phone). So, I'm guessing that there's
a combination of the world being harder to change than was expected and the
world changing out from under the original expectations...

IOT might change network demand...so far seems like a solution in search of
a problem. Or crazy mobile bandwidth needs coming from self driving cars or
what not. But those also still seem like wealthy world problems that aren't
going to induce changes places that are already not a valuable enough
business prospect to warrant getting good cell phone coverage.

Having shared fiber backbones seems like the only way to get better
competition in denser areas (I like that honeycomb stuff!), and public
mandate and subsidy seems like the only way to get better service in sparse
areas. I'm sure the postal service knows a thing or two about this sort of
thing...

  Doug

On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 11:27 AM Steve Ross <editorsteve at gmail.com> wrote:

> There is a bit of a misconception on public broadband as well. Of the 1100
> systems in our Fiberville database, only about 200 (serving about 230
> communities) are publicly owned. The history of almost all of them is that
> national carriers refused to make even minimal improvements in service,
> and/or there were no LECs willing or able to partner. Most of those
> communities would have simply continued to die off. That also comes with a
> cost.
>
> Public-private partnerships and service by tier3 LECs (often operating as
> CLECs in the fiber footprint) are the norm in rural areas.
>
> We see a lot of nasty consequences of this patchwork. One first-rate rural
> operator in New England will not be allowed to bid in CAF2 because on paper
> it looks over-extended to the FCC. Yet it is the logical low-cost operator
> for the CBGs at issue, and without this company, those CBGs probably will
> not be served at all. I suspect many other situations like this will soon
> come to light.
>
> We've seen many rural LECs that, given small loans, could bring their
> services up to speed... and lose out to more heavily subsidized
> (politically favored) new entrants.
>
> We see 20 states that don't even allow municipalities to threaten to build
> their own systems ... and rural population loss in those states is four
> times higher than in the "non-restriction" states even though the
> restriction states overall have faster population growth even as their
> rural populations dwindle. This requires more investment in urban
> infrastructure! It is not cost-free or economically efficient!
>
> Also, car-to-car data communication in the looming driverless era MUST be
> thru 5G microcells in all but the most rural areas. Where there are few
> cars and trucks on the road, the communication can indeed be car-to-car.
> The data traffic for driverless vehicles will be double the peak video
> traffic. The networks we build now must take those things into account as
> they evolve.
>
> Government even made a hash of the net neutrality thing. A few sentences
> to patch the telecom act would have protected small carriers against
> peering-point extortion, without subjecting them all to Title II. Same goes
> for pole attachments (and the issue was made more complex as Title II at
> least regulated them to some extent).
>
> And BTW, this is not a liberal-conservative thing. Bernie made a mess of
> VT broadband expansion by pushing a wireless provider in the ARRA period
> over a fiber provider run by a good guy he didn't like. It is a patchwork
> thing.
>
>
>
> Steve Ross
> Editor-at-Large, Broadband Communities Magazine (www.bbcmag.com)
> 201-456-5933 <(201)%20456-5933> mobile
> 707-WOW-SSR3 (707-969-7773 <(707)%20969-7773>) Google Voice
> editorsteve (Facebook, LinkedIn)
> editorsteve1 (Twitter)
> steve at bbcmag.com
> editorsteve at gmail.com
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 12:54 PM, John Badal <JBadal at sacred-wind.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Excellent – good point.
>>
>>
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* David Breecker [dba] [mailto:david at breeckerassociates.com]
>> *Sent:* Friday, March 2, 2018 10:51 AM
>> *To:* Jane Coffin <coffin at isoc.org>
>> *Cc:* John Badal <JBadal at sacred-wind.com>; Steve Ross <
>> editorsteve at gmail.com>; Christopher Mitchell <christopher at ilsr.org>;
>> rl at 1st-mile.org; 1st-Mile-NM <1st-mile-nm at mailman.dcn.org>;
>> masha at bbcmag.com
>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [1st-mile-nm] IEEE: 5G is in Danger of Being Oversold
>>
>>
>>
>> I think Jane makes a good point.  In our work analyzing “energy poverty”
>> in Africa and Asia, we see that one of the first things people use
>> electricity for is television.  But that’s a stepping stone to developing
>> energy infrastructure capable of supporting “productive use” in industry,
>> agriculture, etc.
>>
>> db
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mar 2, 2018, at 10:46 AM, Jane Coffin <coffin at isoc.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi All –
>>
>>
>>
>> May I play devil’s advocate.  I am not from NM (but love it there).  I
>> come from a rural coastal town in Maine.  Local uptake can often start out
>> with entertainment, and shift once the network is better and/or the
>> community realizes the value-add.  Note that we see this all over the
>> world, and that entertainment content has been driving network
>> infrastructure development in many parts of Sub-Saharan Africa, South East
>> Asia, LAC, etc.  I take your point on subsidization, but think there is a
>> good reason for public network infrastructure dev.  Why not subsidize the
>> preliminary FTTH deployments with a long-range plan for community pay-back
>> or just see it as worthwhile socio-economic dev?  We build and maintain
>> roads at the State and local level…
>>
>> 2/ With you.  We helped a project in rural South Africa purchase a mast
>> (cost was $2,600.00).  They were quoted a monthly rental of $2,600.00 on an
>> existing mast.  With the mast purchase, they expanded coverage and were
>> able to shift to a hybrid not-for-profit/profit WISP.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Jane
>>
>>
>>
>> Internet Society | www.internetsociety.org
>>
>> Skype:  janercoffin
>>
>> Mobile/WhatsApp:  +1.202.247.8429 <(202)%20247-8429>
>>
>> *From: *1st-mile-nm <1st-mile-nm-bounces at mailman.dcn.org> on behalf of
>> John Badal <JBadal at sacred-wind.com>
>> *Date: *Friday, March 2, 2018 at 12:33 PM
>> *To: *Steve Ross <editorsteve at gmail.com>, Christopher Mitchell <
>> christopher at ilsr.org>
>> *Cc: *Richard Lowenberg <rl at 1st-mile.org>, 1st-Mile-NM <
>> 1st-mile-nm at mailman.dcn.org>, "masha at bbcmag.com" <masha at bbcmag.com>
>> *Subject: *Re: [1st-mile-nm] IEEE: 5G is in Danger of Being Oversold
>>
>>
>>
>> Steve & Christopher,
>>
>>
>>
>> This has been a good discussion.  I agree that anyone daring or committed
>> enough to provide broadband in rural areas deserves praise.  My primary
>> concern about FTTH in high cost areas is actually twofold: 1) the added
>> investment of new FTTH networks, especially using public grant money, is a
>> wasteful use of public funds in light of the fact that the vast majority of
>> bandwidth is being used for entertainment, not for academic or job
>> enhancing information.  A business case for unsubsidized FTTH systems in
>> rural areas is hard to find.  And 2) where the owner of the only utility
>> poles in town decides to provide broadband services in competition with
>> those that are attached to its poles, abuse of monopoly power is not only
>> possible, but is actually in practice. I would love to see more
>> partnerships – private and public/private – for the purpose of expanding
>> rural broadband.  What we’ve experienced instead is an arrogant abuse of
>> power.
>>
>>
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Steve Ross [mailto:editorsteve at gmail.com <editorsteve at gmail.com>]
>>
>> *Sent:* Thursday, March 1, 2018 3:42 PM
>> *To:* Christopher Mitchell <christopher at ilsr.org>
>> *Cc:* John Badal <JBadal at sacred-wind.com>; 1st-Mile-NM <
>> 1st-mile-nm at mailman.dcn.org>; rl at 1st-mile.org; masha at bbcmag.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [1st-mile-nm] IEEE: 5G is in Danger of Being Oversold
>>
>>
>>
>> BTW, one person's cross-subsidy is another's avoiding stranded costs.
>> Rural counties are losing on average more than 1/4% of their population a
>> year. A coop or tier3 LEC sees survival as a better alternative. I have
>> shown that a quarter to half of all rural job loss is due to lack of
>> broadband access. It is by far the BIGGEST source of rural job loss.
>>
>>
>>
>> I really have a lot of respect and admiration for any broadband
>> deployers, including the national carriers. But when they can't make a
>> business case for serving an area they should $%^&% get out of the way of
>> others who think they might be able to. Instead they buy politicians.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Steve Ross
>> Editor-at-Large, Broadband Communities Magazine (www.bbcmag.com)
>> 201-456-5933 <(201)%20456-5933> mobile
>> 707-WOW-SSR3 (707-969-7773 <(707)%20969-7773>) Google Voice
>> editorsteve (Facebook, LinkedIn)
>> editorsteve1 (Twitter)
>> steve at bbcmag.com
>> editorsteve at gmail.com
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 5:34 PM, Steve Ross <editorsteve at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Chris is absolutely right, but making it happen is not as easy. Few
>> electric coops have been willing to take the risk -- and Chris and I and
>> others do a lot of missionary work. More than half of all new MDUs are not
>> FTTH even though fiber is CHEAPER in that case.
>>
>>
>>
>> We can generally show that fiber can work at about 8 premises per mile
>> taking the service... even less if pole attachment rights are not held
>> hostage. But we don't know how revenue will flow from driverless vehicles
>> to network deployers yet, and Washington is not paying any attention.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Steve Ross
>> Editor-at-Large, Broadband Communities Magazine (www.bbcmag.com)
>> 201-456-5933 <(201)%20456-5933> mobile
>> 707-WOW-SSR3 (707-969-7773 <(707)%20969-7773>) Google Voice
>> editorsteve (Facebook, LinkedIn)
>> editorsteve1 (Twitter)
>> steve at bbcmag.com
>> editorsteve at gmail.com
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 4:50 PM, Christopher Mitchell <
>> christopher at ilsr.org> wrote:
>>
>> Any place that has electricity, especially those served by co-ops could
>> get fiber ultimately. It may take a well-designed grant program, but it can
>> be done far more efficiently than any of the universal service programs in
>> operation today.
>>
>>
>>
>> Google decided to focus on dominating AI and driverless cars and such
>> rather than deployment. There is no evidence that they were losing money,
>> rather anyone that understands how such businesses make decisions should be
>> aware that while there are fiber models that are profitable, they may not
>> offer the return that some in Google were expecting. That's fine. the small
>> ISPs I see building fiber steadily year after year are profitable. They
>> aren't going to buy NFL stadium sponsorships, but they are providing a
>> service that is desperately desired and they are making a good return.
>> Google will focus on dominating the future of AI and driverless cars and
>> who knows what. They have a different calculus.
>>
>>
>>
>> The vast majority of North Dakota has FTTH. I believe it is the 4th most
>> sparsely populated state in the union. But it is very easy to simply ignore
>> the evidence and pretend that it just can't be done.  We have documented
>> where rural fiber is available, and it is far more than most realize.
>>
>> https://muninetworks.org/content/rural-cooperatives-page
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Christopher Mitchell
>> Director, Community Broadband Networks
>> Institute for Local Self-Reliance
>>
>>
>> MuniNetworks.org <http://www.muninetworks.org/>
>>
>> @communitynets
>>
>> 612-545-5185 <(612)%20545-5185>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 7:36 AM, John Badal <JBadal at sacred-wind.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Business case?  Even the well heeled Google has rethought its FTTH plans
>> in urban areas far more densely populated than NM’s rural areas.  The
>> sizzle got ahead of the steak.
>>
>>
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Christopher Mitchell [mailto:christopher at ilsr.org]
>> *Sent:* Thursday, March 1, 2018 8:32 AM
>> *To:* John Badal <JBadal at sacred-wind.com>
>> *Cc:* masha at bbcmag.com; Doug Orr <doug.orr at gmail.com>; rl at 1st-mile.org;
>> 1st-Mile-NM <1st-mile-nm at mailman.dcn.org>
>>
>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [1st-mile-nm] IEEE: 5G is in Danger of Being Oversold
>>
>>
>>
>> The point of a gig is not to use all of it anymore than the point of a
>> highway is to experiment with the maximum number of cars you can put on it.
>>
>>
>>
>> The point of a gig is abundance - sure 452 Mbps would probably do that
>> too, but a gig resonates and is a standard.
>>
>>
>>
>> It would be difficult for me to use all of the electricity that can flow
>> into my house - but we overprovision certain kinds of infrastructure when
>> that can unlock additional value.
>>
>>
>>
>> And finally, if we assume that communities will still need high quality
>> Internet access in 30 years, everyone I talk to that does both fiber and
>> wireless says that while fiber is more expensive on the front end, the much
>> lower operating and future upgrade costs ultimately make it MORE cost
>> effective than wireless over a period of decades.
>>
>>
>>
>> There are many legitimate reasons for people in rural areas to "cry" for
>> better connectivity even if they have the same number of gigabit
>> applications as we do cars that are 5 lanes wide.
>>
>>
>> Christopher Mitchell
>> Director, Community Broadband Networks
>> Institute for Local Self-Reliance
>>
>>
>> MuniNetworks.org <http://www.muninetworks.org/>
>>
>> @communitynets
>>
>> 612-545-5185 <(612)%20545-5185>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 4:48 PM, John Badal <JBadal at sacred-wind.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> 5G has the same sexy appeal to the uniformed as fiber to the home.  Rural
>> communities are crying for both, afraid they’d fall deeper into the digital
>> divide, but unaware that the vast majority of consumers could never use
>> gigabit speeds outside of recreating in the home Star Trek-like virtual
>> reality holodecks.    What makes much more sense to me is for Albuquerque
>> to build 20-lane highways and 10-lane boulevards throughout the city to
>> eliminate any congestion during rush hours, along with robotic car removal
>> systems to dispense with cars damaged in an accident.
>>
>>
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* 1st-mile-nm [mailto:1st-mile-nm-bounces at mailman.dcn.org] *On
>> Behalf Of *Masha Zager
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 28, 2018 5:30 PM
>> *To:* 'Doug Orr' <doug.orr at gmail.com>; rl at 1st-mile.org
>> *Cc:* '1st-Mile-NM' <1st-mile-nm at mailman.dcn.org>
>>
>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [1st-mile-nm] IEEE: 5G is in Danger of Being Oversold
>>
>>
>>
>> It’s not. See this:
>> http://www.bbcmag.com/2017mags/Mar_Apr/BBC_Mar17_5GNotAnswer.pdf
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *Masha Zager *Editor-in-Chief, Broadband Communities
>> masha at bbcmag.com
>> 518-943-0374 <(518)%20943-0374>
>> www.bbcmag.com
>> www.twitter.com/bbcmag
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* 1st-mile-nm [mailto:1st-mile-nm-bounces at mailman.dcn.org
>> <1st-mile-nm-bounces at mailman.dcn.org>] *On Behalf Of *Doug Orr
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 28, 2018 7:16 PM
>> *To:* rl at 1st-mile.org
>> *Cc:* 1st-Mile-NM
>> *Subject:* Re: [1st-mile-nm] IEEE: 5G is in Danger of Being Oversold
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm unclear as to why 5g fixed is going to be cheaper to deploy than
>> fiber. If the state charges $250/antenna... that buys a lot of hardwired
>> installer time. And the antennas need backhaul, presumably, so lighting up
>> a neighborhood in anticipation of new customer uptake... that seems a lot
>> like upgrading infrastructure that would be needed if the idea is to offer
>> faster aggregate speeds.
>>
>>
>>
>> What's the model here?
>>
>>
>>
>> Does anyone know of real world benchmarks for 5G applications (e.g.,
>> netflix)?
>>
>>
>>
>>   Doug
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 1:47 PM Richard Lowenberg <rl at 1st-mile.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Following on recent postings.     RL
>>
>> -------
>>
>> Commercial service is years away, but even then, 5G won’t fulfill all of
>> its promises
>>
>>
>> https://spectrum.ieee.org/telecom/internet/5g-is-in-danger-of-being-oversold
>>
>> By Stacey Higginbotham
>>
>> Just like graphene or Elon Musk’s startups, 5G has become a technology
>> savior. Proponents tout the poorly defined wireless technology as the
>> path to virtual reality, telemedicine, and self-⁠driving cars.
>>
>> But 5G is not a technology—it’s a buzzword unleashed by marketing
>> departments. As early as 2012, Broadcom was using it to sell Wi-Fi. In
>> reality, 5G is a term that telecommunications investors and executives
>> sling around as the solution to high infrastructure costs, the need for
>> more bandwidth, and a desire to boost margins.
>>
>> The unifying component behind 5G is faster wireless broadband service. A
>> more stringent—and practical—definition is the use of high-frequency
>> millimeter waves (in addition to the microwaves that 4G LTE relies on
>> today) to deliver over-the-air broadband to phones or homes.
>>
>> If you’re talking about phones, 5G is still years away. And new services
>> aren’t really on the menu. Just listen to the heads of several
>> telecommunications companies, who have begun to tamp down investors’
>> expectations around what 5G can deliver.
>>
>> (snip)
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>> Richard Lowenberg, Executive Director
>> 1st-Mile Institute     505-603-5200 <(505)%20603-5200>
>> Box 8001, Santa Fe, NM 87504,
>> rl at 1st-mile.org     www.1st-mile.org
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> 1st-mile-nm mailing list
>> 1st-mile-nm at mailman.dcn.org
>> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/1st-mile-nm
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 1st-mile-nm mailing list
>> 1st-mile-nm at mailman.dcn.org
>> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/1st-mile-nm
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 1st-mile-nm mailing list
>> 1st-mile-nm at mailman.dcn.org
>> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/1st-mile-nm
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 1st-mile-nm mailing list
>> 1st-mile-nm at mailman.dcn.org
>> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/1st-mile-nm
>>
>>
>>
>> David Breecker,
>>
>> President
>>
>>
>>
>> * David Breecker Associates*
>>
>> *www.breeckerassociates.com <http://www.breeckerassociates.com>*
>>
>>
>>
>> Santa Fe Office: 505-690-2335 <(505)%20690-2335>
>>
>> Abiquiu Office:   505-685-4891 <(505)%20685-4891>
>>
>> Skype:  dbreecker
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 1st-mile-nm mailing list
> 1st-mile-nm at mailman.dcn.org
> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/1st-mile-nm
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/1st-mile-nm/attachments/20180302/0a973b34/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 7371 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/1st-mile-nm/attachments/20180302/0a973b34/attachment.png>