[1st-mile-nm] FCC 5G Ruling

[Doug Orr]

Freakin' awesome. He didn't hilight the unsuitability of mimo for standard
network protocols, but otherwise...outstanding!

Can't wait to read this:
===
One does not have to conclude, as Fred Goldstein does, that 5G is “a
spectrum eating monster that destroys competition” to argue that 5G is
being way oversold by carriers as a means of pushing for policy goodies.
===



On Wed, Oct 17, 2018, 1:58 PM Christopher Mitchell <christopher at ilsr.org>
wrote:

> I think Harold Feld's reality check on 5G is worth remembering here:
>
>
> http://www.wetmachine.com/tales-of-the-sausage-factory/so-what-the-heck-does-5g-actually-do-and-is-it-worth-what-the-carriers-are-demanding/
>
>
> Christopher Mitchell
> Director, Community Broadband Networks
> Institute for Local Self-Reliance
>
> MuniNetworks.org <http://www.muninetworks.org/>
> @communitynets
> 612-545-5185
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 2:55 PM Doug Orr <doug.orr at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Oh, and I don't think I forwarded this recent one from Ars where Verizon
>> admits it is intending to use 5g to compete against existing cable companies
>> <https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/10/hate-your-comcast-broadband-verizon-might-sell-you-5g-home-internet/>.
>> No autonomous vehicles, no IOT, no telemedicine. Video entertainment. For
>> those already served by cable.
>>
>> Here's a fun article on 5g
>> <https://www.marketplace.org/2018/10/11/tech/local-national-and-global-fight-over-5g-infrastructure>
>> from Marketplace with the money quote:* "But all this raises the
>> question: If 5G is such a big deal, economically and in terms of security,
>> should the federal government pay for it?" *Great question, Marketplace!
>> I smell bonuses all around for the Verizon marketing department! Wag the
>> Dog, wireless operator edition.
>>
>>   Doug
>>
>> p.s. Of course Comcast also doesn't like net neutrality (Ars yesterday
>> <https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/10/comcast-complains-it-will-make-less-money-under-calif-net-neutrality-law/>),
>> it will make less money! This whole charade boils down to two things: (a)
>> saturated cable market, and (b) saturated mobile market. Oh, plus cord
>> cutting and the inability of mobile operators to serve video at scale.
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 7:31 PM Doug Orr <doug.orr at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> And... 2 years old, but an article more or less what I've been saying:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/chickens-and-eggs-problem-5g-use-case
>>>
>>> Filling a much needed gap...
>>>
>>> I'll have to look up the reference but other analysts are showing up
>>> with the surprising notion that this is all about challenging cable for
>>> consumer video. (And, my personal twist, getting the public to pay for the
>>> buildout via scary stories about China and global competitiveness.)
>>>
>>> I agree that the morass of local regulations are a total impediment to
>>> uniform buildouts. But the overreach isn't a great precedent and I don't
>>> for a second believe that the carriers are going to keep the aesthetic or
>>> safety or consumer needs of local communities as significant
>>> considerations. Or the underserved.
>>>
>>> On the other hand, living in a relatively well to do community, I'd be
>>> pretty happy with $70/mo 300Mbps service.
>>>
>>>   Doug
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 6:55 PM Richard Lowenberg <rl at 1st-mile.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> There are many articles and points of view on yesterday’s FCC ruling on
>>>> next gen. 5G infrastructure.
>>>> Below are links to the FCC ruling, and to a municipalities-oriented
>>>> article from MuniNetworks.
>>>>
>>>> First, a very good page of 5G resources from Next Century Cities.
>>>>
>>>> https://nextcenturycities.org/next-century-cities-5g-resources/
>>>>
>>>> ---------
>>>>
>>>> FCC Facilitates Deployment Of Wireless Infrastructure For 5G
>>>> Connectivity
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-streamlines-deployment-next-generation-wireless-infrastructure
>>>>
>>>> ---------
>>>>
>>>> FCC Stomps on Local Control in Latest Small Cell Decision
>>>>
>>>> Thu, September 27, 2018 | Posted by Lisa Gonzalez
>>>>
>>>> https://muninetworks.org/content/fcc-stomps-local-control-latest-small-cell-decision
>>>>
>>>> On September 26th, Republican FCC Commissioners adopted an Order that
>>>> usurps local control and, in keeping with this administration’s prior
>>>> policy decisions, strengthens the power of the largest companies,
>>>> obtaining nothing in return.
>>>>
>>>> At issue are local governments’ ability to determine the amount of fees
>>>> to charge mobile carriers that want to place 5G equipment in
>>>> rights-of-way. In addition to establishing fees, the Order sets strict
>>>> timelines in which cities and towns must respond to carrier
>>>> applications. The FCC decision eliminates local communities’ ability to
>>>> negotiate in order to protect their own rights-of-way and the poles,
>>>> traffic lights, and other potential structures in them.
>>>>
>>>> To back up their decision to adopt the new policy, the Republican
>>>> controlled FCC relied on the incorrect claims that application and
>>>> attachment fees in larger communities are so excessive that they create
>>>> a burden which prevents carriers from investing in rural communities.
>>>>
>>>> (snip)
>>>>
>>>> The FCC does not require mobile carriers to commit to expanded coverage
>>>> in smaller communities within the Order.
>>>>
>>>> (snip)
>>>>
>>>> In addition to the limits on fees, the Order interferes in the public
>>>> safety and aesthetic requirements communities can require for small
>>>> cells, imposing a reasonableness requirement. The Order sheds little
>>>> light on the “reasonable” standard. For towns that highly value
>>>> aesthetic architectural qualities — as in the case of historic downtown
>>>> districts — the FCC waves away the unique needs of individual
>>>> communities.
>>>>
>>>> (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
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/1st-mile-nm/attachments/20181017/a89fdbef/attachment.html>