Consequently,
it will likely repurpose the mission of the FCC’s Connect America Fund (CAF)
program created to subsidize infrastructure construction in high cost areas to instead
help defray the cost of deploying fiber to the premise (FTTP) infrastructure in
these areas. At the same time, the FCC could also realize that significantly greater funding will be needed to do the job than the $9 billion the CAF has budgeted for its second phase covering the period 2014-2019.
The
FCC this year recognized that its current eligibility criterion for CAF
subsidies is potentially outdated. It’s targeted to high cost areas where
premises are not served by landline connections providing at least 4 Mbs down
and 1 Mbs up. The FCC issued a notice
of inquiry in August to take testimony as to whether that standard should
be increased and modified to include latency as well as speed.
In prepared
remarks delivered this week, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler suggested 25 Mbs
should be considered the new minimum. He went on to observe that might also be
too low and only a quarter of the throughput that Americans presently expect given
their growing appetites for high definition streaming video and multiple
connected devices in their homes and small businesses.
“Today, a majority of American homes have access to 100 Mbs,”
Wheeler continued. “It is that kind of bandwidth that we should be pointing to
as we move further into the 21st century. And while it’s good that a majority
of American homes have access to 100 Mbs, it is not acceptable that more than
40 percent do not.”
Relative to high cost areas, Wheeler noted the FCC “will continue to establish
requirements for our universal service programs, but beyond that, consumers are
establishing their own expectations.” That recognition of end user needs represents
a significant departure from existing policy where telecommunications providers
and governments tell consumers in these areas what they should expect instead
of the reverse. It’s also an implicit recognition that there should be a single
standard and not a separate and lesser standard for high cost areas of the nation.
Which makes sense given that core content providers and other services are
tailored for a single standard of quality at the network edge.
Noting
FTTP deployments in several metro areas of the U.S., Wheeler impliedly recognized
FTTP infrastructure is replacing the speed-based “broadband” metal wire paradigm
of the legacy telephone and cable companies. That model utilizes “bandwidth by
the bucket,” speed-based pricing tiers based on the assumption that metal wire
infrastructure has limited carrying capacity and that service must accordingly be
rationed and priced based on demand.
Wheeler
recognized with FTTP, that pricing model that irks many consumers faces obsolescence.
“Once fiber is in place,
its beauty is that throughput increases are largely a matter of upgrading the
electronics at both ends, something that costs much less than laying new
connections,” Wheeler said.
Wheeler also acknowledged that
mobile wireless services cannot substitute for FTTP. “While LTE and LTE-A offer
new potential, consumers have yet to see how these technologies will be used to
offer fixed wireless service,” he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment