Broadband Buzz

The telecom blogosphere is rife with reaction to the details of the $7.2 billion in broadband stimulus funding.

(Acronym reminders: NOFA – Notice of Funds Availability; NTIA – National Telecommunications and Information Administration; RUS – Rural Utilities Service)

Here are some snippets.

Vince Vittore, Yankee Group: “Probably the most disappointing of the multiple definitions offered up by this NOFA. Broadband under this interpretation is “advertised speeds” of at least 768 kbps down and at least 200 kbps upstream. Both NTIA and RUS missed the opportunity to push the boundaries here.”

Harold Feld, WetMachine: “Biggest Policy Screw Up The introduction of “managed services.” In theory, allows services like telemedicine to get dedicated capacity without resorting to “tiering” that is anathema to network neutrality. In reality, is great new way for incumbents to privilege their own VOIP and video services over traffic of others.

Best Issue They Got Right That Everyone Else Thinks They got Wrong: Speed. I am in the minority in thinking they played this right. There are too many good projects potentially excluded by allowing only speeds of 45 mbps or better (what the House originally proposed). I dislike relying on advertised speed rather than actual speed, but that problem needs to be addressed globally because trying to enforce it here is too damn difficult.

Blandin Foundation, Blandin on Broadband on the grant-writing process: “I have actually written grants for the NTIA. They are arduous. If you plan to take on the challenge, I wish you luck. If you do I hope that you will consider your project valuable enough to deploy regardless of what funding decisions are made.”

Craig Settles, Fighting the Next Good Fight on incumbents vs. public utilities: “If the NOFA gives bonus points to proposals that exceed NTIA/RUS’ minimum definitions of broadband, there’ll be happier hearts in the Heartland. Given how many communities have shown that they and public utilities can build faster networks at cheaper subscription rates than incumbents, bonus points give these types of networks a boost in the grant game.”

Carl Weinschenk, ITBusinessEdge: “In short, the philosophical debates are ending and the actual awards are set to start. ... The money in the package – $7.2 billion – is a lot for you and me, but not a lot when it is positioned compared to total telecom spending. The big deal, then, is not breadth of the expenditure itself, but the fact that it is being applied to bringing broadband to rural areas. The post suggests that the real goal is to do thing such as bring home-based employment, modern industry and health care to these areas.”