3Mbps Down and 1Mbps Up Are Inadequate Bandwidth Goals

So apparently there's some level of consensus getting entrenched among DC policy circles that setting the residential broadband bar at 3Mbps down and 1Mbps up is adequate.

Well I'm here today to refute that thinking, to show that this isn't enough bandwidth to support today's applications let alone tomorrow's, and to lay out the ramifications of what happens if we set inadequate goals for broadband.

To start with, let's take a look at some of the apps that already exist today that need more than 3Mbps down and 1Mbps up:

OnLive - This distributed gaming service allows users to play their favorite console games without having to own the console. Instead the game is hosted on remote servers and delivered to TV sets through a thin-client set-top box. In addition to gaming, this technology can be used to deliver educational simulations. If a user wants to be able to experience these games in HD, they need 5Mbps of downstream bandwidth.

PBS - PBS is digitizing all of its archives of video content, much of it in HD, and making it available to the public and in particular to schools across the country, enabling students to do things like watch reports from the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer about historical events from the last thirty years. If a student wants to be able to access an HD video from PBS, they need 8Mbps of downstream bandwidth.

Livestream - This site has an app that enables robust webcasting for a whole range of purposes, whether it be a rock concert, government meeting, public forum, or other event. The professional version of the app can deliver high quality full-screen video. If a webcaster wants to be able to stream video of this quality, they need 1.7Mbps of upstream bandwidth.

Home monitoring - There are a host of solutions offering to help secure homes with video cameras that can be viewed over the Internet. While most tout their ability to operate using little bandwidth, the reality is that means they're delivering lower quality video. These cameras often can deliver higher quality video if sufficient bandwidth is available, plus we need to factor in that a single home can have multiple cameras running. If a homeowner wants to have four cameras streaming low to high quality video at the same time, they need anywhere from 1-100Mbps of upstream bandwidth. (The 100Mbps is for MPEG HD video.)

These are just a sampling of the kinds of apps available today that require more than 3Mbps down and 1Mbps up.

Even more important is to recognize that the real demand for bandwidth doesn't come from any single app but rather from the simultaneous use of multiple apps. Between desktops, laptops, netbooks, game consoles, and media players, many if not most households already have multiple devices ready to make use of broadband.

But what's the point of having multiple computers in you can't use them at the same time? If little Johny's in the living room playing OnLive, does that mean little Susie shouldn't be able to watch a video from PBS in her room because there isn't enough bandwidth available? Should Mom have to wait until the kids go to bed to talk with friends and family on a videocall? And how much bandwidth is Dad left with then?

If a household has three computers but can only get 3Mbps of downstream bandwidth, then that means if everyone's online at the same time they can only get 1Mbps each. That's the bare minimum that's needed to do basic web surfing on today's Internet effectively and efficiently.

We need to understand what setting the broadband bar too low means in practical terms. By saying you're "served" if you get 3Mbps down and 1Mbps up then you're basically relegating everyone at the bottom to be unable to use the top tier of today's apps let alone be able to benefit from the next generation of tomorrow's apps. It also means discouraging simultaneous usage of even the basic apps of today.

Put another way, imagine if we had the same attitude towards electricity. It'd mean not being able to make toast while you're drying your hair. Or it'd mean only being able to run one of your home's multiple computers at a time. When thought of this way it's an absurd proposition, and yet that's what we're on the verge of doing with how we define who's fully served by broadband.

We also have to consider the ramifications of setting the bar too low from the perspective of the decisions that government must make on what broadband to subsidize.

First off, we risk investing taxpayer dollars in inadequate technologies, in deploying broadband that's already outdated before it's even deployed.

Secondly, if we rush to get the unconnected served by these lesser technologies we may put rural areas in the position of permanently being second-class digital citizens, both in terms of equipping them with technology that has inadequate capacity as well as preventing them from being eligible for getting future government funding to build the networks they need.

One of my biggest concerns in all of this is that we're not being technology neutral in setting the broadband bar. I'm worried that we're allowing what's "realistic" to infect decisions that should be first and foremost about what we need. If we allow the capabilities of today's technologies to be the sole determinant of where we set our broadband goals, then how are we going to get to a tomorrow where bandwidth's much more widely available, much more capacious, and much less expensive?

I'm not saying we can ignore the constraints of different technologies, or that we should put aside any technologies that can't deliver next-generation speeds, but instead that if we let their limitations dictate our actions then we're going to be holding back the entire country.

We have to set the broadband bar based on the kinds of capacity that we need for people to be able to benefit from all the apps that the Internet makes possible.

That's why I think we should start the conversation about who's fully served by broadband today at 10Mbps down and work our way up from there. At 10Mbps you can do everything that today's Internet has to offer. And you can support the simultaneous usage of multiple apps. 10Mbps is also a speed that most upgraded cable and DSL modems are already delivering today, plus it's a speed that the next generation of wireless should be able to deliver in the next year or so, if we are to believe their claims.

At the end of the day, we can't afford to set meek definitions. We can't allow ourselves to set broadband benchmarks that are more appropriate for the 20th century than the 21st. We can't ignore the apps that can already make use of bandwidth greater than 3Mbps down and 1Mbps. And we'd be remiss if we didn't acknowledge the fact that there's a wave of new apps on the horizon that simply won't work over broadband that's that slow.

So let's stop kidding around and start setting the broadband bar where it needs to be, establishing definitions based on what users need today, and then work diligently towards bringing this kind of capacity of all Americans.