Hi Mark, Thanks for the response and the attachments. I am looking forward to draft.
In the mean time could you elaborate on "the overhead of Title II and the regulatory uncertainty that comes with Title II". Thanks Mark ----- On Jul 6, 2017, at 10:41 PM, Mark Radabaugh m...@amplex.net wrote: > Steve Coran and associates are currently working on the FCC comments that are > due on the 17th. A draft should be available later this week on the FCC > committee list later this week and will have a very detailed discussion of the > subject. > > Below is the letter many of our members signed onto when the initial proposal > to > reverse Title II was released by the commission. It covers much of the > reasoning behind WISPA’s position (though the letter is not a official WISPA > filing). > > > > > It’s a good place to start from in discussing the issues. > > In regard to the ‘good’ things in Title II such as Pole Attach and Right of > Way > access that could be lost with a reversal of Title II the FCC is conducting > two > proceedings 17-84 Accelerating Wireline Broadband Deployment by Removing > Barriers to nfrastructure Investment and 17-79 “Accelerating Wrieless > Broadband > Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investement”. WISPA filed > comments supporting the commissions authority to apply it’s rules regarding > equal access regardless of regulatory classification. > > > > > Mark > > Mark Radabaugh > WISPA FCC Committee Chair > [ mailto:fcc_ch...@wispa.org | fcc_ch...@wispa.org ] > 419-261-5996 > > > > > On Jul 6, 2017, at 9:55 PM, Mark Steckel < [ mailto:m...@fix.net | > m...@fix.net ] > > wrote: > > Mark, > > Can you please explain this position, specifically the arguments against the > Title II classification? > > Thanks > Mark > > > ----- On Jul 6, 2017, at 9:41 PM, Mark Radabaugh [ mailto:m...@amplex.net | > m...@amplex.net ] wrote: > > > > I would prefer not to see members signing onto the EFF letter. The EFF > position > is contrary to the positions that WISPA has taken on Network Neutrality and > Title II both at the board and committee levels. > > WISPA continues to support the principals of network neutrality and an open > Internet but believe this can best be achieved without the overhead of Title > II > and the regulatory uncertainty that comes with Title II. > > > Mark Radabaugh > WISPA FCC Committee Chair > [ [ mailto:fcc_ch...@wispa.org | mailto:fcc_ch...@wispa.org ] | [ > mailto:fcc_ch...@wispa.org | fcc_ch...@wispa.org ] ] > 419-261-5996 > > > > > On Jul 6, 2017, at 7:52 PM, mike.lyon--- via WISP < [ [ mailto:w...@wispa.org > | > mailto:w...@wispa.org ] | > [ mailto:w...@wispa.org | w...@wispa.org ] ] > wrote: > > Forwarded on from another mailing list. > > -Mike > > > Begin forwarded message: > > > > > From: Erica Portnoy < [ [ mailto:er...@eff.org | mailto:er...@eff.org ] | [ > mailto:er...@eff.org | er...@eff.org ] ] > > Date: July 5, 2017 at 15:59:37 PDT > To: [ [ mailto:na...@nanog.org | mailto:na...@nanog.org ] | [ > mailto:na...@nanog.org | na...@nanog.org ] ] > Subject: Sign onto EFF's comment to the FCC on their net neutrality proposal > > > > > Dear colleagues, > > As many of you know, the FCC is currently engaging in the process of > repealing its network neutrality rules and eliminating its Title II > authority over broadband providers. > > I'm writing you today to ask you to sign on to a letter that EFF has > prepared for filing, which explains several key engineering concepts > that are vital to understanding how the Internet actually operates given > that the FCC's own findings misinterpret how the Internet works. > > The letter stays away from legal arguments, and instead focuses on > technical statements on the design and operation of the Internet. It is > meant to establish a factual record for the FCC about the Internet and > it is necessary because its initial findings in its Notice of Proposed > Rulemaking > < [ [ https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-344614A1.pdf | > https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-344614A1.pdf ] | > [ https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-344614A1.pdf | > https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-344614A1.pdf ] ] > are > just wrong. For one, the FCC thinks that broadband Internet providers > are the ones providing end users with the services of the entire > Internet, from search engines to online newspapers to language > translation tools. > > /*If you're willing to sign on and help, please email > [ [ mailto:engineers-nn-comme...@eff.org | > mailto:engineers-nn-comme...@eff.org > ] | [ mailto:engineers-nn-comme...@eff.org | engineers-nn-comme...@eff.org ] ] > (off-list) by Friday, July 14 */and I will > be happy to share a copy of the letter for you to review before you > agree to sign on. > > The more signatures we can get, the more likely the FCC is to take > notice as well as the courts should they move forward. All it takes is > an email. Please help us make sure the FCC gets the facts from an > engineer's standpoint. > > Thank you for your support, > > Erica Portnoy > Staff Technologist > Electronic Frontier Foundation > _______________________________________________ > WISP mailing list > [ [ mailto:w...@wispa.org | mailto:w...@wispa.org ] | [ mailto:w...@wispa.org > | > w...@wispa.org ] ] > [ http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wisp | > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wisp ] > > > _______________________________________________ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > _______________________________________________ > Wireless mailing list > [ mailto:Wireless@wispa.org | Wireless@wispa.org ] > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > _______________________________________________ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless _______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
