Starlink has posted an update on satellite 34343, which it lost communication with on Sunday. The SpaceX-owned global internet firm says that the satellite “experienced an anomaly” while it was in LEO at around 560 km above the Earth. It also used wording to play down any concerns about risk to the thousands of other man-made objects at a similar altitude. However, orbital intelligence agency LeoLabs is less coy and describes Sunday’s incident as a “fragment creation event.”

Rapid Unplanned Disassembly

Following the anomaly on Sunday, Starlink’s official line (as above) was to play down any risks to the International Space Station, Monday’s Transporter-16 mission, or the upcoming launch of NASA’s Artemis II mission. It doesn’t go as far as admitting there is any post-rapid unplanned disassembly debris, but does say that it will “continue to monitor the satellite along with any trackable debris and coordinate with NASA and the U.S. Space Force.”

Naturally, SpaceX and Starlink teams are working to determine the cause of the anomaly and implement any changes necessary to prevent this from happening again. Sadly, the analysis of whatever happened towards the end of last year, when another Starlink satellite tumbled from space after an “anomaly,” didn’t stop this latest debris‑generation incident.

LeoLabs provides some further analysis regarding the fate of satellite 34343. Its radar system “immediately detected tens of objects in the vicinity of the satellite after the event.” Moreover, the independent space‑situational‑awareness (SSA) data provider reckons that the not-an-explosion was “likely caused by an internal energetic source rather than a collision with space debris” or another satellite.

On potential risks to other satellites and missions from the now-ex-satellite, LeoLabs doesn’t highlight any specific dangers. It reckons the fragments from the anomaly will probably de-orbit within a few weeks.

This was indeed a similar Starlink satellite incident to that which occurred last December, think the independent analysts. It goes on to recommend greater clarity to ensure safety in the operating environment.

SpaceX IPO

SpaceX is warming up Wall Street for what could be the largest IPO of all time. It reportedly wants to raise around $75 billion in its offer, which equates to a $1.75 trillion valuation.

It would be better for Elon Musk’s firm if fewer rapid unplanned disassembly incidents happened between now and the IPO, tipped to be this summer.

However, with FCC approval and plans for thousands more Starlink LEO satellites and even talk of a 1 million satellite Orbital Data Center System from SpaceX coming to light, one might assume that any unsolved anomalies become more frequent.

Starlink’s official social media channels are boasting about an incredible performance update on the way to mobile customers. A Tweet on Sunday claimed that the next-gen V2 satellites being launched by SpaceX would deliver “100x the data density of the current V1 generation satellites.” That’s the kind of upgrade multiplier anyone can appreciate.

The announcement will affect the Starlink Mobile service, which was previously branded as ‘Direct to Cell’ until recently. Whatever the moniker, this service provides satellite-to-phone communications – data, voice, messaging – across 32 countries spanning six continents. When enough V2 satellites get into LEO position, we’d say these “cellphone towers in space” are going to boost the service quality significantly.

The Starlink Direct to Cell, now Starlink Mobile, service only began to roll out commercially last July. However, compared to traditional mobile service providers, its only real draw is the inherent ‘connectivity where you need it’ and emergency coverage where space-based comms beat those on Earth.

100x, 20x, what the x?

Starlink Mobile’s current service, using V1 satellites, is currently only good for ‘light data’ and texts, according to a number of mobile-centric sites. Thus, the upgrade to V2 is going to be significant.

Putting some numbers to the claims, we see that the V2 upgrade is touted to deliver ‘5G from space,’ which is also compatible with 100s of existing LTE phones. Don’t get the 100x and 20x claims seen across Starlink social media and web pages mixed up. The V2 satellites upgrade is said to provide “100x the data density” compared to the current V1 satellites, with “around 20x the throughput capability” per satellite.

Starlink also expects terrestrial operator partners, like T-Mobile in the U.S., to provide services which “seamlessly transition between satellite and terrestrial networks without interruption or degradation in service.” Previous Starlink announcements point to a goal of peak speeds of 150 Mbps per user becoming realistic with the rollout of the V2 satellites.

SpaceX is currently planning up to 15,000 new satellites to power its ‘5G from space’ goal. Starship’s progress at putting the larger, more capable V2 satellites into space will impact the availability window of the enhanced service, but some V2 Mini satellites are already being launched to help bridge the gap.

Thus, early 2027 looks most likely to be when the initial V2 service will be tested in the early rollout stage.

Distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks have become an unfortunate routine part of the modern internet, with botnets of compromised devices spreading ever wider. Unfortunately, the scale and frequency of those attacks have also been rising. The Aisuru-Kimwolf botnet recently smashed its previous record, hitting 31.4 Tb/s in December. To put it into perspective, that's bandwidth enough to stream nearly 2.2 million Netflix 4K movies at once.

An attack of that dimension is enough to easily knock many internet service providers offline, if not entire countries. In a blog post (via BleepingComputer), Cloudflare calls it an "unprecedented bombardment" targeting its customers, dashboard, and infrastructure. The company notes that these attacks are performed in a "hit-and-run" fashion, with gigantic bursts of traffic hitting everywhere at once, lasting from a few seconds to minutes.

Cloudflare also notes that the potential attack size grew by 7x in a single year, thanks to the growth of the Aisuru and Kimwolf botnets. Aisuru is considered the "parent" botnet and comprises small, internet-connected devices such as IoT equipment, DVRs, and even virtual machines on hosting services. Aisuru's devices reportedly live primarily in the U.S. The botnet grows by gaining access to new devices via default credentials (e.g., username "admin", password "admin") and outdated firmware that contains known vulnerabilities.

As for Kimwolf, it can be regarded as a variant of Aisuru, but explicitly targeted at Android-based devices: mobile phones with outdated software or malicious apps, smart TVs, and set-top boxes, among others. Cloudflare says most of Kimwolf's two million minions live in Brazil, India, and Saudi Arabia.

The operators of the botnets have an interesting economy that they operate within. They sell access to the botnet to other cybercriminals, sometimes at surprisingly low prices, for tens of thousands of dollars. The renters then use the botnet to spread their malware, spam, or whatever nefarious activity has been scheduled for the day. The received funds help expand the botnet further.

Cloudflare does note that the Aisuru-Kimwolf network is "parasitic" and that its owners rent out "residential proxies", a term describing a set of devices in a residential setting, adding a layer of anonymity for attackers to hide behind.

On the technical side, UDP carpet-bombing is apparently the most commonly used technique, and the one employed for the 31.4 Tb last December. That entails spreading out the attack surface so wide that it makes it hard for the defenders to block it. Cloudflare adds that the combined botnet has also been targeting gaming services with hyper-volumetric HTTP attacks, sending gigantic amounts of legitimate-looking requests to online services that ultimately overwhelm the target's network or computing capacity.

Amid widespread anti-government protests, Iran has shut down all methods of internet access within its borders, reports IranWire. It has done the same previously, during earlier, milder episodes of revolt. However, this time the authorities seem to have also been successful in disrupting the tens of thousands of Starlink receivers thought to be inside the country. On Sunday, U.S. President Donald Trump said that he would speak to Elon Musk, the owner of SpaceX and Starlink, about restoring internet access to the Iranian public.

You're likely well aware of the severity of the clashes between protesters and the Iranian authorities. The general worldwide news media are filling the airwaves and front pages with reports about the uprising, and shocking numbers of casualties and arrests over the last four days.

During previous notable times of public unrest, Iran has cut public communications like internet services, mobile services, and even phone services. The commonly accepted reason for such blocks is to prevent easy communication and organizing by protesters. The same actions serve to limit the flow of images and videos to the outside world. Thus, the internet blockade helps the Iranian government shape the narrative, or at least gives it a better chance of doing so.

Starlink disruption likely relies on acquired Chinese or Russian tech

IW highlights something quite different during this latest spate of organized government dissent. On Friday, it noted that “even satellite internet services like Starlink sharply dropped.” Internet researcher Amir Rashidi told IranWire that, this time, “military-grade jamming signals were detected targeting Starlink satellites.” This directed action by the Iranian authorities meant that up to 80% of Starlink traffic was disrupted. Rashidi characterized this jamming effort as unprecedented yet highly sophisticated, and suspects Chinese or Russian tech has been acquired for this purpose, though doesn’t rule out something domestically developed.

Internal to Iran, government-aligned internet sites and channels reportedly started to come back online, thought to be through a progressive white-listing system. The first beneficiaries were “government-aligned Telegram channels, state media accounts, and some university networks,” notes IranWire. The last time there was a crackdown on the internet and digital communications it lasted 12 days. Perhaps this could be longer.

President Trump will talk to Elon Musk about Iran’s internet blockade

U.S. government officials have been quite vocal in condemning the reported killing of more than 500 protesters and the 10,000+ that have been imprisoned over the last four days.

On Sunday, U.S. President Donald Trump told reporters he has plans to talk with Elon Musk about restoring internet services in Iran. Trump was answering a question from a reporter about restoring internet services, like Starlink, for the Iranian public. “He's very good at that kind of thing, he's got a very good company,” the President assured concerned reporters.

Starlink satellite 35956 suffered from a serious anomaly on December 17. It is described as largely intact, but is currently “tumbling, and will reenter the Earth’s atmosphere and fully demise within weeks,” says the official Starlink X account. Geospatial intelligence partner Vantor shared what is likely the last clear image of the ill-fated satellite after SpaceX urgently requested visual intelligence.

Space anomaly damages satellite 35956

We don’t have a clear description of what exactly happened with satellite 35956. Starlink just describes the problem as an “anomaly” that occurred on December 17. Engineers working for Starlink are said to be “rapidly working to root cause and mitigate the source of the anomaly.” No insight into this investigation is ready yet, but apparently, some software changes are already being deployed that “increases protections against this type of event.”

It was observed that satellite 35956 lost communications at an altitude of 418km. “The anomaly led to venting of the propulsion tank, a rapid decay in semi-major axis by about 4 km, and the release of a small number of trackable low relative velocity objects,” says Starlink.

Currently, the “tumbling” satellite remains largely intact, according to the satellite communications firm. It is estimated that it will “reenter the Earth’s atmosphere and fully demise within weeks.” Importantly, neither the larger part of the satellite nor its “small number of trackable low relative velocity objects” are thought to pose any threat to humans on Earth. It is also noted that its trajectory will place it below the International Space Station, so those folks don’t need to worry either.

Partner SpaceX urgently requested visual intelligence, and Vantor quickly responded by capturing a “12 cm non-Earth image that provided visual intelligence about the condition of the spacecraft.”

Vantor explains that its WorldView-3 satellite was 241 km away from the Starlink satellite 35956 when it captured this image of the “tumbling” spacecraft. The image reproduced in the LinkedIn post isn’t the sharpest picture of a satellite we have seen, but it was enough to “provide confirmation that the satellite was mostly intact, enabling SpaceX to assess potential damage,” says Vantor.

Starlink is currently the largest satellite operator by quite some margin. There are approximately 12,000 active satellites now in LEO space, with over 8,000 operated by Starlink. Tens of thousands more are planned by Starlink and global rivals, and it isn’t surprising that there are issues, accidents, and near-misses from time to time.

There was a notably “dangerously close” approach between a newly launched Chinese satellite and Starlink-6079 a few days ago. VP of SpaceX’s Starlink Engineering, Michael Nicolls, disclosed that a Chinese satellite came within 200m (219 yards) of an orbiting Starlink device. That’s an extremely close call with catastrophe, with Starlink LEO satellites known to travel at speeds exceeding 17,400mph. Nicholls called for improved coordination between space agencies.

On December 9, a rocket launched from the Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center took nine satellites into orbit. One of the Long March 2D rocket payload satellites was then observed to pass within 200m of the Starlink-6079 satellite (NORAD ID 56120) in low-Earth orbit (LEO) at 560km (348 miles) altitude.

Nicolls emphasized that near-misses like this will continue to happen. “Most of the risk of operating in space comes from the lack of coordination between satellite operators,” claimed the Starlink VP. “This needs to change.” Indeed, change is required to prevent the near-miss news, bad as it is, from taking a tragic twist.

There are approximately 12,000 active satellites now in LEO space, with probably 8,000 operated by Starlink. Starlink satellites travel at incredible speeds, exceeding 17,400mph, so a collision could easily destroy anything involved.

Moreover, the resulting high-velocity debris fragments, in their thousands, could cause far more damage, with some commenters on Nicolls’ post raising the specter of the Kessler Syndrome. That would be a chain reaction of collisions, exponentially increasing debris, and potentially making LEO space unusable for generations to come.

Science can help prevent such an unfortunate outcome, but global coordination is lacking, so a policy push seems to be required. China doesn’t notify or share trajectories to voluntary platforms such as the U.S. Space-Track.org or the UN’s International Telecommunications Union. Hopefully, it won’t need to see a massive space incident to prompt it into some sensible preventative collaborative action.

If you think LEO space is crowded now...

Meanwhile, plans for greater numbers of LEO satellites are forging ahead, cranking up the chance/danger of a collision. Starlink plans to expand its constellation to around 42,000 for global internet coverage. Amazon Leo has plans for over 3,200 satellites. In China, Guowang talks about targeting 13,000 satellites, and Shanghai Spacecom has mentioned a target of 14,000. Over in Europe, the Eutelsat OneWeb constellation numbers 648 satellites, with Gen2 mega-scale rollout still in consultation. And there are more…

Ukraine’s Defence Express news has highlighted the continuing issue of Russian drones with access to Starlink satellite internet guidance. Despite assurances from U.S. Pentagon officials from over a year ago, drones from the Russian aggressors are still flying into Ukrainian airspace to strike their targets – with Starlink hardware clearly strapped to them, claims the source (machine translation).

The new report, on what seems to be an ongoing issue, has been sparked by one of the first sightings of a crashed/disabled ‘Molniya’ (Lightning) strike drone. This is shown in pictures originally shared by Serhiy ‘Flash’ Beskrestnov, a Ukrainian electronic warfare and communications expert, who is active on Telegram social media.

In the images, a Starlink Mini is clearly perched atop the grounded drone. ‘Flash’ doesn’t insist this drone actually came from Russia, but the overall design and internal components (like the battery) suggest it was very likely a Russian device.

Perhaps even more serious than this latest spotting is the Ukraine Defense Express assertion that Starlink usage by Russian drones hasn’t been totally stopped since it was first documented in 2024.

Later that same year, the US Defense Department’s assistant secretary for space policy, John Plumb, told Bloomberg that the Russian military’s unauthorized use of SpaceX’s Starlink internet had been blunted. An IMI report says that Plumb wasn’t specific about the measures put in place to deny Russian access, but that it was a “good solution” for Starlink and Ukraine.

Russian Shahed-136 drones have previously been seen kitted out with Starlink gear. The Ukraine Defense Express says that Russia’s recently unveiled RD-8 mother drone is Starlink controllable, too. Evidence of this wasn’t reproduced within the source story.

If the Ukraine Defense Express is correct, though, it is unsettling to know that the incessant Russian drone onslaught hitting Ukraine’s military, civilians, and key infrastructure could be weakened with just a little more political will.

T-Mobile is making serious inroads in the home broadband market with its own-branded 5G Home Internet service and, more recently, the launch of Mint Mobile MINTernet. Now, the company is refreshing its 5G Home Internet service with new tiers and hardware upgrades for new customers.

• New 5G Home Internet tiers and Wi-Fi 7 at T-Mobile

Previously, T-Mobile offered a single tier of service, with unlimited 5G data at $50 per month with AutoPay. T-Mobile is now calling this plan Rely, and it comes with what T-Mobile calls a “high-performance gateway,” which we’re assuming is still the Sercomm TMO-G4AR or equivalent hardware. The company says this plan offers “fast speeds,” but it actually imposes artificial speed limits.

There are also two new tiers: Amplified and All-In. Amplified costs $60 per month and includes a new Wi-Fi 7 gateway (it’s not specified whether it’s a dual- or tri-band setup). T-Mobile says that this gateway gives you access to its fastest 5G internet speeds (30 percent faster median speeds versus Rely).

The All-In plan also includes the Wi-Fi 7 gateway and access to the fastest internet speeds, but it adds Hulu and Paramount Plus subscriptions for $70 per month. The All-In plan also has another added benefit: the TechEdge Suite. According to T-Mobile, this includes a Wi-Fi 7 mesh extender (to increase wireless coverage in your home), 24/7 tech support, an internet 5G gateway hardware upgrade after three years, and an “advanced cyber security” package.

T-Mobile says typical download speeds for the Amplified and All-In plans are 134 to 415 Mbps, while uploads average 12 to 55 Mbps.

All plans include a 5-year price lock guarantee, unlimited data, and no annual contracts. In addition, if you already have a T-Mobile voice line, you can knock $15 off the aforementioned monthly plans (meaning Rely would then cost $35/month).

Of course, you need to read the fine print when it comes to 5G-based services, and T-Mobile Home Internet is no exception. The wireless carrier notes that even though it’s selling “unlimited” 5G plans, you could be subject to data prioritization, particularly for “Internet Heavy Data Users” who exceed 1.2TB during a billing cycle.

Customers can access the new plans starting on November 13, and qualified new customers can get up to a $300 prepaid virtual debit card for making the switch.

The German Koblenz Regional Court has banned 1&1 from referring to its fiber-to-the-curb (FTTC) service as fiber-optic DSL, because it still uses copper cables for the final stage of its connections, sometimes for up to a mile. According to the Federation of German Consumer Organizations [machine translated], users who visited the ISP’s website and checked connection availability would get a ‘1&1 fiber optic DSL connection available’ check mark, even if the entire line isn’t composed entirely of fiber optic cables.

However, the reality is that the fiber optic cables end at the distribution box, which is usually installed in the street for residential neighborhoods or at the service room of a multi-unit structure building. From there, the company uses copper lines to run directly into the homes of its subscribers and pairs it with vectoring connection technology that reduces interference between multiple connections that terminate at the box. This boosts the DSL speed up to 100mbps, giving subscribers the impression that they’re paying for and getting fiber optic internet, which is not the case. "However, the plans listed directly below the check results with the label "1&1 Fiber Optic DSL" were not fiber optic plans. In fact, they offered conventional DSL plans," the body explains.

The monthly rates on these connections do reflect DSL pricing, not fiber optic connection costs. But the fact that its branding and presentation have ‘fiber optic’ all over, customers who aren’t familiar with terminology and pricing can be easily confused. Because of this, the German consumer group sued the company, with its chairperson, Ramona Pop, saying that “Anyone who apparently promises fiber optics but can only deliver DSL is deceiving customers.”

German courts have agreed with the consumer group, saying that the company’s use of ‘fiber optics’ was misleading. After all, when customers hear fiber optics, they often assume that they’re getting fiber optics all the way into their homes. And while the fine print reportedly contains information saying that part of the line uses a copper connection, the judiciary said that it wasn’t enough to avoid tricking customers into thinking that the offered connection is full fiber.

Unfortunately, while the consumer group may have won this round, the order isn’t enforceable yet. The company has appealed the ruling, so we will have to wait for the decision of a higher court before 1&1 will be forced to change its advertising.

An amateur satellite tracker accidentally discovered a subset of classified military SpaceX satellites that are transmitting data on the wrong radio frequency. According to NPR, Canadian Scott Tilley found the mysterious signal while working on his hobby of monitoring satellites at home, when he inadvertently set his system to scan for radio frequencies that usually didn’t have traffic. To his surprise, he saw a signal emanating from space in the 2025-2110 MHz band, which satellites use to receive data from ground stations.

It is somewhat unusual, as this should’ve been empty, so Tilley recorded the transmissions for a few minutes. “It was just a clumsy move at the keyboard. I was resetting some stuff and then all of a sudden I’m looking at the wrong antenna, the wrong band,” Tilley told NPR. “[It] should have nothing there. I got a hold of my mouse and hit the record button and let it record for a few minutes.” He then compared his data to a satellite tracking database maintained by other amateurs and enthusiasts, which allowed him to identify the offending satellites. “Bang, up came an unusual identification that I wasn’t expecting at all. Starshield.”

Starshield is SpaceX’s classified satellite constellation, used primarily by the U.S. military for Earth observation and communications. It currently has over 200 satellites as part of the network, operated by the National Reconnaissance Office. Tilley says that he’s detected the unusual signal from 170 Starshield satellites, all within the same frequency range.

The 2025 to 2110 MHz spectrum is typically quiet because it’s reserved by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) for satellite uplinks, which are usually conducted in short bursts, rather than the reverse. Because of this, SpaceX’s use of this frequency for sending data back to Earth can potentially cause interference with other nearby satellites — whether commercial, scientific, or even military — causing them to become unresponsive to commands. “SpaceX is smart and savvy,” Tilley said to the publication, and it’s likely that the company just went to “do it and ask forgiveness later.”

It’s unlikely that SpaceX’s circumvention of global standards has caused a significant disruption, as no other satellite operator has complained so far. Still, Tilley said that he published his findings on the open-access research repository Zenodo.org so that different operators are aware of this potential interference.

Several cell providers have hopped on the 5G home internet service bandwagon, with T-Mobile, AT&T, and Verizon offering service in select areas across the United States. Now, a new player is entering the fray: Mint Mobile. Mint Mobile is a subsidiary of T-Mobile, which is a known quantity in this segment, and its new service is called MINTernet.

Unsurprisingly, MINTernet operates on T-Mobile's nationwide wireless network, offering unlimited 5G service. Now, whenever unlimited data is mentioned in the 5G realm, you should always look at the fine print. In this case, Mint Mobile says that once you consume over 1TB of data within your billing cycle, "network speeds vary and may be reduced." This is similar to the T-Mobile Home Internet policy, where the restriction is implemented after exceeding the 1.2TB threshold.

Regarding the speeds you can expect, the "Broadband Facts" label for MINTernet indicates that typical download speeds will range from 133 to 415 Mbps, while uploads should reach a maximum of around 55 Mbps. As for latency, expect to see 16 to 28 ms in most situations.

MINTernet costs $40 per month if you opt for the introductory 3-month offer, and this price is contingent upon paying the entire cost upfront ($120). However, if you already have a Mint phone plan (or intend to add one at the time of signup), your monthly cost drops to $30 ($90 upfront).

A 6-month plan is also offered at $45/month ($270 upfront) or $35/month ($210 upfront) with a phone plan. Finally, there's a 12-month plan that drops back down to $40/month ($480 upfront) or $30/month ($360) with a qualifying phone plan. All customers will get a free 5G gateway (modem/Wi-Fi router) with their order, along with a 14-day money-back guarantee.

Considering that MINTernet runs on T-Mobile's 5G network, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that my first run-in with its 5G home internet service ended in disaster in 2022. However, I revisited the service in 2024 with much better results, averaging over 600 Mbps for downloads and over 50 Mbps for uploads. T-Mobile Home Internet costs $50/month with autopay, so if you tick the right boxes, MINTernet will save you up to $20/month.

SpaceX revealed its new V3 Starlink satellites, which it says will provide gigabit connectivity to users and enable 60 Tera-bits-per-second downlink capacity on the Starlink network. The company says each launch will add 20 times the capacity of its current V2 mini offering.

The above animation was first shared by SpaceX on Monday, during a live stream of the 11^th flight test of SpaceX’s reusable Starship vehicle, notes PCMag. And now we can see why SpaceX has started to use its more powerful Starship vehicle, in preference over the existing Falcon 9 rocket, which was used for prior generation satellite deployments..

As well as their obviously significantly larger physical form, a V3 satellite is estimated to weigh in at as much as 2,000kg (4,409 pounds). Compare that to the existing V2 Mini satellites, which are less than 600kg, and the V1 satellites at around 300kg.

We’ve established that these V3 Starlink satellites are big and heavy, so what are the network performance gains? SpaceX’s latest social media bulletin regarding the performance of these units is quite brief. However, it highlights that V3 will “bring gigabit connectivity to users and are designed to add 60 Tera-bits-per-second of downlink capacity to the Starlink network.”

Thankfully, there were some prior news releases and filings, which flesh out V3 details. An important one, for example, is that for every upcoming Starship launch, it will be possible to put 60 V3 satellites into orbit. “That's more than 20 times the capacity added with every V2 Mini launch on Falcon 9,” says SpaceX. Moreover, each new V3 satellite boasts 1,000 Gbps of download and 200 Gbps of upload bandwidth, making them better than 10x faster than V2 models.

With the V3 satellites deploying, probably early next year, we might begin to see SpaceX CEO Elon Musk’s original vision of a global broadband service materialize. The new satellites’ next-gen architecture should deliver the increased coverage and speed to iron out connectivity and capacity wrinkles some users are experiencing with the service, as it stands. However, it has previously been indicated that Starlink users will need new hardware to benefit from the best speeds V3 satellites will enable.

Hopefully, SpaceX is still designing even its latest, biggest, and heaviest satellites to completely burn up upon reentry, at the end of their working lives. With V3, there’s a lot more mass to be combusted on the way down to Earth, and as more satellites head into orbit, space debris — and that debris falling back to earth — remains a growing concern.

A few weeks ago, we warned that a ‘routine evaluation’ of its business had triggered AOL’s decision to discontinue its 34-years established dial-up internet service. The fateful day came and went this week. As we bid September farewell and moved into the 10^th month of 2025, AOL’s dial-up service stopped picking up the line for its last remaining screechy modem-toting customers.

Not only was AOL’s dial-up Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN)-based internet connectivity service shut down mid-week, the AOL Dialer software and AOL Shield browser were also laid to rest.

Originally known as America Online, AOL became many a fresh World Wide Web surfer’s first home. It was the biggest internet service provider (ISP) in the US in the late 1990s to early 2000s. Stats show that, at its height, the service enjoyed over 35 million subscribers. Of course, we know it pivoted to providing broadband, along with all its rivals, as we progressed into the new information age. With the rapid pace of technological change, and thirst for greater bandwidth and always-on connectivity, by the time we entered the 2010s AOL’s dial-up offering had plummeted in popularity so far as to become a niche service.

It is worth repeating the officially stated reasons behind the closure of the service. Back in August, AOL said that it “routinely evaluates its products and services and has decided to discontinue Dial-up Internet.” We don’t know how many customers were hanging onto this particular service for the internet needs. However, the latest U.S. census figures we could find indicate that about a quarter of a million users were dial-up hold-outs. Most of these folks may have limited choices due to their rural or remote homesteads.

Alternative ISPs and dial-up modem uses

Afghanistan’s fiber networks are being disconnected by the governing Taliban. The reason for the ban on fast internet connectivity is to “prevent immorality,” according to a Taliban spokesman, as quoted by Sky News. As many as 10 out of 34 provinces in the country have already been affected, according to sources.

Dial-up connectivity stalwart AOL has set a date for cutting off the remainder of its old-tech internet holdouts. AOL, now a Yahoo! property, will end its dial-up internet service, the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN)-based internet connectivity service, on September 30, 2025. Its dial-up service has been publicly available for 34 years, and has provided many an internet surfer's first taste of the WWW. AOL will also end its AOL Dialer software and AOL Shield browser. RIP slowband.

The notice was delivered with more of a whimper than a screech, unbefitting of the end of an era. AOL wrote an inauspicious 100-word article on its help portal to inform the masses about this schism in connectivity, framing the decision as the result of a routine evaluation.

“AOL routinely evaluates its products and services and has decided to discontinue Dial-up Internet,” wrote the iconic internet service provider (ISP). “This service will no longer be available in AOL plans.”

The help message then went on to explain that it won’t just be the dial-up modem service that will be terminated on Sept 30. Also being administered their last rights at the end of September are the AOL Dialer software and AOL Shield browser. The former will be useless without the associated service, of course, but the latter was optimized for older OSes and slow connections, and could still be useful for some.

Who will miss the screeching modem?

In large countries, with regions where traditional PSTN phone lines are still available, but newer internet connectivity options may not be, some might argue that dial-up is still viable. Also, sometimes it is advertised as a backup connectivity option. In the U.S., for instance, the latest government census data indicates approximately a quarter of a million remaining dial-up holdouts.

One of the natural successors for internet connectivity in hard-to-reach places is satellite, with around eight million subscribers in the U.S. Meanwhile, ten times more people use the current favorite, and price/performance internet connectivity sweet spot, delivered by the DLS/cable/fiber optic trinity.

We know some countries/regions have quite a range of competitive 5G offerings for home internet access, but that isn’t the U.S. at this time.

Did you suffer with PSTN PTSD?

You’ve likely heard of T-Mobile Home Internet by now. We’ve discussed the ups and downs of the 5G-based cellular broadband service on these pages several times over the years. After some initial headaches during the rollout of the broadband service, T-Mobile Home Internet has, for the most part, become a viable alternative to traditional cable internet providers, with over 7 million customers. However, chances are that you haven’t heard of T-Mobile Fiber Home Internet. Until recently, the internet service was only available in a few dozen markets across the United States. T-Mobile is making some big moves today with the announcement that T-Mobile Fiber is moving past its trial phase to an official launch in the U.S.

So, what sparked the official rollout of T-Mobile Fiber? In April, T-Mobile announced that it had acquired Lumos, a fiber-to-the-home internet provider serving 475,000 households. That acquisition provided T-Mobile with the additional capacity to expand T-Mobile Fiber, which is now accessible to over 500,000 households in the U.S.

T-Mobile Fiber is available in three tiers, starting with Fiber 500. Fiber 500, as you would expect, provides symmetrical data speeds of up to 500 Mbps for $75/month with Autopay. Fiber 1 Gig boosts data speeds to 1 Gbps for $90/month, and Fiber 2 Gig gives you 2 Gbps speeds for $105/month. The Fiber 500 plan comes with a basic Wi-Fi 6 router, while the Fiber 1 Gig and 2 Gig plans come standard with “whole home” Wi-Fi 6 mesh hardware. T-Mobile customers who also have a qualifying voice line can get $15 off the above pricing each month with Autopay, and all plans come with a 5-year price guarantee.

Amazon CEO Andy Jassy just confirmed that the company’s Project Kuiper has begun deploying satellites in low-earth orbit. “Important moment for @ProjectKuiper as we just confirmed our first 27 production satellites are operating as expected in low Earth orbit,” Jassy said on his status on X (formerly Twitter). “While this is the first step in a much longer journey to launch the rest of our low Earth orbit constellation, it represents an incredible amount of invention and hard work. Am really proud of the collective team.”

Elon Musk's Starlink is facing growing competition from China’s state-backed satellite internet initiatives and Amazon’s Project Kuiper, intensifying the race for dominance in space-based connectivity. As China rapidly develops its low-Earth orbit (LEO) satellite network, concerns are emerging over potential data security risks.

Shanghai-based SpaceSail, one of China’s leading satellite internet companies, is aggressively expanding into international markets. According to a report by Reuters, the company has signed agreements to provide services in Brazil and Kazakhstan, with discussions underway in more than 30 other countries. SpaceSail aims to deploy 648 LEO satellites this year and expand to a total of 15,000 by 2030, potentially rivaling Starlink’s global reach. It is claimed that the company has state-backed funding from Shanghai Spacecom Satellite Technology (SSST).

Amazon's Project Kuiper, led by Jeff Bezos, is also entering the satellite broadband industry, with a projected investment of $16 billion. The project is expected to spend up to $3.5 billion on satellite launches by 2025, aiming to provide widespread internet access and integrate with Amazon Web Services (AWS). However, Project Kuiper faces an uphill battle against Starlink, which already has a strong market presence and brand recognition.

As of February 2025, Starlink, operated by SpaceX, has established a significant global presence. It offers satellite internet services in over 100 countries, including the United States, the United Kingdom, and various nations across Europe, South America, and Asia.

In contrast, Amazon's Project Kuiper is still in the developmental phase. The initiative plans to deploy its first production satellites in early 2025, to commence broadband services later in the year. While specific service regions have not been officially announced, Amazon aims to deliver high-speed, low-latency broadband to unserved and underserved communities worldwide.

China’s rapid satellite expansion raises concerns about potential data security risks, echoing past controversies. Western governments previously flagged Huawei’s telecom infrastructure as a potential cybersecurity threat, leading to bans and restrictions in multiple countries. Similarly, TikTok has faced scrutiny over alleged data-sharing practices with the Chinese government.

Unlike commercial competitors, Chinese internet providers operate under strict government oversight, which could enable Beijing to exert control over global communications infrastructure. This also raises questions about whether data transmitted via Chinese satellites could be accessed or monitored by authorities, potentially compromising user privacy.

As competition in satellite internet heats up, data security and geopolitical risks will become central issues in the industry. The expansion of Chinese satellite services could lead to further scrutiny from Western governments, especially as more nations adopt LEO-based connectivity solutions.

Starlink just launched an AU$15 (about US$9) monthly plan in Australia for existing users. This is a massive discount from the AU$139 (about US$86) monthly fee that users from the Land Down Under pay, but it comes with a stingy 5GB data cap. If you need more data, you could purchase Roam data at AU$3 (about US$1.86) per GB, which allows you to use your Starlink practically anywhere. According to PCMag, this news comes just days after the company started offering a US$50 monthly plan that comes with 50GB of Roam data.

Unfortunately, this plan isn’t available to new users, so you either must have an existing account or have previously subscribed to Starlink to take advantage. Starlink’s email to its customers requires you to log into your Starlink account and choose the “Backup” plan option under “Activate Service” for a preexisting Starlink dish. So, you won’t see this option listed under Starlink’s Service Plans when you’re applying for a new line.

Although affordable, many commenters have criticized the 5GB limit as too low, with some saying that almost all phone plans come with that amount of data, or more. Furthermore, the add-on rate for Roam data is just as expensive compared to other data plans. The average person might use, say, 30GB a month, which means if you’re a family of four, you’ll pay AU$360 (about US$225) for 120GB of data. But if you use a lot of data (like streaming a lot of 4K videos), then you’ll spend a lot more.

However, others say that this isn’t for the average user — instead, it’s only supposed to serve as a backup for areas that only have one or two wired service providers and no phone service at all. So, in case you lose internet connection for a short while, you could remain online. And if the outage lasts longer than expected, you could purchase additional data as needed.

Given that Starlink plans aren’t under contract, users could just purchase the needed hardware and then sign up for the service when they need to. This means there are potentially thousands (if not millions) of Starlink hardware in the wild gathering dust and not giving the company cash flow. By enticing users who do not have reliable backup internet to purchase a cheap monthly subscription, the company could earn money from these Starlink dishes that are otherwise unused.

According to the Swedish paper Expressen (machine translated), two fiber optic cables operated by Global Connect between Sweden and Finland were damaged Monday morning. The Swedish Post and Telecom Authority (PTS) said that the cable breaks occurred on land in Finland. The damage affected about a hundred businesses and six thousand homes.

Swedish authorities initially suspected foul play, with the Minister of Civil Defense saying sabotage was suspected. However, Finnish police denied this, saying there was no ongoing criminal investigation regarding the cable break.

Telecom operator Elisa later announced that one of the cables was accidentally by an excavator at a construction site, with Global Connect confirming it. However, the other damaged cable is still being investigated at the time of writing, and we don’t have any news yet on what caused its disruption.

Damage to internet cables isn’t usually big news, especially if it didn’t have a significant global impact. However, two fiber optic lines were disrupted between Sweden and Finland just weeks after two undersea internet cables had been cut in the Baltic Sea. A Chinese ship is suspected of deliberately dragging its anchor while traversing the area, thus cutting the BCS East-West Interlink Cable connecting Sweden and Lithuania and the C-Lion1 traveling between Finland and Germany. NATO authorities are still investigating the previous event. Still, this news highlighted the vulnerability of communications cables and how simultaneous damage to multiple cables, deliberate or otherwise, could throw the global internet into chaos.

The Baltic Sea incident has prompted many to focus on undersea cables, like the US FCC, updating its undersea cable regulations, and Meta, planning to build its undersea cable network. However, cables are much easier to damage on land, by accident or otherwise, as they’re much more accessible. For example, in 2011, a 75-year-old Georgian woman once knocked out the internet for Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia after she cut a fiber optic cable while scavenging for copper. Another recent incident was when saboteurs knocked out several fiber optic cables in France, affecting over 10,000 subscribers over six departments (the French equivalent of counties).

The internet cables between Sweden and Finland were cut by accident. Although it is still inconvenient to the affected subscribers and would have to be repaired by their owners, it's not another suspected escalation of the ongoing tensions between Russia and NATO.

According to NATO intelligence officials, some of the services we take for granted in our daily lives could be easily disrupted if Russia chose to do so. Analysts believe Russia already has plans in place and is developing further strategies to disrupt Internet and Global Positioning System (GPS) networks worldwide.

Analysts believe Russia is mapping the undersea fiber optic cables that transfer data between continents. Officials speculate that the nation may have already carried out attacks on telecommunications and GPS networks on a smaller scale. NATO thinks Russia may have plans in place to target those networks in retribution for the West’s support for Ukraine in its war against Russia.

The deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, Dmitry Medvedev, laid bare the warning in June. Following an attack on Nord Stream 2, a gas pipeline between Russia and Germany, Medvedev issued a warning to NATO and other Western countries. Believing the West was behind the attack that blew up the pipeline, Medvedev said nothing was holding Russia back from “destroying the ocean floor cable communications of our enemies.”

In 2023, damage to a cable running under the Baltic Sea disrupted telecommunications between Sweden and Estonia. Russia strongly denied any involvement, but Sweden’s civil defense minister said the damage resulted from “external force or tampering.”

More recently, Russia was accused of an attack on GPS navigation systems that grounded flights from Helsinki, Finland, to Tartu, Estonia, for a month in April. Melanie Garson, an international security expert at University College London, told Business Insider that Russia has been developing this “cheap and effective way of malicious gray-zone interference” without resulting in open warfare for quite some time.

In a world increasingly dependent on the internet, data flows between continents are reliant on undersea telecommunications cables. A network of fiber optic cables spanning around 745,000 miles transmits 95% of international data. These cables have been viewed as potential military targets for decades, and both the U.S. and the former USSR kept watch over them during the Cold War.

Since Russia has land-based internet connectivity to Europe and Central Asia, it is much less reliant on undersea cables than the rest of the world. It makes recent Russian naval and intelligence activities worrisome. According to a Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) report, Russia’s spy ships and submarines have been loitering near the undersea cable routes.

In response, NATO countries are stepping up their surveillance and patrols in vulnerable areas. NATO itself stepped up aircraft patrols off the coast of Ireland amid concerns about Russian submarine activity there. The organization is also establishing a system to automatically warn of attempted interference with oceanic fiber optic cables and reroute communications via satellite.

Unfortunately, the West doesn’t have any backup systems for the undersea fiber optic cable network, or the GPS systems aviation relies upon. The CSIS has called on the U.S. to increase its international cooperation to better coordinate a response to potential attacks on these key areas of infrastructure and for the rest of the world to work on developing robust alternatives for international communications systems.

Saboteurs damaged the fiber optic networks of several French telecommunications providers during the night from July 28 to July 29. The damage caused telephone and internet service disruptions for fixed and mobile customers in several regions of France. The malicious acts did not affect Paris, home to the Olympic Games.

According to sources from the French police, the nighttime sabotage affected several telecommunications operators, including Free and SFR. The impact covered six departments, the French equivalent of counties in the U.S. and U.K. Customers in Bouches-du-Rhône, Aude, Oise, Hérault, Meuse, and Drôme. Free management also reported incidents in Marne and Vaucluse. Thankfully, the vandalism did not impact Paris or the ongoing Olympic Games.

SFR reported minimal impact. Representatives for the provider said the sabotage only affected its long-distance network, which consists of large loops that automatically reroute themselves when a line is cut. SFR said around 10,000 fixed-line customers remained impacted. 

The group explained that large sections of fiber optic cables were cut. It said the damage would have required using an axe or an angle grinder. Reports indicated that cables in electrical cabinets in southern France were cut. Additionally, cable installations in the Meuse region near Luxembourg and the Oise area near Paris were vandalized.

Junior Minister for Digital Affairs Marina Ferrari condemned the action in a post on X (formerly known as Twitter.) She said she condemned “in the strongest terms these cowardly and irresponsible acts.” Ferrari thanked the teams mobilized during the early morning hours to repair the damage.

Nobody has claimed responsibility for the sabotage as of this writing. It’s the second large-scale vandalism France has experienced in the past few days. Just before the Olympic Games opening ceremonies, deliberate fires in several railway signal boxes disrupted passenger train service throughout France for most of the weekend.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) today announced that it has updated what it considers to be the benchmark for broadband speeds. The update sees 100 Mbps download and 20 Mbps upload as the new standard. This is a four-fold increase compared to a 2015, which set the benchmark to 25 Mbps download and 3 Mbps upload. As our Internet dependence increases, changing the bare minimum speed to be called broadband needs to evolve. The FCC explains how it determines the speeds to qualify as a broadband connection

"The increase in the Commission’s fixed speed benchmark for advanced telecommunications capability is based on the standards now used in multiple federal and state programs (such as NTIA’s BEAD Program and multiple USF programs), consumer usage patterns, and what is actually available from and marketed by internet service providers." 

The report also indicates that in the long term, it aims to set a long term goal of 1 Gbps/ 500 Mbps speeds for American consumers, but no date is given in the release. 

Updating the benchmark standard is a given. We all need faster Internet connections for home working, streaming and gaming. Nvidia GeForce Now requires at least 35Mbps for 1080p at 240 FPS. Higher speeds will be required for lag-free multiplayer gaming. For movie streaming, Netflix needs 15 Mbps or higher for 4K streaming but it also has aspirations to expand into cloud gaming. 

Other Evaluations by the FCC

This report also analyzes its deployment and other factors such as affordability, adoption, availability, and equal access. Last year, the White House announced plans to invest $42 Billion for universal internet access by 2030. Based on the data it collected as of December 2022, the report highlights the following:

• Fixed terrestrial broadband service (excluding satellite) has not been physically deployed to approximately 24 million Americans, including almost 28% of Americans in rural areas, and more than 23% of people living on Tribal lands;
• Mobile 5G-NR coverage has not been physically deployed at minimum speeds of 35/3 Mbps to roughly 9% of all Americans, to almost 36% of Americans in rural areas, and to more than 20% of people living on Tribal lands;
• 45 million Americans lack access to both 100/20 Mbps fixed service and 35/3 Mbps mobile 5G-NR service; and
• Based on the new 1 Gbps per 1,000 students and staff short-term benchmark for schools and classrooms, 74% of school districts meet this goal

Is 100 Mbps "fast"?

For many casual users, 100 Mbps should be plenty. While cities and most towns would have easy access to more than 100 Mbps speeds, this might not be the situation in remote locations. So getting such speeds in certain locations would come at a premium. The FCC said, In addition to deployment, the report considers broadband affordability, adoption, availability, and equitable access when determining whether broadband is being deployed in a reasonable and timely fashion to all Americans.”

With the help of such reports, government bodies including local councils could assess the situation and make provisions to have a wide deployment, including fiber. As reliance on telephonic communications is decreasing, having the best possible internet speeds and accessibility grows for home, commercial, and educational purposes.

Popular TechTuber Jeff Geerling has delivered an updated take on the old chestnut about the relative merits of pigeon-based vs internet data transfers. With the proliferation of super-fast home connectivity like gigabit fiber, one might expect the carrier pigeon to be blown away in 2023. Spoiler alert: the pigeon with its high-capacity microSD cards won Geerling’s data transfer race by a significant margin. However, as you will learn later, the pigeon gets outpaced at distances over about 600 miles.

Famously, in 2009, a South African company compared the transfer speed of a pigeon carrying a 4 GB memory stick vs local ISP Telkom’s ADSL service. The pigeon delivered its data payload in one hour and eight minutes. An hour was added to physically transfer the 4 GB of data to the computer. Meanwhile, the ADSL service had only managed to send 4% of the same data over a distance of 60 miles.

In Geerling’s 2023 re-race, over a decade later, pigeon evolution hasn’t significantly changed the birds, but data density was significantly higher. The YouTuber managed to kit out the bird with a trio of stripped-down 1TB SanDisk Extreme PRO flash drives (5g each) without overburdening it.

The bird flew for a mile, and it only took about a minute to reach its destination. From this data point and adding the SanDisk flash drive transfer times, Geerling plotted a baseline 3TB transfer graph for the pigeon. It looked like carrier pigeon transfer might be a winning strategy over shorter distances, up to around 600 miles, but the internet connection will triumph at any greater distances.

Geerling wanted to throw another challenger into the mix to spice up the race. So, he donned a pigeon mask and jumped on a plane to carry 3 TB of files from his home in the US to the Canadian data center, which the internet transfer also targeted. In the graphs, you see that PiJeff (jet-assisted Pigeon Jeff) does a little better over longer distances, but will still ultimately be beaten by internet transfers after around the 5,000-mile mark.

To conclude, Geerling says he could have easily done better as PiJeff, stuffing his luggage with very high capacity drives, but wanted to stick to the common 3 TB across all alternatives.

Geering notes in his video that his Gigabit connection doesn’t really live up to its billing, with a best sustained transport speed of about 75 MB/s. Hopefully, another decade later, we will all have broadband measured in petabits, and pigeons won’t have to endure having flash NAND devices strapped to their legs for our amusement (research).

Today, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) has added 802.11bb as a standard for light-based wireless communications. The publishing of the standard has been welcomed by global Li-Fi businesses, as it will help speed the rollout and adoption of the  data-transmission technology standard.

Advantages of using light rather than radio frequencies (RF) are highlighted by Li-Fi proponents including pureLiFi, Fraunhofer HHI, and the Light Communications 802.11bb Task Group. Li-Fi is said to deliver “faster, more reliable wireless communications with unparalleled security compared to conventional technologies such as Wi-Fi and 5G.” Now that the IEEE 802.11bb Li-Fi standard has been released, it is hoped that interoperability between Li-Fi systems with the successful Wi-Fi will be fully addressed.

Of course, Li-Fi isn’t going to sweep away Wi-Fi and 5G alternatives (nor wired networks). Radio waves still have a distinct advantage with regard to transmission through the atmosphere at great distance, and though opaque objects. Instead, work must concentrate on using horses for courses – with Li-Fi advantages being harvested where possible.

In the Fraunhofer HHI video above you can see a Li-Fi system re-using a building’s lighting infrastructure for data. Don’t worry, the lights don’t visibly blink or flash, as the data transmission uses part of the infrared spectrum.

Where Li-Fi shines (pun intended) is not just in its purported speeds as fast as 224 GB/s. Fraunhofer’s Dominic Schulz points out that as it works in an exclusive optical spectrum, this ensures higher reliability and lower latency and jitter. Moreover “Light’s line-of-sight propagation enhances security by preventing wall penetration, reducing jamming and eavesdropping risks, and enabling centimetre-precision indoor navigation,” says Shultz.

Now the IEEE 802.11bb standard is published, manufacturers can have greater confidence in the ecosystem and start integrating the tech, where suitable. One of the big wheels of Li-Fi, pureLiFi, has already prepared the Light Antenna ONE module for integration into connected devices. This 14.5mm long component (pictured above and top) is currently being provided to OEMs for evaluation. In its promotional materials the firm suggests that Li-Fi is preferable over Wi-Fi for: more connections without congestion, greater security and privacy, and doing the heavy lifting for the highest bandwidth tasks.

We expect to see a far fuller gamut of Li-Fi network devices, and user devices which support the standard, emerge between now and MWC next February.

The White House on Monday announced plans to spend as much as $42 billion on making internet access universal in the country by 2030, according to a report by Reuters. This initiative is part of President Joe Biden's new economic policies, which will be a part of his 2024 re-election campaign.

"Today, 24 million people in our country do not have access to high-speed internet, either because they cannot afford the monthly cost of a plan or because they live in communities that have not yet been fully connected to fiber-optic networks," Vice President Kamala Harris said in a statement. "Every person in our nation, no matter where they live, should be able to access and afford high-speed internet."

The funding was made possible by the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment Program, which was authorized by the 2021 $1 trillion infrastructure law that President Biden supported. The allocation of funds was determined based on a recently released coverage map by the Federal Communications Commission, which identified areas with limited access to broadband.

Broadband companies such as Verizon, Comcast, Charter Communications, and AT&T have been hesitant to provide access to low-population rural communities due to the high costs involved and the limited number of potential subscribers in these regions.

The states receiving the highest funding amounts are Texas and California, the two most populous states in the country, with $3.1 billion and $1.9 billion respectively. Less populous states like Virginia, Alabama, and Louisiana also ranked in the top 10 for funding, as they have large rural areas that lack internet connectivity compared to their major urban centers. The funding amounts vary, ranging from $27 million for U.S. territories like the U.S. Virgin Islands to over $3.1 billion for Texas. Each state will receive a minimum of $107 million.

During a White House address on Monday, President Biden highlighted the significance of this investment, stating that it is the largest investment ever made in high-speed internet. He emphasized that, in today's economy, internet access is as crucial as electricity and water. 

Cisco was one of the first high-tech companies to halt its business in Russia and Belarus after the former started its full-scale war against Ukraine on February 24, 2022. During the company's exit, Cisco's Russian subsidiary physically destroyed unsold equipment worth 1.9 billion rubles ($23.5 million), reports CNews citing the state-run Tass agency.  

Network giant Cisco destroyed its equipment stocks worth almost 1.9 billion rubles ($23.5 million) in January 2023, months after announcing its decision to discontinue operations in Russia and Belarus in March 2022. The physically destroyed equipment included mainly spare parts for the company's devices that were not sold due to the current policy imposed by Cisco. Meanwhile, it is unclear whether those spare parts also fall under the U.S. sanctions against Russia. 

Despite the financial impact, Cisco made the decision to destroy the equipment rather than allow it to fall into Russian hands. But while $23.5 million sounds like a lot of money, the actual impact seems to be considerably higher. 

While the Russian news agency claims that the equipment was destroyed in January, Cisco's financial report for the quarter that ended January 28, 2023, does not mention this in any way. This is because the company essentially wrote off $67 million worth of assets, including spare parts already imported to Russia as well as furniture and cars, after conducting a risk assessment of its assets and potential financial exposures in Russia and Belarus as early as calendar Q1 2022. 

Based on the assessment, Cisco reserved for the non-recoverability of most of its assets in these countries. Consequently, it recorded non-recurring charges of $67 million in its cost of sales and operating expenses in the third quarter of fiscal 2022. These charges were related to the non-recoverability of certain assets and special personnel-related expenses aimed at supporting affected employees. 

It should be noted that for Cisco, which reported revenue of $13.592 billion and net income of $2.773 billion in the second quarter of fiscal 2023, $23.5 million worth of equipment and $67 million in various assets are relatively negligible sums of money. 

Classrooms in education and training centers increasingly rely on technology to provide students with exceptional learning experiences. Rudimentary networking equipment is not only going to struggle to keep up but also might pose security risks. Aruba Instant On equipment is not only able to extend to cover the substantial networking demands of an educational setting, but also provides reliable security features to keep the network and sensitive data protected.

Students at all levels need reliable access to the internet, and Aruba Instant On hardware can help give it to them. In educational settings, the Instant On AP15, AP17, and AP22 access points provide critical wireless Wi-Fi coverage for laptops, iPads, and other smart devices that move with students. Meanwhile, an Instant On 1960 Series network switch can provide the wired backbone to the network for computer lab PCs and security infrastructure, allowing simple management and robust line-of-defense options all in one spot.

Indoors, the AP15 and AP22 access points combine to blanket classrooms and study lounges with a reliable and fast Wi-Fi signal. Whether students simply need to access class readings and homework assignments or need to get online for video collaboration, these access points provide the necessary bandwidth. And even in large classrooms, devices like the AP22 can support many connected devices at once. 

When students want to enjoy the fresh air they don’t have to struggle with a Wi-Fi connection that’s less reliable than inside the school building. Instant On AP17 outdoor access points  extend the network seamlessly to outdoor spaces.. The AP17 comes built into a weatherproof enclosure, so it’s good to go, rain or shine. With Smart Mesh networking, all of the access points can appear as a single network for students, so they don’t struggle with connections as they move from class to class.

From the initial setup to future expansion, it’s simple to build out a robust network with Aruba’s hardware. Each access point can link up to the network with a single cable, sending data and receiving electricity through a Power over Ethernet connection. This links back to the Aruba Instant On 1960 switches capable of supporting anywhere from 24 to 48 separate access points. They are stackable, letting you combine up to four switches for a truly expansive network. 

Keeping the network up and running is easy with the Aruba Instant On app or web portal. These provide remote network management tools to quickly troubleshoot issues or identify devices that are taking up too much bandwidth. Management is made simple, so an extensive IT department isn’t required to keep the systems up and running. And security is at the forefront, with many built-in tools to make for a safer network. 

You can find out more about what Aruba Instant On can do in educational settings here. 

Intel is still working on a comprehensive fix for the intermittent Ethernet connection issues we highlighted in a report back in January. In the meantime, it has a workaround that basically turns off Energy Efficient Ethernet (EEE) mode. MSI appears to be the first Intel partner to release an installer delivering the workaround. Intel says it is continuing to “work towards a solution.”

If you have a modern Intel motherboard featuring a version of the Intel I225, I226, or Killer E3100 2.5GbE controllers, the headlining update is for you. Users with motherboards packing these controllers have reported intermittent disconnections when using Ethernet. Thus, you will not have observed this particular issue if you only use Wi-Fi for your internet and LAN connectivity.

Intel Raptor Lake motherboards often leverage the new Intel I226-V controller, so this intermittent connection issue (which similarly annoyed users of the previous-gen motherboards/controllers like 2019’s I225) continues to provide disappointment to the newest-gen customers.

Previous advice regarding workarounds, such as reducing the controller’s max transfer rate to 1 Gigabit, were not bulletproof when we last reported on this Ethernet issue. However, Intel appears to have narrowed down the cause of the connectivity dropouts to some kind of energy-saving functionality present in the driver. Unfortunately, it wouldn’t be the first time that energy efficiency implementations end up causing users to spend a lot of their personal energy in fault-finding and fixing productivity sapping side effects.

Intel’s update, shared by Chi11eddog, says it includes the mitigation of “disabling Energy Efficient Ethernet (EEE) at 1Gbps / 2.5 Gbps.” It is possible to do this tweak yourself in Advanced Windows/ Linux driver settings,  but the downloaded patch may have a little more finesse, as it seems to still apply EEE at 100Mbps speeds.

MSI has released an updated driver for its affected motherboards, like the MPG Z790 Carbon WIFI. We have looked at the download file, which doesn’t include release notes, and are not sure whether the files within will work on motherboards/systems from other brands. We think that others could right click and install the E2FN.INF file, but please apply at your own risk. Please note there are different drivers depending on whether you are using Windows 10 or 11. Also, you should check your own motherboard vendor’s update pages to see if there are Intel Ethernet patch / update files available for your specific product.

We hope that Intel’s investigations reveal that this continuing problem for its networking controllers is fixable by software or firmware update, rather than leaving users with energy saving functionality disabled or a hardware revision being required.

Are you often frustrated by the lack of transparency regarding available broadband services in your area? Well, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has heard your complaints and is taking steps to provide consumers with a wealth of information about internet service providers (ISPs) before you take the plunge with a contract. 

This week, the FCC unveiled easy-to-understand labels called "Broadband Facts," which are similar in concept to nutrition labels found on packaged foods in U.S. grocery stores. Customers can view pertinent details about broadband services, including service pricing, overage fees, data throttling limits, etc. 

The FCC mandates that these labels be placed "in close proximity to an associated plan advertisement" to ensure maximum visibility. In addition, the full label must be on full display, and ISPs won't be able to get away with simply placing a link on its website that the customer must click to read the full details.

Other essential details arising from this new initiative include making the data available to third parties so that consumers can make more informed decisions while comparison shopping. The broadband plan labels must also be accessible from a customer's account portal when logging in online. Given that the FCC states that the labels be present at the point of sale, we'd imagine that they will be prominently displayed at brick-and-mortar locations for ISPs like Comcast, Spectrum and Verizon, for example.

Taking a closer look at the label, there are sections on the monthly rate for the plan and whether it represents special promotional pricing that will expire after a set number of months/years. There are also provisions to describe any activation fees, one-time or monthly equipment fees, the associated early termination fee (if any) and the amount of government taxes that will be applied to each monthly bill.

ISPs usually love to tout their download speeds in their advertising and then place their upload speeds in small print. They do this because cable providers often offer upload speeds that are much lower than the downloads. For example, my current cable internet plan offers 500 Mbps downloads, but upload speeds are capped at 25 Mbps. Thanks to the FCC, download and upload speeds must now be displayed along with "typical" latency on the Broadbands Facts label. In addition, true unlimited data is becoming a rarity with U.S. home broadband plans, so there's also a section that details how much data you're allotted per month (in gigabytes) and how much you'll be charged per gigabyte for going past that limit. 

"Broadband is an essential service, for everyone, everywhere. Because of this, consumers need to know what they are paying for, and how it compares with other service offerings," said FCC chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel. "For over 25 years, consumers have enjoyed the convenience of nutrition labels on food products. We're now requiring internet service providers to display broadband labels for both wireless and wired services. Consumers deserve to get accurate information about price, speed, data allowances, and other terms of service up front."

Overall, this seems like a long overdue change to help consumers make more informed decisions when comparing and selecting a new broadband service -- even if the label looks a bit cheesy. Well, that is if you even have the option to pick from more than one broadband provider in your area. Most Americans only have access to one fixed-line broadband provider, although wireless options from ISPs like Verizon and T-Mobile are also starting to expand their reach across the U.S. However, even those services have issues of their own concerning service reliability.

Consumer Reports and The Verge recently examined over 22,000 U.S. broadband bills submitted by readers. They found that most households spend between $65 to $75 per month on broadband service compared to an average of $40 in London and $31 in Paris. Frontier Communications, on average, had the lowest monthly bill at $53, while Viasat had the highest at $117.

Scientists from the Technical University of Denmark in Copenhagen have achieved 1.84 petabits per second data transfers using a single photonic chip connected via a single optical fiber cable. The feat was accomplished over a distance of 7.9 km (4.9 miles). For some perspective regarding this achievement, at any time of day, the average internet bandwidth being used by the whole world’s population is estimated to be about 1 petabit/s.

With the ever increasing amounts of data shifted across the internet for business, for pleasure, and software downloads or updates - infrastructure firms are always on the lookout for new ways to increase the available bandwidth. The 1.84 petabits/s over a standard optical cable using a compact single chip solution will therefore hold much appeal.

Photonic chip technology holds great promise for optical data transfer purposes – as the processor and the transfer medium both work with light waves. The New Scientist explains in simple terms how the Danish scientists, led by Asbjørn Arvad Jørgensen, managed to deliver such bandwidth with the resources at hand.

Firstly, the data stream used in the trial was split into 37 lines, with each one sent down a different optical thread in the cable. Each of the 37 data lines were split into 223 data chunks corresponding to zones of the optical spectrum. What this allowed is for creating a "frequency comb" where data was transmitted in different colors at the same time, without interfering with other streams. In other words a “massively parallel space-and-wavelength multiplexed data transmission” system was created. Of course, this splitting, and re-splitting massively increased the potential data throughput supported by a fiber optic cable.

It wasn’t easy to test and verify 1.84 petabits/s bandwidth – as no computer can send, or receive, never mind store, such a humungous amount of data. The research team used dummy data over individual channels to verify what would be the full-on bandwidth capacity. Each channel was tested individually to ensure data received matched what was transmitted.

In action, the photonic chip splits a single laser into many frequencies and some processing is required to encode light data for each of the 37 data optical fiber streams. A refined fully capable optical processing device should be possible to build at approximately the size of a match box, according to Jørgensen. This is a similar size to current single color laser transmission devices used by the telecoms industry.

Ut is reassuring that we will be able to keep the same fiber optical cable infrastructure, but replace matchbox-sized optical data encoders / decoders with the similar sized photonic chip powered devices, potentially delivering an effective 8,251x increase in data bandwidth. The researchers say there is enough potential shown in their work to inspire “a shift in the design of future communications systems.”

For further information about the record 1.84 petabits/s data transfers you can check out the Petabit-per-second data transmission using a chip-scale microcomb ring resonator source paper.

Google announced it would introduce significantly faster fiber broadband services early next year. Two new speed tiers are being introduced to the Google Fiber stables: 5 Gbps ($125/month) and 8 Gbps ($150/month) services. These will be symmetrical services where upload and download speeds are equal. In addition, Google will provide subscribers with Wi-Fi 6 routers and up to two mesh extenders to deliver robust internet speeds throughout their households.

In September, the Google Fiber Connect blog teased that employees were testing a symmetrical >20 Gbps service in Kansas, so readers might be a little disappointed by the announcement of 8 Gbps speeds, at best, today. However, Google has kept the offerings it has created symmetrical, will eschew data caps, will not impose installation fees, and claims that it will maintain “accessible prices.” So, how do the new Google Fiber offerings shape up compared to what already exists? Check out our features and pricing comparison table below.

What is startling from the above is what poor value the entry-level service of 1 Gbps appears to be in light of the new, faster services using the dollar-per-Gig metric. Of course, there are fixed costs to providing the connectivity and equipment to any premises, and many customers may see no need for >1 Gbps speeds.

Google addresses the above gripe in its blog post by asking, "Who needs 5 Gig and 8 Gig?" The answer is customers who want to be ready for the next great bandwidth-hungry developments of the internet age, as well as “creative professionals, people working in the cloud or with large data, households with large shared internet demands.” In other words, any pastime or job where large file transfers are necessary should benefit from the faster speeds, and Google also hints at reduced lag in time-sensitive operations like share dealing and FOREX – but doesn’t specifically mention gaming.

The first regions to access these new, faster Google Fiber tiers will be Utah, Kansas City and West Des Moines via early test programs. Interested parties and existing customers should register their interest here for retail rollout in early 2023. Near the end of its blog, Google said 20 Gbps services were still in testing, so we can hold onto hope that there will be further faster GFiber tiers added in the coming months. In the meantime, Google could really do something about ‘accessibility’ if it flattened out the dollar-per-Gig metric for its 1 Gbps and 2 Gbps service users.

Google is teasing the dramatic expansion of its Fiber internet service over the coming months. Not only is GFiber coming to more places than ever before, it will start making multi-gig speeds widely available and accessible. How fast? In a blog post Google Fiber CEO Dinni Jain dropped a big hint – Google has been testing >20 Gbps fiber internet speeds at the home of one of its execs in Kansas.

Google Fiber currently has a simple but attractive pricing plan for customers within its service areas. People can choose a 1 Gbps service for $70, or upgrade to 2 Gbps download speeds for $100. Appealingly, both services offer 1 Gbps uploads – great for remote working and content creators. Moreover, Google provides mesh Wi-Fi networking as standard so service should be usable throughout your residence without extra equipment, and thankfully Google has no such thing as a data cap.

Going forward, Google wants to make significant steps beyond the 2 Gbps package it introduced in 2021, while rival providers in the US are already offering 2, 5, 8, even 10 Gbps products. However, GFiber says it is assuredly making gains on its stated path to 100 Gbps symmetrical internet provision.

In the above screenshot from a network analysis tool, you can see GFiber speeds at beyond 20 Gbps.  This speedy fiber service was tested at the home of Nick Saporito, the company’s Head of Commercial Strategy. The dial on the left shows the test connection achieving 20.20 Gbps throughput.

You may well be excited by the fiber speeds being tested, but other parts of your brain will likely be fearful of potential pricing, and be pessimistic about availability. GFiber’s CEO says he knows raw speed isn’t enough. A compelling fiber product must also deliver on “pricing, value, simplicity and reliability.” Jain adds that even as promised download speeds ramp up, GFiber is going to keep the pressure on accessible pricing and provision of symmetrical up/down speeds. Furthermore, the GFiber product will be enhanced so that the best speeds are available throughout your home.

Google promises the next big step in fiber speeds is “just around the corner.” So speed hungry folk in GFiber areas should keep an eye on any emailed upgrade offers, the Google Fiber blog, and of course here for any breaking news.

Wi-Fi 6E has yet to penetrate every facet of our wireless life like the preceding Wi-Fi 6 specification, but Netgear is making strides in that direction with its latest product release. Today, the company announced the Nighthawk AXE3000 USB 3.0 Adapter (A8000), which adds Wi-Fi 6E connectivity to your laptop or desktop.

Of course, you’ll need a Wi-Fi 6E router to take full advantage of the speed the A8000 offers. Once connected, the dedicated 6GHz band provides you with up to 1,200 Mbps of bandwidth. The A8000 also supports legacy 5GHz (up to 1,200 Mbps) and 2.4 GHz (up to 600 Mbps) bands for connecting to older networking hardware.

As you might expect from this high-speed networking device, the A8000 uses a USB 3.0 connection and a dongle form factor for quickly plugging into a free port on your laptop or desktop. Netgear also includes a USB cradle with a flip-open design so that you can position the adapter for the best possible reception and performance.

For those unfamiliar with Wi-Fi 6E, the specification was first announced in 2020 as an extension of Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax). Wi-Fi 6E improves upon Wi-Fi 6 by supporting the 6GHz wireless spectrum in addition to the existing 2.4GHz and 5GHz bands. The 6GHz band supports more capacity, features wider channels (up to 160MHz), and is not prone to interference from household electronics. 

While Wi-Fi 6E promises higher connection speeds, the “gotcha” is that its short wavelengths mean that increased bandwidth is limited to shorter distances, and signals are easily stymied by walls or flooring. Even though Wi-Fi 6E tops out at the same 1,200 Mbps as Wi-Fi 6, the performance of the former should be more consistent than the latter. 

Speaking of the Wi-Fi 6E support, we should note that it is extremely limited at this point. Macs are completely left out of supporting the 6GHz band on the A8000. In fact, only Windows 11 supports the 6GHz band at the moment — if you’re running macOS or Windows 10, the A8000 isn’t for you. But if you have a Windows 11 PC and are interested in the A8000, be sure to check out the best gaming routers for a perfect match.   

The Nighthawk AXE3000 USB 3.0 Adapter (A8000) is priced at $89.99 and will be available from major retailers and direct from Netgear later this month so be sure to check out our list of Netgear promo codes.

Intel has proclaimed that “the Wi-Fi future is here” after successfully demonstrating Wi-Fi 7 technology with partner Broadcom. In the over-the-air demos, a Wi-Fi 7 connection between an Intel Core-powered laptop and a Broadcom access point achieved a steady 5 Gbps transfer speed. This is a worthwhile upgrade versus Wi-Fi 6, which maxes out at 1 Gbps.

As the Intel news blog highlights, industry collaboration is essential to ensure the widespread adoption of Wi-Fi 7 and its practical benefits. Having one Wi-Fi 7 in one category of devices but no other is pretty useless.

Broadcom chimed in to assert that “the ecosystem is ready.” It highlighted the value of Wi-Fi 7 goes beyond simple speed increases to deliver greater network capacity and the benefits of much lower latencies. The reduced latencies will be invaluable for immersive experiences over Wi-Fi, with the most obvious applications being online gaming and reduced latency wireless VR headsets. For media streamers, it also opens up the eye-popping possibility of UHD 16K streaming (or more people on the network streaming 4K or 8K videos). Last but not least, the newest Wi-Fi standard could help reduce wireless network traffic jams in busy homes and offices.

The underlying technologies behind Wi-Fi 7 include wider 320 MHz channels in unlicensed 6GHz spectrum and higher order 4K QAM data modulation. Intel’s blog also outlined the importance of multi-link operation and improved channel utilization efficiency.

Video: demo compares Wi-Fi 6 on the 5 GHz band, vs. Wi-Fi 6E on the 6 GHz band, vs. Wi-Fi 7 on the 6 GHz band.

These are still early days for Wi-Fi 7, as it isn’t expected to be certified until next year, with products bearing the Wi-Fi 7 logo perhaps not appearing until H2 2023. However, last month an Intel exec was quoted as saying Wi-Fi 7 will start to be “installed in PC products such as laptops by 2024.” As one (code)name is never enough, Wi-Fi 7 devices will also be referenced as featuring the “Wi-Fi 802.11be” connectivity protocol.

A positive from the lengthy sounding rollout timescale is that Wi-Fi 7 speeds could be further enhanced in the interim. Hopefully, Wi-Fi 7 will catch on quickly, inspired by the attractive transfer speeds and latency benefits. It will also be welcomed if Wi-Fi 7 device rollout isn’t hampered by the component shortage problems, which slowed Wi-Fi 6E device availability.

After we published a story about my T-Mobile home Internet service dying with customer service unable to fix the problem, I got a lot of messages from readers with similar experiences. Three T-Mobile employees (two former and one current) who handled / handle home Internet support calls also reached out, claiming that the company uses canned excuses like “we’re upgrading the tower” in order to get customers off the phone and pad their stats. 

Update (9/2/2022): This article has been updated to reflect new, corroborating information from two new anonymous sources: one current and one additional former T-Mobile Home Internet employee. Both reached out to us after initial publication.

All of our T-Mobile sources asked to remain anonymous but provided proof of current or recent former employment at the company. In one former employee's most recent position, he worked in engineering, which he said is the last level of escalation for problems with the home internet service. There, he claims, he was frequently unable to solve customers’ problems but was encouraged to use an “it’s the tower” explanation so he could keep calls to under ten minutes. He said that service reps are penalized if calls run longer than 600 seconds or customers call back about the same problem within a week.

According to all of the sources we spoke to the company also penalizes support reps if a customer calls back with the same problem within a certain number of days (one former rep said 7 days and but the current employee and other former employee said 3 days). Therefore, they are incentivized to tell you something that will keep you from calling again for that time period. 

"We had a metric called IOCR/FCR - our bonus was heavily weighted around not having the customer call back for 3 days when I was there," our second former employee source said. "We were coached into a number of ways to confuse or lie to the customer to prevent them from calling back."

In my case, after spending several minutes on the phone with support doing everything from power cycling to removing and replacing the SIM card, I was put on hold while my rep said he would “do a few things” to fix the problem. He then returned and told me that my local cell tower was being upgraded and that I shouldn’t expect to have service for 48 hours, at which point I cancelled my service. Though I was on the phone for nearly 20 minutes, it still felt like the company was trying to give me an excuse, because they couldn’t actually help me.

"In regards to the particular error code you were getting [All PDN IP Connection Failure], and the lack of response from T-Mobile as to the specifics of that error, the answer is quite simple; they don't know," our first former employee source said . "I could tell you stories all day long about calls from customers with issues on their home internet service that never got solved, because no one in any of those departments, no matter how high up the chain we went, had any idea how to fix the problem."

According to our first former employee source, T-Mobile customer service reps hope that a hard reset of the 5G Gateway does the trick if a customer calls in with a problem. The company will often send replacement hardware to appease customers if that doesn't work. But as we've heard from customers on T-Mobile's forums and Reddit, even this isn't a surefire way to fix connectivity issues.

"If that doesn't fix it, they have no clue where to go from there, and you are typically out of luck at that point," he explained. "The 'tower is being upgraded' response is a canned response that is given when they have no other answer for what is happening."

The former employee said that, if the tower near me were really being upgraded, my rep would have told me right away. This is because customer support reps have multiple screens in front of them and can pull up a real-time map of the service area tied to your address. So if there were a tower outage or upgrade in process, the support rep would present that information to the customer within the first minute or two of the call.

According to our second former employee source, support reps would do what they could to find a plausible tower excuse that wasn't a complete lie. Instead, they'd zoom out on their computer maps until they found a tower that was having issues.

"If you report slow service or no service, I would query your address and zoom out on the coverage map until I could see a tower that had any work being done on it (Sometimes, we might zoom out 25-50, 100, or even 200+ miles to force another tower to populate)," our second former employee source said. "I would then tell you, 'It looks like work is being done in your area, please allow up to 72 hours for the issue to resolve' to effectively end the call, preventing you from calling back within 3 days. People who constantly called back dinged the rep's stats."

We reached out to T-Mobile for comment on our source’s accusation that the company’s support reps are under pressure to get customers off the phone (and therefore are incentivized to mislead them). The initial statement we got back didn’t really address the issue:

"We frequently make improvements to our 5G network to support services like Home Internet. On some occasions, that can cause short interruptions in our service. While extended issues are uncommon and typically last less than 12 hours, we encourage Home Internet customers to reach out to our award-winning customer care team for support in these cases."

However, after we published this article, the company sent a more direct response, saying:

"Our care model is designed to put the customer first, which means resolving issues as quickly as possible with the best information at hand. As is the standard in our industry and others, we prioritize NPS to measure our customers’ experiences with us, and we also rely on efficiency metrics to continually improve how we’re delivering the experience."

Both the current T-Mobile employee and the first former employee attributed the issues T-Mobile Home Internet customers are encountering to a lack of foresight into the demands and rigors of relying on cellular data for home internet service.

"It usually comes down to the same thing, lack of coverage. What most of us feel is that T-Mobile is in a rush to get as many customers as possible on HINT w/o considering the lack of bandwidth locally," the current employee said. "Now, they're offering HINT in places that technically had the max amount of users (per local capacity), which causes us to think those customer complaints are about to get much worse. They call it Home Internet Lite."

Our first former employee source agreed.

"The company simply did not take the time to become subject matter experts in the industry, and did not properly parse out the details of potential issues they would run into, before launching headfirst into the home internet world,” he said. “They just wanted to be part of the game, and have that extra perk to offer customers, and they wanted to be able to say they were the first to offer 'nationwide 5G Home Internet.'"

Other readers reached out to me, including Chris, who wrote about the All PDN IP Connection Failure error message I received, theorizing that the company may not have enough capacity on the newer towers that support the home Internet service.

“I was told that it has a lot to do with towers that still exist in the wild that aren't capable of handling connections for multiple reasons. There are still Sprint towers that need to be fully integrated, and older towers that just don't support enough connections to be reliable. All of this upgrading happens with little-to-no notice because they don't think it's necessary when there are towers nearby that should be a good fallback. Not so true for the home internet users!

It's worth considering that the router connects with different parameters than would a cellphone. A cellphone crawls the network seamlessly changing from "cell" to "cell" that is covered by whichever tower. The internet service requests a connection in a bit of a different way, not expecting to be on the move but indeed expecting to use more bandwidth.

When there are multiple towers nearby and not all of them are fully compatible with the home internet service, you're likely not going to get far enough to be assigned an IP address. If for some reason it connects to an older Sprint tower, or a tower that's at limit for user capacity, there will be issues. Your device will ask the PDN for access and get denied. An incompatible tower may not be configured for the requests made by your device. A perfectly good T-Mobile tower may already be at capacity and so your device sits in queue hoping for a connection. It might not try indefinitely and so it becomes necessary to power cycle it.”

I asked our T-Mobile source about this possibility, and he said it could be a factor in some customers losing connectivity suddenly.

Another reader, Stanton, reached out to tell me about his problems. He was also told about tower upgrades in-process and had no trouble with T-Mobile phone service in the same location:

"So I got T-Mobile home internet back during the pilot days. I've ran into the same errors as you. I've been through 5 to 6 gateways of theirs. They have claimed tower upgrade for over 6 months. My area is nothing but 5g and 5guc towers. My iPhone as well doesn't have issues with connectivity in these areas.

I've been waiting over 6 months for them to resolve this issue. Eventually I told them to pause my internet so I don't pay them for crap I'm not using. My issue is my location doesn't have access to fancy spectrum and such. Our best landline deals are cable which wants almost $200 a month for what T-Mobile offers or AT&T which claims the fastest they can provide is 18mbps."

Gary actually had his issues solved after T-Mobile sent him a new, upgraded 5G Gateway:

"I, too, had complete failure of my silver CYLINDRICAL gateway. They offered me a newer version (square black gateway) and my problem went away. I am surprised they did not offer it to you. Yes, they went through the whole litany of possible causes... tower upgrade, reboots, move location of gateway, etc. When they offered to replace the gateway with a newer version, I jumped on it. It has been working fine now for three months."

Interestingly, Carl contacted me to say that he signed up for T-Mobile Home Internet only to have horrible reception at his location. The company’s explanation: The service was not actually available in his area and they never should have sold it to him.

"Reading your article about your T-Mobile Gateway experience brought up my own horrible experience as a first time T-Mobile cell and home internet experience. Long story short, it never worked very well at all from the beginning. Barely had two bars. Constantly getting tech support. Was shipped three additional units to 'try' by tech support over 90 days. Problem was, I wasn't supposed to have been sold home internet. She confirmed my address and informed me that the 'service was NOT available in my area.' I shouldn't have been sold the unit to begin with."

Washdc, a commenter on my prior article, wrote:

"This could have been written by me... over 10 hours on the phone with customer service and their "tech team," three different devices, 48-hour tower outage (I live about one mile away from two towers) and absolutely no consistent coverage. I will give this inconsistency a few more days, hoping that after three weeks the system "settles down," and then crawl back to fios. Good bye to all the savings, hello to working internet. Fios must be so proud."

To be fair, not every person we heard from has had problems with T-Mobile. Anshel Sag, an analyst who tracks 5G with Moor Strategies and Insight, said that he’s not aware of problems with T-Mobile’s home Internet service and that he uses it successfully himself.

“In my experience with the service, it operated at roughly the same speed and reliability as my smartphone,” he said.

Sag said he spoke to his contacts at T-Mobile, who said that mine sounds like an isolated incident. 

As the feedback I’ve gotten shows, clearly I’m not the only one who has experienced serious problems with T-Mobile Home Internet. However, it’s impossible to know what percentage of users actually had to cancel their service due to unresolved issues. Of course, people online are quicker to point out problems with a product or service than they are when they have good experiences. Those with good experiences don't usually have a reason to speak out.

When the T-Mobile Home Internet services works, it’s fantastic. The 500+ Mbps downloads and 70+ Mbps uploads I got during my two successful weeks with the service were incredible and far superior to what my previous provider, Spectrum, was able to provide. However, the prospect of unreliable service was enough to scare me away, sending me back into the open arms of Spectrum.

Regardless, for those that have experienced extended outages, been fed untruths by T-Mobile employees, or have been sent multiple hardware replacements in vain in hopes of solving the issues, the positive potential doesn’t matter.

If you recall, I penned an article late last month about switching from Spectrum to T-Mobile Home Internet. The reasons were simple: T-Mobile promised faster speeds, a lower price, no contracts, and many freebies for new signups. After installing the 5G Gateway in my home, everything appeared to go exactly as prescribed by T-Mobile. However, as soon as I discovered, T-Mobile Home Internet ultimately proved to be a disaster for me, forcing me to come crawling back to Spectrum.

But before we get to what made me cancel T-Mobile Home Internet, let’s discuss the positives.

What I liked about T-Mobile Home Internet

For the two weeks I had the service, I routinely saw peak downloads of 500+ Mbps and uploads of 70+ Mbps. The download speeds were roughly 100 Mbps higher than my Spectrum internet service, while the uploads were three times faster. I achieved this performance even though my signal “only” bounced between three to four bars (out of five).

My service was rock solid during those two weeks, with no dropouts. I had consistent performance around the clock. Peak speeds dipped slightly during the evening hours, but downloads were still comparable to Spectrum, while uploads were still double. This was an impressive performance considering we’re talking about a wireless 4G LTE/5G connection.

Another positive aspect of the service is that T-Mobile promises no data caps or data throttling/ prioritization. Considering that fixed internet providers like Spectrum and Comcast institute mandatory data caps on customers in certain markets, this was a big draw.

Finally, there were the freebies. By signing up for T-Mobile Home Internet, you receive a 50 percent discount on YouTube TV for a year, one year of Paramount+ for free, a discounted Philo TV subscription ($15/month), and a free Amazon Echo Show 5 smart display/speaker.

However, all those benefits are for naught if the service ends up quitting on you.

Why my love affair with T-Mobile Home Internet quickly turned to divorce

My T-Mobile Home Internet happiness came crashing down roughly two weeks after activating the service. The workday started normally. I had just finished my morning meeting for work, I had Sling TV on in the background on the Roku TV in my office, and I was writing a follow-up to my original T-Mobile internet story (which eventually morphed into the account you’re reading now). Then, the Roku TV suddenly complained that it had lost its internet connection. Shortly after, my Mac indicated no internet connectivity when I went to refresh a webpage.

I got up, walked over to the T-Mobile 5G Gateway, and saw it was reporting “No connection.” Every 30 seconds, it would show one signal bar, then cycle back to the No Connection error. I chalked it up as a fluke and power cycled the 5G Gateway. It booted back up and displayed the same status message about a lack of connectivity. At this point, I was pretty annoyed, so I started tinkering with the tall, cylindrical device.

I swiped across the circular touch screen and came across the Alerts page, which showed that I had a critical error message: “All PDN IP Connection Failure.” Because I needed internet to work, I turned on the Personal Hotspot on my iPhone (Visible Mobile, which uses Verizon’s network) and wirelessly tethered it to my Mac. Next, I typed the error message into Google and found several threads on the official T-Mobile Community Forums, Reddit, and other sites. It’s a problem that many people have encountered and one that T-Mobile seems reluctant (or unable) to fix.

I tried moving the device to every room of my house, upstairs and downstairs. I even plugged it into an outside receptacle to rule out any interference issues – no dice.

Contacting T-Mobile customer service

I was able to get in contact with a customer service representative within a minute of calling the support number. First, the customer service rep had me perform a power cycle (which I had already done multiple times). Next, I explained that I was getting the All PDN IP Connection Failure error and was told to perform a hard reset of the device by pressing the reset button on the back of the device with a paperclip. Unfortunately, that resulted in the device rebooting and presenting the same error message. He also had me remove and reinsert the SIM card to no avail.

At this point, the rep put me on hold and said that he would “do a few things” on his end to ensure that I could gain a signal and hence have functional service. However, when this step didn’t work, he put me on another five-minute hold and told me that he found the reason for my outage: a cell tower upgrade. According to the rep, T-Mobile was upgrading the tower from 4G to 5G, which is why I saw the error messages.

I found that explanation problematic for two reasons. For starters, the closest T-Mobile tower is about a mile from my house, and I had T-Mobile phone service about two years ago – with 5G connectivity. Secondly, I later had a friend with T-Mobile phone service come over, and they picked up a 5G signal with 4 bars (the maximum) on their iPhone.

Even more troubling is that the rep said this “upgrade” started that morning and would go on for 48 hours, which again seemed very odd. I was told that nothing else could be done on his end and to wait for the upgrade to be completed, then try again. Forty-eight hours without internet in the work-from-home age? That’s absolute torture.

The most I’ve been without internet with Spectrum in 20 years (even when it was called Time Warner Cable) was about 30 minutes to an hour. And that happened maybe once every two years or so. Waiting 48 hours was a bridge too far, but I complied.

Without access to home internet via our Orbi mesh router, all of our smart devices went “dumb.” No Echo speaker access, no control over our Ring cameras, no streaming TV services, etc. The best I could do was tether my iPhone to our Smart TVs around the house to watch Sling TV and Disney+ for the kiddos. During this time, I revisited the T-Mobile forums and Reddit to see what other people were experiencing.

Apparently, I’m not alone with the All PDN IP Connection Failure

Not surprisingly, other users say that they encountered much of the same commentary from T-Mobile customer service. Many never had service restored, even after having a replacement 5G Gateway sent to their homes. Here’s a sample of the responses from the T-Mobile forums and Reddit:

“I am having this “All PDN IP Connection Failure” error code as well. I have called T-Mobile’s support for 5 days in a row and no one can tell me what it means.” – eshoemake

“I started TMHI service a couple weeks ago. I’m 0.6 miles from a T-Mo tower.  The signal has been strong.  5G, 3 bars, decent Mbps.  Lost connection 2/18/22.  T-Mo tech said it was a tower issue.” – coyote

“I got T-Mobile home internet just over 2 weeks ago. Had blazing speeds, everything was working flawlessly. Then a week ago I lost all connection and kept getting the ‘PDN IP Connection Failure’ on my Nokia trashcan. Multiple calls/hours on the phone, multiple factory resets, etc, didn’t fix the issue. I’ve been sent 3 different Nokia trashcans in the past 6 days since Tech Support didn’t know the cause. All 3 do the same thing. I have not had internet for over a week now.” – Satcaster

“Why hasn’t anyone from T-Mobile replied? I’m having the same issue and haven’t found any reliable fixes from internet searches.” – Tannerqmartin

“I have been having the same problem for the last month. Still no internet. No resolutions. No answers. And T-Mobile seems clueless. So I have paid for a month of nothing. Many factory resets, swapping SIM cards, moving to different areas, new gateway, and still nothing.” – SJ_Traydrelia

“I had to cancel the service now ever since I got this error. I called the support line practically daily and spent ~1hr troubleshooting. It was just fine since I got it last year. Nothing changed in my setup at home, no new devices, etc. Internet connectivity had been unresolved for 7 days.” -- spindceate

Calling back to T-Mobile customer service

It was rough (I know, first-world problems), but we endured 48 hours, and the service never came back online. At this point, I was fed up. So I called customer service back and was told they didn’t know when the “upgrade” would be finished or when I’d get my service back. At that point, I told them to cancel the whole thing and return to Spectrum.

Maybe it was a rash decision, but I don’t have time for BS. Either your service works, or it doesn’t. And telling a customer to wait 48 hours for internet service to be restored is unacceptable, especially just outside the second-largest metropolitan area in North Carolina and home to Research Triangle Park.

It was at this point that I went crawling back to Spectrum. Since I never got rid of my Arris Surfboard cable modem, reactivating service was as simple as calling in and signing up for service. If there’s any consolation, Spectrum signed me up for three years of service at the same speeds I was spec’d for previously (500/20) at $49.99/month – a $20 discount compared to my previous rate. They say that the price is good for 36 months, after which I will likely have to perform my yearly dance with the retention department to maintain that pricing.

T-Mobile Home Internet was great when it worked, and I really wanted to give the service a chance. But leaving our family high and dry for two days with no ETA on restoring service, and the reports of customers who have never gotten their service back, killed any hopes that I had for T-Mobile Home Internet. 

I did reach out to T-Mobile’s PR team after canceling the service, inquiring about the All PDN IP Connection Failure error and tower upgrades, and received the following response:

Thanks for your patience as we sorted out what happened. It looks like there were upgrades in your area that probably caused your service disruption. However, our team looked into the issue and expects the issue to be resolved. If you’re interested, we’d love to get you signed up again for Home Internet. Let me know if you’re interested.

I received that response back from T-Mobile within 24 hours, and apparently, a team was tasked with finding the true root cause of my outages – I doubt that a regular T-Mobile Home Internet customer would get that treatment, but I digress. Also, I’ll never know if T-Mobile actually resolved the problem because the 5G Gateway is now back on its way back to the company. And my request for an explanation for the All PDN IP Connection Failure error also went unanswered.

Note: As with all of our op-eds, the opinions expressed here belong to the writer alone and not Tom's Hardware as a team.

A good internet connection is just as important as water and power to your home. Some remote users may choose Starlink, others may prefer a 5G option. But what if you have no viable options?

Akamai network architect, Jared Mauch, was so frustrated with the mainstream ISP offerings at his rural home in Michigan that he set up his own FTTH (Fiber To The Home) ISP. It has been such a resounding success that other rural folks have joined up with Washtenaw Fiber Properties LLC for their internet provider. Moreover, Mauch has now qualified for $2.6 million in government funding and will be able to reach nearly 600 further homes in the sparsely populated Washtenaw county area, reports Ars Technica.

Mauch was spurred to set up his own ISP after miserable commercial offerings of internet connectivity to his rural home. AT&T offered DSL with 1.5Mbps downloads, and Comcast wanted a $50,000 upfront payment to extend its cable network to his property. With his networking expertise, Mauch decided on a third path – to set up his own FTTH ISP.

Washtenaw Fiber Properties LLC started with one customer, Mauch himself, but when word got around it grew quickly to 30, and there are currently 70 service subscribers. The fiber network currently relies on about 14 miles of fiber, but to complete the new government-funded project, Mauch will be laying a further 38 miles of fiber. 

With the new fiber in place, it is estimated that Washtenaw Fiber Properties LLC will be able to cater to nearly 600 widely dispersed rural customers. Two of the most remote properties in the government contract will each eat up $30,000 of the funding cash, to run the cables and provide service. The cash comes as part of the county’s $71 million dedicated to infrastructure projects, which was allocated as part of the American Rescue Plan's Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds.

Expanding the Washtenaw Fiber Properties LLC network to meet with the government contract obligations isn’t going to be a challenge, according to Mauch. The work needs to be completed by the end of 2026, but Mauch says that it will be half finished before 2022 is over, with the other half complete by the end of 2023.

So, what kinds of broadband packages will new Washtenaw Fiber Properties LLC customers have access to? For $55 per month, Mauch says people can get a 100Mbps symmetrical service with unlimited data. If you want 1Gbps with unlimited data you will have to scratch together $79 a month. A one-off $199 installation fee is charged to all new customers.

Being the world's No. 1 supplier of notebook platforms, Intel must adopt the latest technologies as soon as possible to maintain this lead. In addition, one of the key selling points of laptops is a fast Wi-Fi connection, so adopting the latest tech version is crucial for the CPU giant. As it turns out, Intel is poised to support Wi-Fi 7 by its client PC platforms by 2024.

"We are currently developing Intel's Wi-Fi '802.11be' in order to obtain the 'Wi-Fi Alliance' certification, and it will be installed in PC products such as laptops by 2024," said Eric McLaughlin, vice president of Intel's wireless solutions division, at a press conference in South Korea, reports ET News (via The Register). "We expect it to appear in major markets in 2025."

Wi-Fi 7 (also known as IEEE 802.11be) will offer a maximum raw aggregated bitrate of 40,000 Mbit/s (40 Gbit/s), which will make wired Ethernet connections obsolete for most users. However, in most cases, client devices will support considerably slower connections.

But to get such a high bitrate, Wi-Fi 7 clients and access points will have to use three bands — 2.40 GHz, 5 GHz, and 6 GHz — and increase channel width to 320 MHz as well as add 4096-QAM. Meanwhile, since Wi-Fi 7 will rely on technologies its predecessors introduced, things like mandatory support for MU-MIMO (Multi-User Multiple-Input Multiple-Output) and OFDMA (Orthogonal Frequency-Division Multiple Access) capabilities supported by Wi-Fi 6 and Wi-Fi 6E.

Given the significantly improved performance of Wi-Fi 7 over Wi-Fi 6/6E, Intel expects the technology to be adopted by bandwidth-hungry applications, such as augmented reality and virtual reality headsets that use Intel's WiGig (Wireless Gigabit) technology.

The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) is expected to adopt the IEEE 802.11be specification only in 2025 formally, so some of its peculiarities might change. But interestingly, Intel looks at it with enthusiasm and expects the performance of the upcoming Wi-Fi 7 technology (or its own Wi-Fi 7 client chips) to improve by the time it rolls out commercially in 2024.

"Since there is more than a year left before the release of 802.11be, there is still a chance that we could improve the processing speed even further." Said McLaughlin.

For quite a while now, Intel has been one of the foremost advocates of Wi-Fi 7. So far, both Broadcom and Qualcomm have already announced their Wi-Fi 7 draft-compliant chips for access points and client devices.

Access to high-speed internet at home is practically a necessity these days. That need became even more apparent during the COVID-19 lockdowns, which forced families to work and learn from home. While most children have gone back to in-person learning, many adults have remained in work-from-home mode with no plans to change. Throw in our copious consumption of streaming TV services, large downloads for operating system updates, PC and console games, apps, etc., and it's clear that having a fast and stable internet connection is a high priority for many people.

Unfortunately, for many Americans, actual choices in high-speed internet carriers for your home are often extremely limited.

Why I Decided to Drop Spectrum Internet

I’ve been a long-time Spectrum Internet customer, even when it was previously known as Time Warner Cable. But having Spectrum internet isn’t by choice; it has long been the only option I have living in rural Garner, NC, situated just southeast of Raleigh. While AT&T Fiber and Google Fiber are available within 20 miles of my address, neither services my neighborhood. Given the regional internet monopolies around the country, Spectrum is still my only choice for high-speed cable/fiber internet.

But why did I decide to give Spectrum the boot? I was sick of having to jump through hoops yearly to keep my current service at a reasonable price. I’ve been paying $69.99 for 400/20 internet, but every year Spectrum jacks the rate to $84.99. Then I have to call their customer service line and waste 45 mins of my day to get them to reduce the rate back to $69.99. Sure, it’s a once-a-year thing, but I’ve been looking for an out.

A friend, who also just so happens to be stuck with Spectrum, asked me about other ISP options when it dawned on me that T-Mobile offers Home Internet at $50/month. I asked her to see if her address was eligible for service, and it was. She decided to take T-Mobile up on their two-week free trial offer and signed up for service.

At that moment, I asked myself: Could I also potentially ditch spectrum and go with a 5G wireless service as my primary link for home internet?

What is T-Mobile Home Internet?

T-Mobile Home Internet provides internet service to your home using a 5G gateway using T-Mobile's cellular network. The 5G gateway contains a 4G/5G modem that connects to T-Mobile's cellular network and combines a Wi-Fi 6 router for linking up all your devices. T-Mobile only offers its Home Internet service in areas with excellent coverage (for obvious reasons). And even then, not all addresses are serviced, based on network capacity.

T-Mobile Home Internet costs $50 per month when you sign up for Autopay ($55/month without Autopay), including all taxes and fees. If you are an existing T-Mobile Magenta Max mobile customer, your monthly price drops to just $30/month with Autopay. The 5G gateway is provided free, so there is no monthly equipment (modem) fee to pay (as is often the case with fixed-line providers like Spectrum and Comcast), and there are no long-term contracts to sign.

The goodies don't stop there. T-Mobile currently offers home internet customers 50% off YouTube TV for a year, Paramount+ free for a year, and Philo TV for $15/month (versus the standard rate of $25/month). If that wasn't enough, new signups get an Amazon Echo Show 5 (second generation) for free.

According to the company, you can expect "typical" download speeds of between 33 Mbps to 182 Mbps and upload speeds ranging from 6 Mbps to 23 Mbps. However, as you see below, actual speeds can be much higher, rivaling legacy cable companies. The other big thing that most people would probably want to know is the current situation with data caps, given that this service works on T-Mobile's cellular network. Surprisingly, the answer is that there are no data caps. While Comcast and Spectrum have implemented data caps on their fixed-line customers in multiple U.S. markets, T-Mobile thankfully eschews the practice–at least for now.

As for overall performance, T-Mobile provides the following disclaimer:

Speeds can vary depending on location, signal strength and availability, time of day, and other factors. Our speed projections are based on our analysis of internal and third-party data.

T-Mobile says its home internet service is available to 30 million Americans.

Signing up for T-Mobile Home Internet

Getting signed up for service was relatively easy. First, I clicked this T-Mobile link to enter my phone number and see if my home address was eligible. Once eligibility was confirmed, I was able to chat with a representative who asked me a few questions and sent me several secure links to enter my name, address, billing information, and social security number (to perform a credit check for the new hardware that would be sent to me).

After about 10 minutes, the signup process was complete, and I was informed that the 5G gateway would arrive within two business days. On the second business day, the 5G gateway arrived as promised via UPS, and I was eager to test it out.

First Impressions and Setup

After removing the 5G gateway from the box, I was struck by its size. It measures 8.5 inches tall and is silver in color. It’s shaped like a cylinder, reminding me of the first-generation Amazon Echo. On the back of the device, you’ll find a power port, a power button, a reset button, a USB-C port (which worked just fine charging my smartphone), a phone jack and two Ethernet ports. Unfortunately, compared to modern wireless routers, T-Mobile’s 5G gateway is lacking in port selection. So you may want to pick up one of the best network switches we’ve tested.

You’ll find a small, circular touch display on the top of the device. You can swipe across the screen to see your current signal strength, messages from T-Mobile, the number of connected devices, and battery status. Yes, the 5G gateway has an integrated battery, and it will continue to function if the power plug is pulled (this feature should come in handy during power outages).

To set up the gateway, you must first download the T-Mobile Internet app and install it on a smartphone. I then plugged the gateway into the wall in my office on the second floor of my house and powered it up. It booted up, performed a quick software update, then confirmed signal strength of three out of five bars. The app itself is very basic, with few controls for the router. You can see network status, signal strength, connected devices, change the SSID/passcode, and adjust the frequency bands. That’s about it. There are no parental controls, advanced wireless controls, access controls, MAC filtering, or anything like that. This is just a barebones setup that should work fine for most households. Power users will likely want to look elsewhere or simply connect their existing router to the 5G gateway.

At first, I was concerned about the signal strength, as I had the gateway situated on top of a bookshelf next to my cable modem, which isn’t near a window (T-Mobile suggests placing the gateway near a window for the best signal). I then stuck it near a window in my office and was greeted with the same three bars. I next took the 5G gateway downstairs on the opposite side of the house and placed it near a window. I still obtained three bars. At that point, I decided to just put it in the original location near the cable modem and proceed with the setup. After the initial setup, signal strength has hovered between three bars and four bars.

Upon opening the T-Mobile Internet app, I was asked to scan the QR code on the bottom of the gateway to expedite setup. This prepopulated the SSID and passcode, then began communicating with the gateway and the T-Mobile network for activation. After about 30 seconds, the setup process was complete, and I was ready to go.

At any given time, we have 40+ Wi-Fi devices connected to our wireless router (a first-generation Netgear Orbi RBR50 Wi-Fi 5 mesh router with two satellites). We're talking multiple laptops, smartphones, tablets, Smart TVs, Amazon Echo speakers, and about a dozen Kasa smart light switches, light bulbs and power outlets. Given the sheer number of Wi-Fi devices in my home, I opted to piggyback my Orbi off the 5G gateway to make things simple (granted, I could have just changed the SSID and password on the 5G gateway to match my Orbi, but I didn’t want to drop coverage that my router and two satellites provide through the whole house and outdoors).

Testing Performance

I first connected just my iPhone to the 5G gateway over Wi-Fi and performed a Speedtest. To my amazement, I registered download speeds exceeding 470 Mbps, while uploads came in at nearly 72 Mbps.

For reference, my Spectrum internet connection gives me 430 Mbps to 450 Mbps and tops out at around 21 Mbps for uploads. Subsequent tests have shown the 5G gateway hitting peak download speeds of 557.37 Mbps from my MacBook Pro (connected directly to the 5G gateway) around 3 p.m., which is unheard of for home internet out here in the sticks.

For a worst-case scenario, I tested again around 9:00 p.m. ET, and the 5G gateway's speeds dropped to around 400 Mbps for downloads and 40 Mbps for uploads. That's a steep drop-off, but still, plenty of throughput for our needs.

I next performed the same tests with my Orbi router plugged in via one of the 5G gateway’s two Ethernet ports. The download and upload speeds were unaffected, so I stuck with that setup.

I’m not a big gamer, so I’m primarily concerned with having a fast and stable internet connection 24-7-365. In the days that I’ve been testing T-Mobile’s Home Internet service, it’s been flawless. I haven’t experienced any service interruptions or significant speed shortfalls. The 5G gateway has remained slightly lukewarm to the touch, which cooler than the toasty Arris Surfboard SB6183 cable modem I’ve been using for years.

The 5G hotspot can simultaneously handle multiple Smart TVs streaming, my daily conference calls, my large file downloads, and just about anything else I throw at it.

Wrap-up

I went into this test a little skeptical of using a cellular-based internet service for my home internet, but those worries never came to fruition. Signing up for T-Mobile Home Internet was easy, the setup process with the app was minimalistic with little room for error, and the actual internet service has been rock solid. Throw in the fact that I’m saving $20 per month ($240/year), and the switch has been a no-brainer for our family.

About the hardest part of this whole process will likely be the phone call that I will need to make to Spectrum’s customer retention department to tell them that I’m canceling my existing service.

Note: As with all of our op-eds, the opinions expressed here belong to the writer alone and not Tom's Hardware as a team.

FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel has proposed raising the minimum acceptable transfer speeds for services classed as ‘broadband’ to 100Mbps for downloads and 20Mbps for uploads. A minimum accepted 100/20 service level would be a significant upgrade on the 2015 minimum standard for broadband, which the FCC set at 25/3 Mbps.

According to Rosenworcel, and we think you might agree, the FCC’s 25/3 metric is very much behind the times. This became abundantly clear at the height of the pandemic, with all the internet gaming, media consumption and WFH tasks that became central to many people’s daily lives. Moreover, the FCC Chairwoman went so far as opining that the current broadband standard is harmful in some ways.

“The 25/3 metric isn’t just behind the times, it’s a harmful one because it masks the extent to which low-income neighborhoods and rural communities are being left behind and left offline,” explained Rosenworcel.

How did the telecoms bureaucrats come to decide on the 100/20 Mbps minimum standards figures? The FCC says it believes in setting “big goals,” so that everyone can have a fair shot in the online world of the 21st century. There is said to be a “range of evidence” supporting the new minimum proposed broadband speeds, including some work previously done as part of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

The FCC proposal is a small but important step. Next up, the proposal would have to be voted on by a commission that is currently divided by two Democrat and two Republican members, with an empty seat needing to be filled. If the proposal gets through to the next stage of being implemented, then telecoms companies will have to encouraged with government funds and coerced with the threat of regulator action. The commission will be keen to check that telecoms companies provide services that offer “affordability, adoption, availability, and equitable access,” and will be deployed in a reasonably timely manner.

We checked speedtest.net today, and it says that the median fixed broadband speeds across the whole of the US was 154 Mbps download, and 21.6 Mbps download using June 2022 data. This data roughly indicates that the new 100/20 broadband goal should not be an insurmountable challenge for the government and private sector to achieve. Most of the upgrading work will probably need to be done in those aforementioned low-income and rural communities. The US is ranked 8th in the world for (median) broadband speeds.

The newly proposed 100/20 Mbps standard might take a little time to get over some hurdles, but it looks like it should get the green light in due course. With the effort needed to bring broadband definitions up to date in evidence, the FCC has also prudently started rolling forward with a separate national goal of 1 Gbps / 500 Mbps to usher in the ‘Gigabit future’.

Researchers at the National Institute of Information and Communications Technology (NICT) in Japan have achieved greater than 1 Petabit per second (Pb/s) data transfers using 4-core fiber with standard cladding. The key advance, facilitating this new transfer speed record, is the transmission system's support for optical bandwidth exceeding 20 THz. This beefy bandwidth comes largely thanks to the application of wavelength division multiplexing (WDM) technology and the deployment of the experimental S-band.

According to the NICT researchers, with this amount of bandwidth on tap you could broadcast 10 million 8K TV channels simultaneously.

One of the most important aspects of the headlining advance, achieving 1.02 Pbps data transfers, is that the cables used were compatible with existing infrastructure. Adhering to this specification, the technology will be able to be deployed in high-throughput and long-distance links sooner rather than later.

Previous attempts at high-data-rate transfers using the same optical fiber cabling, 125μm diameter 4-core MCF (Multi Core Fiber), peaked at 0.61 Pbps in tests by the same researchers back in March 2020. Now that greater than 1 Pbps transfers have been achieved with 4-core MCF, the research team can claim performance parity with more advanced 15-core fiber.

The push up from 0.61 to 1.02 Pb/s is mostly due to WDM technology. 'M' in this acronym stands for multiplexing, and record optical bandwidth exceeding 20 THz was achieved after multiplexing the already commercially adopted C- and L-transmission bands with recently explored S-band technology. 

"Two kinds of doped fiber amplifiers along with Raman amplification with pumps added in a novel multi-core pump combiner, enabled transmission of 801 wavelength channels over the 20 THz optical bandwidth," explains the academic post.

The diagram above shows a summary of how the impressive bandwidth was achieved. Throughput is plotted against the wavelengths exploited – in 801 channels with 25 GHz spacing for high spectral density.

In the diagram above we get a hint regarding the next step by NICT. Every time the researchers achieve a high data rate transfer milestone, they appear to follow up with work on a long-distance optimized fiber transmission technique. Thus we would expect, with some degree of confidence, that the 4-core MCF long-distance data rate record of 0.32 Pb/s (distance between 2,000 and 3,000km) will be broken in the coming months.

AMD and Qualcomm are teaming up to make the Wi-Fi in your business laptop faster. Today, the two companies announced that they're working to bring Qualcomm FastConnect to PCs with AMD Ryzen processors, beginning on enterprise notebooks using the Ryzen Pro 6000 series chips and Qualcomm FastConnect 6900.

This will bring Wi-Fi 6 and 6E to some business notebooks, though they would hardly be the first. But AMD and Qualcomm claim that by also bringing Microsoft in on the collab, laptops including the HP EliteBook 805 series and Lenovo ThinkPad Z series will take advantage of wireless options built into Windows 11. 

Specifically, those laptops will use Windows 11 Wi-Fi Dual Station, which Qualcomm has pushed before for gaming. (In fact, back when that was announced in October 2021, AMD corporate vice president Jason Banta said the company was planning to bring the tech to business laptops. Some promises do come true!)  This will allow laptops to use multiple Wi-Fi bands simultaneously for reduced latency, stronger connections, and, the companies claim, better video conferencing. And because these notebooks can use the 6GHz wireless band, they shouldn't have to fight for a connection with older network devices.

AMD is also pushing its AMD Manageability Processor for Ryzen Pro 6000 PCs for remote management. (However, laptop manufacturers will have to enable this for each notebook, so just because a laptop uses those chips doesn't mean it will have the feature.)

“Out-of-band Wi-Fi remote management is an important tool for enterprise IT managers to diagnose and fix issues, even when the operating system is not running,” Banta said in a press release. “AMD Ryzen PRO 6000 Series processors with Qualcomm FastConnect 6900 enable next-generation business laptops to have the processing and connectivity tools needed to perform in modern environments, offering professional-strength remote manageability for users in the new, hybrid workplace."

The Lenovo ThinkPad Z series and HP EliteBook 805 laptops were announced at CES, and we expect to see them sometime this year. 

Almost two decades ago, widely available 500 Mbps – 1 Gbps Internet connections opened the door to services we could barely dream of. For the next step of Internet evolution, higher speeds are needed. CableLabs, the company that heads development of the DOCSIS protocol used by cable networks, already has technology that will enable home or office Internet connections at 10 Gbps, but to make them widespread this decade, it needs assistance from industry peers. 

CableLabs' DOCSIS 3.1 and DOCSIS 4.0 standards already support up to 10 Gbps maximum downstream speed as well as 1 – 2 Gbps or 6 Gbps upstream speeds, respectively. To support such extreme data rates over long ranges, the technologies use the full spectrum of the cable (0 MHz to ~1.80 GHz, DOCSIS 4.0 only), 4096 quadrature amplitude modulation, narrower (25 kHz or 50 kHz wide) orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing (OFDM) sub-carriers that can be bonded inside a block spectrum, and a number of other innovations.  

But while DOCSIS 3.1 is used by several cable companies in the U.S. (albeit at around 3 Gbps download speeds), DOCSIS 4.0 yet has to be widely supported. DOCSIS 4.0 is not going to become a mainstream technology overnight, there are many companies working on solutions to make 10 Gbps Internet connections a reality within this decade, reports ZDNet. 

First up, to build network equipment that supports full-duplex DOCSIS 4.0 protocol, one needs appropriate modem system-on-chips. Last year Broadcom and Comcast successfully transferred data at a 4 Gbps data rate over a lab-based hybrid fiber-coaxial (HFC) network using a prototype DOCSIS 4.0 modem based on Broadcom's SoC as well as two cable modem chips and Comcast's virtual cable modem termination system (vCMTS). 

Theoretically, it is possible to build a DOCSIS 4.0-supporting modem today, but the problem is that DOCSIS 4.0 requires an optical fiber network or a slightly cheaper hybrid fiber-coaxial (HFC) network or just to show its potential.  

Armstrong, a U.S. cable company, launched a 10 Gbps fiber-optic network in Medina, Ohio, to deliver this extremely-fast connectivity to more than 3000 businesses and residences. Meanwhile, Charter Communications has demonstrated a higher than 8.5 Gbps downstream and 6 Gbps upstream over an existing HFC network. 

Building new infrastructure takes time and money. To make it easier for operators to adopt DOCSIS 4.0, CableLabs has developed a new device called Coherent Termination Device (CTD) that teams up coherent optics and wavelength-division multiplexing (WDM) in the optical access network to increase efficiency of existing fiber optics networks and therefore increase data transfer rates. While the technology works, it is unknown how fast will it be adopted by the industry. 

"While we don't know what the future holds, we do know that the internet will play a vital role in shaping it," said Phil McKinney, CableLabs president and CEO. "The 10G platform and its applications [will] create a better future for humanity."

While Wi-Fi 6 was adopted fairly quickly because numerous vendors had released draft-802.11ax routers and adapters, the adoption of Wi-Fi 6E is slow because it has been hampered by a crushing shortage of components and new regulations around the 6 GHz spectrum. As a result, many business clients may skip 6E and go straight to Wi-Fi 7 in 2023, according to a new report from Dell'Oro.  

"Although manufacturers launched Wi-Fi 6E products in mid-2021, products are either not available, or they are in very limited supply," said Tam Dell'Oro, Founder, CEO, and Wireless LAN Analyst. 

Wi-Fi 6 allows 867 Mbps over a 160MHz band at 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz frequencies, but with three bands (the so-called 3x3 configuration), it goes all the way up to 2.54 Gbps. Wi-Fi 6E adds formally unregulated 6 GHz+ frequencies to get even more throughput when/where possible, but that adds both components and regulatory constraints. 

The 6 GHz frequency support adds an appropriate radio frequency front end (RFFE) module, with all of its typical chipset support like a power management IC and an appropriate physical radio. Unfortunately, the assembly of components required to enable Wi-Fi 6E both on client and host devices is significant, which has slowed down Wi-Fi 6E adoption by both types of devices.  

"Supply constraints have prompted manufacturers to focus on enabling the availability of popular models by re-designing these models with components that are more readily available," said Dell'Oro. "Our interviews with systems integrators reveal users are asking for Wi-Fi 6, not 6E. Therefore, if companies have to prioritize their production, Wi-Fi 6 will be the priority." 

Wi-Fi 7 (also known as IEEE 802.be and dubbed as Extremely High Throughput (EHT)) adds loads of features over 2.4 GHz, 5 GHz, and 6 GHz frequencies targeting even higher throughput than Wi-Fi 6E does. Meanwhile, ratification of the standard is expected in early 2024 at best, which essentially might mean an adoption pattern similar to Wi-Fi 6 (draft, then full). In fact, Dell'Oro expects first Wi-Fi 7-enabled products next year. 

"With Wi-Fi 7 products shipping as early as 2023, we predict users will bypass 6E," said Dell'Oro.

Asus is looking to advance the networking space with its latest offering, the ROG Rapture GT-AXE16000 gaming router. At first glance, it looks like the typical over-the-top best gaming routers with spider-esque 8 antennae. However, the ROG Rapture GT-AXE16000 stands apart from the rest of the pack because it is the first gaming router with quad-band Wi-Fi 6E support.

There’s a single 6 GHz band to handle your bleeding-edge networking devices (up to 4,804 Mbps) along with two 5 GHz bands (4,804 Mbps each). The fourth band is dedicated to 2.4 GHz devices and provides a total of 1,148 Mbps of bandwidth, bringing the grand total to 16,000 Mbps. We should mention that while Asus makes the distinction that this is the first quad-band “gaming” Wi-Fi 6E router, the Netgear Orbi 960 Series emerged last year as the first quad-band Wi-Fi 6E router.

Asus keenly points out that the second 5 GHz band can be used as a dedicated backhaul when connecting with AiMesh compatible routers. This would be helpful if you need to extend Wi-Fi coverage in hard-to-reach areas of your home or in, for example, a detached garage/workshop.

However, the ROG Rapture GT-AXE16000 doesn’t just excel at wireless networking; it also features a plethora of wired ports to handle your devices. There are four GbE (supporting port bonding) and two 10 GbE ports along with a 2.5 GbE WAN port. All of the ports are configurable for WAN usage, which allows you to support [atypical] consumer-centric scenarios like receiving service from multiple ISPs at once. Running the show is a 2 GHz quad-core processor.

Not to be left out, Asus also gave some attention to the existing ROG Rapture GT-AX11000, which sees several improvements and the addition of “Pro” to its name. This tri-band router features two 5 GHz bands (4,804 Mbps each) and a single 1,149 Mbps 2.4 GHz band. Asus also opened the 5 GHz band by adding a third high-power 160 Hz channel to join the previous two.

While not as generous as Asus’ flagship router, the ROG Rapture GT-AX11000 Pro offers up four GbE, one 2.5 GbE and one 2.5 GbE WAN port for wired duties. It also gets a brain transplant by using the same 2 GHz processor from the ROG Rapture GT-AXE16000.

Asus has not yet indicated when the ROG Rapture GT-AXE16000 or GT-AX11000 Pro will be available for sale, or for how much. However, the existing GT-AX11000 carries an MSRP of $449.

MediaTek will be powering AMD's Wi-Fi 6E modules for upcoming Ryzen-based laptops and desktops, the companies announced today. The first to come will be the AMD RZ600 series Wi-Fi 6E modules, which will be based on MediaTek's Filogic 330P chipset.

In a press release, the companies claim that they have "developed and certified PCIe and USB interfaces for modern sleep states and power management," and that the company's own optimization and testing process will help laptop and desktop manufacturers save time in product development.

There are two models in the series, the RX616, which is faster (with a phy rate up to 2.6 Gbps) and works with 160 MHz WiFi, which should support 6GHz spectrum; and the RZ608, which goes up to 1.2 Gbps and relies on 80MHz bandwidth. The Fliogic 330P chipset supports Wi-Fi 6 and 6E as well as Bluetooth 5.2. The RZ616 will fit in M.2 2230 and very short M.2 1216 slots, while the RZ608 is meant solely for M.2 2230. MediaTek claims its power and low noise amplification technology helps manage power and allows for a small chip for "laptops of all sizes," though I've never seen a laptop too small for a Wi-Fi card.

Teaming up with MediaTek reduces AMD's reliance on Intel, which makes its own Wi-Fi modules (and also acquired Rivet Networks, which owns the Killer brand aimed at gaming laptops' wireless needs). Reports of the pairing started way back in September 2020.

In May, the CEO of Ayaneo, which is making a handheld gaming device based on the AMD Ryzen 5 4500U APU, blew the RZ608's cover. CEO Arthur Zhang stated "[t]he RZ608 announced today has never been revealed on the Internet, so many of you don't believe it." He also included details including the correct versions of Bluetooth, Wi-Fi 6E and the M.2 22330 module size.

AnandTech later reported that the RZ608 is actually a rebranded MediaTek MT7921K module with an AMD logo on it. It's unclear if the RZ616 had more input from AMD.

The new chips should debut in Ryzen laptops and desktops in 2022.

Future GPUs are about to get a whole lot faster. Details of HBM3 have trickled out slowly, with the first vague specs coming from SK hynix. But Rambus' announcement that the company has developed a new HBM3-ready combined PHY and memory controller brings much more information to light. That includes a potential for HBM3 to reach up to 8.4 Gbps-per-pin, 1.075 TB/s of throughput, and support for up to 16 channels of memory and 16-Hi memory stacks. That's more than twice the capacity and bandwidth offered with HBM2E, portending potential radical speedups for tomorrow's GPUs and SoCs. 

Like HBM2E, the new HBM3 standard utilizes a 1024-bit wide interface with 64 bits per channel. However, HBM3 supports 16 channels. That's twice the number of channels with HBM2, resulting in the lion's share of the performance improvements, including the more than doubled throughput. Additionally, the architecture also supports a pseudo channel for each channel (up to 32 pseudo channels), allowing for fine-tuning traffic based on the size of memory accesses, which is particularly helpful for AI workloads. 

The increased number of memory channels supports more memory die, thus supporting up to 16-Hi stacks (supports up to 32 Gb per channel) that deliver up to 32GB of total capacity, with 64GB of capacity possible in the future. 

Paired with SK hynix's PHY and memory controller, the company says it plans to hit 1.075 TB/s of throughput and 8.4 Gbps/pin with HBM3. That's more than a doubling of HBM2E's metrics, which weigh in at 460 GB/s and 3.2 Gbps/pin. Notably, these specifications match the heights of the PHY and memory controller's capabilities, but it will take some time for memory vendors to evolve their products to support such speeds. As a result, we should expect somewhat lower performance from the leading-edge products. 

Rambus also provides its customers with reference 2.5D packaging designs (including both interposers and packages) to speed the integration of its PHY and memory controllers into an SoC. These feature what we should consider rather standard interposer designs connected to the memory package via microbumps.

The Rambus offering fully supports the JEDEC spec, so it doesn't support the (for now) exotic HBM-PIM (Processing in Memory) tech that has embedded in-die processing power. Those memories are still in the early stages of industry adoption from several memory manufacturers but are largely thought to be a shoo-in for JEDEC support in the future. 

Many details of the actual JEDEC HBM3 spec are still fuzzy, as the standards body hasn't officially made the details public yet. However, the picture is becoming a bit clearer as the ecosystem continues to evolve and players like Rambus and SK hynix begin sharing the preliminary details. 

Rambus tells us that the first SoCs that leverage its design will land either late next year or early 2023, so we expect the formal spec reveal in the coming months.   

Widespread flaws affecting Wi-Fi have been disclosed to the public by security researcher Mathy Vanhoef nine months after he tipped the Wi-Fi Alliance off about the problem. The vulnerabilities, reported by Gizmondo from a site set up by Vanhoef exploit mistakes in the implementation of Wi-Fi standards, and can affect any Wi-Fi device no matter how old, and running any level of security including WPA 2 and 3. 

The ‘fragmentation and aggregation attacks’ - FragAttacks for short - are 12 different vulnerabilities that see Wi-Fi devices leak user data if probed in the right way. Three of the flaws are baked into the Wi-Fi standard itself, while the others flow from programming errors in specific products. The flaws have likely been lurking since Wi-Fi was first released in 1997, as even the venerable WEP protocol is vulnerable - though you really should have moved on from WEP by now, as it’s easily broken. 

By taking advantage of the way some routers accept plaintext during handshakes, for example, or the way some networks cache data, intruders could intercept personal data, or even direct users to fake websites. Vanhoef talks us through the attacks in this YouTube video, remotely controlling a smart plug and compromising an outdated Windows 7 PC.

“The biggest risk in practice,” Vanhoef writes, “is likely the ability to abuse the discovered flaws to attack devices in someone's home network. For instance, many smart home and internet-of-things devices are rarely updated, and Wi-Fi security is the last line of defense that prevents someone from attacking these devices. Unfortunately, due to [these] vulnerabilities, this last line of defense can now be bypassed.”

There is some good news, however: most of the flaws are hard to exploit, patches are available for many devices, including three from Microsoft going all the way back to Windows 7, and from all major router manufacturers (though not all models have received new firmware yet). At the time of writing Vanhoef said he wasn’t aware of any attacks in the wild using the exploits. This could be a good time to ditch your service provider’s router for the latest and best routers.