NCTA-The Internet & Television Association is arguing that it would be smart for cities and towns to team with cable ops on the kind

of gigabit-speed broadband service that turns them into "smart" cities and communities.

Telcos are actively going after the smart cities market, and utilities can be expected to follow, says Dr. Peter Williams, CTO, Big Green Innovations, at IBM in a smart cities online preview. In fact, Williams says last year he fielded calls from utilities about smart cities "every other week."

But NCTA, which Wednesday released a white paper it commissioned from Bill Maguire of Connected Communities, says cable ops are uniquely positioned to be the go-to provider when cities and localities want to ramp up connected communities for IoT and with 5G small-cell deployments.

Among the key "underappreciated affinities" between cable ISPs and communities:

1. "Cable networks have the capability to support smart community/IoT applications both now and in the future.

2. "A rapid expansion of the number of homes where gigabit service is available means that the smart home will be an increasingly viable platform capable of advancing smart and connected community objectives.

3. "Smart and connected community partnerships between cable providers and local governments reflect new and evolving approaches to collaboration."

Among the paper's recommendations to local governments is to make sure to talk to cable providers and include them in the process and to evaluate whether their existing connectivity can support the smart apps and deployments.

For their part, cable ops should educate community leaders about cable expertise and end-to-end connectivity and should look at public-private partnerships with cities or universities and nonprofits as a way to grow economic activity in their communities and ultimately draw new customers.

But NCTA members are not waiting around for a green flag. NCTA points out that Cox, Comcast and Charter all have partnerships with cities "to develop, test and evaluate different solutions for IoT applications, as well as to engage more stakeholders to participate in efforts to deploy new innovations that help to address key community concerns, such as energy efficiency or better water management."

"There’s no question that cable’s investment in deep fiber over the last five years will play a substantial role in enabling smart cities, both directly and indirectly through mobile backhaul," says internet industry analyst and author Larry Downes, project director, Georgetown Center for Business and Public Policy. "But more than abundant capacity, smart cities and the IoT more broadly need is killer apps. So far, consumers haven’t embraced many, in part because of concerns about personal data collection and use that have been amplified by recent social media breaches.

"Can broadband providers and cities crack the case together? Absolutely. Access providers have already proven they can adapt their networks to new applications, such as security. And since many smart city apps will connect devices owned and operated by local governments, including lighting, transport, trash and parking, there’s no doubt that private-partnerships will be essential to accelerate adoption."

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), in early comments at Monday's annual State of the Net conference in Washington, presaged a discussion later in the day about whether and how federal support to build broadband facilities should be part of the Trump administration's proposals for upgrading the nation's infrastructure of roads and bridges.

That dialog sparked an examination, suitable to the venue and referred to throughout the day as part of the "kinetic versus cyber" ecosystem, of telecommunications' importance vis-à-vis tangible products.

"The more we can do in the broadband space, the  better," Schatz said in his remarks at the conference. "We can get bipartisan support," but he proposed that "we should do little things" rather than go for sweeping telecom reform.

Schatz also addressed the continuing controversy about net neutrality, insisting that, "reversing the Open Internet order is not so easy." He said that "right now it is just too polarized" to legislate on that issue, although he thinks Congress should do so.

"I'm open to legislating but only if it's not a Trojan horse for undermining the authority that is already in place," said Schatz, who sits on the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation.

He also said he "believes Jessica should be back on the FCC," a reference to former Democratic FCC commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel, whose term ended after an ill-fated, politically laced attempt to reappoint her in late December.

Schatz's remarks included his views on privacy and the Internet of Things, which were major topics throughout the SOTN annual conference.

"IoT is one of the spaces where we need rules of the road; also artificial intelligence as it relates to law enforcement," Schatz said. "I don't think this is apocryphal sci-fi stuff. We have to have this conversation, ideally private-sector driven." 

He did not offer any suggestions on how Congress would become involved in these rapidly developing tech/telecom sectors.

At a subsequent session on IoT, Dr. Ron Ross, a fellow at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, characterized cybersecurity intrusions as "the greatest national security problem," emphasizing that communications and utility operators are not adequately prepared for attacks, such as "exfiltration" of customer information. He said building the infrastructure to defend against cyberattacks "is incredibly complex."

The panel also addressed looming issues such as liability and how IoT systems can be built that enable consumers to keep control over their own data.

Reassigning Spectrum, Funding Broadband Deployment
A session on "Rethinking the Future of Communications Policy" spanned a terrain from spectrum allocation to FCC staffing.

After declaring the current broadcast incentive auction a success (despite its lower-than-expected revenue results), the panel said it expects further efforts to retrieve airwaves for new digital applications. In particular, the panel focused on government agency controlled airwaves, which it called "the low hanging fruit for more spectrum."

Larry Downes, project director of the Georgetown University Center for Business and Public Policy, cited the opportunity for the new administration "to incentivize federal agencies with underused spectrum to give it up or share it for commercial use.   

Although the Defense Department is unlikely to relinquish its massive spectrum holdings, according to panelists, airwaves controlled by aviation and other agencies may be diverted to commercial use.  No one offered specifics regarding timetable or how the transfer would be accomplished.

Broadband will be part of the Trump administration's national infrastructure construction plan, said Markham Erickson, a partner at Steptoe & Johnson law firm, who represents telecom and internet clients. He expects the primary federal actions will be created by providing tax incentives and subsidies for private investment, "some mechanism to get broadband out to rural places."

Erickson also said he expects that the FCC will retain "extensive regulations" over some telecom sectors, although he did not cite specific topics.

With FCC transition team member Mark Jamison (pictured above) on the panel, discussion also touched on the extent of the FCC reorganization agenda. Jamison, who is director of the Public Utility Research Center at the University of Florida, was a member of the Trump transition team working on the FCC.

Jamison said that the "basic goal" was to "elevate the role of technical analysis."

"It's easier to hire lawyers than economists or engineers," he said. "I think the commissioners and public will be better served" with more technical expertise.

Gigi Sohn, a former advisor to former FCC chairman Tom Wheeler, concurred, noting that it was "very frustrating to bring engineers and economists" from telecom and media companies and count on their information. "As a result, we're reliant on industry input," Sohn said, lapsing, as she frequently did on the panel, to using "we" when discussing a job she left three weeks ago, a very common gaffe among recently quondam public servants. She joked about the ex post facto “we” that crept into her comments.

The panel agreed that FCC reorganization should reflect greater overlap of activities that affect multiple bureaus.

"The FCC should recognize the convergence of all kinds of Internet Protocol technologies," said Downes. "There is no need to separate bureaus based on [legacy] structures."

Sohn also used the platform to predict that Trump appointees will adopt the mantra "Consolidation, consolidation, consolidation," in counterpoint to Wheeler's "Competition" mantra. She predicted that the FCC will have no role in upcoming merger considerations, with those functions going to the Federal Trade Commission and Justice Department.

Erickson pointed out that there are similar rules at various bureaus and agencies, noting as an example that the Justice Department may be better equipped to take "a bigger view of intermodal and intramodal competition."  

In his closing keynote,  Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) avoided any indication that an omnibus Telecommunications Act reform is in the works.

Comcast was the only "Platinum Sponsor" of the annual event;  AT&T, Verizon and Google were among the "Gold Sponsors."

Larry Downes, project director at the Georgetown Center for Business and Public Policy, is no fan of the FCC's broadband privacy proposal and took the extra few days the FCC provided for official comment to tell it so.

Downes, an Internet industry analyst and author, filed a letter in the docket referencing his article in the Harvard Business Review on what he calls the three major problems with the FCC proposal.

FCC chairman Tom Wheeler has proposed requiring that subscribers opt in to most third-party uses of their broadband data -- like what sites they visit -- for uses including the targeted marketing that drives much Web advertising. Edge providers like search engines and sites have not had such restriction on their use of Web data.

In his letter, Downes boiled his criticisms down to those three main points:

"False Premise": The FCC’s assumption that ISPs have “unique” access to consumer information is flatly wrong.  Thanks to a nearly-complete campaign to encrypt information flow, ISPS are largely blind to the kind of sensitive information the FCC claims as its chief motivation for the rulemaking.

"Double Standard": Leaving out the dominant “edge” providers who are in fact the “gatekeepers” of transactional information unnecessarily subjects consumers to two sets of different rules and different enforcement mechanisms for information exchange. 

"Transaction Costs of 'Opt-In'": Subjecting ISPs and ISPs alone to “opt-in” requirements for nearly any use of consumer information, as all economists agree, significantly raises the transaction costs of precisely the kind of information exchanges that have so far fueled the “cycle of innovation” that elsewhere the FCC praises as the source of the Internet’s phenomenal success.  To do so only for those providers who have the least access to transaction data is both arbitrary and capricious."

The FCC last week extended the comment deadline from June 27 to July 6. When the FCC reclassified broadband as a Title II common carrier service, it assumed regulatory oversight from the Federal Trade Commission.