Tomorrow, congress will be given the FCC’s ten year plan for making high-speed internet the nation’s dominant communications network. The New York Times has details on how the plan will be implemented and the obstacles it may face.

Specifically, some telecom companies oppose the plan because it may add to their competition, and broadcast networks may not be pleased about any changes to the wireless spectrum, parts of which can be used for mobile services.

The plan includes subsidies to ISPs to wire rural areas where there is currently no competition for broadband service, because there’s no broadband service. It also calls for the development of a set-top internet and cable box for home televisions.

Still, “each bullet point will trigger its own tortuous battle,” said Craig Moffett, a senior analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein & Company.

For much of the last year, Julius Genachowski, the F.C.C. chairman and the plan’s chief salesman, has laid the groundwork for the Congressionally mandated plan by asserting that the United States is lagging far behind other countries in broadband adoption and speed. About a third of Americans have no access to high-speed Internet service, cannot afford it or choose not to have it.

In a speech last month, Mr. Genachowski observed that the country could build state-of-the-art computers and applications, but without equivalent broadband wiring, “it would be like having the technology for great electric cars, but terrible roads.”

The plan envisions a fully Web-connected world with split-second access to health care information and online classrooms, delivered through wireless devices yet to be dreamed up in Silicon Valley. But to get there, analysts say the F.C.C. must tread carefully with companies like Comcast and AT&T that largely control Internet pricing and speeds. Already, there are questions about the extent to which the F.C.C. has jurisdiction over Internet providers.