What the new open access rules mean for WiMAX operators such as Clearwire: Incumbent mobile operators generally disapprove of rules that would prevent them from restricting the flow of various types of data. This also affects cable operators such as Comcast, who in the past have been accused of slowing or capping data flow of P2P file sharing and other applications. Operators insist that it is necessary to control data flows in order to maintain the overall quality of their networks. Usage statistics of 3G-3.5G mobile data as well as cable networks consistently show that bottlenecks can occur, particularly during peak usage periods. Without some means to control heavy data usage during those periods, they argue that their service to their customers will suffer.

Alternative services providers argue that operators can use the quality control mechanisms (QoS) as a ruse to restrict their services such as VoIP, even during periods or conditions when doing so does not improve overall network quality.

It seems likely that the new FCC rules will require fewer restrictions on data flows.

For the most part this move is favorable to WiMAX and LTE service providers, even though they may wish to take advantage of QoS mechanisms. This is a net benefit because these new networks will have the 'fattest pipe' with more headroom to handle abuse from heavy users.

Source: Ericsson, 2009

Ericsson and many operators point out the impact P2P file sharing and file exchange sites have on overall network traffic. Statistics show that this can squeeze out other users if not controlled using Traffic Handling Priority (THP) QoS mechanisms. Arguments can be made that methods such as peak period rates and encouraging programs that schedule downloads of files, videos, emails and web content during off-peak periods, can also help even out demand curves.

The FCC guidelines will leave much 'devil is in the details' regarding how rules are interpreted and enforced: QoS implemented in the RAN can be used in conjunction with routers and applications servers to provide improved VoIP, multicast/unicast IPTV and other services. These could simply treat all other traffic as generic, while speeding along specific traffic that requires real-time performance.

We have doubts about the enforceability and prudence of rules governing quality of service, flexibility of service caps and rate plans. A high degree of flexibility is needed in order to facilitate efficient use of network resources, provide commensurate return on investments, and create an environment in which innovation rewarded rather than impeded.

UPDATE:
On Monday, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski outlined plans to expand FCC scrutiny of open access rules. The process to follow will include hearings and opportunities for parties to respond to the proposed guidelines before details are ironed out. Colin Crowell, a senior adviser to Genachowski, said that “this is the announcement of the beginning of a process. The chairman said two things with respect to mobile; first, that the principles ought to apply to all platforms, in order to be technologically neutral. The principals ideally apply in a technologically neutral way so that your expectations as a consumer and entrepreneur don't change as you choose different ways of reaching the Internet. Second, he indicated that how, to what extent, and when the principles will apply to different platforms is what the process will determine" (Cecilia Kang, 2009. ”FCC Endorses Network Neutrality”. The Washington Post.) 

The transcript of the Chairman’s speech reveals a balanced approach to the proposed rule making (2009. “FCC Chairman's Net Neutrality Speech Text - Post I.T. - A Technology Blog From The Washington Post.” The Washington Post.) We agree with this approach and believe that the FCC has struck a balance between broadband to the home and wireless broadband that fits the nature of the industry and ‘natural rights’ to open access. 

Chairman Genachowski laid out three reasons for the rulemaking:

1. The “…limited competition among service providers.”
2. TV subscriptions, voice and video of service providers increasingly compete with similar products provided over the Internet. “The net result is that broadband providers' rational bottom-line interests may diverge from the broad interests of consumers in competition and choice.”
3. The explosion of Internet traffic requires judgment in the use of available, more sophisticated tools (QoS).

The following statement sums up the FCC’s motivation in announcing plans for the new rules:

“Saying nothing -- and doing nothing -- would impose its own form of unacceptable cost. It would deprive innovators and investors of confidence that the free and open Internet we depend upon today will still be here tomorrow. It would deny the benefits of predictable rules of the road to all players in the Internet ecosystem. And it would be a dangerous retreat from the core principle of openness -- the freedom to innovate without permission -- that has been a hallmark of the Internet since its inception, and has made it so stunningly successful as a platform for innovation, opportunity, and prosperity.”

The Nitty Gritty
The heart of the announcement is the move to introduce two new principle “freedoms”:

“Today, I propose that the FCC adopt the existing principles as Commission rules, along with two additional principles that reflect the evolution of the Internet and that are essential to ensuring its continued openness.”

“The fifth principle is one of non-discrimination -- stating that broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications. This means they cannot block or degrade lawful traffic over their networks, or pick winners by favoring some content or applications over others in the connection to subscribers' homes. Nor can they disfavor an Internet service just because it competes with a similar service offered by that broadband provider. The Internet must continue to allow users to decide what content and applications succeed.”

The speech goes on to recognize that there are circumstances that require managed services, but these must be balanced by the open access principles. The heavy peak demand use can be managed to assure it does “not crowd out everyone else. And this principle will not constrain efforts to ensure a safe, secure, and spam-free Internet experience, or to enforce the law.” 

We think that the FCC has struck the right chord for regulation of the communications environment. The ruling recognizes the convergence between communications media that will occur over fixed and mobile services, and the need to maintain the openness expected of the Internet as it is made available through evolving wireless broadband technology. This establishes a balance between the needs of operators to control and optimize network traffic to achieve quality of service, and the needs of third parties and users to have open choices in the development and consumption of applications and services in a common cloud environment.

The move initiates direct involvement on a case-by-case basis to assure non-discrimination of access. This applies directly to the current Google Voice on the Apple iPhone issue that is before the FCC. The course of action fits the opinions we expressed in our article on the subject: namely, that Apple will be required to make the Google Voice app available. The Chairman’s speech also mentions what we discussed about the need developers have expressed for greater visibility of store access and the apps development and promotion process. Developers want so-called ‘open source’ efforts to have openly disclosed requirements for approval of applications, sales through apps stores, compensation rights, and promotion or other business and marketing arrangements that are generally available to others.

The proposed changes elicited the expected reaction from AT&T, Verizon and CTIA, which is probably representative of the majority of incumbent wireless and cable operators. AT&T’s response was that the ruling should exclude the cell phone industry because competition is abundant, and because of the increased strain that rapidly rising bandwidth demands

For reference information, Click Here

For more information you can contact the author at robert@maravedis-bwa.com

Copyright © 2009 by Maravedis Inc. All Rights Reserved.
No reproduction without consent.



>> Top