Total Pageviews

Thursday, August 25, 2016

Wi-Fi dominant data technology for mobiles - Mobile World Live

Wi-Fi dominant data technology for mobiles - Mobile World Live: "The Global State of Mobile Networks study, based on 12.3 billion measurements taken by 822,556 OpenSignal users in an 84 day period, found that smartphone users spent more than 50 per cent of their time connected to Wi-Fi, with Netherlands the most mobile Wi-Fi hungry country, where it accounted for 70 per cent of all smartphone connections.

“You could argue that in many places Wi-Fi has become a far more important mobile data technology than 3G or 4G,” noted the report." 'via Blog this'

Sunday, July 31, 2016

10 reasons not to trust BEREC on net neutrality

10 reasons not to trust BEREC on net neutrality. The EU process to create Open Internet guidelines lacks transparency, independence and credibility: "Requests for information from BEREC about the 15-16 December meeting including the participants and agenda have been denied.

 Ensuring the extreme version of net neutrality was further solidified in a secret “expert” meeting with Marsden and van Schewick in February in Rotterdam. The event was not open to the public nor the criteria for selecting the experts disclosed. BEREC’s websites notes the existence of a special packet of information made for the meeting, but the packet is not available on the website. Strand Consult has made multiple requests for the materials of the meeting, but BEREC has not responded.

In response to a question Strand Consult posed at the release of the guidelines on June 6, BEREC revealed that the “experts” were selected by Frode Sørensen and Henk Don of the ACM. The group comprises the collective “Friends of Frode” (FOF), those who are either professional net neutrality advocates funded in part by Google (van Schewick, Cooper); those who favor proactive regulatory intervention (Marsden); and a vendor to the European Parliament (Marcus). Henk Don said he was pleased with the “range of views” presented by the four FOF. "

This is genuinely not satire! - to repeat, I don't actually favour net neutrality! I am a FRAND person....

'via Blog this'

Thursday, July 28, 2016

R Street responds to BEREC on zero-rating and net-neutrality guidelines

R Street responds to Body of European Regulators of Electronic Communications (BEREC) on zero-rating and net-neutrality guidelines: "R Street believes that, while some activists have called for guidelines that would discourage regulators from experimenting with some forms of pro-access zero-rating on the presumption that all zero-rating is anti-competitive, BEREC should ultimately provide guidelines that allow different nations to reach different conclusions about zero-rated services, consistent both with broad network-neutrality principles and pro-access principles." 'via Blog this'

Wednesday, July 27, 2016

Dean Bubley's Disruptive Wireless: My comments on BEREC's Net Neutrality guidelines consultation

Dean Bubley's Disruptive Wireless: My comments on BEREC's Net Neutrality guidelines consultation: "General comments:

There needs to be consideration of meshed, relayed or shared connections which run directly between users’ devices. In device-to-device scenarios, does the owner/operator of an intermediate device become responsible for the neutrality of the “onward” link to 3rd parties? (which could be via any technology such as WiFi, Bluetooth, wired USB port etc) 


There needs to be consideration that some of the more invasive mechanisms for traffic discrimination and control will in future move from “the network” to becoming virtualised software (provided by an ISP) that reside in edge-nodes at the customer premise, or even in customers’ mobile devices. It is unclear how the implementation guidelines deal with predictable near/mid-term trends in NFV/SDN technology, especially where there is no clear “demarcation point” in ownership between ISP and end-user. 

Equally, in future there may well be CAP companies that offer their services “in the network” itself, also with NFV/SDN. There needs to be careful thought given to how this intersects with Net Neutrality guidelines 

The evolution of artificial intelligence & machine-learning means that workarounds or infringements may become automated, and perhaps even invisible to ISPs, in future. This may also impact the nature of QoS as used for different applications. See http://disruptivewireless.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/telcofuturism-will-ai-machine-learning.html for more details 


Where wholesale relationships occur – eg MNO/MVNO, “neutral host” networks using unlicenced-band LTE, or secondary ID on the same WiFi hotspot – and the traffic-management / IAS functions are co-managed, how do the guidelines apply? Which party/parties is responsible?"



'via Blog this'

MP Rajeev Chandrasekhar calls for clear Net Neutrality laws, more powers for TRAI to enforce them | The Indian Express

MP Rajeev Chandrasekhar calls for clear Net Neutrality laws, more powers for TRAI to enforce them | The Indian Express: "The TRAI consultation paper dated December 9, 2015, had sought comments on the matter of differential pricing.

In ‘counter comments’ to the claim that VoIP and OTT services take away the level playing field, the MP said “the need for a free, open and fair internet, however, must supersede this desire of telcos to misuse control, and increase profits”.

He says the TRAI Act, in its current form, does not have enough teeth to adequately define and enforce consumer rights. “There is significant evidence that due to the finite number of access providers and limited competition in the sector, there exists a pricing and QoS co-op. There is therefore a need for a strong set of legal consumer rights and a legislation that gives Indian consumers a fair deal.”" 'via Blog this'

Thursday, July 21, 2016

Net neutrality overreaction antics round two

Net neutrality overreaction antics round two: "Having heard the histrionics over net neutrality on the part of telcos last week, this week saw the other side of the debate proffer some portentous proclamations about what might happen to the Internet unless regulators take an even tougher stance on how data traffic is treated.

None other than world wide Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee, Harvard law professor Lawrence Lessig, and Internet and Society professor Barbara van Schewick of Stanford law school on Thursday penned an open letter, casually titled: "four days to save the open Internet in Europe"." 'via Blog this'