dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2014-08-08 16:04:20: Last week FCC boss Tom Wheeler stated that he found Verizon's efforts to throttle unlimited LTE users unless they move to a metered billing plan "disturbing," expressing concern that Verizon was using network management to drive profits, not to prote.. ..

78036364 (banned)
join:2014-05-06
USA

78036364 (banned)

Member

Is the FCC commish asking

at&t, T-Mobile and Sprint about their throttling of unlimited data users? No? Hmmmm curious.

IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman
join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC

IPPlanMan

Member

Re: Is the FCC commish asking

What's curious about it?

Would you like him to ask?
Singular
Premium Member
join:2008-08-13
Shelbyville, KY

Singular

Premium Member

Re: Is the FCC commish asking

said by IPPlanMan:

What's curious about it?

Would you like him to ask?

I know they do it, I have the grandfathered unlimited plan and when\if I hit 5Gigs a month I am throttled to 128k\128k. They even send you a nice text message telling you that you are being throttled because using 5Gigs a month makes you a heavy user apparently.
78036364 (banned)
join:2014-05-06
USA

78036364 (banned)

Member

Re: Is the FCC commish asking

said by Singular:

I know they do it, I have the grandfathered unlimited plan and when\if I hit 5Gigs a month I am throttled to 128k\128k. They even send you a nice text message telling you that you are being throttled because using 5Gigs a month makes you a heavy user apparently.

Yep they throttle even if a tower is not congested. Unlike Verizon's plan which would only apply to congested tower while they are actually congested.

ArrayList
DevOps
Premium Member
join:2005-03-19
Mullica Hill, NJ

ArrayList

Premium Member

Re: Is the FCC commish asking

I'm not buying it.
78036364 (banned)
join:2014-05-06
USA

78036364 (banned)

Member

Re: Is the FCC commish asking

said by ArrayList:

I'm not buying it.

Not buying what?

»www.att.com/esupport/dat ··· 0000000U

As a result of the AT&T network management process, customers on a 3G or 4G smartphone with an unlimited data plan who have exceeded 3 gigabytes of data in a billing period may experience reduced speeds when using data services at times and in areas that are experiencing network congestion. Customers on a 4G LTE smartphone will experience reduced speeds once their usage in a billing cycle exceeds 5 gigabytes of data. All such customers can still use unlimited data without incurring overage charges, and their speeds will be restored with the start of the next billing cycle

ArrayList
DevOps
Premium Member
join:2005-03-19
Mullica Hill, NJ

ArrayList

Premium Member

Re: Is the FCC commish asking

I have no reason to believe that AT&T is not lying through their teeth. There is nothing compelling them to act against their own interest in this case.
AmericanMan
Premium Member
join:2013-12-28
united state

AmericanMan to Singular

Premium Member

to Singular
AT&T throttles down to 128k? Oh wow I didn't know that...

Does limiting your device to HSPA+ (what AT&T calls "4G" as opposed to "4G LTE") get around that restriction or not?
78036364 (banned)
join:2014-05-06
USA

78036364 (banned) to IPPlanMan

Member

to IPPlanMan
said by IPPlanMan:

What's curious about it?

Would you like him to ask?

I'd like him to be fair. Not sure why it's ok for others but not Verizon.

xirian
Premium Member
join:2003-01-26
Beacon, NY

2 recommendations

xirian

Premium Member

Re: Is the FCC commish asking

Because verizon agreed to certain terms when they bought the spectrum they use for lte. The other carriers did not.
78036364 (banned)
join:2014-05-06
USA

78036364 (banned)

Member

Re: Is the FCC commish asking

said by xirian:

Because verizon agreed to certain terms when they bought the spectrum they use for lte. The other carriers did not.

A)They did not.

B) even if you want to intend they did under the block C rules, that only applies to their 700 MHz spectrum. They also use AWS for LTE and that is not under ANY rules. So explain why they can't throttle that?

Frank
Premium Member
join:2000-11-03
somewhere

4 recommendations

Frank

Premium Member

Re: Is the FCC commish asking

said by 78036364:

said by xirian:

Because verizon agreed to certain terms when they bought the spectrum they use for lte. The other carriers did not.

A)They did not.

B) even if you want to intend they did under the block C rules, that only applies to their 700 MHz spectrum. They also use AWS for LTE and that is not under ANY rules. So explain why they can't throttle that?

A) Yeah they did, it's the reason why my iPhone5 came unlocked straight out of the box.

B) Because most of verizon's LTE coverage across the entire united states is 700mhz lteband 13 while their AWS lteband 4 (1700mhz) coverage is limited to areas where they have XLTE and is only designed to be supplemental. Only 35% of verizon phones even have access to AWS anyway, I know my iPhone 5 doesn't.

source: »www.androidcentral.com/v ··· ced-xlte

IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman
join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC

1 edit

1 recommendation

IPPlanMan to 78036364

Member

to 78036364
Well... He's being fair....

»www.reuters.com/article/ ··· 20140808

Aug 8 (Reuters) - The head of the U.S. communications regulator on Friday said he is asking all large U.S. wireless carriers to explain how they decide when to slow down download speeds for some customers, after questioning Verizon Wireless about such a plan.

Verizon, the No. 1 wireless carrier, in July said the top 5 percent of high-speed data users on its older, unlimited data plans might experience slower speeds starting Oct. 1.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler wrote to Verizon that he was "deeply troubled" by the plan, concerned that the company's decision to slow down, or "throttle," data was based on consumers' data plans instead of network or technology needs.

Verizon defended the practice, telling Wheeler it was a narrow, "widely accepted" and lawful way to manage networks.

But Wheeler on Friday indicated he was not convinced.

"'All the kids do it' was never something that worked for me when I was growing up," he told reporters after the monthly FCC public meeting.

""My concern in this instance - and it's not just with Verizon, by the way, we've written to all the carriers - is that it is moving from a technology and engineering issue to the business issues ... such as choosing between different subscribers based on your economic relationship with them."

The FCC did not disclose the letters to the other big carriers, AT&T Inc, Sprint Corp and T-Mobile US . But an FCC official said Wheeler asked other carriers questions similar to those asked of Verizon about their network management policies and practices.

Verizon was the first to receive such a letter because it was the only one with a new announcement of a policy change, the official said, and letters to other carriers followed Verizon's response.

Representatives for AT&T, Sprint and T-Mobile did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

OrangeCrush
@209.222.23.x

OrangeCrush to 78036364

Anon

to 78036364
Wind throttles me after I move past 10 GB, but they also told me that they would before I signed up with them. Is it possible that the other American carriers are being less disingenuous than Verizon? Ask New Yorkers without access to FIOS and victims of Hurrican Sandy just how honest Verizon is

OpTiC
Premium Member
join:2014-03-08
West Covina, CA

OpTiC to 78036364

Premium Member

to 78036364
Tmobile doesn't not throttle unlimited data users if you pay the truly unlimited plan. Verizon is a excuse pest and using it as a excuse.

anuoldman
join:2007-06-09
Pompano Beach, FL

anuoldman to 78036364

Member

to 78036364
the real issue here is that the public is being promised LTE speeds and 'unlimited' data... but the companies selling this promise can't deliver the speeds from a technical standpoint in many places and decide not to deliver the speeds and effectively the data for certain customers

they are outright lying.... and it's time to punish them
AndyDufresne
Premium Member
join:2010-10-30
Chanhassen, MN

AndyDufresne

Premium Member

OH NO!

He is not happy so is he going to write another strongly worded letter so Verizon can quake in their boots?
78036364 (banned)
join:2014-05-06
USA

78036364 (banned)

Member

un-intended consequences

The nimrod of the FCC doesn't realize that if he prevents Verizon's throttling because it's not fair to do it to unlimited data customers only then 1 of 2 things will happen.

1. Verizon decides to throttles EVERYONE. I'm pretty sure that's not the commish's goal.

2. If Verizon can't throttle unlimited data customers at all they simply won't have ANY. I'm sure this is also not what the commish intends.

These are the 2 outcomes. The outcome where you go back to unlimited data customers using as much as they want without any sort of network management is NOT going to happen. Anyone that thinks so is naïve.

ArrayList
DevOps
Premium Member
join:2005-03-19
Mullica Hill, NJ

ArrayList

Premium Member

Re: un-intended consequences

I'd love to see the response if they throttled all of their customers. Verizon needs brought down a peg or two.
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Skippy25

Member

Re: un-intended consequences

Be default all user on a congested node are "throttled". That's what happens to a network that is not built out enough to handle the capacity of subscribers they sell to.
78036364 (banned)
join:2014-05-06
USA

78036364 (banned)

Member

Re: un-intended consequences

said by Skippy25:

Be default all user on a congested node are "throttled". That's what happens to a network that is not built out enough to handle the capacity of subscribers they sell to.

Not that's the limits of the spectrum they have. Sorry Verizon should do things so they have 1/3 they have now which is what T-Mobile has. You DO know how spectrum and bandwidth in regards to LTE work don't you? Or do I have to give you a remedial course?
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Skippy25

Member

Re: un-intended consequences

Thanks but I understand it.

I guess we are agreement then and they simply have too many subscribers for the LTE network to handle. I guess they should reduce that number and stop signing up more people in those areas.
78036364 (banned)
join:2014-05-06
USA

78036364 (banned)

Member

Re: un-intended consequences

said by Skippy25:

Thanks but I understand it.

I guess we are agreement then and they simply have too many subscribers for the LTE network to handle. I guess they should reduce that number and stop signing up more people in those areas.

because people only use their MOBILE phone in ONE area. You're suggestion would obly work if one's MOBILE phone only worked in their "home area"
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Skippy25

Member

Re: un-intended consequences

Well I guess that is a problem for them to figure out now isn't it.

A vast majority of the population is within 25 miles of their home a vast majority of the time.
sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH

1 recommendation

sonicmerlin to 78036364

Member

to 78036364
Uh... Cable has limited spectrum capacity over coax as well. They address congestion by splitting a node. The analogy to Verizon is for them to put up an additional cell tower. They have ridiculous profit margins so they can certainly afford it.

ArrayList
DevOps
Premium Member
join:2005-03-19
Mullica Hill, NJ

ArrayList to Skippy25

Premium Member

to Skippy25
on a "congested" node. There is no oversight to show that the nodes are actually congested. It's the same bullshit with caps on traditional ISPs. This excuse that it's because of congestion doesn't cut it until they prove that it is really what it is.

AVD
Respice, Adspice, Prospice
Premium Member
join:2003-02-06
Onion, NJ

AVD to Skippy25

Premium Member

to Skippy25
said by Skippy25:

Be default all user on a congested node are "throttled". That's what happens to a network that is not built out enough to handle the capacity of subscribers they sell to.

I think the term "throttle" literally implies intentional downgrading of speed.
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Skippy25

Member

Re: un-intended consequences

The reason for the qoutes.
78036364 (banned)
join:2014-05-06
USA

78036364 (banned) to ArrayList

Member

to ArrayList
said by ArrayList:

I'd love to see the response if they throttled all of their customers. Verizon needs brought down a peg or two.

Considering the throttling will happen very rarely it won't matter. As a tiered data customer I have incentive to not use too much data. I'd be charged $15 per GB overage. I'd RATHER be throttled instead.

Once again Verizon will not be knocked down a peg. I don't see how forcing Verizon to kill off unlimited data is BETTER. Because Verizon COULD have done that but instead chose less than 1% throttling and yet people are getting their panties in a wad over it.
sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH

sonicmerlin

Member

Re: un-intended consequences

Verizon didn't kill off unlimited data because that would alienate 22% of their customers overnight and result in a massive revenue drop. This isn't rocket science.

catchingup
@135.23.225.x

1 recommendation

catchingup to 78036364

Anon

to 78036364
said by 78036364:

These are the 2 outcomes. The outcome where you go back to unlimited data customers using as much as they want without any sort of network management is NOT going to happen. Anyone that thinks so is naïve.

Or 3. throttle users if and only if the tower is congested and throttle them within speed limits based on what capacity is left not a set speed limit.

But that is waaaayy too logical and makes way too much sense. Won't work in the dysfunctional world that is called Earth.

••••••••
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Skippy25 to 78036364

Member

to 78036364
1.) Everyone or no one that uses what ever among they determine to be excessive gets throttled. I believe they defined that as 4.7GB.

2.) They can't just take it away or they would have. Which is the entire reason they are trying to use throttling as a way to "encourage" them to "voluntarily" change to a metered plan.

••••••
BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
Central CT

BiggA to 78036364

Premium Member

to 78036364
Exactly. They would just kill off Unlimited unilaterally. Wheeler doesn't seem to get that wireless can't be truly Unlimited.

••••••
Raides
join:2004-09-27

Raides to 78036364

Member

to 78036364
So no one should do anything because you're worried where this is going?

No. That's not a good reason. Words can't express how retarded that line of thinking is. It's the kind of straw-man argument someone gives when they don't have anything else to say.

The wireless companies, Verizon and AT&T especially, are swimming in money because of their anti-consumer practices. I like what the FCC is doing with this, I just wish they'd do more of it. We should be attacking this and it should get defeated. They've changed the meaning of the word "unlimited" to the point where the dictionary should have a version that includes the "Wireless Cell Phone Context" definition. I do agree that the FCC should go after all the carriers.
houghe9
join:2008-02-27
Lexington Park, MD

houghe9

Member

Re: un-intended consequences

Thank you!!! The opinion mr guy is disgusting. Unlimited is unlimited. A contract is a contract and not holding the companies accountable for the contract they agree to because you are afraid they will take it away is pathetic. They are not doing it to be nice. They are screwing us and letting them get away with it because hey they could REALLY screw us is no way to live. If they want unlimited crushed then let them crush it but stand up and have some integrity and make them honor their end of the contract.
BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
Central CT

BiggA

Premium Member

Re: un-intended consequences

They can unilaterally change it at any time they want. If you happen to be in contract, then you would have the option of leaving with no ETF, but other than that, they can do whatever they want pretty much.

guppy_fish
Premium Member
join:2003-12-09
Palm Harbor, FL

guppy_fish

Premium Member

FCC

All bark and no bite == the FCC

Just another headline that will fade into the dark

PamelaTS
Digital Chick
join:2004-04-20
Dallas, TX

PamelaTS

Member

Sprint unlimited

I've been on Sprint for several years with my unlimited data plan. I use the Hell out of it where my tablet is limited to 2GB I've used my phones lte connection to the time of 8+ and never noticed throttling.

Flyonthewall
@206.248.154.x

Flyonthewall

Anon

Most likely explanation for this is...

It makes the FCC look like boobs for doing nothing, and they don't like the public spotlight being so bright.

tito79
join:2010-03-14
Port Saint Lucie, FL

1 recommendation

tito79

Member

Re: Most likely explanation for this is...

unlimited plans used to be a luxury now its a necessity now.

Smith6612
MVM
join:2008-02-01
North Tonawanda, NY
·Charter
Ubee EU2251
Ubiquiti UAP-IW-HD
Ubiquiti UniFi AP-AC-HD

Smith6612

MVM

Let's think an extreme case here.

Let's say that the FCC is able to ensure that the 700Mhz C Band spectrum cannot be throttled, perhaps through a law or a ruling, and Verizon goes about their throttling/prioritization scheme anyways. The FCC has a very powerful tool at their hand, and that is license revocation under the terms that the spectrum license was violated. Overnight, the FCC could force Verizon to shut down a major chunk of their LTE network, less the AWS spectrum. That would send a very strong message to every carrier out there if Big Red has their network grounded just like that.

... of course this wouldn't happen. The issue would be far more complex than that. I would love to see the fireworks show that comes out of such an act, though.
AmericanMan
Premium Member
join:2013-12-28
united state

AmericanMan

Premium Member

Define "Not Happy"

"Not Happy" as in thoroughly upset about Verizon's horrid practices, or "Not Happy" as in Verizon's check didn't clear?

I shouldn't be too cynical though...compared to the last FCC boss at least Wheeler is saying something, that's a good first start. Let's see how it all pans out, maybe Wheeler will surprise us all yet!

w0g
o.O
join:2001-08-30
Springfield, OR

w0g

Member

Verizon is being singled out? not really

This caught the FCC's eye because Verizon sold the plans unlimited w/o any type of throttling. Now in attempt to push the users off the plans they're adding in throttling.

As far as I know no other company has moved to throttle unlimited connections for anything but network management / QoS when a capacity issue arose.

Verizon is saying that anybody on unlimited will be throttled after 4.7GB no matter if a capacity issue exists or not, taking away from its unlimited goodness.

They have no plans to throttle users who pay per gigabyte.

I don't think this is a problem at Sprint or T Mobile. Basically unlimited means unlimited and they don't do any limiting of these plans outside of standard QoS. My connection on T Mobile still works fine after I transfer 70GB/money for example with no forced throttling at any point.

Verizon tho, they are basically really looking to apply their new limited billing to unlimited plans through throttling. Once you hit 4.7GB it becomes unuseable.

•••

RadioDoc

join:2000-05-11
La Grange, IL

RadioDoc

LOLz..."attack vector". Karl, you're funny.

"Former PK President Gigi Sohn sits as one of Wheeler's current advisers, making it pretty clear that transparency will be Wheeler's attack vector moving forward"

What is 'pretty clear' is Gigi Sohn and his buddy Tom will go skipping together into a lucrative telecom lobby position once Wheeler's term is up. So much posturing from this guy with zero results.

VLte Unlimit
@70.212.0.x

VLte Unlimit

Anon

Verizon LTE Unlimited User

This was posted at 4:04.. we know where this is heading.
old_wiz_60
join:2005-06-03
Bedford, MA

old_wiz_60

Member

FCC won't be happy until...

Verizon gives them more money under the table, then it will all be fine.

The FCC works for the carriers/cable cos, not the people. Saying they have the customer's best interests is just to hide the fact of the bribes they receive that completely turn it around.

Soon we will overtake South Korea as being one of the most corrupt nations on earth, with bribes openly passed around.