Santa Rosa, CA
|reply to 88615298 |
said by 88615298:So you want AT&T to do DPI on your packets to determine which should be free or not? said by moonpuppy: said by IPPlanMan:
How is it possible to have phantom traffic?
At what level does the screwup occur?
As a poster said later, the phone reverts to using 3G service when in standby mode. This could be nothing more than the phone acknowledging where it is and making sure all updates have been downloaded (like service packs on Window PCs.)
Then that data should be FREE of charge.
That opens the door to net neutrality violations. "AT&T's new walled garden packets will now not count towards your overage!"
My Blog 2.2
your moderator at work|
|reply to Gbcue |
It doesn't need to be a deep packet inspection. AT&T should know which update servers its phones regularly hit. It can then say "any traffic to update.thisserver.com doesn't count towards the cap/overage" while still counting traffic to other data sources (even its own non-update sources) towards the cap/overage. This wouldn't be a network neutrality violation at all. They'd simply be filtering out system updates so that the customer is only charged for data they requested.
It doesn't even require that. All of those updates occur on different logical channels. (google Location Area Updates / Routing Area Updates and GSM or UMTS). All of that stuff takes place on the signaling side and doesn't even reach the systems that handle data billing. In GSM and earlier revisions of UMTS (3G), it is all handled over circuit switched, not packet switched.
AT&T is very capable of doing things the way you said though. All it has to do is assign certain communication to a different APN (as it does with visual voicemail on the iPhone, FOTA updates on any phone that does FOTA, etc...)
|reply to Gbcue |
Communication between the mobile device and the network should not be billed. A great deal of communication occurs between the mobile device and the network, near constant communication actually. No inspection is required to determine what is what here anyway... That communication does not occur on the same logical channels that data is passed.
If it did, you would be saying AT&T should also be billing you for the data your voice traffic consumes.